Texas schools are having difficulty meeting the requirement of having armed security officers, as mandated by state law.
A new Texas law is taking action to enhance public school safety. The law, which went into effect earlier this month, requires armed security guards at nearly 9,000 public school campuses across the state. However, reports indicate that not every school has chosen to comply with the legislation.
This legislation was prompted by the tragic Uvalde school shooting in May 2022, which claimed the lives of 19 children and two teachers at Robb Elementary School.
Under this new law, schools are required to develop and implement a “multihazard emergency operations plan” to address prevention, mitigation, preparedness, and response during disaster and emergency situations. They must also establish a “school safety and security committee,” regularly conduct emergency school drills and exercises, and identify weaknesses or vulnerabilities in their campus security.
The measure states, “The board of trustees of each school district shall determine the appropriate number of armed security officers for each district campus. The board must ensure that at least one armed security officer is present during regular school hours at each district campus.”
The bill allows for various individuals to serve as armed guards, including school district peace officers, school resource officers, commissioned peace officer employees, school marshals, or school district employees who have completed school safety training and carry a handgun on school premises.
Schools are also required to provide mental health training to employees who regularly interact with students, focusing on the recognition and support of children and youth who may pose a threat to school safety due to mental health or substance use issues.
Funding Issues
Additionally, schools must agree to undergo annual on-site intruder detection audits, safety and security audits of school facilities every three years, and a review of facilities every five years.
As part of the measure, the state will provide school districts with a $15,000 grant per campus to cover the costs.
The legislation includes exceptions for schools that cannot afford to hire armed security guards or do not have enough personnel who qualify as security officers, making it impossible for them to comply with the law.
Supporters of the bill, including Republican lawmakers, believe it will significantly enhance safety in Texas schools. However, opponents, such as the Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA), a nonprofit focused on equal educational opportunity, have raised concerns. They cited a study by the National Library of Medicine, which found that the majority of school shooters are actively suicidal and intend to die in the act, casting doubt on the effectiveness of armed security in deterring such incidents.
Schools Struggling to Hire Armed Guards
“We all support the idea,” said Stephanie Elizalde, superintendent of the Dallas Independent School District, which has over 140,000 students. ”The biggest challenge for all superintendents is that this is yet again an unfunded mandate.”
Elizalde explained that while the state provides an additional $15,000 per campus, it is still insufficient to hire additional armed officers. In Texas’s second-largest district, it would cost an extra $75,000 for each additional officer. According to an analysis by IDRA, hiring an armed security guard for an entire school year could cost up to $100,000.
As a result, some school districts have opted to hire private security firms or arm more staff and teachers. Others, including Houston ISD, Fort Worth ISD, and Katy ISD, are seeking exemptions from the law due to difficulties in filling officer positions at some schools, as reported by Houston Public Media.
“All school districts that do have police departments, and not all do, but all school districts that have police departments, by my understanding, have struggled to fill spots,” said Steve.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
