Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01301990 - 2.2 ` TO:. Board of Supervisors FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator -. Richard K. Rainey, Sheriff-Coroner o Michael J. Phelan, Chairm;Wt Court Security OveCommittee a couK�`t DATE: January 26, 1990 SUBJECT: COURTHOUSE SECURITY MEASURES TAKEN TO DATE OR PROPOSED Specific Request(s) or Recommendations(s) & Background & Justification RECOMMENDATION: A. Acknowledge receipt of this report from the County Administrator and Sheriff-Coroner. B. Acknowledge the responsibility of the County to provide security to the Court, staff and public in the courthouse facilities and in recognition of this responsibility acknowledge the following comprehensive series of actions which have been taken by the Sheriff-Coroner under the direction of the Board of Supervisors with the approval of the Court Services Oversight Committee: 1. Each facility has a resident Sheriff's Sergeant referred to as a"Facility Security Manager",to work closely with the presiding judge of each facility to coordinate and maximize the security effort in that facility. 2. All Deputy Sheriffs and Sergeants assigned to the Court Security Bureau are issued,and must carry at all times, a two-way radio and alarm pager. 3. All Deputy Sheriffs and Sergeants assigned to the Court Security Bureau are issued a hand-held searching wand. 4. Each Facility Security Manager(Sergeant)holds a mandatory deputy training meeting on a monthly basis. G 5. A security manual has been prepared by the Sheriff's Court Services Division and issued to each judge, referee and commissioner. e Continued on attachment: YES Signature: Recommendation of County Administrator Recommendation of Board Committee Approve Other: Signature(s): Action of Board on: Jannary 30 1990 Approved as Recommended X Other X In addition to accepting this report, the Board REQUESTED the Finance Committee to review Courthouse security and the security of all County facilities and report to the Board as soon as possible . (Comments were heard from Sandy Jagoda, Jean O 'Hara, Ronald Romo , and Lawrence Gault . ) 0 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 �O cc: See page-5- Ply Batchelor, Cl rk of Ase Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By (`/ , Deputy Clerk 6. Each judge,referee and commissioner is regularly sent security bulletins. 7. Each judge, referee, and commissioner, and his or her respective bailiff has met with the Facility Security Manager and reviewed the Bench Security Manual. 8. Policy dictates that when bailiffs and transportation deputies are not otherwise busy,they patrol the common area in their facility. 9. Signs reading "Subject to Search" have been placed in each of the court facilities. 10. Random searches are being conducted in court facilities within the limits permitted by civil liberties rights, which preclude indiscriminate searches: 11. The Court Security Bureau of the Court Services Division has assumed the responsibility for emergency evacuation in case of fire, earthquake, bomb threat, and hostage situations in all court facilities in the County. 12. Emergency evacuation training has been received and coordinated; evacuations are held in cooperation with Risk Management. 13. Court security training officers have been identified and trained. 14. All Deputy Sheriffs transferred into the Court Services Division must complete five weeks of training. 15. Two holidays observed as Court Holidays (but not County holidays), Lincoln's Birthday and Admissions Day,have been identified as Court Security Training Days. February 12, 1990 will be an eight-hour block of training in the Bray Court Building having to do with emergency evacuations. 16. The Assistant Sheriff- Court Services Division, is currently developing a 40-hour court security course in conjunction with Los Medanos College and the California State Sheriff's Association. 17. Alarms have been installed in all courtrooms. The alarms are checked routinely. 18. New defendant-restraint equipment has cut down on escape attempts. 19. Liaison has been developed with local police departments to provide for a coordinated response in case of any incident. 20. Magnetometers are used when a court hearing has been identified as high-risk. 21. The role of the Court Services Oversight Committee has been formalized. 22. A Committee on Justice Facility Planning was created last year to develop a workplan and schedule for the preparation of a justice facilities master plan. 23. Regularly scheduled meetings are held between the Court Services Oversight Committee and the Assistant Sheriff-Court Services Division. 24. A close relationship has been established with each jurisdiction regarding recommendations regarding remodeling of existing facilities. 25. A policy regarding the use of the security tunnel joining the Martinez Detention Facility and the Bray Court Building has been formalized. 26. Last November,the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court,Superior Court Administrator,Assistant Sheriff-Court Services Division and Court Services Division Commander recently attended a three- day court security seminar for court managers. - 2 - Z' C. Acknowledge, in addition to the above measures which deal primarily with the security of the Courts themselves,the following extensive measures which have been taken in regard to the security of employees generally: 1. A memo was sent to all department heads in December 1987 asking all department heads to make an assessment of their security needs. 