The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 07251989 - IO.5 � ._SE L I.O. 5 Board of Supervisors FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE = `s o stit2ft ;may DATE: July 17, 1989 ST"1 COUtZ� SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE REPORTOFTHE 1988-89 GRAND JURY ENTITLED "COURT SECURITY" Specific Request(s) or Recommendations(s) & Background & Justification RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt the following report of our Committee as the Board of Supervisors' response to the Report of the 1988- 89 Grand Jury entitled "Court Security". 2. Remove this item as a referral to our Committee. BACKGROUND: On June 9, 1989 the 1988-89 Grand Jury approved the attached report on"Court Security". On July 17, 1989 our Committee met with the Sheriff-Coroner, members of his staff and members of the 1988-89 and 1989-90 Grand Juries. We reviewed the proposed response suggested by the Sheriff-Coroner and discussed the Grand Jury's recommendations with the members of the Grand Jury and the Sheriff-Coroner. At the conclusion of these discussions we formulated the following response,utilizing a format suggested by the Grand Jury in their final report, in which the Grand Jury requested that written responses to Grand Jury recommendations clearly specify: A. Whether the recommendation is accepted or adopted. B. If the recommendation is accepted,a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date. C. A delineation of constraints, if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within the calendar year. D. The reason for not adopting a recommendation. Continued on attachment: YES Signature: Recommendation Cou y Administrator Recommendation of Board Committee �Qp�ev O r: Signature(s): om Pol SUNNE WRIGHT MC EA< Action of Board on: July 25, 1989 Approved as Recommended x Other Vote of Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN x Unanimous (Absent — ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE Ayes: Noes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN. Absent: Abstain: • Attested a& 07.s /989 cc: County Administrator P 11 B chelor, Clerk of the Board Sheriff-Coroner Foreman, 1988-89 Grand Jury of Supervisors and County Administrator Foreman, 1989-90 Grand Jury Superior Court Judge Wayne Westover Byti Deputy Clerk CLVM:eh(io-4) This and all future responses to Grand Jury recommendations coming from our Committee will follow this format as closely as possible. RECOMMENDATION# l: In the interest of uniformity of security plans and actions, the Court Security Manager and responsible department heads require all court personnel to attend security training programs. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is adopted. B. The Sheriff-Coroner is responsible for implementation of this recommendation. Effective July 1, 1989, all bailiff's staff meetings, where security training is presented, will be mandatory for all sworn personnel. These meetings will be held at least once a month. Authorization for absences must be obtained prior to the meeting date. Training in security measures will be made available to all courthouse personnel,including clerical staff and judges. To the extent possible this recommendation is now fully implemented. We are also asking the Sheriff-Coroner to provide the Board of Supervisors with a updated report on Courthouse Security during June, 1990. RECOMMENDATION# 2: The Court Security Manager and the Chairman of the Court Services Oversight Committee continue to encourage greater support among members of the bench,court staff and all security personnel for improved security. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is adopted. B. The Sheriff-Coroner is responsible for implementing this recommendation. Every effort is and will be made to communicate to all employees of the Court. The open discussion of areas of specific concern,as well as about plans for change, appears to be generating a better understanding of Court Security's role. This exchange is having a positive impact on the support for improved security. Safe rooms are available in the Courthouse in Martinez by using various rooms which are vacant on one day or the other. By varying the rooms which are used from day to day there is less chance that anyone will get the impression that there is a single room which could then be attacked. These rooms are available on request for families in domestic relations cases or other sensitive cases where there is concern for the safety of the parties. Full implementation of this recommendation requires the wholehearted cooperation and understanding of the judges. This issue is being discussed through the Oversight Committee and it is anticipated that there will be no significant problems in this area in the future. This recommendation is, essentially, implemented. RECOMMENDATION# 3: The Board of Supervisors wholeheartedly endorse and finance an effective court security program. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. B. The Sheriff-Coroner and County Administrator's Office have been cooperating on legislative proposals to more fully fund security measures in courthouses. The most viable measure at this point appears to be the possibility of a courthouse construction bond measure which is currently before the State Legislature and which,if placed on the ballot by the Legislature and approved by the voters, would provide funding for courthouse security measures as well as actual construction of courthouses. At the same time, we believe that the program which the Sheriff-Coroner has implemented is an effective system. Implementation of this recommendation will have to await action by the Legislature and the voters. - 2 - C. Because of the need to await action by the Legislature and the voters complete resolution of this issue will not be completed by the end of the calendar year. The ability of the Board of Supervisors to unilaterally improve the security system beyond the substantial measures which have been taken in the past year by the Sheriff- Coronerare dependant on funding forthis purpose which is unlikely to be available in the absence of acourthouse construction bond measure. RECOMMENDATION It 4: The Presiding Judge of the Superior Court make every effort to assign any potentially volatile case to the A. F. Bray Courts Building; where security provisions can be more effectively provided. RESPONSE: A. This recommendations is accepted and forwarded to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court for his consideration. B. Only the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court can determine which trials will be held in which courtrooms. We are sending a copy of this report to Presiding Judge Merrill with the request that he seriously consider the Grand Jury's recommendation. The Sheriff reported to us that it appears that a number of potentially volatile trials are now being set in the courtrooms in the Bray Courthouse Annex because of the increased security which is possible in that building. RECOMMENDATION It 5: The Court Security Manager increase random searches, particularly in the Family Law Courts' waiting areas. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is adopted. B. The Sheriff-Coroner is responsible for implementing this recommendation. The Sheriff reported to us that each Bailiff now has a handheld wand which he or she can use to search visitors for weapons. A mobile unit is available which can be moved to any area of the courthouse where it is felt that because of a sensitive trial or hearing electronic search of visitors is appropriate. This unit has been used on several occasions in the past few weeks and is available for increased use as it is required. The passage of a courthouse construction bond measure would allow the purchase and installation of additional security measures which cannot be funded within the County's current resources. C. While we believe that adequate security is presently available within the courthouse, additional security measures will depend on the availability of state funds for this purpose and such funds will not be available by the end of the calendar year. - 3 -