Edgar County Board reviews building safety, storm shelter and courthouse security needs

Edgar County Board members and staff reviewed physical and digital security at county facilities and flagged several follow‑up items, including meeting with the state’s attorney and judges to discuss courtroom security changes.

During a staff briefing, participants identified the government center’s storm shelter as the only nearby designated safe space for several neighboring properties and recommended completing the shelter work so employees and the public have an accessible option. Board members said the basement of the Methodist Church in Christman has been used as a shelter in the past and discussed whether it or the underpass is a safer choice for neighborhood sheltering.

Staff reported that some departments do not need panic‑button hardware; the highway department said the single employee typically locks the front door and uses a cell phone for emergency contact. The animal shelter uses cameras and the old concrete building there was considered relatively secure; airport staff said they would use the vault if necessary. The board asked staff to confirm which departments need panic buttons and whether any budget was included for panic hardware.

Members also discussed the county’s emergency notification and siren network. Several outdoor sirens in Paris and nearby villages are inoperable; alerts are currently handled through a subscription notification system that receives National Weather Service warnings and delivers messages by phone/text to enrolled subscribers. Board members asked staff to confirm how the subscription system is managed and why a particular tornado alert did not reach some locations.

IT and cybersecurity were raised: Ross reported it is time to upgrade Microsoft software, which may require replacing some machines. The board noted that some of the IT recommendations did not have line‑item budget amounts and asked departments to work with IT to identify costs and potential timing.

On courthouse security, the board agreed to arrange a meeting with the state’s attorney and judges to review proposals for changes in the lower courtroom—items discussed included possible jury box removal and other separation measures. Members said state grant money had funded some camera work previously and they will investigate whether court security fund resources can support further changes.

No formal security purchases or policy changes were approved at the meeting; board members asked staff to return with cost estimates, confirm grant availability, and set up the meeting with judicial and legal stakeholders.