Charlottesville City Schools

Safety & Security Resources

Superintendent’s Advisory Committee Meeting #7

January 14, 2021

Goals for This Meeting

Recap of Tuesday’s Zoom Presentations

• Key Ideas
• Exit Survey Results

​

Follow-Up Resources Needed (Discussion)

• Additional information from LAJC
• Additional information from other schools?
• Additional models for consideration?
• Additional feedback from groups in Charlottesville?

​

Summarize and Clarify Next Steps

• Discontinue short-term discussions
• Readiness to make a recommendation about a direction for a long-term plan? (Discussion)

​

​

​

​

​

Norms

• Let's participate AND listen so that we have equity of voice and perspective. “I” statements are helpful

​

• Let's agree that it's OK to disagree. We need to have honest conversation.

​

• If we are going to speak truths freely, we need to establish a sense of protected space and trust. This may be messy and uncomfortable work. This is complex.

​

• Embrace discomfort and extend grace to one another.

​

• Metaphorically, this needs to be a round table where we’re all on the same side and prioritizing the children of our community.

​

• Let’s assume good intention and positivity from one another, with permission to still communicate accordingly.

​

• If we hear something that sounds “off,” confusing, or uninformed, let’s clarify to move forward together.

​

​

Norms - Media/Social Media/Public Conversation

• From norms: “...establish a sense of protected space and trust.”�
• Beth Cheuk or Kim Powell will publish minutes and speak to public/media about this group’s work.

​

• If there are discussion points where it would be helpful for you to gather opinion/input, we will try to be clear.

​

• If you need to speak about this committee, speak for yourself and please do not try to represent the the thoughts of the group or the perspective of another individual.�

​

​

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 School Safety Forum

Alexandria: Renewed MOU for school-based SROs but with a more explicit commitment to equity, student protections, and data-keeping.��Toronto: Discontinued SROs in 2017 with a decision that centered the voices of black, brown, and indiginous students who described the negative impact of in-school policing. Developed new “safety monitor” positions that hired trusted community leaders (as well as an administrative infrastructure to support the new model). Have since seen drop in suspensions. Focus on relationships, culture as key indicators.��Legal Aid: Reinforced some of the general ideas of the Toronto presentation, presented Charlottesville schools data on police interactions (presented to this committee at the November 10 meeting).

​

​

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

​

12 responses; Unanimous interest in the Toronto model

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

Are there other safety models that you’d like us to consider? (Bonus points: do you know of a specific school system that has implemented it or is developing it?)

• Look into the Schott Foundation for Public Education's work around a Fair and Just School Climate. They work with several agencies focused on police free schools and could probably connect you with specific school models. - http://schottfoundation.org/; http://schottfoundation.org/issues/school-climate-discipline. Also look into the work of the Advancement Project: https://advancementproject.org/�
• I'm working on it. When/if I come across some, I will let you know.�
• Rather than looking only at other models nationwide, please hold real community visioning sessions with students, families, and members of the community so that they can all imagine together what "school safety" can be.

​

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

What was the most important thing you heard this evening? (1/3)

• Don't take something away without replacing it. If teachers don't feel safe in their building without armed police, that is a call to action.
• Toronto’s actionable advice about how to implement a removal of SROs.
• From Toronto: "Deep and ongoing mindset work is needed in anti-racism, restorative justice and practices in conjunction with any plan moving forward. Disciplinary policy reform and establishing new plan with or without SRO’s must happen together—not independent processes. Greater commitment and transparency is to ensure that the most affected stakeholders are not just invited to give input but their input is continually sought and valued. We must keep asking what stakeholder group/perspectives are missing in our discussions. Even more African American, Latino/Hispanic students, parents, teachers, and community engagement is a must.
• Toronto appears to have an actual anti-racist model, centering students most affected, and has benefitted from removing the SROs.

​

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

What was the most important thing you heard this evening? (2/3)

• I think a few of the things Jim from Toronto said stuck with me. If there is not someone in the school with a gun, and teachers feel scared, there is probably a problem with the school. Also, if we look where there has been violence, gun violence particularly, SRO's were often times there. I think that seeing the Toronto model be successful can be a guide to us, we have had the same model for so long this might be a really good opportunity to try something new, there was a reason the board made the decision in June to have officers taken out of our school and one of the main reasons was community voice.
• centering the data around the kids who feel unsafe (not the exact words) and considering that the idea of teachers who feel unsafe is actually a culture issue not one that would require SRO's.
• That this is a process that is going to take time and while it is imperative to solicit feedback and input from key stakeholder groups, we must be certain to include the voices of our most marginalized groups in this process.

