Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Funding Cut for School Resource Officers

Federal Aid Helps Keeps Police in Schools

October 20, 2013

WHEELING — In just three years, Wheeling has lost almost three-fourths of the federal funding that helps pay for full-time city police officers at Wheeling Park High School and Warwood, Triadelphia,......

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Oct-21-13 9:16 AM

all because they removed the paddle.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-21-13 8:26 AM

The obama administration is the most callous ever. After the children were murdered in the school shooting in Connecticut, obama wanted all kinds of new gun laws enacted to "protect the children." Now he is going to cut funding for school resource officers so we must assume the children don't matter anymore. He is a total fraud.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-21-13 8:23 AM

The article should be called the Conspiracy of Baloney. For public officials to put out information like that, holding up child safety for political agendas is disgusting. Fed Grant programs are not meant to be permanent nipples for local officials. They seed programs. Many other areas have long ago weened from the Fed money and have incorporated school safety into local budgets. Clearly it IS IMPORTANT and important enough to stop hinging it on handouts. Education is property tax supported and taxes revenues in the nothern panhandle are through the roof because of the energy values on property. Perhaps the tons of new money could be used for something like...I dunno school safety maybe. We have had some near misses in this area and been lucky so far but to stand there and allege that if someone else doesn't pay for it we may not have school officers. Its about equal to one teacher position. This is deplorable conduct on the part of school and police officials.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-21-13 1:26 AM

When I was growing up, students showed respect for authority. We did not need someone with a badge to get our attention. Having resource officers is not solving the problems. First is was HS, then middle, soon they will be managing kindergarten classes. It is parents who have challenged the authority of the school personnel. Let staff do their job and hold parents accountable.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-21-13 1:04 AM

Aren't the resource officers almost like an "insurance policy" so those in administrative positions don't have to get their "hands dirty" or get involve with lawsuits both real and frivolous. Lifetime 50 year old principal having to use physical force to stop a fight etc as opposed to some young resource officer, I know who the bigger target for a news story and/or lawsuit is.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 10:42 PM

How many incidents do the resource officers handle per year?

How many could/should be handled by the principal or assistant?

Is it too easy just to call the resource officer, as if they are not handling an incident, then what are they doing with their time?

Is it a case of since they are there, let them handle it?

Are all the cases one-per-student, or is it a few students who create most of the cases in a year?

In either case, if there is enough to keep them busy, WHY? What is the administration doing, or not doing, to let this happen year in and year out?

Are all the middle schools less safe than a few years ago, or is it just easier to put one officer per school?

Where is the school board on this?


1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 10:38 PM

egi: Actually life has always been as you describe, we just didn't have the twenty-four hour media going on non-stop about the plight of our neighbors, and giving impressionabSchool shootings

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 10:37 PM


Sorry if I misread your comments.

My point is that if resource officers are believed to be needed, they should be funded locally. It is too easy to just take federal money.

If you need them locally, then you can decide 0, 1, 2 per school.

Local decisions would waste less money.

You ask about districts that cannot afford this -- if they believe it is essential for safety, then they would put it ahead of the dozens or hundreds of other items in the budget and cut something else. I don't believe they can't afford it, but if that is really the case, then they probably need to think about closing down and consolidating.

It is not our/their responsibility to fund other/our school districts through federal funds.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 10:26 PM

I think Hilltopper went beyond Billeries claim of "it takes a village!" Made the claim that many parents are not "involved" in raising there own children and then claims that if these "same" parents had a child at risk they would be concerned!

If they are not involved would they really be concerned?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 10:15 PM

caltransplant, Does that include any and all programs that the public schools can dream-up? Educating students is the "goal!" When the US department of Education (not a constitutional requirement at the federal level) keeps issuing reports of the students lack of reading and math skills......

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 9:58 PM

I'm tired of paying for protection of other peoples children when I don't even have any!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 9:54 PM

A few incidents across the country cause hysteria. Nobody wants children hurt. This is a costly prevention where it is unlikely a tragedy would actually happen. What do the officers do when they are not disarming students? They do what counselors use to do. So what do the counselors do? Push pencils regarding standardized tests. If anything, the school needs social workers to identify high risk students and intervene. There is a lot more to address than weapons in the majority of schools.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 9:33 PM

Public schools ARE a constitutionally protected expenditure of public funds!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 9:32 PM

This is what happens with EVERY grant!

The low IQ lemmings always line up for the "free" grants that pay for things like "resource" officers only to stick US with the bill to keep it up!!!!

When will the people EVER wake up!!

The Government uses grants like a drug dealer uses free samples!!!

One you are hooked, the bill come due!

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 8:31 PM

"hilltopper, So it's my responsibility to be "involved" in someone else's children?" I DO BELIEVE THE QUOTE TO USE HERE IS "IT TAKES A VILLAGE."

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 8:23 PM

WVU1986, The main point of the article is the writer complaining about federal TAX dollars being reduced!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 8:19 PM

I understand the parents who have kids in these schools and are happy to pay the tax for resource officers, but why do you think that a 75 yr old widow here should pay tax for this at the cost of their well being. How about the school passing the hat and all the parents and staff can contribute to the salary and benefits what you see fit to protect your kids. After all, the protection is from someone else's kid. Maybe then people would start discipline at home.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 7:06 PM


Nice analysis of my pro-resource officer stance. Right away I am a frustrated parent of a bullied child. Thankfully I do not have a child that has suffered from bullying at school. The world that we grew up in no longer exist. Today people lose their lives over a parking space, looking at someone the wrong way or simply being somewhere at the wrong time. Examples are not hard to find.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 6:59 PM

Richard: I am not a resource office nor am I employed by the school system. In fact, none of my family members are teachers or in law enforcement. So, that's not my motivation. I'm a parent, plain and simple. I believe in protecting children and that's why I gladly pay my taxes for this and will continue to do so.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 6:13 PM

If they must be there wouldn't a physically fit police officer be a better image, and if the lady is a cop, she should be wearing professional looking apparel and so should the Jerry Corona look alike. Today teachers dress like the kids. What ever happen to adults setting an example for children? Retry

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 6:06 PM

The time has come to start making parents responsible for their children actions. Fines and maybe some mandatory classroom training for parents of students would be a start. Resource Officers are needed sometimes but not a requirement for a school.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 5:55 PM

Parents should spend time with their children and teach them about respect, responsibility and how bullying is bad. We would not have this type of society. We should be holding the parents for the actions of their children with fines. The government is not a full time babysitting service.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 5:47 PM

egi: Sounds to me like you should teach your child some self defense techniques and as a parent let your child know that anyone that messes with them will be messing with you. I grew up knowing I was protected from harm because of my parents and I took boxing lessons from my father. Today nothing parents raise nothing children and everyone thinks, only thinks, they are a winner, when in fact they're winers. It's a cruel world out there, prepare your child and include yourself.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 5:47 PM

WVU- You must be a resource officer trying to justify your job. Or A school admin person trying to avoid one.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Oct-20-13 4:46 PM

Public schools are not a Constitutionally permissible expenditure of taxpayer dollars so, no, the protection of children in public schools is not a federal issue.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 46 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.

I am looking for: