Sen. Iovino wants to restore arrest rights to sworn school police |

Sen. Iovino wants to restore arrest rights to sworn school police

Deb Erdley

A new law that stripped school police officers of the authority to make arrests and issue detention and citation orders may be on its way out the door.

The law, intended to enhance school security, passed earlier this year and accidentally stripped school police officers of powers they have had for more than 20 years. Tuesday, state Sen. Pam Iovino said she plans to introduce legislation to restore those powers.

Iovino, a freshman Democrat whose district includes portions of Allegheny and Washington counties, said she heard concerns from across the district about the negative impacts Act 67’s unintended consequences have had on school safety.

“I am hopeful for strong bi-partisan support for this common sense school safety legislation,” she said.

Iovino said the bill she plans to introduce was a carefully crafted and contains language that was developed with input from both the Senate Democratic and Republican caucuses and as well as the Fraternal Order of Police.

She said state law in effect since 1997 previously provided school police officers sworn by a judge with the right to make arrests and issues citations on school property.

Deb Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Deb at 724-850-1209, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.