LRSD unveils enhanced school security ideas

A Little Rock School District presentation of preliminary plans for enhancing school safety — including the arming of 10 safety and security staff members — drew a crowd of about 100 Thursday — most to argue for alternatives to armed security guards and a few to say that the weapons can be a deterrent to violence.

Ron Self, the district’s safety and security director, told the district’s Community Advisory Board and the audience that Act 393 of 2015 authorizes “commissioned school security officers” to be armed if they undergo 60 hours of initial training as well as additional training over time.

The Little Rock district’s early plan is to have 10 of the district’s security staff members go through that training, Self said. Those would include the safety and security office’s four administrators — including Self, plus two investigators and four of the district’s 11 patrol guards. That would be one armed patrol guard for each of four zones in the school district, he said.

None of the 10 employees who would be armed under the plan are assigned to just one school, although the district does have a combination of unarmed security guards and armed school resource officers — who are members of the Little Rock Police Department — at all of its middle and high schools. The district has one security officer per 238 students, Self said. That compared with one officer for 800 students in Dallas; one officer for every 1,100 students in Memphis/Shelby County, Tenn.; and one officer per 1,500 students in Los Angeles.

Self made the proposal for

the armed security guards at a meeting in which he also described the district’s other safety measures, including newly replaced school camera and alarm systems, refresher drills on how to respond in the event of an active shooter and greater acceptance by teachers of the Rave Panic Button app on their personal cellphones.

Pamela Smith, the district’s director of communications, presented the results of a recent survey of 1,614 school staff members, students and parents in which a large majority said they opposed arming classroom teachers, which is allowed by Act 393 and has been suggested by President Donald Trump as a way to prevent occurrences, such as the Feb. 14 shooting deaths of 17 people at a Parkland, Fla., high school.

The survey results, which will be on the district’s website starting today, also showed that a majority of staff members and parents felt safe on their school campuses but only 46 percent of students said they agreed or strongly agreed that they felt safe at their schools. Another 27 percent of student respondents were neutral on the question. Fifty percent of staff members said they disagreed or strongly disagreed that staffing for district security was appropriate.

“I’m not in favor of arming teachers,” Little Rock Superintendent Mike Poore told the crowd. “It’s my view that teaching is a profession and … we’ve added a lot of things on to that profession over time and our educators have willingly taken some of those roles on because they know that it’s ultimately going to benefit kids. Carrying a weapon is a whole different level for a teacher to assume, and it’s a whole different level of training that takes away from the training that should be done to improve what we are doing educationally.”

Poore said there is no plan to ask Arkansas Education Commissioner Johnny Key, who acts in lieu of the school board in the state-controlled Little Rock district, to act right away on any alterations to the school district’s safety efforts. He said it might be summer — after Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s newly appointed statewide School Safety Commission submits its recommendations by July 1 — before district proposals are finalized.

Little Rock Deputy Superintendent Marvin Burton is one of the 18 members of that state commission.

A total of 26 people signed up to speak on the security issue Thursday night but that number dropped to about 15 at the end of the presentation.

Audience member Robert Webb questioned the wisdom of responding to violence in schools with more violence and worried that black male students are at risk when school personnel are armed.

“I strongly oppose any more guns on LRSD campuses,” Webb said.

Audience member Helen Davis called for more counselors and social workers to interact with students who are hurting. Misbehavior can be misinterpreted, she said.

Parent Vicki Hatter urged that if additional armed security is needed that the district acquire the more highly trained school resource officers from the Little Rock Police Department rather than arming civilians.

Richard Pruitt, a retired military police officer, warned that armed personnel on school campuses will ultimately result in the shooting of a student, either because a student gets a gun from the adult or an adult mistakenly shoots a student.

Natasha Burch Hulsey, another audience member, urged that the focus be placed on keeping students well fed and involved in extracurricular activities rather than on armed officers.

Robin Doyle, another audience member, said armed officers are a deterrent, and that armored cars aren’t robbed because the drivers are armed.

Community Advisory Board members also had questions.

Member Anthony Hampton asked for a cost analysis of the proposal. Self had estimated the initial cost to be about $50,000 for training, supplies — including district-issued guns — and salary stipends for the commissioned school security officers. That would decrease to about $15,000 a year after that. There are no plans to add to the current 80-member security staff, he said.

Advisory board member Melanie Fox asked for more information on how the district can better intervene before acts of violence occur.

Poore said he was pleased with Thursday’s session.

“It was factual, and there are even more facts needed,” Poore said. “That’s not a surprise when you are talking about a challenging topic. The questions that came from the advisory board and the community were all good questions. We have to work on those and come back and share those answers. We have an obligation to create an even greater outreach at some point and we’ll give some consideration on how to do that.”