Committee approves amendment and advances security‑training bill after wide public testimony

The Philadelphia City Council Committee on Commerce and Economic Development on Oct. 15 approved an amendment to bill 250646 and voted to report the measure to full council with a favorable recommendation and to suspend council rules for first reading. The ordinance, as introduced, would create citywide baseline training requirements for security officers and a city certification process for trainers.

Councilmember Isaiah Thomas, sponsor of the security‑training legislation, asked the committee to pass the bill out of committee while his office continues to work with stakeholders on outstanding technical changes. Thomas told the committee the process has included “over 50 meetings” and comments from “over a 100 different stakeholders” and said his office would continue to refine training hours and provider rules.

Union representatives and security officers provided detailed, personal testimony in support. Tyrone Patterson, a security officer and SEIU 32BJ executive board member, said: “Serving as a security officer in Philly can be demanding and dangerous.” Daisy Cruz, district director for SEIU 32BJ’s Philadelphia locals, urged passage and described the bill’s proposed structure: in‑person instruction for newly hired officers within their first 90 days plus “an additional 8 hours of recurrent annual training.” She said the law would establish a city certification process to ensure training is delivered by qualified organizations.

Several security officers described on‑the‑job incidents that, they said, underscored gaps in employer training: “I was meeting with an officer who was at work in North Philly, and he got shot several times,” Tyrone Patterson said; another witness said she had to crawl under a restroom stall to assist an unresponsive person. Supporters argued mandated baseline training would improve officers’ ability to deliver lifesaving care and de‑escalation.

Industry groups warned the committee that the bill’s scope and implementation timeline posed problems. Steve Amate of the National Association of Security Companies said the bill “shows a complete lack of awareness or and total disregard for the current training being provided to security officers” and argued that private security employees do not have the same roles, responsibilities, or liability protections as police or EMTs. Natalie Kidd of BOMA Philadelphia and Ed Gross of the Greater Philadelphia Hotel Association said many employers already provide extensive, site‑specific training — Gross testified his members require “over a hundred 65 hours of total training in their first 90 days, and an additional 54 and a half hours on an annual reoccurring basis” — and warned the measure could add significant costs, administrative burdens, and disrupt staffing for major 2026 events.

Small and local security contractors raised legal and operational concerns. Omar Wilson, president of Scotland Yard Security Services, said the bill as written could “put Scotland Yard out of business” because of curriculum and certification requirements; he and other firm representatives proposed allowing companies to deliver their own training to a city‑approved curriculum and to exempt currently certified officers trained under existing state programs.

City administration testimony described support for the bill’s intent while requesting changes to make the law workable. Camille Duchasse, the city’s chief administrative officer, said the Parker administration supports adequately training security employees but flagged issues with prohibitions on employer‑provided training, a five‑year experience rule for third‑party nonprofits, site‑specific curriculum needs, and a request to delay implementation to Jan. 2027 to allow administrative planning and resource allocation.

After extended public comment and discussion, the committee approved an amendment to bill 250646 and then moved and approved a motion to report bill 250646 as amended from committee with a favorable recommendation and to suspend rules to permit first reading at the next council session. The motions were moved from the dais; the committee carried the amendment and the motions by voice vote.

What remains: the committee-approved amendment and the record of extensive, divided testimony indicate the bill will continue to be negotiated before final passage. Supporters pressed for mandatory baseline, in‑person training and city certification; employers and industry groups pressed for recognition of employer training, reduced initial‑training hours, and protections for small local contractors. Council indicated willingness to continue working with stakeholders on outstanding technical issues.