Texas Appleseed -Executive_Summary

7/31/2019 Texas Appleseed -Executive_Summary

1/30

Texas

School-to-PrisonPipelineTicketing, Arrest & Useof Force in Schools

How the Myth of the Blackboard JungleReshaped School Disciplinary Policy

ExecutiveSummary


2/30


3/30

Texas Appleseed Report Team

D F, Legal DirectorPrimary author

R L, Executive Director

J M, Communications Director

E A, Data Analyst

Texas Appleseed Mission

App p j v

p p - p. T

p p

jv j . I C C

( ppp p ) p .

Texas Appleseed Executive Committee

J. C D, Chair Emeritus, Graves, Dougherty, Hearon & Moody,*austin

M W, Chair, Susman GodfreyL.L.P.,* houston

A D. Ev, Secretary-reasurer,Allene Evans Law Firm,*austin

R C. L, Immediate Past Chair, Marshall & Lewis LLP ,* houston

R. J G, George & Brothers, LLP ,*austin

G Hf, Tompson & KnightLLP ,* dallas

C K, Mayer Brown LLP ,* houston

M L, Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP ,* dallas

C F. , Bracewell & Giuliani, LLP ,* houston

A V F, Greenberg raurig, LLP ,* houston

*Aliations listed or identication purposes only.

Book Design: Vv Cv C

V App .pp. p p.

F E Cp 00, App. A v, p : F p

p p . Rp v () p p

p p p p . T

p p .pp..


4/30

Acknowledgements

T p v p pp Houston Endowment;

Harold Simmons Foundation; Rockwell Fund, Inc.; Te Charles Stewart Mott Foundation;

Te Simmons Foundation; Te Brown Foundation. App p

p pVinson & Elkins, LLP (H), Gibson

Dunn & Crutcher LLP (D), qv p.

O p p v , jv p , jvj , p p - p.

App pp p

vp p:

Sv EAttorney

Advocacy, Inc.

austin, tx

F, .D.

Director o ResearchCouncil of State Governments Justice Center

austin, tx

L E. F, J.D., .D.Director o Planning and Programs

Assoc. Clinical Proessor oEducation Policy and Planning

Hogg Foundation for Mental Health

The University of Texas at Austin

austin, tx

W HPublic Policy Directoror Louisiana and Mississippi

Southern Poverty Law Center

new orleans, la

L MzPolicy Research Intern

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition

austin, tx

D RAttorney

Advocacy, Inc.

houston, tx

J S, M

Public Policy DirectorTexans Care for Children

austin, tx

SStaf Attorney

National Center for Youth Law

oakland, ca

L H. T Eq.Director

Strategies for Youth

boston, ma

J WDirector o Strategic Planning and Development

Charles Hamilton Houston Institute

for Race & Justice, Harvard Law School

cambridge ma


5/30


6/30

1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In a little over two decades, a paradigm shit has occurred in the Lone Star

State. Te misdeeds o childrenacts that in the near recent past resulted in

trips to the principals oce, corporal punishment, or extra laps under the

supervision o a middle school or high school coach, now result in criminal

prosecution, criminal records, and untold millions o dollars in punitive nes

and hety court costs being imposed against children ages 10 through 16.

Ryan Kellus urner& Mark Goodner

: N C

C C (00)

S v p

v , p v

. Dp , p, v

, , p pp .

, v C C p

.

I vv 275,000 non-trafc tickets are issued to juveniles

in Texas each year O C A

(OCA). L p jv J OCA

- v grossly exceed

. W p pp pp, v j f

- vp , , p p,

, p .

Cz v v . I ,

v p v ,

- - .


7/30

2

Executive

Summary

S- , p

p p q .

T , ,

- p. Cp p

, p . W

, p p ( S R

O SRO) v p. , p

v p p , , , -

v. A , p

ppp

p,

v v. T p

, q p p

j p p q

.

