Senate Tees Up School Safety Bill, 'Guardian' Debate
The Senate Appropriations Committee approved a rewrite of the proposal to give more flexibility to school districts that want to participate in the controversial guardian program.
April 15, 2019 at 12:43 PM
5 minute read
Nearly 14 months after the Parkland school shooting, state senators moved toward passing a wide-ranging school safety bill that would include allowing classroom teachers to serve as armed school “guardians.”
The Senate Appropriations Committee approved a rewrite of the proposal to give more flexibility to school districts that want to participate in the controversial guardian program. Other changes Thursday included an expansion of mental-health services in schools that would assist students with suicidal intentions, trauma and violence.
The proposal (SB 7030) is now ready to go to the full Senate as the annual legislative session enters its final three weeks. While Republican leaders are supporting the measure, passage is not expected to happen on a party-line vote.
Sen. Anitere Flores, R-Miami, sided Thursday with Democrats in voting against the bill because of the provision that would allow armed teachers. Meanwhile, Sen. Bill Montford, D-Tallahassee, said he could not support the provision but said “maybe I can get there.”
“More good comes from this [bill] than bad, but I firmly believe that kids' lives should be protected more than just by hope, and for that reason I can't vote for this bill today,” Flores said.
Her GOP colleagues, however, argued the expansion of the guardian program is needed to ensure that schools would have armed people immediately available to thwart threats in active-shooter cases.
Lawmakers last year rushed to pass a school-safety bill after confessed gunman Nikolas Cruz killed 17 students and faculty members at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland on Valentine's Day. The bill addressed numerous issues, including creating the guardian program to allow armed school personnel whose primary duties are outside the classroom.
Many school districts have declined to go along with creating guardian programs. But the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission, which was created in last year's bill, issued numerous recommendations in January, including expanding the guardian program to allow armed teachers.
Senate and House Republican leaders have followed that recommendation.
“It would be my greatest hope in life that we can live in a world where there were no guns in classrooms,” Senate Appropriations Chairman Rob Bradley, R-Fleming Island, said. “But Nikolas Cruz shattered that hope when he brought a gun into a classroom and killed our precious children. And that's the reality we live in today. Period.”
One of the ways senators are looking to expand the guardian program would be to allow school districts that want to participate to contract with out-of-county sheriff's offices to train guardians. That would give flexibility to school districts that don't see eye to eye with their counties' sheriff's offices about participation in the program.
In the last year, 25 school districts have implemented some type of the guardian program, said the sponsor of the bill, Senate Education Chairman Manny Diaz Jr. He added that 12 other school districts are looking into doing so.
“We have 67 districts that all have different needs,” Diaz, R-Hialeah, said. “The flexibility and the local option is really the theme of the bill.”
During a four-hour hearing Thursday on the proposal, a number of teachers opposed allowing teachers to volunteer to be guardians.
“Classroom teachers are already surrogate parents, we are guidance counselors. We are schedulers. I help kids get through college applications. That's the stuff I want to do,” said Ellen Barber, a Palm Beach County high school teacher. “I don't want to carry a gun, and I don't want my colleagues to carry a gun.”
Under the bill, guardians would get a $500 stipend for participating in the program, which would require them to go through psychological evaluations and 144 hours of training. Each guardian would need to be appointed by a school superintendent or charter school principal.
Democrats overwhelmingly opposed the guardian provision, arguing that more guns in schools will not make students safer and could lead to scenarios where gun-related accidents can happen.
Yet, Democrats said they like other provisions in the bill that would expand mental-health services for students, enhance communications between schools about new students' histories with behavioral issues and improve data collection on incidents that occur on school premises.
“If we really want to get to the root cause of the problem, not just in schools, but in society too, we need to address mental health,” Montford said.
One of the changes to the bill would require school districts to enhance mental-health services provided to students.
Sen. Kathleen Passidomo, R-Naples, proposed an amendment that would require school districts to offer mental health care to students, including programs that assist students in dealing with anxiety, depression, bullying, trauma and violence as well as suicidal tendencies.
Mental health services have become a focal point during debate following two recent suicides of Parkland students who had survived the mass shooting last year. The suicides happened within a one-week span.
“The bottom line is, what is more important than protecting our children and making sure they are safe, both physically and mentally?” said Passidomo, whose amendment was approved.
To cover the cost of mental-health services, the Senate has proposed in its 2019-20 budget setting aside $100 million, a 44 percent increase from the current year. The House is pitching $30 million less than the Senate.
The House version of the school safety bill is also ready for a full floor vote.
Ana Ceballos reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
St. Thomas University Settles With Fired Professor Who Had Alleged Academic Freedom Violations and Discrimination
9 minute readEx-St. Thomas Univ. Law Professor Sues School Over Firing, Alleging Defamation
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250