JCPS poised to keep SROs and delay in-house security

Jefferson County Public Schools appeared prepared to continue using school resource officers for another school year, delaying a proposal to bring school security operations in-house for at least a year.

School resource officers are sworn police officers who report to their law-enforcement agencies rather than directly to district administrators. Under the district’s earlier in-house security proposal, personnel would have been supervised by JCPS, an accountability change sought by community advocates.

The district introduced the idea of ending SRO contracts and creating an internal security team for the 2019–20 school year. The school board did not vote on that proposal, and officials set it aside for further analysis.

Subsequent planning documents indicated that JCPS wanted to postpone a change until the 2020–21 school year while it continued its analysis, gathered additional input and reconsidered available options. In the meantime, the district could continue using SROs despite organized opposition from community advocates.

Decision rested with the school board

District representatives said contracts with local police agencies would require school board approval. Earlier SRO agreements had passed by wide margins, although changes in board membership meant that a later vote was not necessarily predictable.

The district also said its planning could be affected by school-safety legislation then moving through the Kentucky General Assembly. The bipartisan Senate Bill 1 proposal called for both additional school resource officers and expanded mental-health support for students.

Community organizations had argued for more than a year that police presence in schools could undermine student trust and disproportionately affect Black students. Participants frequently raised their concerns at school board meetings and urged JCPS to invest instead in counselors, de-escalation training, trauma-informed care and restorative practices.

Advocates also asked the district to apply its racial-equity analysis protocol to any security plan. Their central concern was that routine disciplinary matters could escalate into law-enforcement encounters, drawing students into the court system at an early age.

Questions about an in-house team

Under the preliminary in-house proposal, each middle and high school would receive a security officer, while elementary schools would share officers. Those employees—potentially including retired law-enforcement personnel—would report through a district security chief to the superintendent.

Important details remained unresolved. Officials had not determined whether the proposed officers would carry weapons or possess arrest authority. Those questions were especially significant to advocates concerned about the effect of policing on students who had previously experienced trauma or difficult interactions with law enforcement.

The proposal stated that one goal was to reduce school-based arrests and citations equitably. District officials had also reviewed peer school systems that reported fewer student arrests after shifting security operations in-house.

JCPS separately asked the board to consider additional resources for its Security and Investigations Unit. That unit investigated potential criminal activity involving the district but did not routinely patrol schools in the same way as SROs.

What the proposal included

• Continuation of police-agency SRO contracts while JCPS reviewed alternatives.
• Further study of an in-house security workforce accountable to district leadership.
• Consideration of state legislation addressing officers and mental-health support.
• Review of arrest authority, weapons policy, staffing and racial-equity effects.
• Potential additional resources for the district’s investigative unit.