Brittany Kelley
KYLE — The Hays CISD Board of Trustees discussed a resolution for an exception to the House Bill 3 law that requires districts to have school resource officers (SROs) at every school campus during its Sept. 15 meeting.
“As we’re very, very aware, House Bill 3 changed the dynamic of what we saw in safety and security with the school setting. With that particular legislative session, we did see the requirement to have peace officers on every school campus,” explained Hays CISD Chief Safety & Security Officer Jeri Skrocki.
To abide by this requirement, she stated that the district partners with the Hays County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO). This partnership has been limited, Skrocki continued, as law enforcement has experienced retaliation societally, making the positions less attractive.
Because of this, the district was afforded an exception to the mandate in 2023, since there were not enough officers from HCSO to be placed on every campus.
“With this last legislative session, House Bill 121 has required us to annually reinstate the assertion of that exception, with the understanding that we are still seeking officers from the area to staff those schools,” Skrocki said.
According to the director, these SROs not only provide safety, but create connections with students. She explained that initially, students typically have a negative association with officers, but that these officers on campus give students an opportunity to have a positive experience with them.
Trustee Raul Vela began the discussion by noting that the district, despite having the utmost regard for student safety, faces a “very real picture” of budget shortfalls, since this is, yet another, unfunded mandate by the state.
“We’re just going to cut to the chase here,” said trustee Courtney Runkle. “We have some SROs that we thought that we were going to have this year, that we are not going to have and we have a commissioners court [Sept. 16 that passed a budget] that does not include the number of SROs that we need in Hays CISD to cover this law … I’m going to plead to our public and to our parents that are listening that the commissioners court is the court that approves and funds the Hays County Sheriff’s Office for the SROs. We need everyone advocating for safety at all of our campuses.”
She continued by emphasizing that the Hays County Commissioners Court should know that this is a law and because of the lack of resources, the district is in the position where it is, once again, forced to sign an exception form.
“This is the last time I want to see a wavier. We need support at every single one of our campuses,” concluded Runkle.
Trustee Vanessa Petrea built on the same idea by Runkle, stating that the district reached the maximum amount it could to fund the SROs and that the county is supposed to be in a 75-25 split, with the district paying 75%.
“This is frustrating that we’ve carved out our dollars — we’re waiting, patiently, since 2023 — and they’re not doing their part,” emphasized Petrea.
Encouraging community members to reach out to those that make the decisions was trustee Johnny Flores, who informed attendees that the commissioners court accepts comments, not only in-person, but online. Additionally, the state representatives that voted for the unfunded mandates can also be reached to voice concerns and change.
“We have done more than our fair share. We are ready to receive additional officers to be where we need to be,” said Vela. “Hays County Commissioners Court, I hope you hear that. Hays County Sheriff’s Office, I hope you hear that, that we are not here just crying these alligator tears because we want something. We have put in the work … We’re just asking: meet us [there].”
No action was taken by the trustees on Sept. 15; however, the resolution passed unanimously at the Sept. 22 meeting.
To listen to the discussion, visit bit.ly/4mz1L4D.
