ShareThis Page
Auditor Wagner assails school security plans |

Auditor Wagner assails school security plans

| Wednesday, June 20, 2007 12:00 a.m

HARRISBURG — More than one-fourth of all school districts in Pennsylvania don’t have a district-wide emergency communications system, according to a survey released today by the state auditor general.

Auditor General Jack Wagner testified before the Senate Education Committee on the results of a survey sent to all 722 public school entities, including school districts, intermediate units and technical schools in the state. Two-thirds of these schools filled out and returned the survey.

The survey found that although 89 percent of responding districts have a comprehensive security plan, there are problems in the communication and implementation of safety procedures.

Wagner said the greatest need for improving school security is for top school district officials and all district employees to be involved in safety plans. He also stressed that districts need to keep communication with local law enforcement officials open.

“Everyone within the school district must totally embrace the plan,” Wagner said. “If not, it won’t work.”

The survey also found that nearly half of all districts do not have a visitor identification policy for those entering school buildings.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.