Article Summary: A proposal to allow Crete-Monee 201-U’s Director of Safety and Security to carry a firearm on school grounds was tabled by the Board of Education following a lengthy and divided debate. Several board members requested more research on the effectiveness and potential negative consequences of such a policy before moving forward.

Director of Safety Job Description Key Points:

• The board discussed revising the job description for the Director of Safety and Security to authorize the carrying of a firearm.

• Proponents argued it would provide an additional layer of security and a faster response time in an emergency, while opponents questioned its effectiveness as a deterrent and raised concerns about student climate and accidental misuse.

• The vote was tabled to allow the administration to research response time data and practices in other Illinois districts with non-police armed staff.

CRETE — The Crete-Monee School Board on Tuesday postponed a decision on whether to authorize its Director of Safety and Security to carry a firearm, choosing instead to seek more information after a robust debate revealed deep divisions on the issue.

The proposal involved revising the job description for the director position, currently held by Mr. Tobias, to include language permitting the carrying of a firearm on district property. Superintendent Dr. Kara Coglianese presented the proposed changes, which were developed with the district’s attorney to ensure legal compliance.

Board members who supported the change framed it as a proactive safety measure. “I just think it’s just another layer of being prepared or like I said, just a deterrent,” said Board President Maurice Brown. He compared it to the district’s Evolv weapon detection system, noting that no single measure is foolproof but adds to overall security.

Dr. Todd Hall, who has a background in law enforcement and school security, agreed. “It is definitely a deterrent… It’s probably better to have it for the safety versus not having it,” he said.

However, several board members expressed significant reservations. Secretary Jamie Zite-Stumbris questioned the proposal’s foundation, asking for research-based evidence to support the move. “Currently there’s no evidence that suggests having someone on site with a weapon is any faster at responding or stopping and minimizing shootings or fatalities,” she stated.

Zite-Stumbris also raised concerns about the potential for a negative impact on school climate, an increased risk of accidents, and the possibility of disproportionate policing. “It’s not a deterrent if it’s going to be concealed,” she added, questioning the argument that a hidden weapon would prevent an incident.

Vice President Alejandro Gallegos echoed some of these concerns, noting that the director had recently given a thorough presentation on the district’s robust safety protocols. “Nowhere in that presentation that he gave said like, ‘None of this works if I don’t have a gun.’ So like I don’t understand why… this whole like presentation that he did is just like null and void if he doesn’t get to carry a gun,” Gallegos said via remote connection.

The discussion also touched on whether the firearm would be concealed or openly carried, with Mr. Tobias noting that visibility is a deterrent but also makes him a potential target.

Faced with a clear divide, the board opted to gather more information. Zite-Stumbris formally requested research on several key points: the response time differential between an armed on-site employee versus a nearby police department, and how many schools with Evolv-style systems and on-site SROs have also experienced shootings.

The board voted unanimously to table the motion, with the administration agreeing to research the questions and bring the topic back for discussion at a future meeting.