Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Security Officer Training topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Security‑training bill laid over after lengthy committee discussion on costs, scope and implementation
Summary
Representative Johnson’s proposal to increase minimum training for licensed private security officers from 12 to 40 hours and annual continuing education from 6 to 24 hours was amended and laid over; sponsors agreed to further stakeholder work after members and industry raised logistical, fiscal and workforce concerns.
House File 1686, a proposal to raise preassignment training for licensed security officers from 12 to 40 hours and increase annual continuing education from 6 to 24 hours, was amended in committee and laid over for further work after wide-ranging testimony and member questions about costs, workforce turnover and implementation details.
Sponsor Representative Johnson framed the bill as a public‑safety and professionalization measure: “Proper, comprehensive, and in person training is a necessity,” she said, listing mental‑health first aid, naloxone administration and non‑violent de‑escalation among proposed topics. The committee adopted an A1 amendment exempting part‑time event staff from expanded training and an A2 amendment delaying the 40‑hour requirement until Aug. 1, 2026, for logistical reasons.
Several security officers and union representatives testified in favor of expanded training, saying many licensed officers currently receive minimal training and would benefit from standardized, trauma‑informed curricula. SEIU Local 26 member Deb Sievers, a security officer, said some security jobs require less training than other public‑facing occupations: “I used to work as a bus driver for Metro Transit and got more training in that job around security issues and safety than I do as a security officer.”
Industry witnesses and the licensing board, however, cautioned the committee about administrative and fiscal impacts. Greg Cook, executive director of the Board of Private Detectives and Protective Agents, said the board expects significant administrative workload to review and audit new courses and that rulemaking and curriculum development could cost “hundreds of thousands of dollars” and potentially double the board’s budget. Other testifiers said the proposals could accelerate unlicensed activity and strain small providers who must meet higher training costs in an industry with high turnover.
Members asked about online versus in‑person training, turnover rates and whether the board would enforce the new standards. Sponsors agreed to continue stakeholder work to refine definitions (part‑time event staff, event security), scope, timelines and fiscal impacts. The bill was laid over for additional work and will return to committee.
