Report Details School Security Proposals

By John Voket and

Eliza Hallabeck

(This is the second part of a report on Newtown school district security.)

In only three weeks last June, during which she provided security consulting services to the Newtown school district, a former police captain observed enough apparent shortcomings at Newtown High School to fill a 29-page report that details dozens of issues, and offered recommendations she felt would best ensure the safety of both staff and students going forward.

Maureen Will, who graduated from Newtown High School in 1975 and was recently hired to manage the town’s emergency communications department, was solicited late last spring by Superintendent Janet Robinson to bring “fresh eyes” and some “perspective” to security practices and procedures in the local school district.

“I wanted her to tell me everything ­— our own self-assessment,” Dr Robinson told The Bee.

 The superintendent said the comprehensive and sometimes critical overview provided by Ms Will, who recently retired from the Brookfield Police Department, “Gives us a good look at what’s working and what’s not.”

The district is currently seeking a new security director. Richard Novia, who held the position for 15 years, was put on administrative leave earlier this year following a disciplinary action. His contract with the school district lapsed June 30.

(A copy of a police report provided to The Bee details allegations that Mr Novia pushed a student into a chair after the student refused to sit for questioning by the former security director and a school resource officer March 12.)

The 30-page report from Ms Will meticulously deconstructs aspects of security procedures, personnel practices, and logistics, along with providing a thorough inventory of security hardware, technology, and suggestions for improvements. While the report indicates some observations and suggestions to be applied districtwide, it pays particular attention to the high school.

Inconsistencies And Recommendations

In her summary, Ms Will wrote that above all the issues and observations she made during her brief consulting stint were apparent “inconsistencies in communications and discipline” among the four-member security force at the high school.

“I cannot fathom that you can have a staff that does not have basic standard operating procedures for day-to-day operations — no standardized reporting forms that are used proactively to track trends/reports and repairs,” Ms Will wrote in her summary. “No clearcut chain of command leaving security staff wondering whom they report to.”

While the report suggests instituting some security measures that will “cost the taxpayer,” she writes that “many changes…can occur at little or no cost.”

The most costly suggestions are the integration of vehicles, namely a Segway to help move security personnel through the interior of the high school, and a golf cart so officers can most efficiently check the school’s outside perimeter.

“With the size of the campus, it may just be that the time has come for their arrival,” Ms Will wrote. She further noted that a golf cart is currently available on campus for the athletic department, but security officers were either not allowed to use it or were not aware it was available to them if needed.

During her three weeks working for the district, Ms Will said that she spoke to the security staff, and as many faculty and administrators as possible.

“Everyone that I spoke with was very forthcoming with their answers and has a true passion and commitment for the students on campus,” she wrote. She also complimented the district’s new leadership, in particular the new superintendent and high school Principal Charles Dumais, as well as the school staff for being “willing to work” on security improvements “to make a change and a difference at the campus.”

During her brief period working in the district, Ms Will said she also observed a “frustration level” among staff who have seen no communication or “continuity of discipline and…no follow-through with requests and/or recommendations by some administrators.”

She said that taking into consideration the fact that Mr Novia had been on the job in excess of ten years, she was “appalled at not observing fundamental security protocols that should be in place for your chain of command, which can lead to conflicts as well as liability.”

Administrator Takes Issue

While Ms Will said she found no written policies or procedures for the security supervisor or staff members, she also never saw any write-ups for when students are accused of theft, documentation showing the staff of the security office were trained properly, or routes to be followed during day or evening security patterns.

Assistant Principal Scott Clayton, who is generally in charge of overseeing the security officers, said there were many statements in the report that could have been addressed by the administration. During her investigation, Mr Clayton said she did not speak to anyone that he knows of.

“There are a number of factual inaccuracies in this document,” he said.

The report said the portable phone system used by the security officers is not compatible with the phone system in the rest of the building; according to Mr Clayton, this is false. He also said the security officers monitor all of the building.

“The document that was prepared by Ms Will has some great recommendations,” said Mr Clayton, who has been at the high school for three years.

Mr Clayton also said the security officers attend monthly meetings to discuss the security at the school, and the report said there is no documentation of these things happening.

“I wish when writing this report, she had talked to us,” he said.

The report also said the security officers do not interrogate students when they are accused of anything, and Mr Clayton said it is not the Board of Education’s policy to have security officers do this.

“Ultimately, we are the people who are going to have to call the parents,” said Mr Clayton.

In one sentence the report mentioned the security camera tapes were misused, but it does not mention how. Mr Clayton said the tapes are not allowed to be monitored as they are taping, and they are only used for review purposes only.

“Spending less than three weeks in the building,” he said, “and at the end of the school year, is not an accurate view of the school.”

Mr Clayton said the report does have some good recommendations, and he is using some of them to write a new procedures policy now.

“You don’t shed your rights the moment you walk into the school,” said Mr Clayton, “but we have to balance that with what is in the best interest of the students learning.”

Mr Novia, who also spoke to The Bee, said points in the report are false.

“Security officers are different than police officers,” he said, “but they work together and serve important purposes.”

The former security supervisor said the report was written from a police officer’s perspective. He respects police officers, he said, but said security personnel are needed for prevention purposes.

(Mr Novia’s response to the consultant report appears in a separate story this week.)

Ultimately, Dr Robinson said the report was a valuable tool to aid the district in enhancing security procedures moving forward.

“It’s not scathing at all, it is constructive,” the superintendent said. “Newtown is far better than a lot of [other school districts], but we always need to be talking about security.”

She said the district cannot rely on just six or seven security officers and administrators to handle issues among 1,700 students.

“We have collective ownership. That means we need an ‘it takes a village’ attitude,” Dr Robinson said, adding that when it comes to fostering the best and most effective security procedures, it takes town officials, police, parents, students, and staff to make it work.

(A copy of Maureen Will’s report on security can be found on The Bee’s website, newtownbee.com)