July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« Daily Private Security News Clips - November 26, 2007 | Main | Daily Private Security News Clips - November 27, 2007 »

November 26, 2007

Twin Falls, Idaho Regulations Remind Us of Need for State-Level Regulation

The article in the Daily News Clips today about the city of Twin Falls, Idaho adopting city-level regulation of private security firms is a good reminder that state-level regulation, as we have in California, is a far better model.

There is nothing wrong with Twin Fall's stated reason for the need to regulate the firms.  But imagine if that trend took hold in California.  If, for example, Pasadena, Glendale, and Burbank each had different ruules and regulations for security firms and security officers, a company might be allowed to work in one city, but not another.  You might have to keep track of different training or uniform or licensing rules for each city, and perhaps certain officers of yours might be able to work in one city, but not another.

It would be an administrative nightmare.

That is why we are lucky to have state-level regulation of security here in California, and why CALSAGA has aggressively responded to any city-level regulations and encouraging BSIS to continue to assert state pre-emption on undue city regulation of our industry.

Recently, CALSAGA worked with the City of Oxnard in responding to draft regulations their City Council had discussed, some of which would have intruded on the state's realm of regulating security.

If you are aware of city level regulations that you believe cross the line into the areas that are supposed to be covered only by the state, let us know.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8357f9b5d69e200e54fa1c6e08834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Twin Falls, Idaho Regulations Remind Us of Need for State-Level Regulation:

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment