Winona County MN November 26 2018

Winona County has a problem. Earlier this month, Premier Security — the private security firm that, for the past 17 years, has staffed the county courthouse with armed guards — terminated its contract with the county amid legal concerns.

Effective Nov. 30, Premier Security will no longer provide protective services at the county courthouse.

“This decision was not taken lightly as we have had a great partnership since 2001,” Daniel Walker, president and CEO of Premier Security, wrote in a notice to county staff.

Walker cited Winona County Attorney Karin Sonneman’s legal opinion investigating the legality of armed guards in Minnesota courts as justification for terminating the contract.

“Rather than be involved in any negativity, it is best to provide our notice,” he wrote. “Premier appreciated being a long-term business partner with you and I wish Winona County all the best in the transition that Sheriff (Ron) Ganrude is requesting.”

Sonneman’s report determined that while it wasn’t illegal for the county to contract with private security agencies, the use of armed guards in the county courthouse not only violated state statute but exposed the county to the risk of lawsuits.

With Premier gone, the responsibility again falls on the sheriff’s shoulders.

Ganrude said his department remains committed to keeping the courthouse safe, and in the absence of a permanent solution will be assigning overtime to deputies and unarmed jail staff to fill the void.

He said the department should have enough untapped funds to avoid overrunning the budget.

The crux of the issue, which spurred months of debate between the county board and the Winona County Sheriff’s Department, came down to whether the guards were acting as private contractors or employees of the county.

Minnesota state statute says that while private contractors can legally bear arms, employees and agents cannot unless they are licensed peace officers.

State statute also maintains that the sheriff is responsible for overseeing court security.

Sonneman made the legal case that the use of armed security in the courthouse in place of peace officers essentially made the guards agents of the Sheriff’s office not contractors, despite the careful wording of their contracts.

“There exists an argument that by supplanting the Winona County Sheriff with Premier Security, the County has, in fact, made Premier Security its employee or agent,” the legal opinion read.

Court security has been an ongoing issue for Ganrude who, since taking office in 2014, has made repeated requests to hire a full-time deputy to oversee security in the courtroom. Each year his request has been denied by the Winona County Board.

This spring Ganrude once again approached the County Board asking them to approve the funds necessary to hire a deputy who would oversee the operations of the private security guards.

However, his request later changed to three deputies after reading Sonneman’s legal opinion.

Despite the Sonneman’s legal opinion, Ganrude’s his request was shot down again. Instead of granting Ganrude the $255,000 necessary to hire the deputies, the County Board made a non-binding commitment to increase the budget for court security from $85,000 a year to $115,000.

Ganrude said he remains hopeful he can convince the county to commit more to court security.

He and Mueller will return to the Winona County Board on Tuesday, Nov. 27, to discuss hiring two deputies at a cost of approximately $180,000 a year — an increase of approximately $95,000 to the budget — to replace Premier Security and satisfy the Sheriff’s obligations.

Ganrude said while three deputies would have been ideal, he recognized the burden this would place on the county which is already grappling with a $1.7 million deficit.

Winona Daily News

Share this post: on Twitter on Facebook