Don’t Turn Back …

Below are my remarks to my colleagues from last night's Board of Education Meeting.

I have to begin with a trigger alert that my comments will definitely make some uncomfortable, but as a Black man in America, I am uncomfortable every day with the notion that innocent people that look like me are losing their lives to those that took an oath to protect and serve our communities. First, I must uplift the name of Jor’Dell Richardson, a 14-year-old boy murdered by police in Aurora, CO. — again, he was a 14-year-old boy murdered by the police, the same system that some want to bring back.

Let me be clear, I am not anti-police, but I am anti-bad policing. I am anti-police brutality; I am anti-school to-prison pipeline. Our Superintendent asked us to trust him and the police chief because they are different people than what we had in 2020. Since we are talking about Juneteenth today, imagine if Abraham Lincoln had angry Southerners that wanted the return of slavery just three years after the emancipation proclamation was signed and President Lincoln said to those freed slaves, “Trust me, I am a different President than those that enslaved you, and these southerners are different than what was in place three years ago.” — My ancestors would have revolted. They wouldn’t have been silent as the United States regressed into an oppressive system, so why would I be silent here today as we are attempting to go back into a system that was oppressive for students that look like me?

Director Bladermann has yet to provide proof that the plan he voted on to remove school resource officers has failed; instead, he has pushed forward a plan to reintroduce school resource officers with the support of President Gaytan. President Gaytan, at a recent community meeting, stated that she supported cops in schools, and one reason she gave was due to a student overdosing on fentanyl and that the school had to wait for the EMT and a cop could have responded faster; the President just made the case for us to focus on ensuring we have full-time nurses in each school and training every adult on first aid and how to administer Narcan, not a cop in school.

Director Baldermann has stated that his plan for cops would not administer tickets but be a deterrent for weapons coming into schools, so I have a few questions.

Before SROs were removed, there was an incident at my school where a student brought a gun to the campus, did that SROs presence stop that student from bringing a gun to school? — NO, HE DID NOT.

Here at this building, a student and parent were shot outside during the school day, did the multiple Denver Public Schools safety and security folks with guns deter the shooting from happening? — NO, THEY DID NOT.

This past week our Denver Nuggets won the NBA Championship; the entire SWAT team was deployed to be downtown for the celebration, but did their presence deter the mass shooting that took place, injuring eleven people? — NO, THEY DID NOT.

Today there was a shooting on 17th street where multiple people were shot after the celebration for the Nuggets. I was downtown, and there were tons of police, but did their presence deter the mass shooting that took place, injuring those people? — NO, THEY DID NOT.

None of these shootings or incidents with weapons were deterred by the presence of law enforcement. So help me understand how the re-introduction of the same failed policy will deter anyone from bringing a gun and or any school-based violence from occurring. In six years, there were 4,929 tickets issued to students, and 87% of those were students of color. The data we used to make that unanimous decision three years ago showed us that we were failing our BIPOC students and complicit in the school-to-prison pipeline. Since their removal, we have witnessed a 90% reduction in tickets to our students. That is progress.

Where is that data to show us this failed?

Where is that data to show us this failed?

Where is that data to show us this failed?

Where is that data to show us this failed?

Where is that data to show us this failed?

We are not talking about the root cause. I have been told that we need to make it look like we are doing something and make people “feel” safe. How is that authentic leadership? How is that rooted in best practices? I was utterly disgusted by the “data” points that the Deputy Superintendent gave at our last meeting, making it seem that there was overwhelming support for the return of SROs by our students, so I asked for the raw data, and after breaking the numbers to actuals the Deputy Superintendent misled the public and the Board of Education.

There were only 2,240 students surveyed out of 88,000 students. That would be 0.025% — but now let’s break those numbers down by school since the Deputy Superintendent did so at our last meeting.

Abraham Lincoln High School: 306 students support out of the 984 students enrolled at the school, which represents only 31% of the student body.

Colorado Early College: 32 students support out of the 471 students enrolled at the school, which represents only 6.79% of the student body.

Compassion Road Academy: 14 students support out of the 83 students enrolled at the school, which represents only 16% of the student body.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr Early College: 181 students support out of the 1,032 students enrolled at the school, which represents only 17% of the student body.

