Editorial: School police should stick to patrolling

Monday, Aug. 9, 2004 | 8:59 a.m.

The chief of the Clark County School District's police force has his priorities straight. Although his lone detective investigating financial crimes is overburdened, Chief Elliot Phelps is not seeking to add more staff in that area. Phelps says making sure patrol shifts are fully manned in order to protect the schools is a more critical mission for his department.

In agreeing with the chief, we can't help but ask: Why does the department need a financial-crimes detective at all? This one detective has spent every working day since last fall working on just one, albeit complex, case -- an internal audit that showed the district's former athletic director had improperly used district funds.

Metro Police and the Nevada Division of Criminal Investigations helped out on the case, which on Friday afternoon resulted in an arrest warrant being issued. The warrant alleges the former athletic director diverted more than $94,000 in district funds for his own personal use.

In our view, Metro and the state agency were appropriate for the case, but the school police detective was not. We cannot imagine what genuine benefit one financial-crimes detective, no matter how diligent, provides a district with 280,000 students and more than 30,000 employees. Financial crimes are notoriously complex and time-consuming and require highly specialized expertise. Phelps said his detective, in the course of investigating the former athletic director, had to be sent out for advanced training.

The value of school police officers lies in their ability to provide extra security for students and employees. They should be on patrol 24/7 to guard against assaults, drug dealing, vandalism, fights, gang activity, weapons possession and other harmful activities. Complex investigations that would keep officers behind their desks for much more than a day are best handled entirely by Metro or the Nevada Division of Criminal Investigations.