The Austin Independent School District (AISD) has an important
role to play
when disaster strikes. In conjunction with the Red Cross, high school
gyms can
serve as hurricane evacuation centers, and cafeterias can feed
thousands. Even
Toney Burger Center would be used in the event that Austin must harbor
political or war refugees. The school district’s bus fleet may also
serve the
rest of the county or city in an emergency. But with campus security
and safety
increasingly on the minds of parents, teachers, and students, AISD’s
internal
preparedness poses another problem. What happens if a school receives a
bomb
threat? What if a tornado were coming? Can campus personnel prevent
student
violence or stop outside intruders?
Although the district has developed a centralized plan for taking
on school
emergencies, the state of readiness of an individual campus is left
entirely in
the hands of that school’s principal. Each campus is responsible for
devising
its own contingency plan. But since very little districtwide,
in-service
training has been devoted to apprising campus personnel on emergency
procedures, it is not clear that every school in AISD is ready to meet
an
unexpected crisis.
Historically, increases in AISD campus security are merely a
response to
some previous event – not a preventive measure. Ortega Elementary
School, in
East Austin, is a prime example of the district’s tendency to react
after the
fact. The school was broken into many times, car thieves routinely used
the
campus as an impromptu “chop shop,” and children would arrive mornings
to see
dead animals dismembered, with blood scrawled on Ortega’s outside
walls. Once,
a stranger wandered onto the playground, displaying a gun. An apparent
misunderstanding at AISD’s police dispatch center prevented officers
from
arriving on the scene for 30 minutes; in the meantime, a teacher had
convinced
the gunman to leave. It was after this incident that a nine-foot fence,
topped
by razor wire, was installed around the campus. Many people, said
principal
Lynda Tynsley, still don’t understand that the fence is intended to
keep people
out, rather than keep the children in.
In 1994, the district made a good first step in helping principals
improve
campus safety by publishing a new School Safety and Emergency Resource
Manual.
It comes with a quick flip chart of emergency procedures for everything
from
bomb threats to natural disasters, which is to be kept within easy
reach at
each school. AISD officials, along with parent and teacher groups,
developed
the plan with the help of the city’s fire and police departments.
Statewide
interest in the manual has been high and the document has served as a
model for
many other school districts in Texas, said Scott Wyatt, AISD’s risk
management
specialist. A written plan is crucial to an effective emergency
management
system – information stored on computer may be unretrievable under
certain
emergencies. But the manual alone won’t help the principal who hasn’t
had any
training. And no one in AISD central administration could say with
certainty
that every campus is equally prepared for a crisis.
A series of Safe Schools Community Forums, which will conclude May
4, is
intended to help schools develop a uniform plan for campus safety –
whether the
threat comes from a natural disaster, or from gang violence. Training
for all
faculty will be in place by Spring 1996, said Bill Perry, AISD’s
school-community liaison. But another safety problem can only be solved
with
money: not all of AISD’s 96 schools have automatic fire alarm systems.
In 1993, a performance review of AISD by Texas State Comptroller
John Sharp
revealed that 26 schools had manual systems, eight had partial systems,
and 30
had none at all. The reason for the disparity is that fire code
requirements
have changed over the years. New or remodeled schools are fully
protected; old
and middle-aged schools are in compliance, but only with the older fire
codes.
The estimated cost of installing automatic fire and intrusion
protection
systems in all schools is almost $1.5 million.
This finding was not listed in Sharp’s report as a recommended
improvement
for AISD, only as something that the authors of the report noticed.
Ostensibly,
the reason for this is that AISD has long planned to include that $1.5
million
in a bond package. AISD bond committee chairman Mel Waxler said he
thinks the
committee will come forward with that recommendation within the next
several
weeks, when it issues its final report.
Nonetheless, many people didn’t know about the problem AISD has
had with
fire protection. Bob Runkel, special services supervisor for the AISD
police
department, said that five more schools have received full fire
protection in
the last two years. Even so, the district has a long way to go before
all its
school buildings – including 500-plus portable buildings – are
completely
covered. “The district spends more on carpet than life safety,” Runkel
said
bitterly. “Most people assume the protection is there, and they’re
appalled
when they find out [otherwise].”
While she did not downplay the crisis, AISD Board of Trustees
President
Kathy Rider said that an emergency request for funds to immediately
rectify any
fire safety situation has never been brought before the board. “If
we’ve got
children and staff in an unsafe situation, we’re going to respond to
that,” she
said. She stressed how important the upcoming bond issue will be in
overall
facilities improvement.
And what if the bonds aren’t passed? “We’ll just keep
nickel-and-diming
it,” sighed Runkel.
This article appears in April 28 • 1995 and April 28 • 1995 (Cover).