On Tuesday, October 7, Newtown Board of Education (BOE) continued its discussion of acquisition and implementation of a weapons detection system at Newtown High School (NHS).

The conversation first began back in June when Sandy Hook School Foundation (SHSF) presented the system as a gift. The system is called CEIA OpenGate, a metal detector that is used by airports, federal agencies, and the Secret Service. Superintendent of Schools Anne Uberti put together a brief presentation discussing the system and its advantages.

Uberti explained the donation from SHSF is a specific “restricted donation” for the CEIA OpenGate system and that BOE “conditionally accepted the donation pending community feedback, review of an implementation plan, and evaluation of potential impacts.” She added that the schools have a “strong layered foundation of safety,” but current safety measures cannot detect concealed weapons hidden in backpacks or cases.

Uberti’s presentation said the system would identify threats before entry, deter someone from bringing a weapon into the school, strengthen NHS’ approach to safety, and could be used at other events like football games. With this system in mind, the board has continuously thought about student well-being.

The research results have been mixed, with some studies pointing to increased anxiety among students — something many, many students expressed.

Students And Parents Express Opposition

Before BOE began discussion of the agenda, the first public participation session drew a few people who expressed distaste for the systems. Several NHS students from Junior Newtown Action Alliance spoke about this system and the harm it could cause.

The first to speak was Cali Taylor, a senior at NHS. Taylor said, “While I appreciate the generosity and consideration of the Sandy Hook Foundation, I’m here to advocate for the rejection of this donation. I understand the purpose of these systems is to keep us students safe, but I feel as if it would have the opposite effect. My biggest concern is that it would result in a hostile environment.”

Taylor continued speaking, saying that school should be a place of “safety” and a place for students to “learn and thrive,” but she thinks the weapons detection system would disrupt the everyday learning environment. She added that she would be reminded every day walking through the doors that she is not safe from gun violence, and if the system were to go off for any reason, be it a Chromebook or a metal water bottle, she would do “anything in [her] power to leave the school.”

Michayl Wilford, a junior at NHS, spoke next. She also advocated for the denial of this system, echoing points her peer made before her: “I get that they’re supposed to bring this sense of safety, but I feel like it’s also just a constant reminder day after day that there’s something to be scared of when we’re going to school.”

Wilford also questioned the logistics of the system, asking if there would be lines to get into school when getting into the building is hard enough with traffic. She also said that the detections system would create an environment where students “have a reason to be scared.”

Charlotte Foley spoke next. Foley is a sophomore, and has spoken to BOE a few times about this issue. She said, “I think we all understand the lasting impact that [12/14] has had on our students, teachers, and our community as a whole. Because of this, I don’t think our schools will ever feel entirely safe again. It’s sad, but the truth. However, there are ways to make school feel more normal and not a constant reminder of what we have lost.”

Foley said the metal detector is not one of the ways to make school feel “normal,” and that the psychological effect will be far greater than the occasional, if ever, detection of a weapon. She said that going through a metal detector will only “remind [her] that [she is] not safe.”

“If your goal is for students to start their morning with fear, then go ahead and implement these machines. But if your goal is to make a positive impact on our school, I urge you not to take this gift. I hope you can hear what my classmates and I are saying and take our voices into consideration because we are the ones who will have to live with your decision every day,” Foley told the board.

Morgan Kenny, another sophomore at NHS, expressed rejection for these detections systems as well. She said, much like her classmates, that these systems will “do more harm than good.” Kenny raised concerns about extra screening and students having to be pulled aside. She said it would be more like “public shaming,” making school feel more “like a place to endure.” She also mentioned that queuing will take away time from learning and increase tardiness.

Kenny ended her comments with, “No student should have to sacrifice their peace of mind just to walk through the front door.”

Alli Holden, a current board member of Junior Newtown Action Alliance, also expressed her rejection for these systems. Alli began her comments by mentioning her brother Matt, who is a 12/14 survivor. Matt spoke at earlier meetings and also expressed opposition.

“I’m going to be straightforward,” Alli said, “These metal detectors would not prevent a shooting.” Alli then mentioned how the doors to NHS are unlocked after 2:30 pm, allowing anyone to walk through the door and either cause harm then or stash a weapon for the next day. She said she thought about ways around this, but realized the only way to ensure proper safety all day would be to hire more staff members to stay after school or lock people out of the building, which would cancel most after school activities. Alli said that all these devices do is create a “false sense of security.”

“Put yourself in the shoes of a student,” Alli told the board, “Not as an adult in charge of the education of the students.”

Karyn Holden, Alli and Matt’s mother, spoke next. She is also against these detections systems. Karyn explained she read Uberti’s newsletter about the systems and watched the videos about them. Karyn said she did other research, but most importantly, she “listened to [her] kids.”

