Skip to content
Know Your Rights
Source: City Limits
Subject: Education Justice
Type: Media Coverage

Getting Lost on the Way to the Principal’s Office

As another academic year gets underway, New York
City public schools once again open their doors under the watch of more
than 5,000 school safety agents, employees of the NYPD who enforce
security on campus. And like last year and the year before,
some officials, parents, school leaders and watchdogs remain vexed
about what they consider insufficient accountability for those safety
agents – who have been accused of everything from making inappropriate
arrests, including placing grade-schoolers in handcuffs, to starting
fights themselves.

A city bill aimed at changing that is slated to receive a hearing before City
Council this fall, more than a year after Harlem Councilman Robert
Jackson, chairman of the Education Committee, introduced it. The
Student Safety Act was to require more detailed, regular reporting of
school safety incidents, and offer parents, students, and school
personnel access to the Civilian Complaint Review Board – the
independent group that evaluates complaints levied against other NYPD
officers – to audit and evaluate complaints. The bill was referred to
the Public Safety committee and hearings were anticipated, then tabled,
in fall of 2008.

Now a hearing is slated for Oct. 22, and the
Student Safety Act seems poised to become law. The legislation has
undergone considerable revision on its way to gathering additional
councilmembers’ support; it appears close to garnering a co-sponsor
count that’s only one member short of the 34 votes needed to override a
possible veto from Mayor Bloomberg.

Coming closer to capturing the backing of Council leaders like Peter Vallone Jr. and Melinda Katz,
the only Council members who sit on both the Public Safety and
Education committees, and perhaps also Speaker Christine Quinn, has
meant eliminating one of the Act’s major elements: No longer will
complaints go to the cash-strapped, stretched-thin CCRB, which along
with other city agencies experienced additional budget cuts this year.
Instead, the revised version offers an enhanced reporting process via
the city hotline 311 and the NYPD’s Internal Affairs Bureau, which is
the office to which parent complaints currently are directed. More
explicit parent education – including posting directions for reporting
complaints in all schools served by safety officers, all police
precincts, and on the first page of school and DOE websites – is
thought sufficient by the bill’s supporters, including a coalition of
community advocates that includes the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund,
Advocates for Children, the Correctional Association of New York, and
the community group Make the Road by Walking.

Advocates charge that safety agents can and sometimes do trample the individual rights
of students and teachers; numerous press reports have documented
children as young as five years old handcuffed, and older children
cuffed, detained and held at local precincts. Principals who have
resisted safety agents’ actions have found themselves arrested as well
– disciplined and threatened with legal action by the safety agents who
ostensibly work for them, in their schools. While many safety agents
serve as benevolent, caring adults in their school communities, the
more detailed reporting elements of the School Safety Act will permit
closer tracking of agents against whom repeated complaints are lodged,
and can reveal possible patterns of behavior in individual agents,
their schools, their community and the school district.

The bill would create "a much more transparent process,” says Udi Ofer,
advocacy director for the New York Civil Liberties Union, also a member
of the supporting coalition. “There’s no question, the bill would be
stronger with the CCRB. But [the revision] will create transparency
that is long overdue. We just can’t wait any longer for it.”

The DOE-NYPD ‘understanding’

presence of police officers in the city’s schools dates back to Mayor
Giuliani’s era: In 1998, Giuliani signed a Memorandum of Understanding
with the NYPD granting the police department the authority to enforce
discipline and address crime in the schools. This memorandum,
widely thought to have expired in 2002, was in fact quietly renewed by
Mayor Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein in Jan. 2003 –
despite repeated denials of its existence by high-ranking police and
education personnel.

In 2007, four years into the new agreement,
Kathleen Grimes, DOE Deputy Chancellor for Infrastructure and Planning,
testified before City Council. “To the best of my knowledge,” Grimm
said, “there is no written Memorandum of Understanding.” And in 2009
hearings convened by the state Assembly’s Education Committee,
“high-ranking members of the NYPD and the DOE testified they had no
knowledge of a new memorandum of understanding,” recalls Brooklyn
Assemblyman Karim Camara. This June, just weeks before the original
legislation for mayoral control of the public schools expired, Camara
obtained a copy of the renewed 2003 Memorandum of Understanding that
continues the prior agreement – and bears the signatures of Mayor
Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein.

During the debate over the
renewal of mayoral control, Camara sought stronger checks on the
actions of police and student safety officers in the schools. Even as a
supporter of mayoral control, Camara considered accountability lacking,
and “information was not being disclosed to the public.” As he pressed
for safety reforms in the revised legislation – reforms that never made
it into the final law – he learned of the Memorandum of Understanding
from Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. “The DOE said there wasn’t one,”
Camara explained, yet he requested and received a copy of the document
from the Assembly’s Program Counsel.

