Following the announcement of an external review of the Office of Public Safety (PSafe), representatives of Margolis Healy & Associates, the firm conducting the assessment, held an open forum in the Daniel Family Commons on Tuesday, April 30 for students to share thoughts and questions. Students brought up a variety of issues and areas in which they would like to see improvement.
Assistant Vice President of Student Affairs and Dean of Students Rick Culliton spoke to the motivation behind conducting the review.
“President Roth decided to engage an external review team after a series of issues were brought to his attention last fall at the Diversity Forum,” Culliton wrote in an email to The Argus.
According to Culliton and Director of Public Safety David Meyer, a similar review of PSafe was conducted four years ago.
“This [current] review was scheduled well before [my] decision to retire and not predicated on any single incident or issue,” Meyer wrote in an email to The Argus.
Margolis Healy Managing Partner Gary Margolis opened the discussion on Tuesday by introducing himself and his associates and highlighting their experience with university security.
“We’re all former chiefs of police or heads of public safety at other colleges,” Margolis said.
When Margolis asked for input on various issues with PSafe, students named a variety of concerns. One student expressed frustration with vandalism of cars at University parking places. Other students mentioned instances of feeling targeted by PSafe because of their races or physical appearances. Many students also agreed that PSafe should build a better relationship with Middletown residents.
In light of recent illicit activities of PSafe officers, one student voiced the need to reexamine the hiring process of PSafe officers.
“There must be something wrong with [our process for selecting PSafe officers],” the student said. “Multiple PSafe officers have been arrested. I don’t know what’s unique about our selection process.”
Students described feeling wariness and distrust around many PSafe officers.
“I think the general lack of communication seems to be at the root of what people feel in general,” noted Andrew Olson ’16. “The only time you see PSafe is when you’re in trouble.”
One student proposed a straw poll of whether students could name members of PSafe, excluding Director Meyer. The majority of students were unable to do so, and of those who knew PSafe officers by name, most were upperclassmen.
Some students stated that PSafe officers act inefficiently when they focus their efforts on breaking up parties instead of preventing assaults. To this complaint, Margolis Healy Managing Partner Steven Healy addressed PSafe’s responsibility to break up parties as part of their job to enforce security.
“Public Safety has a mission,” Healy said. “This notion that there is an either/or, that PSafe can either be busting parties or keeping us safe—it’s not that way. They absolutely have an obligation to break up parties where there is illegal and unsafe underage drinking. We have to acknowledge that the two aren’t mutually exclusive. They can work to keep parties safe and at the same time work against violent acts on campus. More students die each year from drinking-related incidents rather than attack incidents on campus.”
Attendees of the forum also described instances in which they felt PSafe’s actions were racially discriminatory.
“As a faculty member, the thing that’s concerning to me is that my black students who party are more afraid of PSafe than my white students who party,” said Visiting Assistant Professor of African American Studies Sarah Mahurin. “Where the rubber hits the road for me is the strong sense I have that my underage black students have a different experience with PSafe than my underage white students.”
Students identified the lack of transparency as a factor leading to mistrust between students and PSafe.
“I can’t expect to have a fluid relationship with an office without transparency,” said Jalen Alexander ’14.
One student noted that student interactions with PSafe can be extremely positive and named two PSafe officers who communicate and engage with students in a positive manner.
According to Healy, relationships between students and campus public safety officers are generally positive at other institutions, but he also noted that there are opportunities for improvement on the Wesleyan campus. Officers generally report having the same goals as students in terms of communication.
“We did hear officers say that they want to engage with students in a positive way,” Healy added.
Margolis explained that the committee will use student input from the forum to identify areas that the firm will investigate more thoroughly and that the firm is presently in the process of gathering information to make recommendations. In response to an inquiry of whether they were aware of recent PSafe scandals, he said that the firm’s strategy is to review overall issues with the department, not to investigate criminal acts.
“Our analysis will be happening in the coming weeks,” Margolis said. “We’re looking at how Wesleyan compares to national norms.”
Whether the report will be made publicly available is determined by the University administration. Margolis noted that, typically, an executive summary of the firm’s report is released by the reviewed institution.
Olson expressed satisfaction with the event.
“I thought it was really great, just the format of this,” he said. “I feel like people put a lot out there.”
Alexander appreciated the variety of opinions expressed.
“It was great to have people from different areas on campus and different class years come talk about a diversity of issues,” he said.
Additional reporting by Contributing Writer Rehan Mehta.