T p App p p p

p p p vv jv

j . T --p pp p

, v p

Y C (YC) . T

p p, p,

f f YC. L p

YC pp ,

f p . A

, v, v

v , : Texas can interrupt this

destructive cycle and prevent the loss o more young people to the school-to-prison

pipeline through early interventions ocused less on punishment and more on creating

positive school environments that address students academic and behavioral needs.

R p.

Early Segments of the PipelineSuspension, Expulsion and

Alternative Schools

I 00, App p p , p v p,

p R C T Uv p

-p E A v v p, , pp,

p p p . T

009, p p Jv J Av

E , App pp p

p p . S :


8/30

3

Executive

Summary

Whereachildattendsschoolandnotthenatureof theoenseisthegreater

p p I-S Sp

(ISS), O--S Sp (OSS), Dp Av E

(DAE) -v v.

Comparedtotheiroverallpercentageinthetotalstudentpopulation,AfricanAmerican

( Hp) vp ISS, OSS DAE p Jv

J Av E (JJAE) .

Specialeducationstudentsarelikewisesignicantlyoverrepresentedinschooldistricts

p .

W p p

p , v p

vp .

The Advent of Campus Policing and the Criminalization ofStudent Misbehavior

T p p 90

p p

p v p p . T p

v jv -

v q v ( App, Te Genesis

o the Myth o the Blackboard Jungle). S, 978, 00 v p

v p p. I 990, p p. M

, C H S

C (999), p - f

p p v. T S R O (SRO) p

, p , p SRO

pv C pp .

, v

pv S R O p v p

p. T p p SRO

, /, ,

v pv

v vp, - p ,

p v, pv . Cp p v

p p .


9/30

4

Executive

Summary

Assessing Ticketing, Arrest and Use of Force in Texas Public Schools

F pp , App Op R Rq

v p p

p j , q C C v-

p (00-0 00-07) ,

, f, p v

. Only 26 school districts and eight municipal courts could provide any part othe requested inormation rom a searchable database. R C C

, p pv

- v--p. I 00-07, j p

q . O pv

, - -

. O p p . T p

v q . I p the Texas Education

Agency does not require school districts to report student ticketing or arrest data,

v - Dp

S p U C Rp.

T pp p f

.T p , p, pv p

v p p

. I p p

: )

, - v; ) p pp

vp p

p; ) pp v pv v;

) p p v

; ) ISD p q v

p v ; ) v q p p p ppp fv

p p; 7) j p p

v pv

v.

Major Findings: Ticketing, Arrest and Use of Force in Texas Public Schools

Class C Misdemeanor Ticketing

Ticketing of students in Texas public schools has increased substantially over a

two- to five-year periodconsistent with a growing law enforcement presencein schools, but in sharp contrast to a reported overall drop in juvenile crime.

u - j pp p

.


10/30

5

Executive

Summary

u S v C C

v - v- p v .

u T 14 percent

decrease jv 000 008.

Most Class C misdemeanor tickets written by school police officers are for low-

level, non-violent misbehaviorbut ticketing of students can have far-reaching

financial and legal impacts.

u T p

-v Dp C p, D C,

v (v p p)v, jv

, v p p

j v criminal records.

u

L (SB 0) p 8 L 009 ( p j )

p v f p

, v v

C C Dp S, -

not working C C

p .

u S p -p p -p

v C C 7

pp H C .

u T pv p C C $0 $00

v multiple tickets .

Where a child attends school, and not the nature of the offense, is the greater

predictor of whether that child will be ticketed at school.

u T p C C p pp p,

v.

u I 00-07,

C C : H ISD, ,88 ; D ISD, ,0;S A ISD, ,70; A ISD, ,. Hv,

: Bv ISD, ,8; Cp C ISD,

,09; A ISD, ,9; W ISD, ,070.


11/30

6

Executive

Summary

African American and (to a lesser extent) Hispanic students are disproportionately

represented in Class C misdemeanor ticketing on Texas public school campuses.

u O ,

pp A A p p

pp.u I v, p

A A p

: A ISD, D ISD, H ISD, K ISD S A ISD.

