Article Originally Published Here.
Lawmakers are considering legislation in the upcoming session to prevent armed security officers with records of misconduct from serving in the public school system.
It follows a Hearst investigation that found that 10 school systems in the state were employing armed security guards who falsified traffic citations, failed to report deadly pursuit or engaged in racial misconduct.
State statute defines that armed security officers are retired police officers who have separated from the department in good standing.
Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff said in an email that “every child in Connecticut deserves to learn and grow in an environment where they feel safe and respected.
“News that some school districts have brought in armed school officers with troubling records is unacceptable,” Duff said. “We should only allow people with the highest standards of conduct and judgment to fill those positions. No officer with a record of misconduct can be placed in front of our kids.”
Sen. Gary Winfield, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told the Courant that those armed security guards highlighted in the investigation should not be in the state’s schools.
“To be in the schools and to function as they are functioning, you have to be an officer in good standing,” Winfield said. “Part of why some of them are in these schools is because they are officers who left during an investigation and that should disqualify them from participating because they can’t be an officer in good standing. But apparently in some of the schools it doesn’t.”
Winfield said that the legislature needs to ensure that schools hiring armed security officers understand they must be in good standing. He said the statutes are clear about that.
“Good standing requires that you have not left during an investigation or any of the other things that keep you from participating as an officer,” he said.
Winfield said there are two statutes on the issue, with one stating that, to be hired as an armed security officer, you must be an officer in good standing. Another statute states that if an officer is under investigation, they cannot serve as an officer for another agency. Winfield continued,d referring to the Police Accountability Act in 2021.
“I think when you read the statutes together, there is no way you should be able to see them as being able to be in a school,” he said of the armed security officers highlighted in the investigation.
He said there are still discussions about how best to address the issue, whether through new legislation or by linking the hiring of armed security officers to both statutes.
State Rep. Greg Howard, R-Stonington, said he agrees with Winfield that the statutes are clear, but if they need to be clarified to state that any police officer who retires while under investigation shall not be considered in good standing, he supports that.
Rep. Michael Digiovanni, D-Waterbury, vice chair of the state’s Public Safety and Security committee, said he is a firm believer in SROs and armed security officers in schools. He said he would be in favor of clarifying the language on what an officer in good standing entails.
In the same measure, he said that while he is open to having a conversation defining good standing, he would not be open to dissecting an officer’s 25-year career and nitpicking every error.
CT Black and Brown Student Union (BBSU), ConnCAN, and RACCE Inc are calling for school districts to stop hiring armed security officers until policy changes are made.
Anghy Idrovo, Organizing and Policy Director of the BBSU, said in a statement, “This is not just about policy. It’s about our children’s safety and dignity. We cannot allow individuals who failed as police officers to supervise, discipline, or carry firearms around our students. Our children deserve adults who are accountable, trained, and trusted.”
Robert Goodrich, executive director of Waterbury-based RACCE Inc., said the three organizations agree that there needs to be a legislative remedy that mirrors the school resource officer language in the statute, defining specific roles and responsibilities for armed security officers. He added that the term “good standing” needs to be more clearly defined by the state legislature.
“Armed security officers are not required to have any rules or responsibilities by state statute or through regulation by the state department of education,” he said.
