By Wayne E. Rivet

Staff Writer

Cutting the Student Resource Officer from the proposed SAD 61 budget provoked the ire of parents and consternation of Sheriff Kevin Joyce, who told the School Board, “I can’t fix what I don’t know.”

SAD 61 Finance Director Sherrie Proctor presented an overview of the proposed $36 million budget (up 7.78%) at Monday’s public hearing in the Lake Region Vocational Center’s Great Room. Once completed, School Board Chair Janice Barter allowed public comment.

Most comments were directed at the decision to remove the Student Resource Officer (SRO).

Michelle Thibodeau of Naples called herself a “concerned mother of two daughters” enrolled in SAD 61. She is “firmly” opposed to the School Board’s decision to dump the SRO while adding a second Dean of Students — this one positioned at Lake Region Middle School.

“I believe it is a misguided decision,” she said. “The role of the SRO is paramount, not only for the safety and well-being of our students and faculty, but also for the peace of mind of their families.”

Thibodeau “closely” watched a recent Naples budget meeting, at which time the removal of the SRO position was discussed.

“I couldn’t shake off the feeling that this decision might be influenced by a personal conflict rather than what’s best for our schools,” she said. “Additionally, inconsistencies highlighted by (Sheriff) Kevin Joyce during the Naples Select Board meeting regarding the rationale behind this decision have only exacerbated concerns within our community.”

Thibodeau feels a police officer’s presence in a school reassures children that “law enforcement officers are not to be feared” rather they are a “trusted figure.” By developing personal relationships with students, the SRO may be the person a child who is experiencing issues at home will turn to for help, rather than share those matters with faculty members.

“The mere presence of an SRO has a deterrent effect on potential misconduct within our school premises. As a parent, I firmly believe that my children are safer in an environment with a dedicated SRO,” Thibodeau added. “I advocate for having an SRO in every school within our district. Knowing that’s not a possibility, one is better than none. Eliminating the SRO position jeopardizes the safety and well-being of our school community.”

Thibodeau suggested that the School Board place whether to keep the SRO as a stand-alone question on the budget warrant and let voters decide whether to keep it or cut it.

“Let’s work together to rectify this decision and prioritize the safety of our children and faculty,” she added.

Currently, SAD 61 is contracted with the Cumberland County Sheriff’s Office for one SRO at a cost of $106,000. The SRO has an office at the high school, but also makes trips to other SAD 61 schools.

Last week, Superintendent of Schools Al Smith explained that the district proposed a shift in approach from an SRO — which is hired and evaluated by the Sheriff’s Department — to a Dean of Students — which is a SAD 61 employee, who is evaluated by SAD 61 administration — because school officials see a better fit.

“We have not seen what we had hoped we would receive from the SRO. We have not had safety issues. Putting in the Dean of Students (at the high school) has been a game changer. The Dean works with students, knows the kids, is very active when disturbances take place, knows the families and parents very well, and can do wellness checks if needed,” Smith said. “The Dean does a lot of conversation and data pieces with students around their academics, none of which was happening with our SRO.”

Smith added that the cost of a Dean of Students would enable the district to place a DS at both the high school and middle school for what it costs for one SRO.

It was pointed out that the Dean of Students does not carry a firearm.

The superintendent rejected the notion that eliminating the SRO was “personal.”

“I’ve met him four or five times. I have no problem with him personally at all. What I do have a problem with is the role and the expectations of that role,” said Smith, noting that conversations regarding a job description and role “have not made any difference.” He added that the SRO position is a budgetary piece. “It isn’t just the person as you’re trying to allude to, it’s money.”

Smith told The News after Monday’s meeting that the School Board will weigh comments made by the public at their April 1 meeting. He added directors could indeed place the SRO question as a separate warrant article, asking taxpayers if they wish to spend the $106,000 on the position.

The district budget meeting is Tuesday, May 7 at 6:30 p.m. in the Lake Region High School gym.

More comments

Amy Morton of Naples, a parent of three children, asked the School Board, “How many of you have kids within our district that you have to drop off at school every day and wonder if they’re going to be safe?”

“You don’t know what peace it brings to a parent seeing a cruiser outside of a school knowing that someone is there, hopefully able to protect your children if the time comes, especially given the events in our country,” she said. “We need an armed person at the school.”

Morton added that “cuts are being made in the wrong areas” and thought the Dean of Students is “another glorified administrative position when we could have someone potentially protecting our schools.”

“Our kids have to go to school being nervous. That’s not fair. That’s not right. That’s not anything that I had to live in. It’s a different world. Positions like that (SRO) are most necessary within our school,” Morton added.

Tracy Hoyt of Naples, who has a grandchild in SAD 61, rattled off the staggering statistics regarding school shootings and the death toll.

“Guns are brought to school. We need people that can protect our children,” she said.

