Farmington Police Department John P. Drury, Chief of Police 160 Main St, Formington, MH 03835 Offs (603) 755.2731 Dispatch: (503) 75-2231 Fox (603) 755.9712 April 2.2019 School Resource Officer (SRO) The Town of Farmington and the Farmington SAU have experienced many positive things with the presence of a School Resource Officer. The Farmington Police Department, School Resource Officer, and the Farmington SAU have built strong relationships and have been successful in the prevention of school related violence, maintaining a safe and secure learning environment. The Farmington Police Department and the Farmington SAU do have areas of concern. The Farmington Police Department has experienced a high turnover of Schoo! Resource Officers serving in the Farmington SAU. The Farmington Police Department has identified many issues resulting or contributing towards the high level of tumover. This report was not generated to discredit, belittle, or highlight any wrong doing of any specific Department or employee of the Town of Farmington or the Farmington SAU. This report is to serve as information gathered to assist in answering a question regarding, why is the Farmington School District going through so many School Resource Officers, Farmington SRO Analysis Hiring: ‘School police work (SRO) is not for every law enforcement officer. Officers considered for the job should have at least three years of law enforcement experience according to the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO). They should have a strong desire to develop positive relationships with youth on a daily basis. The Farmington police department feels that a well-founded SRO should demonstrate a desire/enthusiasm in providing a safe leaning environment, providing valuable resources to school staff members, fostering positive relationships with youth, developing strategies to resolve problems affecting youth and protecting all students, so that they can reach their fullest potential The SRO service records should cantain no disciplinary actions or complaints involving the youth. They should volunteer for the position: no officer who doesn't desire the SRO position should be assigned. Its the belief of the Farmington police department, that assigning an Officer into the role of SRO would not be as effective. This is also supported by NASRO. The officer chosen for the SRO position should be selected with the assistance of the SAU and supported by the Farmington Police Department.The Farmington police department has remained true to this belief. The Farmington Police Department has provided the opportunity for the Farmington SAU to be actively involved in the selection process. Historically the Farmington Police Department has not experienced a high level of interest for the position of a School Resource Officer. In recent history the Farmington Police Department and the Farmington SAU have had one competitive hiring process. Fortunately, the Farmington Police Department has always had one member willing to volunteer for the position and accepted into the position by the Farmington SAU Information provided by School Resource Officers explaining why they have left the Farmington SAU and resigned from the position of School Resource Officer. It is important to note that during this process | did receive positive feedback, and constructive criticism which will be implemented to make the SRO position better. The positive feedback is not reflected in this report because of the nature of the question. School Resource Officers stated the following: -The SRO stated the Farmington SAU did not provide a welcoming feeling. The SRO described experiencing poor altitudes directed towards them by SAU members, lack of cooperation, interference with investigations, lack of assistance, negative body language directed towards them, and lack of support by the SAU -The SRO expressed concerns about not being part of the SAU team. The SRO stated they were treated as an outsider by some members of the SAU. The SRO described experiencing the Farmington SAU turn their back on the SRO, shutting doors and not including them on how an incident would be handled, not provided with information that is pertinent to the School Resource Officers position or handling calls for service, and watching SAU members whispering to prevent them from hearing conversations. The SRO stated they should have been included in the conversations that were taking place. -The SRO expressed concerns of safety at the Farmington schools. The SRO advised the SAU is full of small groups run by different leaders. The SRO stated the SAU lacks consistency from all three schools presenting challenges for any SRO, the safety of students, and faculty that work there. -The SRO described multiple teachers approaching them to report that the leaders of the schools are not following safety, disciplinary, and other policies. The SRO stated many teachers expressed being concerned for their personal safety. Teachers have reported to the SRO that the SAU fails to protect them, ~The SRO stated they would receive information from members of the three schools that certain leaders/influencers within the Farmington SAU didn't like them. The SRO stated the leaders or influencers would be vocal about this. -The SRO stated they felt that the schools would negatively talk about them during Farmington ‘SAU meetings, phone conferences, and it was observed by the SRO through body language, attitude, and lack of acceptance during calls for service.-The SRO described the Farmington SAU would not effectively communicate with them (lack of communication). No informational sharing is occurring by the Farmington SAU to help fulfil the role of the SRO. -The SRO expressed feelings like they were not needed on a daily basis and the SAU was comfortable with making its own decisions without their input. The SRO described the position like a glorified security guard and not consistent with the MOU or role of a SRO. -The SRO expressed there is no evidence to suggest the IN bas designated the Principal at each school as the reporting official consistent with the MOU of RSA 193-D Safe School Zones, between the Farmington School District and the Police Department. The SRO desoribes Principals failing to share information, provide reports without consultation Spenser (nr! -The SRO stated the SAU lacks command structure, education on their SAU policy and reporting protocols. MOU of RSA 193-D Safe School Zones, between the Farmington School District and the Police Department. -The SRO has expressed multiple concerns that the SAU fails to report school related incidents that are required to be reported (Mandatory Reportable Acts) by the MOU of RSA 193-D Safe School Zones, between the Farmington School District and the Police Department. -The SRO has expressed multiple concerns that the SAU fails to repart Mandatory Reportable Acts. The SRO stated when they confronted the SAU/Principal, or staff regarding the (MRA) the SAU becomes adversarial. -The SRO described receiving Mandatory Reportable Acts by the SAU after the designated 48 hour period of time. -The SRO describes receiving Safe School reports that are not filled out properly, or not filled out in its entirety. The SRO stated there is a principal who does not know how to properly fil out a safe school report. The SRO describes receiving Safe School Reports on incidents only after he notifies the SAU of schoo! principals he is aware of an (MRA), -The SRO stated teachers and other faculty ask him questions why the SAU or principals are failing to take action with incidents occurring inside the schools. -The SRO has expressed concerns that the SAU fails to take reasonable precautions to ensure safety of all students and staff after a Mandatory Reportable Act has been committed. The SRO cited specific examples on how the Principal failed to follow the MOU, or acted in violation of RSA 193-D:6 -The SRO stated they felt the Farmington SAU knowingly fails to comply with reporting requirements under RSA 193-D:4. The SRO's have been unable to identify why this is.