Another step in determining the future role of law enforcement in South San Francisco public schools has been made, with the City Council approving changes and recommending tweaks to the document slated to govern school liaison officer presence within the South San Francisco Unified School District.
For more than a year, district and city officials have been crafting the document, called a memorandum of understanding, in a process complicated by the controversial nature of the subject as some believe the presence of police in schools should be reduced or eliminated. The document must be approved by both the SSFUSD Board of Trustees and the City Council — meaning the document has bounced between the bodies after each round of new amendments.
“This iteration of the MOU is much better than it was the first time we saw it,” Councilmember James Coleman said, noting the “detail-oriented” work the process has required to ensure students’ civil liberties are protected.
The intent of the MOU is to clearly define the role of school liaison officers on campus and when they should or should not be engaged in student disciplinary matters. Previously, officers engaged with students and staff in a variety of manners, including offering presentations and other efforts to build community. However, some students and members of the school community fear it leads to overpolicing and harassment.
The agreement has a stated goal of establishing a “positive working relationship” to “prevent juvenile delinquency and assist in student development.”
The council, in its most recent meeting, signed off on changes made by the school board, among them a stipulation to automatically renew the document each year, a change that could prevent the current drawn-out scenario from repeating itself. With the move, trustees or councilmembers could bring forward changes to the MOU for consideration.
A second change updates the process of handling complaints if the MOU is violated, building on a previous council addition that referenced that students or employees can file complaints against officers. The district added that it had “an independent right” to investigate such complaints to determine whether a breach of the MOU had occurred.
The final change by the school district altered language to broaden collaborative efforts between the school district and the police department, such as providing yearly reports, to also involve the city as a whole.
While the council agreed to these changes, it also had its own new recommendations, meaning the MOU will again be sent back to the school board for either final approval or more alterations.
“It’s my hope that as this ping-pongs back and forth the number of changes should be smaller,” City Manager Mike Futrell said.
Vice Mayor Mark Nagales requested language be added to clarify that while the school district has the right to investigate complaints, it cannot investigate city employees, including police officers.
Councilmember Eddie Flores suggested several updates, mostly to do with tightening up language referencing city or school district positions. Flores, for instance, pointed to references to “school administrators.”
“It should just say principals, clear as that,” Flores said. “That is just very convoluted for me.”
Flores asked also that the supervisor of the school liaison officer be clearly defined for the purpose of filing complaints. The chief and superintendent, he said, should be involved in the event an employee wanted to elevate a complaint to an officer’s superior.
Recommended for you
“The line of hierarchy and communication, I’d like it to be more streamlined so that the chief and superintendent are aware of these communications,” Flores said.
Flores further requested a requirement that parents or guardians be notified prior to the arrest of a student.
Police Chief Jeff Azzopardi, however, said such a requirement would not be feasible due to the nature of events that could lead to an arrest. But, he said, state law already requires notification of a parent or guardian after an arrest before the student can be questioned.
“After they’re arrested it’s the first call that’s made, it has to be, by law,” Azzopardi said.
Flores asked that such state laws be referenced in the MOU.
The SSFUSD oversees 15 middle, elementary and high schools. Currently, just one school liaison officer is employed by the police department, but Azzopardi said he will evaluate the need for a second after the MOU is finalized.
The school liaison program was suspended at the beginning of the current school year corresponding with the reevaluation of the officer’s roles; officers currently only enter campuses in the event that they are called for service.
The meeting saw several public commenters speak out against police presence in schools. Some expressed disapproval regarding the amendment to automatically renew the MOU.
“If you simply ended the [school liaison officer] program, we wouldn’t have to be doing any of this,” South San Francisco resident Eddy Holman said, who noted the “sky has not fallen” since the program’s suspension.
Holman said the efficacy of such programs is not supported by data, and police should only come to schools during emergencies. Students taken into custody, he said, are transferred into the “school to prison pipeline,” particularly given the current district attorney’s “tough on crime” policies.
City staff will work the council’s recommendations into the MOU for presentation to the school board at a later date.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(1) comment
Clarification: The school board recommended an annual review. The City added an automatic renewal in its latest version.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.