Camara said the issue was
acutely resonant in his Brooklyn district. For example, police officers
were frequently called upon to break up school fights. When the
officers assert they have to arrest the fighting students, “the
principal’s hands are tied,” said Camara. Principals don’t know how to
break the cycle. “I spoke with five principals, and got five different
responses.” The lack of coherence prompted his desire for “a revision
of safety policy, and an agreement between schools” about what
constitutes criminal behavior – and what does not. "In emergencies – a
weapon, an evacuation – the NYPD decision overrides. In all other
situations, principals should be allowed to decide the disciplinary
action,” not the police, he said.

“That the DOE would deny its
existence is both baffling and indicative of their confused,
inconsistent and misguided approach to policing our schools,” NYCLU
director Donna Lieberman said three months ago, when the 2003 was made public.

Bloomberg spokesman Jason Post dismissed the renewal as “a technicality,” because
“under mayoral control of the schools, both the DOE and the NYPD report
to the mayor.” Mayoral control of both agencies suggests that no formal
agreements, or memoranda of understanding, are required. Pressed to
explain the DOE’s denial of the renewed memorandum, Post wrote in an
e-mail, “Deputy Chancellor Grimm was mistaken when she said the MOU
[memorandum of understanding] was not renewed.” He could not explain
Grimm’s error, or detail why NYPD officials maintained similar
statements in testimony before the State Education Committee.

In renewing the Memorandum, says Ofer from the NYCLU, “the DOE has
essentially abdicated responsibility for school safety and handed it
over to the Police Department.”

Crime down, police presence up

The number of NYPD officers in the city’s schools is such that if they were
an independent force, they would comprise one of the country’s largest
police departments. Over the last decade, their number has only grown:
In 1998, there were 3,200 school safety agents. Now, there are 5,200 –
plus an additional 200 armed police officers – spread among the city’s
1,400 schools. More than 80 of the schools have permanent metal
detectors at the main entryways. In addition to those permanent
scanning stations, since 2006 most of the city’s middle and high
schools have been subject to random scanning, when mobile
metal-detection units arrive at schools unannounced for spot-checks for
students carrying weapons or any metal objects, like iPods, mp3
players, and cell phones. At schools with permanent or occasional
detectors, long lines snake out of doorways as the day begins, while
students strip off jackets, bookbags, belts, and any other
metal-bearing gear prior to screening.

The Bloomberg
administration’s priority on crime reduction, in the schools as well as
the city, meant identifying high-incident “Impact” schools, among other
measures. School-based crime-reduction costs have risen 65 percent over
the mayor’s two terms, to a total of $88 million in the 2008-09 school

Crime continues to decline across the city as well, Mayor
Bloomberg reported at the same time he announced the current school
safety statistics; Police Commissioner Ray Kelly cited an 18 percent
drop over one year’s time in the city’s murder rate.Major crimes
in the schools have declined drastically from a pre-Bloomberg high of
more than 1,300 incidents in 2001. In 2007-08, 810 major crimes were
reported at the city’s schools. In 2008-09, that total fell to 737 –
but included two rapes (no rapes were reported in 2007-08). Crime
continues to decline across the city as well, Mayor Bloomberg reported
at the same time he announced the current school safety statistics;
Police Commissioner Ray Kelly cited an 18 percent drop over one year’s
time in the city’s murder rate. In the schools, rates of major crimes
like felony assault, burglary and sex offenses are less than half what
they were in 2000-01, according to DOE.
But less critical offenses, like misdemeanor assaults, remain
relatively constant: In 2000-01, before Bloomberg’s tenure, 1,088
misdemeanor assaults were reported in the schools. In 2007-08 and
2008-09, those numbers declined less dramatically, to 1,057 and 953.

educators and advocates say that reporting is inconsistent in the
schools – some principals report every incident, while others do not.
“One problem we face in monitoring safety is that schools have an
incentive to underreport, because there are consequences to reporting
incidents publicly that reflect badly on the school,” says Kim Sweet,
head of Advocates for Children, one of the advocate-sponsors of the
Act. “When schools report publicly, they run the risk of being seen by
both their community and the DOE as a dangerous place – they’re
marked,” and risk inclusion on the Mayor’s Impact School list. (The
Student Safety Act, while strengthening reporting and transparency,
does not provide a means to mandate or enforce thorough reporting.
Schools may still be able to minimize reporting of incidents that may
not rise to the level of major crimes.)

Bad behavior vs. criminal behavior

elected officials, and school leaders agree that major crimes deserve
police attention, but they add that less severe infractions – a
shouting match that becomes a hallway scuffle, bullying in a
schoolyard, insubordination and disrespect – are too quickly
criminalized by the NYPD agents in the schools, and could be more
effectively addressed as disciplinary issues rather than criminal ones.

“I believe the schools are safer,” said Assemblyman Camara. “But
having police officers in schools, some students have been casualties
of this policy. Too many are criminalized. There are 16, 17-year-olds
who now have criminal records, who will have difficulty getting a job
or going to college.”

Councilman Vallone, who chairs the Public
Safety Committee, has long supported vigilant reporting of school
safety incidents, which formed the core of a bill
he sponsored that passed in 2005 requiring annual public reporting of
information on school violence. But even as a strong advocate for
school safety – “school safety takes precedence over the individual
rights of students,” he said in an interview – he agrees that
“confusion exists over who’s in control.”

“I believe the police
make the ultimate decision, but some principals don’t accept that. I’d
like to know which law we’re operating under.”

criminal behavior is “a gray area,” Vallone said. “Kids pushing in the
schoolyard – is that a crime or not? There’s a difference between
robbery and something that should be handled by a principal or a
mediator, or by suspension. But defining a crime – deciding when
disrespect, peer conflict, bullying, shoving is bad behavior or
criminal – that’s something you can’t really mandate by law.”

problem is getting the information in the first place,” said Vallone.
Working for his 2004 bill, which mandated annual reporting of school
crimes but did not include an appeals or oversight mechanism, “the
police were very reluctant to release more information.” But, he added,
“when information does come out from the police department, it usually
does support the police. So the more information that’s released, the

Lining up the votes

The revised Student
Safety Act eliminates the CCRB reporting element, in favor of improving
the existing reporting mechanism, via the NYPD’s Internal Affairs
Division. “The CCRB can’t handle the complaints,” said Vallone. “It can
barely handle the complaints it has now.” Cuts to the CCRB’s budget,
which Vallone cited a year ago in his objections to the original bill,
“would actually hinder” reporting. “You can’t give power without the
funding,” he said. “If the Mayor doesn’t fund the CCRB, the CCRB can’t
do its job.”

Parents have had recourse to Internal Affairs
reporting all along, says Vallone, but new efforts to educate parents
on their options will improve access and transparency. “This bill goes
even further than my bill [No 226]. I’m not opposed to that.”

Vallone plans to support the revised Student Safety Act when it comes up for a
hearing in October. “I will be supporting it,” he said. “I do support
the goals of this bill.” While it’s often his practice to withhold
sponsorship of legislation – as the Chair of Public Safety, Vallone
says it’s critical to preserve his objectivity – his anticipated
endorsement will bring the co-sponsorship count to 32.

Melinda Katz, who with Vallone, sits on both the Education and Public
Safety Committees, has not yet read a revised version of the bill,
according to spokesman Ben Branham. But “based on conversations she has
had with its proponents,” Branham wrote in an e-mail, “she is inclined
to support it.” Her original “strong reservations” about an
“overburdened and underfunded” CCRB have been tempered by the
elimination of the CCRB element, “and increases the likelihood of her
sponsorship.” Katz’s probable endorsement will bring the tally to 33,
tantalizingly close to the 34 votes the bill’s sponsors desire.

Speaker Quinn would not comment publicly on the bill or the revisions
to it; according to her spokesman, Anthony Hogrebe, “The Speaker has
not yet taken a formal position on the legislation, and we continue to
have conversations with all stakeholders.” Many familiar with the
negotiations said she, too, perceived the CCRB reporting requirement as
a stumbling block. Education Committee Chair Robert Jackson, who first
introduced the Student Safety Act, strongly advocated for an objective
monitoring process via the CCRB. In February, he remained adamant in
his commitment to independent oversight: “There needs to be absolute
clarity and transparency, and there needs to be an objective appeals
process independent of the New York Police Department,” Jackson told
City Limits.

This month, Jackson revised his view: “While we
initially pursued an independent process, it soon became clear that the
CCRB lacks the resources to handle these complaints in a timely manner,
especially given the current budget crisis,” he wrote in an e-mail.
“The existing proposal achieves greater transparency by using 311 as
the vehicle for transmitting complaints to [the Internal Affairs
Bureau], and strengthening reporting requirements.”

Advocates see
the bill as a possible national model for school-safety reform.
Mandated quarterly reporting of school safety incidents, in
hyper-granular, wonkish detail, will permit close scrutiny of what
actually happens in the city’s schools, and either refute the claims of
the DOE, or of the advocates who says policing the schools represents a
systemic challenge.

“Many people, including the Department of
Education, accuse us of exaggerating the situation,” says the NYCLU’s
Ofer. “Advocates and the NYCLU believe this is s systemic problem.
Students, parents and police personnel are the victims. School safety
agents are in a position that’s bad for them, making decisions they’re
not trained to make. This bill will allow people to make an informed
decision whether the police department is enforcing school discipline.”
It could also set the stage for discussions of behavior,
responsibility, crime and punishment in the city’s schools, as well as
the nation’s schools.