Bill would require universities to request DPSST disciplinary records for campus security hires

House Bill 2551 would require public university governing boards to request and review disciplinary records from the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training before appointing special campus security officers.

The measure, presented to the Senate Education Committee on April 16, 2025, is aimed at giving universities access to employment and disciplinary records that some witnesses said were previously available until 2015. Representative Zac Hudson, the bill sponsor, told the committee that special campus security officers "may make probable cause arrests like police officers," but they are not sworn officers, and that universities currently do criminal background checks but do not routinely request DPSST employment disciplinary records.

Why it matters: Supporters say access to DPSST records would help universities make more informed hiring decisions for personnel who perform law-enforcement-like functions on campuses. Hudson said the requirement would not ban hiring applicants based on records; it would only ensure universities have the information available to make decisions.

What witnesses told the committee: Representative Zac Hudson (House District 49) said the DPSST disciplinary check was required prior to 2015 and was removed during a governance change. He said the bill "requires universities to request disciplinary records from DPSST and allows DPSST to provide those." Committee members asked about fiscal and operational impacts: some senators asked whether universities or DPSST would bear costs and whether the checks would be electronic. Hudson and other witnesses said DPSST indicated the fiscal impact would be minimal but that workload could increase depending on hiring volume.

Questions and concerns: Senator Robins asked whether universities could already seek these records and, if so, why statutory language was necessary. Hudson replied he would defer to DPSST on whether those records are currently disclosable and said placing the expectation in statute clarifies the practice. Committee members also discussed whether the change should be advisory or mandatory; Hudson said the bill places an expectation in statute because special campus security officers exercise significant authority.

Formal action at this hearing: The committee held a public hearing; no committee vote or final action on HB 2551 was recorded during this session.

Next steps and context: Hudson said the change was developed in cooperation with public universities and that the bill passed out of the House committee on Higher Education and Workforce Development with a unanimous vote.