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

What was the most important thing you heard this evening? (3/3)

• "All of what was shared by the Toronto representatives about why and how they do their model is VERY important. Centering the voices of Black and Brown students/families - " "2,500 students said they experienced trauma from having police in school." "If you want to move the needle for a specific group of students you need to center their voices. What's good for them is generally good for everyone."" And points made about the Toronto school system's work around anti-racism and anti-oppression as part of the overall school culture and how you “can’t underestimate the value of true anti-oppression learning."" Focusing on building relationships and using restorative practices. And the outcomes they are seeing - 25% reduction in suspensions, 50% reduction in expulsions - with NO SROs in the schools. That's great! That's is courageous leadership.
• Toronto has a viable, data driven approach to running their schools without SROs.
• The arguments against SROs.
• The Toronto district's commitment to anti-bias and anti-oppression learning for everyone involved in the school system was important. It changed how they collected data, how they interpreted data, how they responded to teachers who felt they were unsafe without armed guards, and what they viewed as success metrics.

​

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

Other comments/suggestions (1/2)

• It does seem as if this committee has already made a conclusion about recommending SROs. This process has been shrouded and has not attempted to directly ask families what they want to see. This process will be flawed without that community input directly. Our students know what they need to feel safe at school.
• The community wants SROs removed from schools.
• I may have missed it, but I do not recall seeing any panelists of color offering considerations. Additionally, seeking law enforcement representation to give perspective from other parts of the country that have been collaboratively involved with school divisions that have moved away or transformed from traditional SRO model will be helpful as well.
• It was not helpful that you couldn't see who was attending the meeting,
• While the point was well-taken about "If staff feel they need an armed police officer in their place of work to feel safe, we have a problem," our school community has experienced a wide variety of threats and their voices should also be heard. I do believe in this process and think the committee will come up with a viable solution that while will not be amenable to all, will address our students' and schools' needs.

​

​

Key Ideas from 1/12/21 Exit Survey

Other comments/suggestions (2/2)

• Why is this committee considering SROs at all when the decision was already made last year to remove them? That question was asked by MANY people in the chat (in a variety of ways) and yet it was not directly answered which was very frustrating. Why isn't this committee using its time and resources to focus on determining what strategies to recommend without using SROs instead of going back to something that has been shown to cause harm to Black and Brown students?�
• I'm worried that Charlottesville is backtracking on its promise to remove SROs from schools.�
• School safety can't be achieved through policing, policing is not a solution to violence it is only a reaction to violence.

​

Follow-Up Resources Needed (Discussion)

​

• Additional information from LAJC?
• Additional information from other schools (such as Toronto)?
• Additional models for consideration?
• Additional feedback from people in Charlottesville?

Long-Term Plan Timeframe

• Goal: implementation in August
• Ramp-Up Time:
• If model relies on social-workers or mental health staff, the competition to fill these positions is great, and significant time would be needed to recruit, do background screening, and train these positions in ways that would support the new model.�
• If model relies on using community leaders, there will also be time needed to identify the right people, do background screening, and then adequately train them in areas such as de-escalation, trauma-sensitive practices, school policy, and more.

​

• Once model is presented to superintendent, she would present her recommendation for Board/public review in one month (ex, Feb.), and it would likely be presented for approval the following month (ex, March)

Moving Forward

Long-Term Recommendation (suggested steps from 12/8 meeting, with updates)

​

• December: Seek additional input from students of color.
• Update: Still in process
• January: Meet to hear reps from other districts about other models for safety
• Update: Meeting occurred 1/12
• Review other requested “inputs”
• Update: List developed today
• Mid-to-end January: general direction for long-term plan
• Update: Is this timeframe reasonable/appropriate?
• February (if needed): greater clarity on details for long-term plan.
• Update: Is this timeframe reasonable/appropriate?

Summarize and Clarify Next Steps

​

• Discontinue short-term discussions given recent School Board decision to alter attendance plans at CHS and Buford (with max of 150 students present at a time)�
• Is this committee approaching readiness to make a recommendation about a direction for a long-term plan?
• If so, as needed, consider “re-upping” for discussions about greater detail, community engagement about the needed elements?