At the recent Blue Sky Goal Setting Workshop on February 22—a meeting that might seem like a routine planning session to most but carries life-altering consequences for many students—San Mateo City Council member Cwirko-Godycki proposed exploring funding for School Resource Officers (SROs) in local schools. While ensuring student safety is a goal we all share, decades of research show that increasing police presence does not necessarily lead to safer schools. Instead, the most effective strategies involve mental health services, restorative justice initiatives, and school-based support systems that foster positive relationships and early intervention.
Understanding the Regional Context
San Mateo County has already taken proactive steps in school safety by implementing the Student Threat Assessment Protocol, a multidisciplinary approach involving school administrators, mental health professionals, and law enforcement to address student concerns before they escalate. The county has also developed The Big Five, a comprehensive emergency response system designed to keep students safe through preparation and early intervention rather than reactive policing. These initiatives recognize that early intervention and student support are far more effective at ensuring safety than a reactive approach rooted in law enforcement. Expanding on these frameworks—not adding more law enforcement—aligns with what research suggests actually works.
Examining the Role of SROs
Some advocate for SROs, believing they deter violence and prevent school shootings. However, an analysis by Texas State University and the FBI, which examined over 160 mass shooting incidents, found that not a single school shooting was stopped by an armed officer returning fire. Additionally, a 2021 study found that school shootings were 2.5 times more deadly in schools where SROs were present, underscoring the need for a broader approach to school safety.
Moreover, while overall youth crime rates have declined for decades, studies indicate that the presence of SROs correlates with 3.5 times higher student arrest rates, often for minor infractions such as tardiness or classroom disruptions—issues that could be better handled through restorative justice and counseling. In California, Black students make up 6% of public school enrollment but account for 15% of student arrests, while Latino boys, comprising 28% of students, represent 44% of all school-based arrests. Similarly, students with disabilities face referral rates to law enforcement nearly three times higher than their non-disabled peers. These statistics are not just numbers; they reflect real students whose educational experiences and opportunities are deeply affected by the policies we choose to implement.
Fiscal Responsibility: Making Sound Investments in Student Safety
As San Mateo faces a $6 million general fund deficit, every expenditure should be evaluated for its return on investment. Given ongoing financial obligations and declining tax revenues, the city must ensure that every dollar is spent on initiatives that produce real results. Investing in SROs, which have not been proven to significantly improve school safety, raises concerns about fiscal responsibility. With reduced revenue from sales taxes, business taxes, and hotel occupancy taxes, the city must focus on cost-effective strategies that maximize student well-being and public safety. Further compounding the issue is the $7 million shortfall in property-in-lieu-of-vehicle-license-fee reimbursements from the state—funds many California cities depend on.
To put the cost of SROs in perspective, a single officer can cost between $75,000 and $120,000 per year, factoring in salary, benefits, training, and equipment. Expanding SRO programs could require multiple officers, quickly pushing costs into the hundreds of thousands or even millions annually. Meanwhile, for the same investment, the city could hire additional mental health professionals, counselors, or social workers—positions that have been shown to improve student outcomes and reduce disciplinary issues. Even one additional school psychologist or restorative justice specialist could provide direct interventions for hundreds of students in need of support. Given the current financial landscape, prioritizing these proven solutions is not only the right choice for student success but also the most responsible use of taxpayer dollars.
A Holistic Approach to School Safety
A strong and safe school environment is built on trust, support, and evidence-based interventions. Schools that have invested in mental health services and conflict resolution programs have seen lower suspension rates, higher graduation rates, and fewer instances of violence. When students have access to school counselors, social workers, and community-based resources, they are more likely to seek help before conflicts escalate. Research confirms that preventative strategies—rather than punitive measures—create an atmosphere where students feel supported rather than surveilled.
Rather than relying solely on law enforcement, a more balanced approach that includes counseling, social-emotional learning, and peer mediation has demonstrated long-term benefits for students and school communities. If the goal is truly to foster a safe and thriving learning environment, we must look at what the evidence tells us works—not simply default to outdated strategies that feel familiar but fail to deliver results.
The conversation about school safety is an important one, and it is crucial that decisions are guided by research and the well-being of students. San Mateo has an opportunity to lead by example, prioritizing investments that create meaningful change. By focusing on approaches that build positive school climates and support students holistically, we can ensure that every young person in our community has the opportunity to learn, grow, and succeed in an environment that truly supports them.