Ted Shane of Naples questioned the School Board’s decision to drop the SRO considering “today’s crazy world that we live in.”

“There was a school shooting just last week. It happens all the time. To think that the Dean of Students is going to make our children safer, I believe is a big mistake,” Shane said.

Shane called out Superintendent Smith regarding conversations he had with the Sheriff’s Department regarding the SRO situation. The superintendent initially had conversations with a sergeant and a lieutenant regarding the SRO’s role at the schools, but not the sheriff.

“If you had a problem with the deputy here at the school, I would think your first conversation would be with the sheriff, but that didn’t happen,” Shane said.

Superintendent Smith answered that in the education world, when there is a problem with an individual, “I speak with their direct supervisor” — in this case, the sergeant and lieutenant.

“Maybe our expectations of what the resource officer was going to bring to the school district was not realistic, it’s not what we thought they were,” Smith said.

Since the SRO is controlled by the Sheriff’s Department and a union contract, Smith said the school district has “very little control over various pieces,” which have “created some challenges that I don’t know how to fix.”

Shane suggested a conversation with Sheriff Joyce and recommended to the School Board to put the SRO back into the proposed budget.

Sheriff’s response

Sheriff Kevin Joyce attended Monday’s hearing to set the record straight in wake of “inconsistencies” that have appeared on social media.

“If this were about money, then I can accept it because I have budgets too. When I sit here and listen to you say if I have a problem, I go to this supervisor, with all due respect, if I have a problem with a criminal case with your students or with your employees, I probably am going to give you a call at home,” Sheriff Joyce said. “So, I’m a little disappointed.”

The sheriff continued, “I won’t tolerate my SRO being dragged through the mud.”

The sheriff spent several minutes talking about “fiction and facts.”

Fact, his department would go to homes to check on students if they had guns, regardless of whatever decision is made on the SRO. “I won’t leave the school in a situation where they have to worry about violence. They can call anytime if there is a suspicious person or if they need police services. I’m not going to have an attitude over whatever decisions are made.”

The sheriff did note that if the SRO position is eliminated, there would be two deputies covering six to seven towns depending on the day of the week, which could hamper coverage.

Fact, the sheriff expects the SRO to interact with kids. “I’ve got three SROs. They are all different. They all have varying ways that they’re doing their job. But the bottom line is, until I heard by rumor on Feb. 15, I didn’t realize there was a perceived issue with the SRO. In fact, my captain will say last June when school got out, things were really good. So, how did we go from good to bad in five or six months?”

Sheriff Joyce noted that the last time he had contact with Superintendent Smith was last June.

“Last May, I was up here for a Job Fair. I stopped in. Nobody ever said anything about the SRO having issues. I was up a couple of times in April to speak to the law enforcement group here. Not once did anyone go, ‘Hey, I have to talk to you about the SRO...All I heard was good things about the SRO. If there were problems, I’d fix it. But, I don’t find out until I hear third hand on Feb. 15 that the SRO’s got a pink slip and the captain gets an e-mail the next day, I’m not happy about that.”

Sheriff Joyce said the SRO is in a position to give law enforcement a positive image in the eyes of youngsters so when they arrive at high school, “they’re not afraid of this uniform.”

The Sheriff admitted the deputy is a law enforcement officer first, and SRO second. He pointed to a case where a parent contacted the SRO in relation to alleged threats that had been made and the parent sought a protection from abuse and harassment order on the suspect, which was a student.

“When there’s a threat these days, you just can’t take it as a threat. I’ve been telling people before Lewiston happened, we have been lucky because Maine is a pretty good place to live, but we have a lot of guns, we have a lot of mentally ill people, and we just have a lot of people that acting differently,” Sheriff Joyce said. “In this particular case, the father of the victim wanted a criminal case. I agree with that statement — police officer first and SRO second — because had the SRO said no, I’m not taking your criminal complaint, that father would have called me and I’d call the SRO saying you will do it because gone are the days we can take some of these things and think maybe they’re just kidding. A 6-year-old in Virginia last year brought a gun to school and shot a teacher in the face. It happens. I take nothing for granted at this point. The fact the deputy did his job, I support that.”

Sheriff Joyce pointed out that there may be times the SRO is stuck in an office writing out reports that are expected to be turned in to his superiors by the end of his shift.

The sheriff also questioned that if SAD 61 officials were unhappy with continued, perceived problems with the SRO, why no one called him to voice those issues.

“I can’t fix what I don’t know,” the sheriff emphasized. “... I just read the SROs evaluation. His evaluation is much different than what I’m hearing and much different than what I’m seeing on Facebook. Again, I don’t know what to believe. I’ll tell you, it’s a little disappointing that we’re talking on something that has been performance driven. Last year, apparently great reviews, today not so much.”