Denver School of Innovation and Sustainable Design: 13 students support out of the 92 students enrolled at the school, which represents only 14% of the student body.

John F. Kennedy High School: 7 students support out of the 787 students enrolled at the school, which represents only 0.89% of the student body.

Montbello Career and Technical High School: 22 students support out of the 77 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents only 28% of the student body.

Montbello High School: 156 students support out of the 1,109 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents only 14% of the student body.

Northeast Early College: 2 students support out of the 554 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents only 0.36% of the student body.

North High School: 34 students support out of the 1,614 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents only 2.1% of the student body.

Northfield High School: 378 students support out of the 1,872 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents only 20% of the student body.

Prep Academy: 0 students support out of the 42 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents 0% of the student body.

South High School: 131 students support out of the 1,840 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents 7.11% of the student body.

Summit Academy: 23 students support out of the 150 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents 15% of the student body.

Thomas Jefferson High School: 571 students support out of the 1321 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents 43% of the student body.

West High School: 10 students support out of the 637 students that are enrolled at the school, which represents 1.56% of the student body.

Not a single one of these schools could get 50% of their student body to support the return of school resource officers, even when 12,623 students were given the survey. I spoke with an Assistant Principal at one of the schools mentioned above that informed me that their survey was given on the last day of school during the first period; we did not even set our schools up for success with these surveys; we did not create a standard survey to give to schools but allowed each school to come up with their own questions. We do not have any results from the school that prompted this conversation. Also, we have left out other comprehensive high schools like Manual High School. We did NOT engage our charter partners in this conversation, and they represent over 20,000 students in the Denver Public Schools.

Where is the data from them? Furthermore, this data is in direct violation of Executive Limitations 4: Public Presentations to the Board:

3.) Include disaggregated data, including numbers and percentages of marginalized identities within Ends policy 1 . Include all races when presenting data based on race. The data should include both numbers and percentages. Notify the board and explain in the presentation when certain disaggregated data is not available or cannot be legally collected.

The surveys above did not collect disaggregated data as directed in Executive Limitations 4 and should not have been presented to the general public with it being out of compliance with Board Policy.

The Denver Classroom Teachers Association ranked SROs lowest on their survey of teachers and SSPs, asking the Board of Education to prioritize small classroom sizes and mental health supports. Why is there, not an EL proposal from these directors to address these issues raised by the union that supported their political campaigns?

We can not continue to use this false talking point of 90% of school leaders supporting the return of SROs when again, not all school leaders have been engaged. I spoke with leaders at the June Universal, and those that I spoke with told me they have not been engaged on this topic, which leads me to ask who surveyed and what schools do they represent. Did we properly engage our charter partners in these surveys? Because I know with confidence one of our networks was not engaged at all.

Director Baldermann implored us as a board to wait for public comment to happen this month before we made a decision. 91% of the speakers spoke against school resource officers. So how are their voices included in this proposal?

Again, I ask the authors of this proposal to point me to data showing me that the previous policy failed, especially when, weeks BEFORE the incident at East, we ratified EL 10.10 without any revisions. In February, President Gaytan tweeted in support of former mayoral candidate Dr. Lisa Calderon said the following: “Thank you @LisaforDenver for not raising your hand in bringing back SROs to DPS schools. More counselors, not cops. More city partnership and resources for DPS families — experienced mental health professionals, before/after school child care, etc.”

She tweeted this THREE DAYS after the murder of Luis Garcia and the shooting outside of this building in which the student is now deceased, and the parent is paralyzed; what changed in her heart to do a 180 and endorse the school-to-prison pipeline? Director Baldermann stated at our last meeting that he doesn’t actually support the reinstatement of school resource officers but wants people to see that we are doing something; why doesn’t his plan mention pat downs since that is why we are here? In our policy proposal, we end the physical patdowns of our students by our educators and place that responsibility in the hands of our trained professionals in the Department of Climate and Safety. — That is responding directly to the issue at hand, not a performative policy that solves nothing.

This policy only allows School Resource Officers at selective campuses, which will exacerbate school choice for families that have the means to leave their neighborhood school if they believe their campus is NOT safe due to the lack of an SRO. With our approach, we will establish Community Resource Officers to support all our schools, not a selective few.

