April 24, 2024 — Regular Meeting
Conroe ISD Board Meeting — 2024-04-24
Regular Meeting — Unofficial Notes
Based on auto-generated transcript. Not an official record.
Generated 2026-03-28 16:56 UTC
Unofficial Meeting Notes
Conroe ISD School Safety and Security Committee Meeting
April 24, 2024 — Regular Meeting
Note: These are unofficial notes based on an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors or omissions. They are not a substitute for official board minutes.
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 PM on April 24, 2024.
Item 1: Approval of Minutes
Action: Minutes from the previous Safety and Security meeting (November 2023) were considered for approval.
Vote: Motion made and seconded. Approved unanimously with no opposition.
Item 2: Cell Phone Safety Awareness Initiative
Presenter: Ms. Rodriguez (and Dr. Medford for cell phone guidelines overview)
Key Points:
- Based on recommendations from the SHAC (School Health Advisory Council), the district implemented several cell phone safety awareness efforts:
- Ongoing social media campaign educating schools and parents about cell phone safety tips
- Community presentations equipping parents with tools to navigate the digital age
- Cell Phone Safety Week planned for the 2024–2025 school year (similar to Suicide Prevention Week and Red Ribbon Week), led by school counselors to empower students with responsible cell phone usage
Cell Phone Guidelines (approved by the Board):
- PreK–6th grade: Cell phones off and away for the entire school day
- Junior High: Cell phones away all day except during lunch and passing periods (campus discretion on specifics)
- High School: Cell phones away except for clear instructional purposes
- Junior high and high school guidelines were rolled out at the semester break
- Positive feedback received from teachers and parents
- Community surveys were conducted during the development process to gather parent input
- End-of-year feedback from faculty and community will be gathered to refine guidelines for next year
Discussion: The chair noted this was a great example of the system working — an idea originating from the SHAC, flowing to the board, going through a large committee process, and being implemented in buildings. Guidelines are a starting point and may evolve over time.
Item 3: Artificial Intelligence Software Exploration
Presenters: Ethan (Safety staff) and Chief Block
Background:
- Conroe ISD has 4,500+ cameras with approximately 12,000+ camera views/channels
- Five AI vendors were evaluated for potential integration with the district's camera systems
Vendors Reviewed:
| Vendor | Key Details | Pricing |
|--------|------------|---------|
| 21st Century AI | 90% camera coverage integration | $7.8 million upfront; 10% annual maintenance for 5 years; $10,000 per campus installation |
| Omnilert | Initial meeting held; vendor stopped responding after January 5 | No final pricing received |
| Actuate | Pricing per camera per month | ~$18/camera/month (weapons detection only); estimated ~$500,000+/year for district |
| Zero Eyes | Tiered pricing by camera streams | 5-year: $2.6M annually; 3-year: $3.15M annually; plus $15,000 platform fee (possibly per campus) |
| Drift Net (proprietary) | Installs own camera hardware; includes visitor management (could replace Raptor); claims ability to detect edged weapons/knives | $400,000–$550,000/year; 3-year contract: $1.24M–$1.7M |
Key Findings & Concerns:
- All systems require a weapon to be visibly brandished — they cannot detect concealed weapons (in backpacks, under clothing, etc.)
- Four of the five vendors offer substantially similar technology; Drift Net is the proprietary outlier
- Systems can generate false positives from BB guns, airsoft guns, toy weapons, etc.
- A human element is always required — alerts must be vetted by a person before response
- By the time AI detects a brandished weapon, the threat is already active — these systems do not prevent attacks, they enable faster notification and response
- Network concerns raised about Drift Net's proprietary cameras potentially taxing the district's network
- Data privacy concerns raised regarding who owns/stores video when using external camera systems, particularly with students involved
Weapons Detection Systems (walk-through type):
- Brief discussion of weapons detection systems (similar to those at Astros games)
- Estimated cost: ~$20,000 per movable unit
- Significant staffing requirements — each unit needs dedicated personnel, ideally police officers
- Challenge of large high schools with 120+ exterior doors noted
No action taken — informational item only.
Item 4: Staying Safe School Safety Response Training (Texas School Safety Center)
Presenters: Ethan and Chief Block
Background:
- At the committee's direction, Ethan and Chief Block attended the "Staying Safe" training at the Region 6 Service Center in Huntsville, provided by the Texas School Safety Center.
Key Findings:
- The curriculum aims to empower students in active shooter response situations
- Uses familiar framework (Run/Hide/Fight or Avoid/Deny/Defend) but changes "Defend" to "Disrupt"
- The "Disrupt" concept would be introduced at the intermediate and junior high levels and up (not elementary)
- The curriculum encourages students to think critically and make independent decisions during a crisis
- Would facilitate small group discussions where teachers guide students on how to respond, including the "fight/disrupt" option
Concerns Raised:
- Language change from "Defend" to "Disrupt" could create confusion with the existing Standard Response Protocol
- The presenter themselves inconsistently used terminology, creating confusion during the training
- Does not include all five phases of emergency management — focused only on response, not prevention or mitigation
- Does not include parent involvement — many parents would likely have strong opinions about their children being taught these concepts
- Concern about asking too much of teachers — could become traumatic for staff and students even in the training context
- Cognitive ability concerns — questioning whether intermediate-age students can appropriately analyze crisis situations and make independent decisions
- Risk of independent student action potentially conflicting with teacher instructions and endangering others (e.g., a student trying to flee while a teacher directs lockdown)
- Other districts at the training table shared similar reservations
- The program may be better suited for districts without robust existing safety infrastructure (e.g., rural districts without dedicated police departments)
Recommendation:
- Presenters and committee expressed that this program is not a good fit for Conroe ISD at this time given its infancy
- May warrant revisiting in 4–5 years after further development and implementation elsewhere
- Some elements could potentially be incorporated into existing training
Mandatory Status:
- The Texas School Safety Center made clear this training is voluntary, not mandatory, and there is no indication it will become mandatory
No formal action taken — informational item.
Item 5: Intruder Detection Audits for 2023–2024 School Year
Presenter: Mr. McCord
Key Points:
- This is the second year of intruder detection audits
- The district has 65 physical buildings; 58 have been audited as of the meeting date
- 7 remaining buildings will be audited in May
- Results: 57 out of 58 audited buildings had no findings (98.27% success rate)
- The one finding occurred in November and was previously discussed (specifics reviewed in prior executive session)
Notable Highlights:
- No executive session was needed for this item — all information could be shared in open session
- Results have exceeded expectations — described as "unbelievable" and "transformative"
- Students have been exemplary — not a single instance of a student letting an unauthorized person into a building through a door
- Credit given to students, staff, teachers, administrators, and maintenance crews for persistent effort despite the inconvenience
- Some of the district's campuses are compared to small cities in size (Conroe High School would be in the top quartile of Texas cities/towns by population)
- Final results will be reported to the Board of Trustees at the May board meeting
- Additional requirements from the state may come in fall 2024 (details still pending)
No formal action taken — informational item.
Closing Remarks
- Committee members were encouraged to share ideas, concerns, or topics for future investigation with leadership at any time
- Reminder that items like the AI exploration originated from committee member suggestions
Adjournment
Motion to adjourn made by Dr. Stickler. Meeting adjourned.
These notes are unofficial and based on an auto-generated transcript. For official minutes, please refer to Conroe ISD board records.