It’s back to school for Apple Valley, Eagan, White Bear Lake, Ramsey County, Woodbury school resource officers

Mara H. Gottfried, Pioneer Press
·6 min read
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

It’s back to school for some school resource officers whose police departments paused their programs amid confusion over changes to state law.

Apple Valley, Eagan, White Bear Lake and Ramsey County sheriff’s office have returned their officers or deputies to schools. Woodbury plans to Monday. The Mounds View police chief is still consulting with their city attorney, but he said it’s looking likely.

Those departments say they were reassured by recently updated legal guidance from Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and the League of Minnesota Cities.

But legal information this week from Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty differs from Ellison’s, and “that kind of set us back to where we were a couple of weeks, at least with those chiefs in Hennepin County and potentially some others,” said Jeff Potts, Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association executive director.

Since 2015, state law has said school district staff is prohibited from using prone restraint as an emergency restraint for students with disabilities, and physical holding of such students can only happen in emergencies. A change in state law this year expanded it to all students and said school resource officers can’t restrain students face-down or put a student in a hold that restricts their ability to breathe or communicate distress.

The law previously said a school employee, school bus driver or other agent of a district, including a school resource officer, “may use reasonable force when it is necessary … to restrain a student or prevent bodily harm or death to another.” The first “or” was removed to say they could use reasonable force when necessary “to restrain a student to prevent bodily harm or death to the student or to another.”

Departments returning SROs

Apple Valley Police Chief Nick Francis said Friday he felt confident that the law “is cleared up at least to put SROs back in until it can be solidified.” His three SROs returned Friday to Apple Valley and Eastview high schools and middle schools.

Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan Public Schools Superintendent Mary Kreger wrote to families about the return of Eagan and Apple Valley officers; Rosemount hadn’t suspended its program.

“SROs bring prevention, they build positive relationships with students, and their presence provides a sense of safety and security for everyone in our schools,” Kreger wrote of their roles in secondary schools.

The Woodbury City Council decided Wednesday to return school resource officers to East Ridge and Woodbury high schools, based on clarification from Ellison and the League of Minnesota Cities.

Burnsville police hasn’t returned school resource officers to Burnsville High School.

“In the coming weeks, we will be talking with our legislators about the need for clarity” in the law, said Deputy Chief Matt Smith.

Many school districts never had SROs, and for those who do, the majority are still in place, Gov. Tim Walz previously said. But about 40 law enforcement agencies had paused their school resource officer programs.

Ellison’s legal opinion

The Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association said earlier this month that they interpreted the law to mean if there’s a student who is being unruly, a school resource officer could not restrain him or her “until that split second when it becomes a threat or it is to prevent bodily harm or death.” They also said they believed an SRO couldn’t hold a student by the arm, because that’s a form of restraint, unless the student posed a risk of bodily harm or death.

Ellison had issued a legal opinion about the law in August and put forth a supplemented opinion last week. His office said there have been “significant misunderstandings about the impact” of changes to the state law. Ellison said school professionals would not have to wait until someone is injured before intervening with reasonable force.

“The law says school employees and agents ‘may use reasonable force when it is necessary under the circumstances to restrain a student to prevent bodily harm or death to the student or to another …’ ” Ellison’s office said. “The Legislature’s use of the word ‘prevent’ means that when a professional determines a student is about to harm themselves or another, the professional may intervene.”

Hennepin County attorney on law

Moriarty wrote to Hennepin County police chiefs this week because she said many had asked to hear directly from her. She noted they needed to contact their city attorney for specific legal advice but said she could share her office’s interpretation of the law for training purposes.

She also wrote that only the attorney general has the authority to issue binding opinions, which Ellison’s said his is. Even then, an AG’s opinion is “binding only until reviewed by a court, which could occur in the context of a criminal prosecution,” Moriarty wrote. “Given our office’s jurisdiction to review cases and make charging decisions in Hennepin County, we do think it important to provide insight on our interpretation of this new statutory language.”

The state law says a school employee or school resource officer who uses force has a defense against criminal prosecution that is tied to the use of reasonable force standard, “which was changed to only allow reasonable force when there is a risk of bodily harm or death,” Moriarty noted.

Many law enforcement leaders “see the key role of your SROs as building relationships with youth in schools to help ensure safety,” Moriarty wrote. “In other words, they have a different role than officers outside schools whose primary role is to enforce the law. This statutory change indicates that the legislature wants SROs aligned with school personnel in terms of the tools used to interact with youth in schools. This may require a shift in training and policy to bring SROs’ youth engagement practices in line with that of school personnel.”

What’s next?

Six Ramsey County sheriff’s deputies were officially back as SROs this week, said Sheriff Bob Fletcher, but he said Moriarty’s opinion made matters “more complicated” and he expects there will be ongoing discussions. He said he’s considering asking a chief judge to weigh in “before there’s an issue.”

Maplewood police previously pulled their SROs and hasn’t decided what to do, given Moriarty’s opinion, said Maplewood Public Safety Director Brian Bierdeman. He’s consulting with his city attorney.

Brooklyn Park Police Chief Mark Bruley planned to send his department’s SROs back to schools after Ellison’s opinion. But after reading Moriarty’s guidance, he said his department’s program is “indefinitely suspended until we get some sort of resolution from legislation.”

Bruley said he tends to agree with Moriarty’s interpretation of the law. “It’s just not convenient because it doesn’t allow us to get our SROs in,” he said.

Brian Peters, Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association (MPPOA) president, wrote Friday that Moriarty’s opinion could lead to other county attorneys following suit, and they’re the people who “have the prosecution authority on civil and criminal charges for our rank-and-file members.”

Minnesota Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, said Friday that the opinion of Moriarty, prosecutor of the largest county in the state, “makes it clear we need legislation to fix conflicting laws for school resource officers. Legal opinions are not enough to reinstate school resource officers and keep schools safe.”

He and House Minority Leader Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, have continued their calls for a special legislative session on the issue.

House Speaker Melissa Hortman and Senate Majority Leader Kari Dziedzic, both Democrats, said last week they are committed to holding public hearings on SROs within the first two weeks of the 2024 legislative session, which begins in February.

Related Articles