Professors passed a resolution asking officials to publicize data and community feedback on the decision to arm GW Police Department officers before continuing the implementation process at a Faculty Senate meeting Friday.

Faculty senators passed the resolution 21-4, calling on the University to disclose community feedback to GWPD’s online form soliciting input on the decision and any changes to liability insurance and GWPD operational costs caused by the arming of officers with 9 mm handguns. Senators said the seven requests outlined in the resolution, which was penned by eight faculty senators, will allow the senate to remedy the Board of Trustees’ alleged violation of shared governance principles after the body failed to properly consult faculty before the decision.

The shared governance principles, which senators approved in April 2022, outline expectations for communication and collaboration between the administration, trustees and faculty on University issues. Senators argue the decision to arm GWPD represents a lack of shared governance because trustees only told the senate’s Executive Committee they were considering implementation in February before announcing their decision in April. The resolution follows a May letter signed by more than 230 faculty members requesting the Board reverse the decision to arm officers.

Jennifer Brinkerhoff, a signatory on the resolution and a professor of international affairs, international business, public policy and public administration, said the resolution is not intended to reverse the Board’s decision but will help address its breach of shared governance.

“Here, too, the GW community was stymied, but it’s not too late to rectify these two glaring governance submissions,” Brinkerhoff said, referring to the lack of community input and knowledge on the decision-making process.

GWPD armed its two top police officers last month with 9 mm handguns and planned to arm four more by the end of the month, marking a shift to phase two of the University’s implementation plan to arm about 20 officers this fall.

Brinkerhoff said officials’ failure to provide evidence and reasoning to support the decision makes it difficult for community members to trust or accept a decision they did not contribute to. The resolution requests copies of any consulting reports or other research the University referenced to make the decision to arm officers and requests information on GWPD’s salaries and costs associated with training for the policy implementation.

Former University President Mark Wrighton’s initial announcement said the decision came after more than a year of “careful consideration” and that the University was working with 21CP Solutions, Inc., a law enforcement consulting group consisting of police chiefs, lawyers and academics, “to help guide its planning” to arm officers. GWPD Chief James Tate said at a Student Association meeting last month the policy will cost about $150,000 in the first year and $50,000 each year thereafter — funds he said he will draw from GWPD’s internal operating budget of unused salaries.

“The key to building and sustaining trust in any community and especially with governance structures is transparency,” Brinkerhoff said. “While there may be very clear reasoning and evidence behind the decision to arm the GWPD and the timeline to do so, none of this has been shared.”

Brinkerhoff said the research and evidence that opposes the decision, which senators included in the resolution, increases the “need for transparency” from officials on their evidence and reasoning. The resolution contains research about how the presence of a weapon can increase overall “aggression” and found no relationship between armed officers in schools and the deterrence of violence. 

The resolution requests the University “support and regularize robust de-escalation and bystander intervention training” for members of the University community. As part of the arming decision, GWPD officers must undergo monthly de-escalation training, implicit bias training every semester and mental health response training three times per year.

The resolution also states that D.C. decided not to station armed officers in the District’s public schools because perceived safety benefits “do not outweigh” armed officers’ adverse effects on students. The resolution also compared the University’s lack of community and faculty input in the decision-making process to American University’s announcement earlier this month, which said AU’s leadership is seeking feedback as part of deliberations on whether to arm AU police before arming the department.

“Other universities in the urban area include robust community wide, multi stakeholder discussion with fact gathering before making decisions to arm campus police or to implement such decisions,” the resolution reads.

The resolution states that University President Steven Knapp debated arming campus police in 2009 but opted not to after obtaining a consulting opinion from Witt Associates — a crisis and emergency management firm — that advised against arming GWPD.

Arthur Wilson, a faculty senator and an associate professor of finance, said Knapp instead decided to increase communication with the Metropolitan Police Department after receiving the Witt report. Senators approved a friendly amendment to the resolution clarifying that Knapp, not the Board of Trustees, chose not to arm officers at the time.

Wilson said he wants to see the report to understand what information influenced Knapp’s decision.

“The Witt report, we’ve never actually seen it, we don’t know that it recommended that,” Wilson said. “We know that after he saw it, President Knapp chose not to arm the police.”

Guillermo Orti, a signatory on the resolution and professor of biology, said the resolution addresses campus safety issues and faculty concerns about shared governance because the policies allow faculty to provide more input on the implementation plan. The resolution requests the University participate in a community forum organized by students and alumni with the Faculty Senate, and it requests the University “collaborate on forming” a task force with students and faculty to aggregate data on the relationship between armed campus police and community safety.

GWPD Chief James Tate delivered a presentation on the arming implementation plan at a Faculty Senate meeting in September and said officials received faculty feedback on phase one requesting clarification on the use of force policy, which addresses expected de-escalation strategies and bias training.

“The process leading to this decision did not follow agreed-upon principles of shared governance that the faculty, administration and the trustees endorsed in 2022,” Orti said in an email.

He said evidence-based decisions are part of a “collective and transparent process” of discussing experts’ feedback that are likely to be “well-received” by the community, even if not everyone agrees. He said senators requested GWPD’s raw data from the feedback form it used in May and June on the arming decision to allow community members to reach their “own conclusions” because the summary of the data GWPD provided may not reflect the “nuanced composition” of community feedback.

He said learning about GWPD’s operational costs are vital in considering what other programs the arming decision may affect.

“We need time to collect and analyze evidence and options and call for a pause in the implementation plan,” Orti said.

Max Porter, Grace Chinowsky, Rachel Moon, Connor Fox-Moore, Karolina Montalvo and Sarah Gross contributed reporting.