Concerns Raised About Governmental Center Security

County and city employees are raising concerns about their safety in the Governmental Center – particularly over unfettered access to staff and the lack of guards, metal detectors, or other security on the building’s open-format first floor. County commissioners voted Wednesday to direct staff to bring back options for installing a security officer on the ground floor, in addition to other short and long-term solutions Grand Traverse County and the City of Traverse City could explore for the jointly owned building.

County Commissioner Ashlea Walter asked to have Governmental Center security as a discussion topic on Wednesday’s agenda. She said employees – both county and city – have reached out to her for more than a year saying they “feel unsafe on the first floor.” In a heated political climate increasingly tense in recent years, Walter said conditions have “gotten more difficult for public employees.” That was highlighted by a recent extended visit by a YouTuber claiming to be an independent journalist – though he declined to provide credentials nor his full name – extensively videotaping in the Register of Deeds office, which prohibits recording or photography due to the sensitive nature of documents present. Register of Deeds Peggy Haines wasn’t there during his visit, but says her staff were rattled by his aggressive presence and refusal to stop filming even when security was called.

“He was in the vault filming, he wouldn’t say what he was doing, and he wouldn’t identify himself,” she says. “We have truly discussed security on this floor until we’re blue in the face. We’re sitting ducks. I can’t tell you over the years how many times we or the employees across the hall have ended up with irate customers, and we’ve had to call security to come.”

Haines notes the Governmental Center lacks even basic metal detectors, and points to the ease of entering and exiting on the first floor without obstructions. “It doesn’t take a lot for somebody to come in the front, leave out the back, and do who knows what on the way through,” Haines says. “You don't want to think about it, but in all these towns where these things have happened, they didn't want to think about it either.”

While staff said there is a city-county safety committee actively studying security solutions – including education, communication, and training protocols, with an updated safety policy expected to be presented to commissioners at some point in the future – Walter advocated for more direct interventions now.

“Time keeps going by, and we haven’t really made any improvements,” she said, noting employees would “like to have a presence of someone in the front of the building who can help with that situation.” A security guard is present in the Governmental Center evenings, but not during the day when dozens of employees are working on the first floor – in addition to many more staff in the building’s upper levels. Commissioner TJ Andrews said it didn’t make sense why security couldn’t be extended to include day coverage, especially in an election year when Grand Traverse County “has already been shown to be a county of interest.” Haines says that while a security guard won’t solve everything, such an individual would offer a visible deterrent and a first point of contact – someone who could potentially have a buzzer or other means of immediately alerting staff or calling backup.

County Administrator Nate Alger said the county and city had past conversations about security options, ranging from security guards to key card restrictions on stairwells and elevators to “hard changes to the structure of the front door.” However, past county and city administrations “have just not come to a consensus of what that looks like,” Alger said. In more recent discussions with the city, Alger said a cost estimate for a security guard came in at just over $800 per week. The county and city could look at splitting that cost at a 76-24 percent split, reflecting the normal county-city division of building expenses. Even if the city opted not to participate, county commissioners could decide to fund the position themselves, Alger said in response to commission questions.

Traverse City Mayor Amy Shamroe says she’s also heard safety concerns. While she can’t speak for other city commissioners, she believes the city would be open to at least having the discussion about funding a security officer in addition to other long-term solutions. That should include the layout and infrastructure of the Governmental Center itself, she says. That point was also made Wednesday by Deputy County Administrator Chris Forsyth, who pointed to the new county-city facilities master plan calling for security renovations to multiple buildings on the Boardman Avenue campus.

County commissioners voted 5-3 to direct administrators to bring back a proposal for installing a security officer. Commissioner Brad Jewett was absent, while Commissioners Scott Sieffert, Darryl Nelson, and Rob Hentschel were opposed. Sieffert said that unless security officers were armed and highly trained, such an effort was “a waste of time and money.” Nelson didn’t want to be overly prescriptive in telling staff what options to bring back, feeling a security officer was too specific in its direction. Both Hentschel and Sieffert expressed concern about creating an unfriendly or intimidating atmosphere to the public. “This building belongs to the public,” Sieffert said, with Hentschel adding that if a security guard was hired, it should be someone who knows how to be welcoming in addition to a safety presence. “That should be the type of atmosphere we have down there,” he said, a suggestion with which Walter said she completely agreed.

While City Clerk Benjamin Marentette says he personally feels safe working on the first floor, he knows “there are others that have concerns.” He points to the significant difference in space configurations between the first and second floors, agreeing “it’d be good to take a closer look at what our security provisions are overall.” Marentette himself has had to call security over the years to remove individuals, and says that government employees can feel increasingly threatened “with the heightened state of affairs these days.”

“We’re here to serve the public, and we want to provide access,” he says. “But you also want to provide for the safety of employees. It’s a balancing act. If security concerns were not an issue, I like having the open floor plan. It makes it more comfortable and inclusive for folks. But I don’t think we can operate that way anymore.”