BGS defends existing security program as judiciary warns HB 349 would shift courthouse authority

Montpelier — Buildings and General Services officials told the House Corrections & Institutions Committee on April 17 that the department already operates a comprehensive, people‑centered security program for state facilities and said they do not see value in House Bill 349, which would move security responsibility to a newly created Vermont State Building Security Board. Judiciary representatives told the committee the bill would strip the Vermont Supreme Court of authority over courthouse security and risk undermining current courthouse protections.

Emily Kasigi, deputy commissioner of buildings and general services, framed the department s one that focuses on people as well as facilities. "The mission is to develop, coordinate, implement, and evaluate safety and security programs and related training in cooperation with all state organizations in support of the state's efforts to ensure and maintain a safe and secure environment for all employees and visitors," Kasigi said. She urged the committee to understand BGS's existing structure before moving responsibility to a new board.

Bill McSallis, director of the BGS Office of Safety and Security, described the office's day‑to‑day functions and metrics. McSallis said the office runs uniformed visitor screening and access control, emergency procedure planning, threat mitigation, security systems and environmental/occupational safety. He said his unit is roughly 20 people and that BGS manages security contractors in locations including Brattleboro, Burlington, St. Albans and Williston.

McSallis detailed how staff respond to incidents and exercises after‑action reviews. He said BGS handles an estimated "between 70 and a hundred" threat reports a year and receives roughly a thousand other reported incidents that staff evaluate, and that the two figures should not be conflated. "We get it. 'I'm gonna come down there and kill you'—between 70 and a hundred times a year," McSallis said, describing the range of threats the office evaluates. Deputy Commissioner Kasigi added that the larger incident count includes non‑threat reports such as slip‑and‑falls and open doors.

Officials gave additional figures for the programnoted in committee testimony: BGS said it has cameras in about 70 buildings and "over a thousand" video cameras in total; the office has trained approximately 2,500 state employees in about 175 training sessions; it has deployed roughly 60 automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in the last two years; and routine camera footage retention is generally about three months. McSallis also described a 24/7 hotline and an internal SOV Alert system designed to deliver time‑sensitive security messages to building occupants.

McSallis outlined threat mitigation practices: visitor screening (locking exterior doors and pre‑screening appointment holders), distributing bolo advisories when an identified individual is a concern, temporarily reassigning BGS officers or contracting local sheriff coverage when needed, and working with agency leadership on telework or operational changes during higher‑risk events. He said BGS conducts de‑escalation and active‑threat training and runs tabletop and full drills with building safety committees.

Terry Corson, identified in committee testimony as a judiciary representative, told members the bill would remove courthouse security responsibilities now vested in the Vermont Supreme Court. "In my view, that would be a step backwards that I feel would harm the security processes that are in place now," Corson said, arguing the Supreme Court and judiciary security staff have unique knowledge of courthouse operations and risks.

Robert Schell, director of security and safety for the judiciary, described courthouse practices and staffing. "We have 24/7 monitoring on cameras. They are not monitored by a security person, typically during the business days, but are often assigned security personnel when we have higher risk events," Schell said. Schell and other judiciary witnesses described a mixed model that uses county sheriffs, specially trained court security officers and, where necessary, private security to ensure screening and courtroom coverage across 23 courthouses. The judiciary referenced a recent "S‑17" report the committee had requested that cataloged courthouse security measures and staffing needs.

Both BGS and the judiciary emphasized coordination with outside partners, including local law enforcement, the Vermont Intelligence Center and unions. Committee members asked about camera monitoring practices, after‑action reviews following medical events, training content (CPR, "stop the bleed," de‑escalation and active‑threat familiarization) and whether employees required to leave a workplace because of a threat would use leave or telework; witnesses said responses vary by circumstance and that telework options have increased.

No formal action was taken on HB 349 during the hearing. Committee members said they would schedule additional testimony from state employees and from the Vermont State Employees' Association (VSEA) before deciding whether to "work" the bill. Committee members also requested follow‑up on specific questions about staffing, the S‑17 report appendices and operational details.

The committee set a follow‑up schedule for next week to hear state employees and union testimony and to further review the implications of transferring security authority from BGS and the judiciary to a proposed board.