Campus security staff cuts draw pleas from campus safety workers

Two campus security employees told the Yelm Community Schools board they want trustees to reconsider recent cuts that will eliminate experienced security staff and the district’s certified ALICE active-shooter instructor. Matt Sturz, a high-school campus security employee, told the board the reductions will remove the district’s most experienced security professionals and make it harder to enforce attendance and detect bullying.

“Is saving approximately $105,000 worth eliminating two campus positions?” Sturz asked, calling the two-position reduction “what it is” and noting a figure in the superintendent’s packet that he said showed total district savings of $2,341,393 from the reductions.

Will Gunstrom, who also spoke during public comment, described multiple incidents he said he and other security staff intervened in over the prior days — fights, vaping confiscations and a student who ran off campus when confronted — and asked the board who would respond to similar incidents next year if the positions remain cut. “We probably stopped at least four fights from happening,” Gunstrom said, adding that the reductions were personal for him because his family and job are tied to district schools.

Both speakers framed their remarks as safety and student-wellbeing concerns. Sturz cited national figures for context — saying there have been more than 441 gun incidents on school campuses over the past three years resulting in 135 deaths and 340 injuries — and urged trustees to weigh the potential safety implications against budget savings.

Board members did not debate the substance of the public comments during the comment period; later items on the agenda proceeded and the board approved routine personnel and policy items. The speakers said the reductions were budget-driven, and Sturz said his layoff notice stated competencies were not a factor in the decision. He asked the board to explain whether the cuts were necessary given the safety responsibilities he and his colleagues performed.

Next steps: The board did not take formal action during the public-comment period. The reduction-in-force and related staffing decisions remain a district personnel matter; the board later approved the superintendent’s contract following an executive session.