Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Building Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County adopts building security ordinance that regulates weapons and screening in county facilities
Summary
After a first reading and debate, the Chippewa County Board adopted a new ordinance defining prohibited weapons in certain county buildings and authorizing security screening; the ordinance provides employee exceptions and allows county security officers to direct screening.
The Chippewa County Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance (first reading waived by a two‑thirds vote and final approval by roll call) to create Chapter 2, Article 4 of the county code establishing weapons and screening rules for specified county buildings.
Judge Ben Lane addressed the board during public comment in support of the ordinance, saying it would “provide a separate tool in the toolbox for our security officers” and would clarify what is a weapon in county facilities. “This ordinance connects the dots on all of those items, provides those policies and procedures, the lists, the notices, everything that we need, and it gives us an enforcement mechanism as well,” Judge Lane said.
County staff described the ordinance as a compilation of state statutes and other counties’ ordinances intended to fill gaps in current policies. The ordinance applies to county buildings housing the circuit court, the county jail and sheriff’s office, the highway department buildings, and specified county administration and maintenance buildings on Spruce Street. It authorizes security officers to conduct screening and rescreening where they have reasonable suspicion and defines “weapon” broadly, consistent with referenced law.
The ordinance includes exceptions for law enforcement, judges (with concealed‑carry permits), district attorneys with permits and for employees and contractors who carry tools needed for official duties. County staff said they added an explicit exception so employees may carry defensive spray (pepper spray) for personal safety when leaving buildings at night; the ordinance limits those items to the extent state law permits.
During discussion supervisors asked about the scope of screening authority and the standards for requiring a person to submit to screening. County staff stated that screening requires a reasonable basis for concern that a person might possess a weapon or present a security risk and that security officers will follow procedures and training when exercising that discretion. The county also retained a first‑reading process and allowed a brief period for review before final adoption; supervisors later voted to waive the second reading and adopted the ordinance in the same meeting.
The motion to adopt the ordinance passed on a roll‑call vote of 18–2.
Ending: County officials said the ordinance will be implemented with training for security officers and posted notices at affected facilities; staff will return with operational details and any implementing rules as needed.
