In recent days Alamance 411 has been following chatter on social media that has raised our concern that ABSS School Board Members were talking about reallocating SRO (School Resource Officer) funds to help offset the shortfall in the 20/21 county budget from Covid-19. In a social media post, Allison Draper Gant was asked if Brian Feeley mention reallocating SRO funds and she posted "The Board was discussing classified staff pay study and he commented that the two new positions for SRO could be considered for reallocation in the immediate 20-21 budget. He did not say All SRO officers. As we navigate a difficult budget year- all areas are being evaluated. Our MOU’s for Monday night include these two new positions. I can not speak for any board member and their vote. Hope this helps".
On 6/22/2020 An Alamance 411 source directed us to Dayson Pasión social media campaign page where we found that Pasión is running for ABSS School Board and has ties https://runforsomething.net. When you research Run for Something is says: Run For Something (RFS) is a 527 political action committee that recruits and assists ultra liberal Democratic candidates under the age of 40 to run for state and local political offices. Amanda Litman, a staffer on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Presidential campaign, launched RFS in early 2017. They have put 40% of their candidates in office since they were founded.
*** As a voters we need to keep in mind that school board elections are suppose to be nonpatisin.
Research for yourself here:
This is a public comment submitted by Pasión to the Alamance-Burlington Board of Education
Good evening Chair Gant, members of the Board, and Dr. Benson:
This evening, while you are reviewing the School Resource Officer (SRO) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and seven contracts with local law enforcement organizations (LEOs) as well as the budget proposal for next year, I urge you to have a frank conversation about the future of the SRO program and what that needs to look like in the Alamance-Burlington Schools. In the immediate future, I hope the board will pause on the expansion of two SRO positions, especially considering it is not in the strategic plan. It is imperative that the Board considers reallocating those funds to items in the expansion budget that are and have been on the strategic plan, but have not been supported. As we move forward, I hope that the district administration and the Board evaluates the SRO program like it has so wisley evaluated other programs and positions. Perhaps the Board and community should ask these questions about the SRO program:
What measurables are used to define a successful SRO program?
What would it look like in terms of student outcomes?
Although the MOU identifies goals and objectives of the SRO program, I strongly recommend that concrete benchmarks be defined to measure the tertiary intended and unintended impacts of the SRO program in regards to student success, school climate and culture, and the disproportionate representation of systemically marginalized communities in the school-to-prison pipeline.
As a former educator in ABSS, I have seen first hand when SROs are asked to complete a task in which the MOU (Article II, section 5, b) clearly states they are not supposed to handle. I also ask the board to consider stronger oversight of the use of SROs by school administration to maintain program consistency across the district, but also to ensure that the officers that so honorably serve our schools are better protected.
As a community, we want our schools to be as safe as possible for all of our students. Studies show that creating school environments with adequate resources and access to social, emotional, and mental wellness programs, is the best way to achieve the safety that our community desires in our schools.