The National Association of School Resource Officers indicates that there are between 14,000 and 20,000 SROs serving in our schools. Yet, a comprehensive study published by the Washington Post in 2018 discovered that, of nearly 200 school shootings that took place since the tragic event at Columbine High School in 1999, only two were stopped by an SRO.

Additionally, a report from the ACLU in 2019 found that over 14 million students are in schools with police but no counselor, nurse, psychologist, or social worker. This discrepancy highlights the need for resources to be allocated towards services that directly support student mental health and well-being.

Research from the Journal of Criminal Justice shows that SROs do not decrease violent behaviors in schools. The presence of an SRO, as evidenced in the tragic incident at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, does not guarantee the prevention of a school shooting.

Looking at racial disparities, a 2021 study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that schools with police presence reported 3.5 times more arrests than those without, and this disproportionately impacted Black students. This systemic bias contributes to what is commonly referred to as the “school-to-prison pipeline.”

Considering these data and the trends they reveal, it is clear that the simple presence of SROs does not equate to safer schools or a decrease in school shootings. A sentiment that has been repeated by our own Chief of Police; he may want his officers in our schools to build positive relationships, but he has consistently said, even as of this week at the Colorado Black Roundtable event, “I don’t believe that the presence of a law enforcement officer will make schools safer.”

Let’s get one thing clear. Taking cops out of schools wasn’t a mistake. When we made that decision, we did it based on facts. We looked at the research and saw that having cops in schools didn’t make our schools safer or better. Today, there’s still no clear proof to say otherwise. We can’t make big decisions like this one without real evidence to back them up.

Remember, the year 2020. It was a time that reverberated across the globe, a year that echoed with the powerful refrain, “Black Lives Matter.” This came in the wake of George Floyd’s tragic, unjust death. We, as a community and as a school board, we stood shoulder to shoulder with that movement. We voiced our support, not just in words, but through our actions. We made the monumental decision to remove police from our schools. That decision was not just a change in policy, but a monumental stride towards progress, towards ensuring our students, explicitly our students of color, could feel safe in their learning environment.

To contemplate retracing our steps now, to consider reverting to a policy that we had consciously stepped away from, is not just counterproductive — it’s regressive. The mere idea is a slap in the face to the progress we’ve made, and more importantly, it betrays the trust and the commitment we made to our students and our community.

I ask each one of you to think hard about the implications of your vote. Your vote is not just a matter of policy; it’s a signal, a message to our community. To vote in favor of the return of SROs is to openly declare to our Black and Brown students — that you’re choosing to turn a blind eye to the lessons we’ve learned.

The harsh truth, however uncomfortably it may sit with us, is that by voting for the return of SROs, you are inadvertently supporting the status quo of white supremacy. A vote to return SROs implies we as a society — as a school system — are comfortable with more black and brown youth entering the criminal justice system directly from our schools. That might not be your intention, but that will be the interpretation, the perception, and the message received by our students of color. It will come across as a statement that Black Lives truly don’t matter as much and that their voices are less significant, their concerns less valid. We must not endorse a system that allows a white supremacist practice that fundamentally disregards the right of black and brown youth to attend school without fear of racial profiling or implicit bias leading to their arrest or referral to law enforcement to continue to thrive unchallenged.

Voting to return SROs is a vote to ensure more of our black and brown students become entangled in the criminal justice system. That is a fact — born out by national research and DPS’s own historical data!

Think about the implications of your vote. Consider the message you’re sending to our community, to our children. Are you voting for progress, for equity, for justice or are you voting for a return to a flawed and harmful system?

I will end with our equity statement: DPS will be a district that is free of oppressive systems and structures rooted in racism and one which centers students and team members with a focus on racial and educational equity, enabling students to ultimately become conscientious global citizens and collaborative leaders.

Ask yourself, is your vote in alignment with our equity statement, or is it aligned with a white supremacist mindset that allows you to feel comfortable even though your vote will knowingly place our black and brown students at unnecessary risk?

For those that vote for this as a Black man in America and your colleague, I will never forgive you.

• Auon’tai Anderson, Vice President