Despite the objection of a resident and the opposition of two Upper Perkiomen School Board members, armed guards are coming to the district. Last week, the members voted to approve a three-year contract with a Jenkintown firm.
Members Judith Maginnis and Dana Hipszer voted against an action item that will pay the Cardinal Point Security Group more than $1.522 million over the life of the service agreement that runs from July 1 until June 30, 2026. It includes an option for a fourth-year renewal.
An armed guard will be stationed at the high school and middle school from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday through Friday. A similar guard will be located at the 4th & 5th Grade Center, as well as Marlborough and Hereford elementaries from 8:15 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Monday through Friday, according to the district's security agreement with the agency.
Two unarmed guards will be allocated at the high school each day from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. An additional unarmed guard will be assigned from noon to 6 p.m. An unarmed guard will also be assigned to the middle school each day from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m.
During the next school year, the district expects to spend $489,750 for the service. It will pay each armed security officer $43.50 per hour at an estimated total cost of $313,200. The unarmed guards will earn $170,100 at a rate of $31.50 per hour, according to the language of the agreement.
The total security expense will increase to $507,624 for the 2024-25 school year. That number goes up to $525,624 the following year, according to the agreement embedded in the meeting agenda.
Administrators initially budgeted $288,000 for the armed guards for the upcoming year, according to an email message received two months ago from district spokesperson Alexis Jenofsky. Council President Melanie Cunningham characterized the approved figure of $489,750 as a combination of the new armed guards and the guards/crossing guards the district had previously, according to an email message received Monday morning. She wrote that the difference was included in the facilities committee portion of the budget.
On its website, the Cardinal Point Security Group claims it is committed to a focus on comprehensive safety that encompasses physical safety, positive climate, effective culture, and strategic professional development. It states that the organization's goal is to build exceptional proficiency and long-term self-sustainability for a childcare organization, school, and house of worship, governmental or private business. The agency specializes in protection services for those groups of clients.
It also provides executive protection services for specialized events, according to the webpage.
Christopher Springfield – the CEO and president, a United States Marine Corp veteran who holds a Master of Science Degree in Organizational Dynamics from the University of Pennsylvania – oversees all aspects of company operations. Springfield, a retired deputy chief of police, has created comprehensive police tactics curricula and trained police officers, military special operations teams and security personnel, according to his biography. It also states that he has received several thousand hours of leadership, investigations, and tactical-related training and holds various instructor certifications.
Several members voted for the action item despite expressing concerns during the June 15 regular meeting. Vice President Peg Pennepacker told the audience she "hated" the proposal, but that she was leaning towards supporting it.
J.P. Prego described his vote as the most significant since those related to the COVID-19 pandemic. He said the board was putting "something in place to deal with the worst-case scenario. Unfortunately, it's something we have to do."
Several members expressed a concern over police response time. The district's five schools, located in five separate municipalities and spread across two counties, are covered by three community police departments and the state police.
"The response times have me so concerned," Pennepacker said prior to the vote.
Mike Elliott described the contract as a viable option to help keep the students safe. He said administrators must consider any option that could minimize any potential harm to them.
"Any little thing we can do that would lessen the damage, we have to give it a try," said Elliott, who added that the decision weighed on him.
Maginnis expressed skepticism that an armed guard is the most effective way to prevent a mass shooting. Prior to the vote, she referenced a report from the Washington Post that claimed an armed school resource officer was able to stop or disarm an active shooter in two of 225 incidents of gunfire on school grounds between 1999 and 2022.
Some of the deadliest school shootings occurred at buildings with an armed resource officer, according to Maginnis. She referenced incidents at Robb Elementary School in 2022 (28 dead), Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School (29 dead), Santa Fe High School in 2018 (30 dead), Marshall County High School (31 dead) and Great Mills High School (32 dead) in 2018; Santana High School in 2001 (33 dead) and Columbine High School in 1999 (34 dead).
"More often than not, the armed guards were outgunned by the shooters," Maginnis said.
The member said the board and administration should have initially considered preventative measures such as installing alarms on school doors or metal detectors.
"I'm not 100 percent against armed guards," she said. "But we jumped right to [that option] before we even locked our doors."
Maginnis said the public should have been included in the process. She suggested that administrators put together a task force consisting of parents, students and business owners during the upcoming school year to examine the issue.
"I really wish this had been done more openly," she said.
Hipszer expressed a preference to hire additional school resource officers. He described the contract for armed guards as presenting a false sense of security. He also said he was concerned that approval would further delay the necessary conversation regarding the creation of a regional police department.
"Someone, somewhere, sometime, we will need to bridge the disconnect between what the community wants and what it needs, and what municipal leaders are promoting," Hipszer said.
According to Keith McCarrick, the creation of a regional police department would solve this issue for the district. He described the implementation of armed guards as necessary.
"This is a community issue," McCarrick said.
Prior to the vote, a Red Hill resident registered her strenuous objection to the idea of armed guards included in the action item. Julie Swift described the district's plan as misguided.
Swift told the members that the presence of armed guards will do active harm to the children's well-being and never be enough to protect them. She argued that it would threaten the students' existence, describing it as a "massive disruption to a child's sense of security and belonging." She claimed that the children "would become immersed in an atmosphere of fear that their friends and teachers are potentially hostile."
A Pennsburg resident expressed her support for the action item. Vicki Lightcap lauded the board for approving the motion. "I think with the times we're living in, I'm glad you are making the choice to protect our kids," Lightcap said prior to the vote.
According to the message from Cunningham, the district has no interest in starting its own police department. She referenced the amount being spent by Perkiomen Valley to start its own department and described it as unfeasible for Upper Perkiomen.
"It would be really nice if those who were not in favor of us hiring armed guards would focus their efforts on Upper Hanover [in] creating a [regional] police force," she wrote in the message. "But that still leaves Hereford out in the cold. This seems to be the best solution for the time being."