REGIONAL- The Minnesota House took the first step toward returning school resources officers, or SROs, to schools on Monday by passing legislation to exempt them from a law prohibiting school workers from using certain types of physical holds, including prone holds, on students.
The St. Louis County Sheriff’s Office was one of about 40 law enforcement agencies around the state who pulled their SROs from schools at the start of the school year over concerns that officers could be exposed to legal liability after legislators approved new rules last year for applying forceful restraint. While Attorney General Keith Ellison claimed that interpretation was in error, most law enforcement organizations demanded changes in the law before they would consider returning officers to schools.
District 3A Rep. Roger Skraba, R-Ely, voted for the measure, which passed with bipartisan support by a vote of 124-8.
“I am pleased that we were able to come to a bipartisan solution to this issue so that schools across Minnesota and in our region can bring School Resource Officers back,” said Skraba in a written statement.
The issue traces back to an omnibus education bill enacted by the Legislature last year, that instituted prohibitions on the use of force in schools, prohibiting certain physical holds by school staff, including SROs. Language in the new measure would exclude SROs from the prohibitions on prone restraints and physical holds. It also revises the reasonable force standard and mandates that school districts use only trained SROs and establishes new training and model policy requirements for law enforcement.
While legislators gave the bill wholehearted support, it faced strong opposition in committee hearings from education and mental health advocacy groups who were in favor of the all-inclusive approach for anyone who works with students. Exempting SROs from the requirements school administrators and staff are held to creates an unreasonable and dangerous double standard, they say.
“This is especially concerning to us for children with disabilities whom history has shown are mostly likely to be restrained and may be more susceptible to injury as a result of their disability or less able to communicate distress due to complex communication needs,” said a letter from the Coalition for Children with Disabilities.
Dallas, a high school junior who wrote a letter on behalf of the LRC Youth Network, wanted committee members to listen to what students had to say.
“Undoing and removing the ban is simply not the answer,” he wrote. “I can’t express the amount of harm that could come out of this for black, brown and disabled students who will be disproportionately affected by House File 3489. Prone restraints are not an effective way to go about our children’s education.”
The measure had the full support of the executive directors of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, and Minnesota Sheriffs Association, who offered suggestions to clarify portions of the bill.
A joint bill in the Senate has yet to be scheduled for a committee hearing, although it is also expected to have bipartisan support.