The Guilford County Board of Commissioners plans to enter into a new $4.445 million agreement to provide School Resource Officers in local schools – a multi-year pact that would continue the county’s financial commitment to placing deputies in public school buildings across Guilford County.
The proposed interlocal agreement between the county and the Guilford County Board of Education would cover 16 School Resource Officers along with supervisory support over a three-year period.
The commissioners are expected to approve the move at their Thursday, Feb. 19 meeting.
The total cost of the agreement will be $4,445,013. The contract will be retroactive to July 1, 2025, and run through June 30, 2028.
Under the proposal, the school system will reimburse the county on a quarterly basis for a portion of the officers’ salaries and associated costs.
The agreement reflects a continuation of a long-standing partnership between county government and the school system to provide law enforcement officers on campus. School Resource Officers – commonly known as SROs – are assigned to middle and high schools to provide security, build relationships with students and staff and respond quickly to emergencies.
Guilford County staff noted in agenda materials that the cost of providing the officers has increased in recent years due to salary adjustments and other personnel-related expenses. While the school system reimburses a significant portion of the cost, the county is expected to absorb a shortfall estimated at roughly $200,000 over the life of the agreement.
The discussion comes as both boards continue to navigate broader budget pressures. The Board of Education has repeatedly asked the county for additional funding to address teacher pay, staffing shortages and facility needs.
At the same time, the county commissioners are weighing major capital projects and rising operational costs. In recent years, the Board of Commissioners has been very, very generous when it comes to funding the schools and putting big school bonds on the ballot.
Supporters of School Resource Officers often argue that the presence of uniformed deputies in schools provides a visible deterrent to violence and it ensures rapid response in the event of a crisis.
In Guilford County, SRO funding has historically been a shared responsibility between the county and the school system. This new agreement maintains that cost-sharing structure while locking in the number of deputies assigned under the contract.
I will preface my statement with this…We need resource officers in our schools, unfortunately.
That being said, this sounds like we have a classic case of robbing Peter (aka us peasants) to pay Paul (the sheriff buddy of Skip the Omnipotent. I can never be amazed by how he does it. P.T. Barnum would be proud.
Actually, it’s robbing taxpayers to pay government workers. It doesn’t matter who pays the SROs. It all comes from the taxpayers, so who cares?
S-o-o, the County gives money to the school board and now the school board will reimburse the County for a portion of the money sent on Resource Officers. That’s strange. Instead, why not give the school board the money they are going to pay the county. This is like a financial circle firing squad. Maybe it’s an accounting maneuver for god only knows what reason. But given that the school board and county are controlled by democrats, it’s probably their way of spreading lies saying the school board is paying some of the cost for Resource Officers. It’s a crock of cow manure, but it probably makes some sense to the financially illiterate dems that run the county and schools.
I wonder if this same type of ‘logic’ could be used for the money the county gives to non profits and other ‘special projects’. Give these groups money and then these groups give it back to the county through some sort of ‘contract for services.’ Oh no. That won’t work because the county will just give these group more money than they want or need so they can return money to the county. (Like that would ever happen!)
Ken I think you finally hit the proverbial nail on the head. Just look at the last list of nonprofits, 95% were black operated. How many gave a donation back to skips money pit. No one will never know because there is no accountability
police in school ? why not good comms with police close to school & as kids travel too n from ? put $$ saved into the school.
I like your idea. Even better, put the police and sheriff sub offices in the school buildings or on campus parking lots. They can share the public, paid-for county space, and walk the money across to each other each month on payday.
ditto
Taxpayers should be allowed to view the plan for this. If I’m a betting man the uniformed officers will be getting overtime when they staff the school. I would also like the transparency on how this will be done often times SROs aren’t at the school during ALL hours. If taxpayers are paying for these programs transparency on what the program will offer should be required.
Perhaps I over-simplify, but it looks like another layer of jobs (and votes) for the faithful. $4.445 mil for 3 years? Wanna bet it will continue past three years?
I’ve always advocated for armed police officers on school grounds, stationed at every entry/exit point. Furthermore, I have advocated that this be a national program, manned/womaned by armed forces personnel for limited periods each tour (1-3 months).
How about we take the money back from subsidized private and charter schools and use that for school resource officers. I don’t understand how you are all for giving tax dollars to pay for wealthy families tuition ( yes that’s who is benefiting) for private schools/religious schools and for profit charters. These are all personal choices and shouldn’t be subsidized. If you don’t like your public option for school, either move, home school, or pay for private school out of your pocket not mine. Nearly every state that implemented this program is trying to get out of it… Not NC republicans, they doubling down… I say republicans because you run the state.
Nebraska: Voters in 2024 overwhelmingly approved a referendum to repeal a recently passed law that would have allocated $10 million for private school scholarships.
Colorado: Voters rejected a 2024 ballot measure to add a “right to school choice” to the state constitution.
Kentucky: Voters rejected a 2024 constitutional amendment that would have enabled public funding for charter schools and private school vouchers.
South Carolina: In 2024, the state supreme court ruled that a school voucher program (Education Savings Account) could not legally be used for private school tuition.
Illinois: The state allowed its “Invest in Kids” tax-credit scholarship program to sunset at the end of 2023, effectively ending a subsidy.
Arizona & Tennessee: While these states have active programs, they are facing mounting political and legal pressure to reduce costs, increase accountability, or scale back expansion due to budgetary concerns.
Not NC:
North Carolina: Substantially expanded its “Opportunity Scholarship” program, making it available to all students, regardless of income.