Special education students are likely overrepresented in Class C ticketing on

school campuses.

u O p ,

p p

p : M ISD, 9 p p (8 p ) S A ISD, 9 p

p ( p ).

It is not unusual for elementary school-age children, including students 10 years old

or younger, to receive Class C misdemeanor tickets at schooland data indicates

students as young as six have been ticketed.

u pv v,

, . W j

, ,000

v - p v . D p : D ISD, ,8 ; A ISD, ;

W F, 99; A ISD, 9; H ISD, 7.

u Fv p p

, p (,

K ISD, ) 00 007: D, ; Hv,

; K ISD, .

Arrest of Students at School

Of the 12 Texas school districts that were able to disaggregate arrest data by year,

the arrest numbers for nine of those districts increased anywhere from 20 percentto more than 100 percent over the multi-year period for which they provided data.


12/30

Executive

Summary

The majority of arrests in reporting school districts are for non-violent offenses

that do not involve use of weaponsand Disorderly Conduct, one of the offenses

resulting in the largest numbers of Class C misdemeanor tickets, is also one of

the offenses for which students were most often arrested.

u

I p pv f p 00-07, 0 p ,00 vv

v p. In the vast majority o cases, the weapon used was sts.

u D f p p p

00-07.

African American students are disproportionately represented in school-based arrests.

u O 7 pv - App,

0 p . O 0 ,

v vp A A .

Very young children are being arrested on Texas school campuses.

u O 7 p

. O ,900 00-07, vv

.

u p 0

p v - p: E ISD, ; K ISD,

.

Where a child attends school, and not the nature of the offense, is the great

determining factor in whether a student will be arrested at school.

u S : E C

ISD, v ,000 , Cp C ISD,

v ,000 , p 0 p ,000 S A ISD

p ,000 E , M, H U ISD.

Only two-thirds of the 26 school district police departments providing data to

Texas Appleseed could supply numbers on school-based arrests.

u T 7 p p

00-07 7,00 .

u p p D ISD H

ISD pv - .


13/30

Executive

Summary

Use of Force at School

School district police departments are arming police officers with force that includes

pepper spray, Tasers, stun bags, guns and caninesand some of these weapons

are being used on students, despite the risks they pose.

The Texas Education Codes exemption of peace officers from reporting

requirements for student restraint, along with a recent Attorney General opinion

allowing school district police departments to withhold use of force policies

from the public, result in a complete lack of transparency around school use of

force practices.

u O pv App, pv

p .

u O , pv .

u N pv p

.

Use of force policies reveal that many school police departments require officers to

carry pepper spray, but few have policies that restrict its use in situations involving

youth. This is in sharp contrast to the restrictions Texas juvenile justice agencies

have placed on use of pepper spray on youth in their custody.

African American and Hispanic students are disproportionately represented in

use of force incidents at school.

u I pv , A A

j ISD p

p .

u I p p

, vv v j

vv ppp p, p p, .

Educational Programming and Juvenile Facilities

Though a major study has been conducted and legislation passed in an attempt

to improve educational programming in the Texas Youth Commission (TYC),little to no attention has been paid to educational programming in county-run

juvenile detention facilities.

u I , - jv f v

, p YC. Q p jv

pv v pv .


14/30

Executive

Summary

Major Policy Recommendations

School-wide Positive Behavior Supports (PBS)

1) Texas schools should adopt school-wide Positive Behavior Supports (PBS) proven

to reduce student misbehavior and keep schools saferresulting in fewer disciplinary

referrals and reducing the need for law enforcement interventions.

W p , BS pv fv v

pv, pv , p v pp

. I vp

p p .

2) When schools adopt PBS, they must include school police in training and use

PBS as a framework for evaluating and fine-tuning campus policing policies.

F p -

p BS.

Training

3) School-based law enforcement personnel should be required to receive post-

certification training in issues specific to youth, including:

u D- q

u S- q v

u S p , ,

ppp p

u S p , ppp p

u M , , ppp p

u A vp

u Jv

u Sp pp

F BS, seeexas APPleseed, exas School torison iPeline: DroPout to Incarceration -6; exas APPleseed, exas Schoolto rison iPeline: School ExPulsion 22-23 (00).


15/30


16/30

11

Executive

Summary

9) Schools should create or expand effective prevention and intervention programs,

such as peer mediation and restorative justice practices, as alternatives to ticketing.

T p p pv pp, -

p .

Arrest10) Chapter 37 of the Education Code should be amended to specify that arrest of studentsfor low-level, school-based misbehavior should be a last resort, and used only for

behavior that includes weapons or threatens the safety of the campus, students or faculty.

Sp v pv pv v v, v q v p .

11) Juvenile justice stakeholders should determine what percentage of their referrals resultfrom school-based arrests. If they make up a significant portion of referrals, juvenile justice

stakeholdersincluding the local juvenile board and probation officialsshouldwork with education stakeholders to create a plan to reduce school-based referrals.

T q jv j p - v . Jv j p .

Use of Force

12) Pepper spray and Tasers should be prohibited for use on students by school-basedlaw enforcement, except in situations involving firearms or other weapons capable

of causing serious bodily harm.

T , v p f.

13) Prone restraints should be prohibited for use on students as a restraint technique

by school-based law enforcement.

T p p , p , .

Educational Programming & Juvenile Facilities

14) The State should commission a comprehensive study on the quality of educational

programming, including special education services, in juvenile detention facilities.The study should consider whether the programs comply with current law, should

identify best practices, and determine where existing programs fall short.


17/30

12

Executive

Summary

15) Chapter 37 of the Texas Education Code should be amended to require the transitionofall students, released from juvenile detention or TYC, back to their home school.

O , , DAE JJAE.

16) When making decisions about closure or location of new facilities, TYC should

consider the availability of qualified administrative, teaching and special education

staff for educational programs.

Transparency

17) School district police departments should be required to compile a searchable

database that includes the number of citations issued, custodial arrests, and use of

force incidents by school district officers or security guards on each campus.

T p :

u

W j , -.u T p .

u T , / j , .

u Sp , j .

u N f.

u T p , v (p, pv ,

v , v) p j j p

.

u T p , , .

18) Section 37.109 of the Texas Education Code, which requires a School Safety and

Security Committee in every school district, should be amended to require inclusion

of a representative from a parent organization or a parent, if there is no parent

organization in the district; a representative from a student leadership group, or a

student; a representative from an organization that advocates for youth who have

disabilities; representatives from local social service agencies; and a representative

from the local juvenile probation department. In addition to the existing information

that the committee is required to develop and review, the statute should be amended

to require that the committee:

u Rv ppp p .

u p p p v ,

vp

p.


18/30

13

Executive

Summary

u I v - p p,

pp v , , MOU

p, p p

.

u W vp ppp

p p .

u Rv p , ppp.

u v , pvv ( )

jv .

19) School district police departments should compile an annual report for the schoolboard, made available to the public through the districts website, that includes an

analysis of ticketing, arrest and use of force data. Annual reports should include:

u T (- p) , j , p , vp, v Dp, ISD p p p vp. T p p p v .

u T p , , j - p ( p ) , vp, v ISD p p, p , p f , p p

p , pp v vp.

u A , p; p ; p p ppp z.

u H q ISD p p p p , ,

pv p p -.

u H p v p p pvv , p p, v v , v f p p p v .


19/30

14

Executive

Summary

u A p f p, p p , ( ) p , , pvv p p p .

20) For districts that contract with local law enforcement agencies for School ResourceOfficers, the districts Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the law enforcement

agency should require the same data collection, analysis and reporting outlined

above. The MOU also should include a schedule for the routine circulation of this

information to inform their policies and practices around school discipline and

preventative approaches to school crime.

