North Penn High School junior Robel Kassahun speaks to the school board about the possibility of establishing a district police department on Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2025. (Screenshot of NPTV video)
Student leader says most peers surveyed 'were not asked'
The debate will continue, at least for now, as North Penn School Board has tabled a plan to move ahead with developing a district police department.
“Over 98.5 percent said they did not know there was a vote going down right now. They didn’t know what questions were being asked. They were not informed of the scope of the proposal, and they were not asked for their opinion,” said high school junior Robel Kassahun, referring to students.
In late September the board heard a proposal from staff to create a Department of Public Safety and shift existing security officers into armed school police, with one officer each at the district’s high school and three middle schools and at least one other to patrol elsewhere in the district. Doing so would follow similar approaches across the county, give the district more control in hiring, and let staff build relationships in-house while handling minor incidents and citations without involving outside municipal departments, staff said during the September presentation.
Since then, Superintendent Todd Bauer and Coordinator of Emergency Management and Safe Schools Brandon Rhone said Tuesday, they’ve continued talks in executive sessions with the school board, among administrators and school staff, and with selected groups of students on how to proceed. That process drew pushback from several residents on Tuesday night, opposing the proposal and asking the board to wait to gather more input first.
Students were unaware
Kassahun said he’s the current president of the high school Black Student Union and the Cultural Proficiency and Equity student ambassadors, and also walks the halls every day. In a recent survey of students, Kassahun said, 160 high schoolers were asked for their input on the topic of school police, and nearly all didn’t know about the discussion.
“Yet you were still preparing to vote on a policy that will change how safe students will feel when walking into school. How we interpret adults around, and how much trust we place in an institution meant to shape our futures. And yet so many of us didn’t even know this conversation was happening,” Kassahun said.
Voting to move ahead with a shift to policing would send a clear message, the student told the board.
“You will be spreading the message that our opinion wasn’t needed. It’s not merely about right or wrong on the policy, this has nothing to do with saying yes or no to armed guards. But about legitimacy,” he said.
“What we are asking for is something far more fundamental: to be part of the conversation, for the decisions made. To have a meaningful, student-aware forum, where we can ask our questions, raise real concerns, share lived experiences, and help shape what happens in the school we spend most of our hours walking in,” Kassahun said.
He asked the board to delay for more input, and live up to their public statements about focusing on student needs and input.
“We are asking to be partners. We are asking for a transparent process. We are asking for equity in decision making. And equity requires participation. Inclusion requires presence. Safety requires trust,” he said. “Show students that we are valued, not just in mission statements but in action.”
Students Melissa Rich and Malachi Nesbit made similar comments, asking that any final decision be put on hold for further talks with high schoolers, and former board member Wanda Lewis-Campbell said she was struck by their message.
“It really hit me, when he said ‘We weren’t even at the table. We wanted a partnership.’ Nobody consults students anymore?” said Lewis-Campbell.
“As a community member, I’m here to speak against the proposal to arm officers in the schools. Bringing more guns into schools doesn’t make our children safer,” she said.
Former board member speaks out
Lewis-Campbell, a member of the board from 2019 to ’23, said she disagreed with both the approach and the tactics the board and staff have taken to field feedback so far.
“It increases risk. Even well-trained officers are human. You can have accidental discharges, confusion can happen, and in the chaos of a real emergency, adding more firearms only adds danger,” Lewis-Campbell said.
“Students learn best when they feel safe, and supported, and connected, not when they feel like they’re in a militarized school zone. I don’t know about you, but as a parent, I’ve had to give my Black son ‘the talk’ about what happens when you encounter a police officer. Fortunately, they never had to encounter that in schools,” she said.
Former North Penn school board member Wanda Lewis-Campbell speaks to the school board about the possibility of establishing a district police department on Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2025. (Screenshot of NPTV video) She then asked if the funds proposed to go to the school police department could be better spent elsewhere.
“I think we need more counselors, more therapists, more people concerned about the wellbeing of students. Everybody’s talking about mental health, wellbeing — if anything, those are the kind of people we need in the schools, not people who are armed. I’m totally against it,” she said.
Parent Carstein Earl said she had not seen any solid evidence that increasing police presence in schools would reduce violence or increase safety, and said she thought one accident in such a situation would be too many.
“We all share the same goal of keeping students safe, but putting more guns in our schools is not the way to do it,” she said.
“Every firearm on campus introduces layers of risk: the risk of an accident, a weapon being misplaced, or a misunderstanding escalating into tragedy. There’s no solid evidence that arming officers prevents school shootings. What we do know is that accidents happen, and that even one mistake in a school full of children is too many,” Earl said.
And resident Jason Lanier said he still had questions about who would control the new police force, if they would have any outside oversight, how transparent they would be after incidents like a student reportedly bringing a gun into North Penn High School last month and a student assaulting another at Pennbrook Middle School last year, and how they would interact with municipal police like the six local departments the district already works with.
“There has been zero information on how exactly this is going to be produced. It just says, you guys are going to give administration all the slack they need, to do whatever they want. And that doesn’t seem right,” he said.
“Advancing with this little information is a wrong move. It’s going to be problematic for everybody. We need to know what it is that you’re trying to do, before you do it,” he said.
