Upper Darby gets earful on school safety measures
UPPER DARBY » An overview of current school safety practices and the potential to enhance them in the Upper Darby School District generated two hours of discussion at a Tuesday night school board committee meeting.
Given the heightened attention to school safety following the latest mass school shooting in Florida two weeks ago, Superintendent Dan Nerelli, Assistant Superintendent Dan McGarry and Director of Public Safety Lou Gentile detailed how the district would respond if ever a potentially violent person made their way through any of the hallways of its 14 school buildings. The over 30-minute presentation by the trio of administrators paid great attention to emergency drills, lockdown procedures and the matters by which the district will communicate with the public during an emergency situation.
Unlike most committee meetings, there was a strong turnout from the public on the topic with more than 20 people publicly commenting on issues of school safety that lasted over an hour.
“As I’m hearing the plan I hear more of what’s happening in the present (for) a tragic situation; that’s great I love the information, I learned a lot,” said resident Leon Achrich. “I have a request for the board to not be complacent ... You need to look at this from a different perspective, what are we going to do differently.
“Let’s not take anything lightly by way of options.”
The public presented the board and administrators ideas to boost safety, ranging from arming school safety officers to a doorblocking device to prevent intruders from entering a classroom, which was one of the goals of the public forum. The board had not attached itself to any one idea by the end of their Tuesday night meeting and did not openly comment on its stance in favor or against what was presented by the public.
While the board sat quiet as it listened to suggestions, members of the public would provide counter arguments to each other’s suggestions, most notably on topics involving arming personnel and using metal detectors.
“Teachers don’t go to college to learn to fire a gun,” said Scott Keehn. “That’s not what they do.”
“Their job is to teach,” added Keith Banner. “If anything, we should have a trained professional.”
Another resident suggested arming the district’s 39 security officers located in each school building. The suggestion was rebutted when it was reiterated that an armed deputy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School failed to enter the school during the Feb. 14 shooting spree that killed 17 people.
Resident Gregory Borman asked if the district’s security officers, who do not carry a firearm as part of their job, are qualified and trained to protect the district’s 12,000 students if a violent intruder entered any of the buildings.
Gentile said all of his officers are properly trained to do so, many being former law enforcement officers or possessing equal training and background in the field.
Still, the option of putting guns into a school for select personnel to use was not viewed favorably.
“I would want the board to know that if (arming teachers) ever became policy I would probably remove my children from the district,” said Laurie Patterson, whose statement was met with applause by the public. “I’m a huge believer in public education and I love our district so I would never want to do that.”
There was also the suggestion of using metal detectors at school entrances to prevent guns and other weapons from going into the school. While less divisive an opinion than arming teachers or security officers, residents noted the prison-like atmosphere that is impressed upon students with those devices.
Parent Danielle Saunders experienced that type of learning environment when she transferred as a student from Springfield High School to Chester High School.
“It was a major culture shock,” she said. “The metal detectors, security guards; just their presence I thought I was going to school at a prison. I don’t want my children to feel like they’re in a place where they feel like they’re in prison ... that seems to promote more fear with the students.”
Bill Kaplan had a similar reaction.
“I went to school at John Bartram (High School) in Philadelphia, and the atmosphere there was antieducation in some ways,” he said. “I understand surveillance cameras, but to have armed guards, a place that feels like a prison somehow made us feel like third- of fourth-rate citizens.
“Let’s keep the atmosphere conducive to learning.”
Upper Darby Councilman Tom Wagner stated he was in favor of metal detectors, noting the board should put “heavy consideration” on that option.
Even though the district updates annually its districtwide and building safety plans for an emergency situation, the information was new to some members of the public who expressed their relief that the district is ready to employ a plan if needed.
“I understand there needs to be a certain level of security and I do feel a lot better now seeing there is a plan laid out,” said Saunders.
One issue not addressed yet by administrators was a shooting on a school bus transporting children, or a bus being the target of gunfire. Administration said they would look more into that angle.
Administrators have been tasked by the board to get more information on all possible security options and suggestions. Their findings will be presented at a future meeting for the board to take under advisement.
“We want to continue to be an organization that strives to get better at what we do, and that’s because our students are of the utmost importance to us,” said Nerelli.
Tuesday night’s presentation is available to view at https://www.boarddocs. com/pa/udar/Board.nsf/ Public.
At a later part in the meeting the board pushed out of committee a $219,000 bid to install security cameras in the district’s 11 elementary-level school buildings.
A vote on the bid was expected at the board’s Feb. 13 meeting, but was tabled and brought back into committee for more clarification.
Directors Gina Curry and Heather Boyd reiterated that they did not delay action on the board because they were not in favor of the cameras, but some of the information may have been new or unfamiliar to the new board members.
If approved by the board at its March 6 meeting, three cameras will be placed at each elementary school and kindergarten center; two on the outside and one on the inside directed at the main entrance. The administration building will be receiving two cameras, also, as part of the bid. The district will own the cameras and may remove them from the leased properties for Charles Kelly and Walter M. Senkow if they decide to not renew their leases and potential build a new school.
These buildings will be the last to receive security cameras. At present, there are 58 cameras in the high school, and Beverly Hills and Drexel Hill middle schools just had 35 and 11, respectively, put up.