Article Originally Published Here
In a significant turn of events, the Milwaukee Common Council has withdrawn its newly passed ordinance regulating security guards following a legal challenge. The ordinance, approved in March, aimed to mandate licensing and bonding for security personnel but faced opposition from local businesses, leading to its withdrawal on June 28 and formal approval by the licensing committee on July 1.
Ald. Andrea Pratt, who represents the area where Isaiah Allen was fatally shot in August 2023, sponsored the ordinance. Pratt’s intention was to address public safety concerns exacerbated by incidents involving security personnel. “Initially, I was quite discouraged, angry maybe even,” Pratt said after the committee’s decision. “The reason I did it was based on a very real incident and several others that followed.”
The ordinance had been a response to multiple incidents, including the recent death of D’Vontaye Mitchell outside the Hyatt Regency on June 30. The legislation required security guards to be licensed by the city, with specific eligibility criteria including a clean criminal record and a $2,000 bond. However, it did not extend to armed security, which is regulated separately under Wisconsin law.
The withdrawal followed a lawsuit from five businesses arguing that the ordinance was legally flawed. The legal challenge centered on a 2015 state law that restricts municipalities from imposing stricter licensing requirements than those established at the state level.
City Attorney Evan Goyke acknowledged that the city’s position in court was weak and advised the council to withdraw the ordinance. “We were not in a strong position,” Goyke said. The city now plans to explore alternative solutions and potentially advocate for changes at the state level.
The ordinance’s withdrawal is seen as a setback in the city’s efforts to regulate security personnel more stringently. Ald. Pratt suggested that future efforts may involve adding questions to business applications about state licensing standards, although direct licensing requirements might need to be pursued at the state level.
William Sulton, an attorney representing Allen’s family, expressed disappointment with the outcome. He had supported the ordinance but felt it did not go far enough in addressing the broader issue of security guard oversight. “This is a really big problem,” Sulton said, referencing several cases involving security guards that his office is handling.
Emil Ovbiagele, attorney for the plaintiffs in the suit, criticized the ordinance’s execution. He argued that while the intention was good, the implementation was flawed, lacking critical elements such as mandatory training.
The Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce also opposed the ordinance, citing concerns about its practical effectiveness despite its well-intentioned goals.
Next Steps:
- State-Level Legislation: There is a call for state-level legislative changes to address security guard regulation comprehensively. Ald. Pratt and Sulton are planning to push for reforms that could enhance training and licensing requirements.
- Community and Legal Advocacy: The Allen family and local advocates will likely continue to push for changes that address gaps in security oversight, focusing on both legislative and legal avenues.
- City’s Approach: Milwaukee officials will revisit their approach, potentially seeking more effective and legally sound methods to ensure public safety and regulate security personnel.