21) Policymakers should determine an appropriate method of statewide collection

and reporting of ticketing and arrest data for public school campuses to better inform

educational and juvenile justice policy. Two options:

u

EA EIMS q p , p p

EA p. T /, ,

p ;

u JC Jv C M S z

jv p p .

22) Texas Education Code 37.0021, which requires reporting of restraint and

seclusion, should be amended to require reporting for all students, not just special

education students.

-p .

p , q p .

23) Section 37.0021 should also be amended so that school-based law enforcement

are no longer exempt from the reporting requirements for restraint and seclusion.

T p - p.

T v p

q.

24) School district police departments should be required to post unredacted copies

of their policy manuals on the districts website.

v

p.


20/30

15

Executive

Summary

A Snapshot: Ticketing and Arrest Data and Use of Force

Options in Reporting Texas School Districts

T p

. A p v

p p

App p .

App q , -- 7

p ISD p p. Hv,

p pv p q

v- p (00-0 00-07). Sp,

p pv - C C - v-

p, v p q /,

, f, p . S

v 7 p , ,

pp v z. Rp App

q . T

, v p p v

j . App p p

, v .pp.

S-- p pj p.

Growth in School District Police Department Staff &

Increase/Decrease in Ticketing During Same Period

School DistrictPercentage Growth ofPolice Department Staff

Increase/Decreasein Ticketing

Austin ISD 31% 50%

Dallas ISD 24% 95%

Edgewood ISD 35% -72%

El Paso ISD 37% 59%

Humble ISD 92% 29%

Katy ISD 30% -55%

United ISD 71% 37%

Waco ISD 10% -22%

NOE: O p pv p

p ( ) v p p /

.


21/30

16

Executive

Summary

Class C Misdemeanor Tickets Issued in 26 School Districts

and Court Jurisdictions in 2006-07 School Year2

School District/Municipal Court

(Enrollment)Number ofClass C Tickets

TicketingRate

Alie ISD (45,625) 1,926 4 %

Austin ISD (81,917) 2,653 3 %

Brownsville ISD (48,284) 2,8563

6%

Castleberry ISD (3,322) 181 5%

Corpus Christi ISD (38,785) 2,095 5%

Dallas ISD (158,814) 4,402 3%

East Central ISD (8,470) 501 6%

Edgewood ISD (11,906) 233 2%

El Paso ISD (62,635) 1447 2%

Galveston ISD (8,430) 921 11%

Houston ISD (202,449) 4,828 2%Humble ISD (31,144) 431 1%

Huntsville Municipal Court(Huntsville ISD 6,229)

245 4%

Katy ISD (50,725) 1336 3%

Lewisville-Flower Mound Municipal Court(Lewisville ISD 48,890)

262 Less than 1%

Midland ISD (20,827) 369 2%

Pasadena ISD (49,630) 3294

Less than 1%

San Angelo ISD (14,333) 321 2%

San Antonio ISD (55,322) 3,760

5

7%Somerville Municipal Court(Somerville ISD 529) 38 7%

App : L-Cp ISD ( 00-07 p), Mp C ( 00-07 ); App 00-0 C M Mp C( ) 007-08 A ISD (, ) H ISD (00 ).

D Bv v . App v v ( K9 Sp), v, .

ISD . T - p pv 0. App v0 v , p p v. T 00-07.

S A ISD . App v ,8 v , p v.


22/30

1

Executive

Summary

Southlake Municipal Court(Carroll ISD 7,772) 85 1%

Spring Branch ISD (32,098) 5106

2%

United ISD (37,671) 522 1%

Waco ISD (15,403) 1070 7%White Settlement ISD (5,405) 160 3%

Wichita Falls ISD (14,675) 369 3%

NOE: O j pv App

p f.

Sp B ISD - v -. T 00-07 808. App f , p p, , p C C - . Hv, .

Breakdown of Ticketing Offenses for

22 Texas School Districts

200607

DisruptionCurfewLocal Code of Conduct Other Disorderly Conduct

18%

3%

34%

38%

7%

School District/Municipal Court

(Enrollment)Number ofClass C Tickets

TicketingRate


23/30

1

Executive

Summary

Overrepresentation of African American Students in Class C

Misdemeanor Ticketing in Reporting Texas School Districts, 2006-07

School DistrictAfrican AmericanPercentage in Student Body

African AmericanPercentage in Class CMisdemeanor Tickets

Austin ISD 12% 25%

Corpus Christi ISD 5% 7%

Dallas ISD 30% 62%

El Paso ISD 5% 8%

Humble ISD 17% 42%

Huntsville ISD 27% 51%

Katy ISD 9% 18%

Midland ISD 10% 19%

Pasadena ISD 8% 14%

San Antonio ISD 8% 16%

White Settlement ISD 8% 14%

NOE: W pv App,

. O , vp A

A C C 00-07.

School Districts Issuing Tickets to Elementary School

Students, 2001-077

8

School District Number of Tickets

Alie ISD

7

355Austin ISD 91

Castleberry ISD 21

Dallas ISD 1,248

Edgewood ISD 64

Humble ISD8

75

Pasadena ISD 43

Somerville Municipal Court 1

United ISD 48

White Settlement ISD 5

Wichita Falls ISD 99

NOE: O 0 p / j

pv App v.

7 A pv 00 007.8 H ISD pv 00 , v

p.


24/30

1

Executive

Summary

School-Based Arrests and Arrest Rates for

17 Texas School Districts, 2006-079 0

School District

(Enrollment)Number of

Arrests Arrest Rate

Austin ISD (81,917) 1,310 16 arrests or every 1,000 students

Brownsville ISD (48,284) 399 8 arrests or ever y 1,000 students

Castleberry ISD (3,322) 5 1.5 arrests or every 1,000 students

Corpus Christi ISD (38,785) 1,001 26 arrests or every 1,000 students

East Central ISD (8,470) 429 51 arrests or every 1,000 students

Edgewood ISD (11,906) 2069

17 arrests or every 1,000 students

El Paso ISD (62,635) 401 6 arrests or every 1,000 students

Humble ISD (31,144) 187 6 arrests or every 1,000 students

Katy ISD (50,725) 512 10 arrests or every 1,000 students

McAllen ISD (24,558) 111 4.5 arrests or every 1,000 students

Midland ISD (20,827) 126 6 arrests or every 1,000 studentsPasadena ISD (49,630) 1,288

10


San Antonio ISD (55,322) 55311


Spring Branch ISD (32,098) 29812


United ISD (37,671) 23713


White Settlement ISD (5,405) 12 2 arrests or every 1,000 students

Wichita Falls ISD (14,675) 30 2 arrests or ever y 1,000 students

NOE: T p 00-07;

, 7,00 7 .

9 E ISD . T v v .

0 ISD . T - p pv 8,0. App v 8,0 v , p p v. T, 00-07. I ,

p Dp S (DS) UC Rp (UCR). S p DS UCR, vv.

S A ISD . App v ,8 v , p v.

A p, Sp B ISD . App C C . T, 00-07 v .

T U ISD pv 00-0.


25/30

2

Executive

Summary

Representation of African American Students in School-Based

Arrests in Seven Texas Districts, 2006-07

School District

(Enrollment)African American Percentagein Student Body

African American Percentagein School-Based Arrests

Corpus Christi ISD 5% 9%

East Central ISD 11% 21%

El Paso ISD 5% 7%

Katy ISD 9% 17%

Midland ISD 10% 19%

Pasadena ISD 8% 13%

San Antonio ISD 8% 25%

NOE: O 7 pv App - ,

0 . T j

( v ) vp A A p

.

Number of Elementary School Students Arrested

in Six Texas School Districts, 2006-07

School District Number of Elementary School Students Arrested

Austin ISD 96

East Central ISD 63

El Paso ISD 38

Humble ISD 10Katy ISD 13

McAllen ISD 5

NOE: O v

, p 00-07,

App .


