This thread shows there's as much confusion about CCW for EMS on gun boards as there is in the general public.
CCW =/= LEO. This had been reinforced by every entity that ever controlled or regulated CCW at the state, county or local level around the country.
The problem is the bogeyman of "liability". Even though CCW is intended for immediate defense against a threat of death or great bodily harm*, many administrators feel that allowing personnel to CCW at their discretion is the same as issuing them sidearms and powers of arrest, and carries the same liability.
A well-written policy that reinforces the existing laws of the state as well as the codified Use of Force justifications and clearly identifies that the employee has no LE powers should suffice... but that takes actually looking at the issue instead of asking the Mayor what he or she thinks.
There is also the idea that because the CCW'er is in uniform, they have become an "agent of the state" because they are armed... again, a falsehood that is perpetuated most likely due to a perceived fear of liability.
I'll admit that I don't have hours to spend perusing PACER or the various state resources to search for a case where the employer of a non-LE government employee was successfully sued for a 4A violation for use of a personally owned non issued firearm in defense of self or others. It may exist, but my gut instinct is that the situation they fear is the same fiction that allows HR wonks to
cut and paste from another company's handbook create language that bans firearms from the company property because of the threat of "workplace violence" while not implementing hard access controls and believe they are actually doing something other than guaranteeing a disarmed pool of victims.
*
generic language that should address 99% of statutory language regardless of state