Karyn also worried about 3D printed weapons not being detected, as that is a very possible reality. Karyn raised the same point as Alli, citing concerns about the doors being unlocked after 2:30 and anyone being able to access the building. She said she would rather see BOE put this money into more mental health resources in school to stop the problem before it starts and help students who feel isolated.

Marykay Wishneski, a mother of a NHS student, also expressed her rejection for these systems. She explained that she does think the gift from SHSF is “well-intentioned,” but the restrictions and limitations concerned her. Wishneski said, “If you’re using metal detectors as prevention, you’re already too late.”

Thomas Goad spoke next. He believes the metal detectors are “not enough.” He suggested “hardening schools” by using ballistic windows, kick proof plates on doors, and increasing security around entrance points. Following Goad’s points, the first session of public participation was closed.

Board Deliberations And A Vote

Deborra Zukowski began the deliberations by reading the motion into the record. The motion on the floor was to approve the weapons detection system donation. Uberti then went over her presentation, mentioned above, about the specific OpenGate system and its advantages.

Chair Alison Plante opened the floor to discussion amongst members. Brian Leonardi was the first to speak.

Leonardi expressed his approval of the weapons detection system, saying, “I think, whether we like it or not, gun violence is a threat we all face and pretending it’s not a threat … certainly will not make us any safer.”

He said that a metal detector is not an “absolute guarantee” that gun violence will not occur, but it will serve as a “deterrent.” He added, “I think, as a board, if we have the opportunity to improve security … we have a duty to thoughtfully consider that.”

Zukowski then shared her rejection for the systems. Zukowski cited some statistics that should alarm most people. She said there have been 11 school oriented shootings since the 2025 school year started. In 2024, there were 39. She said .1% of all high schools in the United States are directly impacted, meaning a shooting on campus, and only a third of those are actually within the school, or where the weapons detection system might pick up the concealed weapon.

Zukowski said the weapons detection systems may not be “as physically imposing as the ones we see in the airport, they’re still mentally imposing because you’re still having to walk through what you know is looking for deadly weapons.” Zukowski also shared that she is “not convinced” she had the right information about the system to accept the motion.

Board member Chris Gilson called in to the meeting to weigh in and share his opinion. Like Zukowski, he also was not in favor of implementing the system. Gilson said, “I don’t want out children starting each of their days with a reminder that they need to be fearful of each other and that they’re not safe.” He added that he was not “convinced” that the detections system is the most effective way to address the issue, and raised concern about the impact on the culture of the school.

Doria Linnetz spoke next. She recognized the layered and multifaceted approach to safety in the schools, but also recognized that “not one measure is foolproof.” She supported the implementation of these systems and said that it adds an “additional layer of security.”

John Vouros expressed his support as well. He said, “I’ve sat here as a Board of Education member. I sat here during the massacre. For 13 years, I’ve tried very hard to maintain and enhance the education for the students in this community. Why would I not, then, maintain and enhance the safety and security for the same students?”

Plante shared that she herself has struggled “mightily” with this decision. She said that this matter feels like a “very particular” one and it is “unclear how it fits into our broader safety and security strategic plan.” Plante began to ask Uberti to explain a bit how this would fit into the strategic plan, but Zukowski informed the board that Shannon Tomai, who was also not present for the meeting, sent her opinions via text message.

Zukowski read the message, which included, “Oh Lord. It’s almost 3 am where I am. I hope it didn’t pass.” Tomai added that the results of the student survey were clear and that NHS students did not want these systems in place. Tomai’s message included the school feeling like a “police state.” Tomai then called into the meeting as well, so all board members were present for the vote.

Uberti took the floor once more, recognizing immediately the high emotions surrounding this decision. She said she came into the district six months after 12/14 and is “well versed in what this community has been through.”

Uberti then explained that Newtown has as much security as any other school district in the country as a result of 12/14. She noted that when she started at Reed in 2013, there were no cameras or other security measures like cement pillars in front of playgrounds and doors to prevent cars from driving into those spaces.

“As in terms of a plan, there’s not much to add,” Uberti told the board. She recognized manpower is “desirable,” but that is not always feasible. Following Uberti’s explanation, Plante then elaborated on her thoughts.

“This is not something that we are being gifted and we’re arbitrarily implementing. This is something that is part of our layered approach,” Plante said. She added that this is not something she wants to rush, and needs to move slowly on it, and help the community, students, and parents understand how it fits into school security and how it will work. She expressed interest in doing a trial run like at a football game or homecoming to test it out before implementing it at the front doors of NHS.

Tomai then had an opportunity to formally comment. She said, “I think it’s clear that the students do not want this.”

Following Tomai’s comments, Plante opened the floor to a vote.

The vote passed 4-3, with Plante, Vouros, Leonardi, and Linnetz in favor and Zukowski, Tomai, and Gilson against. The students in the crowd with Junior Newtown Action Alliance left shortly after the vote was cast.

=====

Reporter Sam Cross can be reached at sam@thebee.com.