Santa Rosa school district officials want change before considering return of police officers

After another lengthy and emotional debate, Santa Rosa City Schools board members vowed not to renew an agreement to have Santa Rosa police officers on the district’s middle and high school campuses without meaningful change, not only to the decades-old school resource officer program but to the notion of community policing itself.

There is currently no agreement between Sonoma County’s largest school district and the Santa Rosa Police Department but board members, speaking at a special session Monday night to address the issue, said that they will not vote to return officers to campuses until wide-ranging change occurs. No formal vote was taken and debate over the future of the campus police program is slated for further discussion next month.

“This country has spun its wheels on race and policing for decades. The needle hasn’t moved at all,” Area 5 Trustee Ed Sheffield said in an emotional plea to halt the program.

Sheffield, who is Black, pointed to a survey that found 8% of students had a negative experience with the program — a number that would equate to more than 800 students if applied across the entire district.

“This is the reason why Black people lose faith in the system and why we protest and why we destroy property. It’s because we don’t have a voice, and we are always outvoted,” he said.

“Even if it’s only 8% of our students, hey it’s their turn and I’m giving it to them,” he said.

The district created a 32-person ad hoc committee to study the future of the SRO program in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd, a Black man in Minneapolis, and the subsequent civil rights demonstrations. Members of the committee urged the board to heed their call to keep the program, albeit with modifications. The group, which included three board members as well as administrators, staff, teachers, students, parents and community members, began meeting in July and convened 14 meetings for nearly 30 hours, district officials said.

“Everyone on the committee cares deeply for all of our students,“ said Blair Murphy, a counselor at Slater Middle School and member of the committee. ”Please allow SRPD to show that they are committed to the process of improving the program. Please don’t give up on this valuable program that is working.“

Committee members have acknowledged the 32-member group was not unanimous in its recommendations but the vast majority of the volunteer group wanted to maintain the partnership so long as modifications are made. No one on the committee voted to keep the school resource officer program — funded by the Santa Rosa Police Department and not by the school district — unchanged.

“We all need to face our fears. We all need to do the work. We all need to meet in the middle,” said Charli Kirtley, a committee member and a secretary at Santa Rosa High. “This is the time. This is our moment to really take this in a positive direction.”

Area 2 Trustee Jill McCormick, who said she was torn over the issue, expressed concern about the district convening a committee and then potentially casting aside its recommendation.

“I want to honor the work of the committee,“ she said.

“Where do we safely create these partnerships? Where do we safely create the relationships? I understand the argument that schools aren’t the place to do that, but I could also argue that schools are the place,” she said.

Of the more than 30 people who phoned into the meeting during the public comment period Monday night, 19 urged the board to keep the program in place, albeit with modifications. Twelve people called for its conclusion.

Stephen Bussell, ad hoc committee member and president of the Santa Rosa Police Officers Association, said the message of change is heard by program officials. But Bussell, who was slated to become the school resource officer at Maria Carrillo High School in August, said cutting ties now would be a mistake.

“The elimination of the SRO program would severely limit the ability of law enforcement to positively engage with our students,” he said. “We are committed to accountability, transparency, evolution and change.”

But board members argued that law enforcement officials need to acknowledge racism and harm done by officers in uniform — locally and more broadly — before they can return to campus.

“This is not the burden of our children. You cannot use our children to do your work for you. You cannot build relationships with the community with children as your guinea pigs,” Area 3 Trustee Alegria De La Cruz said.

Area 1 Trustee Jenni Klose said she had felt that the program should stay, albeit with modifications, but was shaken by comments made at the Oct. 14 school board meeting by Santa Rosa police about officer training, especially related to dealing with immigrant students and students of color.

"The lack of acknowledgment of the problem, the lack of acknowledgment that our students would be impacted by what they have grown up with even if not personally, even if only on the news, even if only stories from their friends and parents,“ she said. ”That really shook me.“

”If we were going back to school next week I would vote to not continue the program,“ she said.

Elsie Allen High School principal and ad hoc committee member Gabriel Albavera said he too was still thinking about officers’ response to those questions at the last meeting.

“I would really like to hear response to those specific questions,” he said. “As an administrator and administrator of color, it behooves me to know the answer.”

The debate about the future of the SRO program — which has stretched into months — comes at a time when no students are on campus because of the coronavirus pandemic. Some urged the board to take advantage of the time.

“Because students aren’t in school right now, I don’t think this decision should be rushed,” Santa Rosa High student Lauren Kelleher said. “I think we should really utilize the time that we are given.”

You can reach Staff Writer Kerry Benefield at 707-526-8671 or kerry.benefield@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @benefield.