26/30

21

Executive

Summary

T p v p p App q p p p . App p A G p p p p p.

Spectrum of Use of Force Options in 16 Texas School Districts

School

DistrictBaton/Impact

Weapon

Pepper Spray/

Taser Canines Firearm

Alie ISD Yes Neither Not mentioned Yes

Austin ISD Yes Both, also allows useo stun bags

Yesmay also beused in conjunctionwith stun bags in a

bag and bite option

Yes

Brownsville ISD Optional Chemical Irritantmandatory equipmentor ocers

Not mentionedin use o orcesection

Ocers carryhandguns; shotgunscarried in patrol cars.

Cedar Hill ISD Yes Pepper Spray; ocers

also allowed to carr ya utility knie.

Not mentioned Yes

Conroe ISD Yes Pepper Spray Not mentioned Yes

Dallas ISD Yes Pepper Spray Not mentioned Yes

East Central ISD Yes Chemical agentsincluded in use oorce continuumbut not mentionedelsewhere

Not mentioned No duty weaponsissued, but ocersauthorized to carryweapons registeredwith chie. Unloadedshotguns may becarried in vehicles.

Edgewood ISD Yes Pepper Spray; ocersalso authorized tocarry a utility knie.

Not mentioned Handguns,no shotguns

Edinburg CISD Reers to authorizednon-deadly weapons,but does notidentiy them.

Not mentioned Not mentioned No

El Paso ISD Yes Pepper Spray Yes Yes

Houston ISD Yes Pepper Spray/og onlyauthorized or SpecialResponse Team; pepperoam authorized or otherocers. Tasers can onlybe used by speciallytrained personnel.

Yes Yes

Humble ISD Yes Both Not mentioned Yes

Laredo ISD Yes No Not mentioned Handguns;

shotguns/rifescarried by certiedocers.

Lubbock-CooperISD

Yes No Not mentioned Handguns;no shotguns.

Pasadena ISD Yes Pepper Spray Yes Handgun and patrolrifes

Wichita Falls ISD Yes Pepper Spray; alsoincludes bicycle inintermediate weapons.

Not mentioned Handgunsauthorized but notprovided; patrolrifes provided.


27/30


28/30

J. C D, Chair EmeritusGv, D, H & M,*Austin

M W, ChairS GL.L.P.,* Houston

A D. Ev, Secretary-reasurerA D. Ev L F,*Austin

R C. L, Immediate Past ChairM & L LL P,* Houston

G BDLA p,*Austin

C CO C A,* El Paso

D . DfB B L.L.P.,* Houston

E F. FH & W LLP,*Austin

N. S FJ D,* Houston

R. J GG & B, LLP,*Austin

Dv GG & C,* Houston

M K. GB B L.L.P.,* Houston

S GD & LB,* Houston

C HS O Cp,* Houston

G HfTp & K LLP,* Dallas

JF & R P.C.,*Austin

S KG W Uv L S,*

Washington, D.C.

C KM B LLP,* Houston

L KF & J L.L.P.,* Houston

N LA Gp S H & F LLP,* San Antonio

M LG W S LL P,* Dallas

Ez ML L B & L LL P,* Dallas

C F. B & G LLP,* Houston

K D. G & B LLP,* Houston

H. Ez RHouston

M RzRz & N L.L.P.,* Brownsville

Dv SpG, Sp & W, L.L.P.,* Houston

A V FG , LL P,* Houston

L WN L C U & ,*San Antonio

*aliations listed or identication only

T E X A S A P P L E S E E D B O A R D O F D I R E C T O R S


29/30

V App

.pp.

p p .


30/30

W W W . T E X A S A P P L E S E E D . N E T

Date post:	04-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	texas-watchdog
View:	223 times
Download:	0 times

Texas Appleseed -Executive_Summary

Documents