House bill would create new tiers for school security personnel; debate centers on training, scope and funding

House Education Committee — Representatives opened debate on House Bill 473, sponsored by Representative Brown, which would add two assistant school security personnel categories (level 1 and level 2) and a level 3 armed category for school security personnel and establish training and registration requirements.

Supporters including Dr. Gary Washburn, superintendent of Carlsbad Municipal Schools, told the committee their district had lost qualified retired law‑enforcement candidates under current state law and that the bill would create a pathway for experienced former officers and trained civilians to serve in school security roles. “This legislation provides a structured comprehensive training and certification process to ensure that qualified individuals can serve as school arm security personnel,” Washburn said, adding the proposal “does not lower standards, it enhances them.”

The sponsor, Representative Brown, said districts currently face shortages of security staff and that HB 473 would allow school districts to hire directly instead of relying solely on contracted security companies. “This is a clarification of law that needs to occur,” Brown said.

Committee members pressed for specifics on training, background checks, deployment and costs. Representative Vincent and others asked whether the personnel would be district employees (Washburn: “They work for the schools. They’re part of our operating budget.”). Dr. Washburn described the Carlsbad model as aiming for an armed person at each building either through a school resource officer (SRO) or a school security officer; he said some SROs and two security staff in the district are currently armed because they meet existing academy requirements.

Several members emphasized non‑firearm safety measures and relationship building. Representative Caballero asked whether the bill accounted for investments in secure vestibules, cameras and controlled entrances; Dr. Washburn and others said passive security measures are in place in many districts but argued on‑site armed responders can reduce response time during the minutes of an active attack.

Members repeatedly asked about the bill’s training and oversight provisions. Dr. Washburn said candidates would be psychologically evaluated and, unless they were former certified peace officers, would have to complete extensive firearms and de‑escalation training under a Carlsbad MOU with local police. Representative Garrett and others noted the fiscal-impact report (FIR) recommended delaying the bill’s effective date and raising technical amendments; Representative Brown said the sponsors were open to technical changes and would collect committee input before drafting amendments.

Lawmakers also raised funding concerns. Washburn testified Carlsbad funds security positions from its operating budget and had used a COPS grant to add SROs and that adding armed, trained personnel increases operational costs. Representative Baca-Roybal and others said smaller or rural districts could struggle to pay salaries and training without targeted support.

No formal committee vote on HB 473 was recorded in the transcript; sponsors agreed to work with the department and return with technical amendments that address the FIR and public‑safety agency suggestions.

Ending: Sponsors asked staff to circulate proposed technical amendments to committee members and the department indicated it would continue to work with stakeholders before a subsequent hearing.