WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 4151

Authorizes Class Three special law enforcement officers to provide security in places of religious worship; makes certain clarifications concerning their use in nonpublic schools.

2026-2027 Regular Session Introduced by Joe Cryan

Authorizes Class Three SLEOs to provide security at places of religious worship and clarifies their use in nonpublic schools.

Transferred to Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 4151

Summary: New Jersey Bill S 4151 (Session 222)

Overview

  • Jurisdiction: New Jersey
  • Bill Number: S 4151
  • Session: 222
  • Introduced/Sponsored by: Primary sponsor not listed here; Co-sponsor: Joe Cryan
  • Title: Authorizes Class Three special law enforcement officers to provide security in places of religious worship; makes certain clarifications concerning their use in nonpublic schools.

This bill addresses the deployment of Class Three Special Law Enforcement Officers (SLEOs) to provide security services in two settings: places of religious worship and nonpublic (private) schools. It clarifies the authority and use of Class Three SLEOs in these contexts.

1) Purpose and Intent

  • Enhance security at places of worship: The bill authorizes Class Three SLEOs to provide security at religious worship sites, aiming to improve safety in spaces that may be targeted for violence or disruption.
  • Clarify use in nonpublic schools: It makes clarifications regarding the role, deployment, and constraints on Class Three SLEOs in nonpublic school environments, addressing governance, oversight, and permissible activities.

2) Key Provisions and Changes

While the precise statutory text is not provided here, the bill’s title and summary indicate the following core provisions:

  • Authorization for security duties at worship sites:

    • Class Three SLEOs can be assigned or deployed to provide armed or unarmed security services at places of religious worship.
    • The authorization presumably specifies the scope of duties (e.g., presence, monitoring, access control, response to threats) and limits to ensure compliance with regulations governing SLEOs.

  • Clarifications for nonpublic schools:

    • The bill includes clarifications about the use of Class Three SLEOs in nonpublic schools, potentially addressing:
    • Eligibility criteria for SLEOs serving in schools
    • Supervisory requirements and school administration responsibilities
    • Training, certification, and use-of-force considerations
    • Limitations on security activities within school property or events

  • Regulatory framework (likely):

    • Possible alignment with existing state standards for Class Three SLEOs, including training, certification, firearms authorization (if applicable), supervision, and reporting.
    • Compliance with applicable laws regarding school safety, religious protections, and civil rights.

  • Co-sponsorship context:

    • The bill has a co-sponsor (Joe Cryan), indicating some bipartisan or committee interest, though the political context is not provided here.

3) Who Is Affected

  • Religious institutions: Places of worship seeking enhanced security may employ or authorize Class Three SLEOs to safeguard services and facilities.
  • Nonpublic schools: Private or parochial schools may utilize Class Three SLEOs under clarified guidelines, affecting school safety planning, staff roles, and security protocols.
  • Class Three SLEOs: Officers with Class Three designation would be the primary security personnel designated to perform these duties, subject to applicable training, supervision, and statutory limitations.
  • School administrators and religious leaders: Responsible for coordinating with SLEOs, ensuring compliance with state rules, and integrating security measures with public safety requirements.
  • Law enforcement and oversight bodies: Likely involved in licensure, training standards, and any reporting or auditing related to SLEO deployments.

4) Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Legislative status and effective date: Specific dates, effective dates, and transition periods are not provided in the summary. Typically, such bills include:
    • A defined effective date after enactment (e.g., X days post-enactment)
    • Possible phased implementation or interim guidance for institutions
  • Oversight and enforcement: The bill would interact with state employment, training, and firearms or use-of-force statutes, and may require:
    • Compliance reporting to the state police or equivalent agency
    • Regular training renewals and credential verification
  • Implementation considerations: Schools and religious institutions may need to update security policies, liaison with local police, and ensure compliance with any training or supervisory requirements.

Notes

  • The summary is based on the bill’s title and sponsor information. For a precise understanding, consult the bill’s full text, committee analyses, fiscal notes, and any amendments proposed during the legislative process.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.