Lots of talk
Following the public comments, Bauer and Rhone outlined their presentation from the September safe schools committee meeting, and the superintendent said the topic had been discussed in executive session by the board “for a couple of years now.” The staff request of the board up for discussion Tuesday would direct administration to start with developing policies and procedures, have officer candidates begin to undertake training, exams and qualifications, begin legal proceedings to authorize the department with police powers, and allow the officials to carry firearms, “enforce and keep good order,” and issue certain citations, with no set timeline.
“There’s no end-of-the-line, hard date. There are a lot of variables: drafting policies, getting the policies approved, petitioning the court, getting court approval -there are a lot of steps that go into that,” Rhone said.
In recent meetings with students, Bauer and Rhone added, students said they would feel more comfortable if police officers were security staff they already knew, and were familiar with the school, and noted response times could be shorter and some incidents deterred if police were already stationed at schools. The administrator also shared testimonials from superintendents in several neighboring districts that use school police, and a letter of support from Towamencin Chief Tim Troxel endorsing the plan, while adding that statistics would be reviewed quarterly with the safe schools committee and annually with the full board. Initial startup costs are estimated at roughly $250,000 to train and equip five officers, plus yearly costs of just over $57,000 for stipends and other costs.
“We would be transitioning five current employees, who are already in our district, who have built relationships with our kids. Kids know them by name, they greet each other in the morning, and share stories and conversations about all sorts of things, about academics and about life,” Rhone said.
Bauer added that the area police and/or county agencies could still be called for emergencies or events the district could not handle, and no final decisions need to be made soon.
“It’s to start drafting policies, job descriptions, all of the things that we would need to put in place. It’s not, ‘OK, this is done and this starts,’ it’s the process of working toward that, and each of those components would come before the board,” Bauer said.
Board swayed by students
Several board members then asked for specifics on what a yes vote would mean, and would happen next.
“I want to be clear: this is the first step. At that point, the ball is rolling downhill. The votes and discussion would be about the particulars, the policies and approving budgets, but it would not really be another discussion amongst the board, in a public setting, and a public vote, to move forward with this. This would be the vote to do that,” said board member Christian Fusco.
Board VP Juliane Ramic asked how staff could gather more student input while developing those policies and procedures, and Bauer said he and administrators regularly hold meetings with student groups chosen by school principals, but could do more.
“On Friday, we had a conversation at North Penn High School, it was an hour and a half. And the kids had a lot of good feedback, really good questions and really good suggestions. Honestly, they asked the questions , ‘Should we come to the school board and speak?’ I said, I don’t know that we’re there yet,” Bauer said.
Safe schools committee chairman Jonathan Kassa said he’d be open to more feedback and input: “It wasn’t to cut off debate tonight, but this actually opens it up. This is the first step.”
Board member Elisha Gee asked why a vote now was necessary, and was concerned about the student comments.
“When I hear the president of the Black Student Union say he didn’t know this was happening, that’s a problem,” she said.
“Once that ball starts rolling, it’s rolling. And the most compelling thing I have heard is the student that spoke, that very clearly said ‘I do not have a voice,'” Gee said.
Gee then said that she agreed with Lewis-Campbell about “the conversation” with their children about profiling interactions with police, and said she would like to hear more from all involved before moving ahead.
“Obviously I’m against it, but I do think the conversations need to be happening, before this vote commits to a vote. Anyone who votes yes to this tonight, those students tonight, their voices weren’t important enough to hit the pause button and hear from them first,” Gee said.
Board member Al Roesch asked what would happen if an incident occurs where a district officer would need to be put on leave, or how school police would interact with “people who come from countries, in our schools, who have been abused by military and police,” then made a motion to table the authorization for further discussion and input.
Seven board members then voted to table, with Kassa and board President Cathy McMurtrie casting the only votes to proceed.
After the vote to table, several explained why they voted that way; board member Tina Stoll said her opinion was swayed by hearing from the students and asked them to keep speaking up, while board member Kunbi Rudnick said she saw and heard details already from staff, but was also swayed by the students who said they wanted to be heard.
“This is not one that we have come to the table with, pardon my French, a half-ass opinion on. To be clear, I want to keep discussing this,” Rudnick said.
“What made the difference is, listening to the students, and giving them the opportunity (to speak). We need to figure out how to get more voices than the 20 we’ve spoken to,” she said.
Fusco added that he’d like the three incoming board members elected last week to be involved in any future talks, and Bauer said board members could discuss school security with each other in private without violating the state’s Sunshine Act.
Ramic said she recalled roughly 20 such talks on the topic so far before the topic became public, and McMurtrie said she thought the discussion was a sign the board was open to feedback.
“I know there’s folks in the community that say we are a unanimous board, we have groupthink. If you could only know, this was not groupthink,” McMurtrie said.
“This board, and I know the three folks coming in, will absolutely challenge this administration” to continue the discussion as publicly as possible, she said. “They have set the bar high, and we will include students.”
North Penn’s school board next meets at 6 p.m. on Nov. 19 and the safe schools committee next meets at 5:45 p.m. on Nov. 24; for more information visit www.NPenn.org.
This article appears courtesy of a content share agreement between North Penn Now and The Reporter. To read more stories like this, visit https://www.thereporteronline.com
