It still wouldn't be "a violation of state law" for a person with a valid CCW endorsement to enter them with a firearm.
I think it is simply a matter of semantics and a lack of understanding of the wording of the law.
Violation depends upon ones use of the word. Under the CCW law, carry into any of the 17 places or a posted location is not criminal but it would be a violation of the law meaning you did in fact do the opposite of what the law says you should do, however it is not a "violation of the law" in the legal sense of the phrase aka it is not a criminal matter and you will not have a penalty if you do it unless you are kind of stupid after it is noticed and refuse to leave, no different than if you are asked to leave for any other reason.
I personally think the wording was on purpose to make it vague to get folks to comply with others wishes.
I tend to agree with hoff, when responding to an inquiry an authority SHOULD be accurate in their response, however, I doubt any level of training is employed to determine that they even can, let alone will do as much. Basically you get the individuals opinion of what the law states vs an accurate portrayal of it.