WATERBURY – A progressive policy group is recommending Waterbury public schools and police update guidelines on use of physical force and restraints by school resource officers.
A Connecticut Voices for Children analysis of 49 agreements between school districts and police departments on the roles and responsibilities of school resource officers stated that the memorandum of understanding in Waterbury stands out for including the Waterbury Police Department’s use of force policy that addresses de-escalation, authorized use of force options, use of physical force, use of less lethal force, use of deadly force, firearms, Tasers, and reporting.
The school district and police in Waterbury signed an updated MOU in August that the Connecticut Voices for Children report stated was “an excellent improvement” over the previous agreement, but recommended additions to further improve transparency, protect student rights, and adopt trauma-informed practices.
“It articulates a clear purpose to foster a safe and positive school climate and reduce the involvement of young people in the criminal legal system,” the report stated. “It includes a clear graduated response model for responding to student misconduct to support this purpose, and it clearly spells out the duties of SROs in schools.”
Researchers from New Haven-based Connecticut Voices for Children and the Yale Law School Youth Justice Project said the inclusion of the police use of force policy as an appendix was perhaps the most impressive aspect of the updated Waterbury MOU. Only one of the 48 other MOUs analyzed in the report provided the local police department’s guidelines and procedures.
THE UPDATE to the Waterbury MOU followed policy changes that were made last year following a U.S. Department of Justice inquiry in June 2022 concerning allegations about discipline, restraint and seclusion practices, and the number of school-based arrests.
The federal inquiry contributed to the ouster of former School Superintendent Verna Ruffin in July. Mayor Paul K. Pernerewski Jr. blocked the renewal of Ruffin’s contract because Ruffin failed to inform then-Mayor Neil M. O’Leary, anyone on the Board of Education or Police Chief Fernando Spagnolo about the DOJ’s inquiry when it was made.
The Connecticut Voices for Children report recommended the MOU between Waterbury school officials and police be revised to address the nuances in the usage of physical and forensic restraints, physical escorts, and chemical restraints.
At a minimum, it stated any updates to procedures should include provisions related to the student’s age, disability status, degree of cooperation, and potential harm.
“We advocate that officers should not lay hands or use restraints for students who are cooperating or whose behaviors are verbal but who have not initiated any actions of physical threat toward themselves or another person, and they should not use any weapons or forensic restraints with students under the age of 14 except in life-threatening circumstances,” the report said.
The reported recommended Waterbury require SROs use available and appropriate diversionary programs and practices before arresting or referring students under a certain age to court. It recommended the age limit should be at least 12 and preferably 14.
ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION proposed the MOU should specify that SROs should not carry weapons such as chemical agent sprays, pepper spray or Tasers in schools because they can cause lasting damage on young people’s developing brains and smaller bodies.
Chemical agents have no places in schools, said Robert Goodrich, executive director of Waterbury-based Radical Advocates for Cross-Cultural Education who assisted in the Connecticut Voices for Children and the Yale Law School Youth Justice Project analysis of MOUs on SROs.
“Those things not be necessarily taken away from police officers writ large, but in our school environments they should not have access to chemical agents,” he said.
Goodrich said youth and student organizers of RACCE would further recommend that Waterbury SROs not carry any weapons or wear police uniforms.
The report additionally recommended including additional reporting requirements in the MOU beyond the current statutory mandates regarding uses of physical contact, physical restraint, forensic restraint, and any weapons such as firearms, chemical or pepper spray, or Tasers.
GOODRICH SUPPORTED the general recommendation that SROs receive training regarding the MOU, school safety, and adolescent development before interacting with students in school settings. A breakout report on Waterbury said the current MOU does not specify whether SROs must have training before engaging students.
“We need to find a way to secure student rights because not only has policing physically expanded in schools, but surveillance and investigatory powers of police have also increased,” Goodrich said.
The Connecticut Voices for Children report recommended the MOU include information on when an SRO or other law enforcement official will conduct a search of a student, the student’s locker, and the student’s personal belongings rather than a school administrator. It further proposed establishing standard of certainty an SRO must meet to onduct a search and guidelines around when an SRO must obtain a warrant before search a student’s person and property.
“To clarify standards for questioning students, Waterbury policymakers should include clear language that SROs may not question a young person under the age of 16 without parent or guardian permission” the report said.
It also recommends requiring parental or guardian commission to question any special education student or students with disabilities who do not require special education services.
GOODRICH ALSO BACKED another general recommendation the MOUs provide mechanisms for involving the school community and the wider community in the selection and evaluation of SROs.
The Connecticut Voices for Children report recommended Waterbury create a selection and evaluation advisory committee that can make recommendations and provide guidance to the police chief. The membership should include key district administrators, teachers, parents and guardians, students, and community service providers who serve students most affected by the criminal legal system. The report also recommended Waterbury institute an annual performance review process for SROs and a 6-month check-in to provide ongoing responses and offer support.
The report proposed the Waterbury MOU be amended to require that the annual data and recommendations report be shared with the community provided that it protects student identities, and that the community has a period to review the report and provide reactions and recommendations.