2. In February 1988 a questionnaire was sent to all County employees to identify their security concerns. 3. Feedback from the questionnaire was sent to department heads, asking them to consider the input from their employees in preparing security plans for their departments. This memorandum was accompanied by a security survey check list prepared by the Sheriff's Department. 4. Department Security Training was announced to all Department Heads in March 1988. The training was based on the data received from the employee security questionnaires. Departments were asked to nominate one or two employees to be trained as trainers who would,in turn,train the employees in their own department. 5. Safety Coordinators and Floor Wardens at the Courthouse were trained in March 1988 by staff from Risk Management and the Sheriff's Department on the emergency action plan and activities of emergency response personnel and specifically what to do in case of a shooting. 6. A report on security and safety issues in county buildings was made to the Board of Supervisors on April 4, 1988. 7. In April 1988 two comprehensive training programs were presented to Safety Coordinators and security trainees covering profiles of the potentially violent, the assault cycle interventions, emergency protocol,personnel and facility security. The training included a take home package of class outline visuals and handouts needed to present the program to follow employees. Thirty-five participants from 24 departments attended the training. 8. In February 1989,Risk Management communicated with all departments regarding additional needs they might have for security training. D. Request the County Administrator and Sheriff-Coroner,in conjunction with the Court Services Oversight Committee,or other appropriate representatives of the Superior and Municipal Courts,to review the report which was requested last year from the architectural firm which is currently determining the cost of finishing off the two remaining courtrooms on the third floor of the Bray Court Building as soon as the report is available. This review should thoroughly investigate all possible means of providing increased security to the Court, staff and the public. The methods to be reviewed should include, but not be limited to, investigating the feasibility and appropriateness of: 1. Completing at least one of the two remaining courtrooms in the Bray Court Building as a"high-risk" courtroom,to be used for particularly sensitive criminal trials as well as selected domestic relations cases. 2. Converting one or more existing courtrooms in the Bray Court Building or the Main Courthouse to a "high-risk" courtroom, to be used for particularly sensitive criminal trials as well as selected domestic relations cases. 3. Restricting access to one or more Superior or Municipal Courtrooms through the use of a walk- through metal detector at the entrance to the courtroom or by the use of a hand-held wand,either on a permanent or periodic basis,to screen all individuals before allowing them access to the courtroom or by relocating sensitive preliminary hearings and trials to more secure courtrooms. 4. Restricting access to one or more floors of the Bray Court Building or Main Courthouse through locking all but one access door to the floor and then using a walk-through metal detector to screen all individuals before allowing them access to the floor, either on a permanent or periodic basis. - 3 - 5. Restricting access to the entire Bray Court Building or Main Courthouse by installing walk-through metal detectors at each entrance to the building, either on a permanent or periodic basis, to screen all individuals before allowing them access to the building, hallways and courtrooms. 6. Moving all domestic relations and possibly juvenile courts to the Bray Court Building, either separately or in conjunction with one or more of the above recommendations. E. Request the County Administrator to determine whether it is possible to identify any previously approved bond capacity for other projects such as the Sheriff's Patrol Building which is not currently needed for the originally approved purpose and which might prudently and legally be diverted to courthouse security. If the County Administrator determines that it feasible,prudent and legally possible to divert such funds from their originally approved purpose without negatively affecting such projects,request the County Adminis- trator,Sheriff-Coroner and appropriate representatives of the Superior and Municipal Court to review their conclusions under Section D above and attempt to arrive at the most appropriate way to use any funds which may be made available in this way to increase security in the Bray Court Building and the Main Courthouse. F. Reaffirm the Board's support for the Statewide Courthouse Construction Bond Measure(SB 1621-Presley) providing it includes clear authority to use the proceeds of the bond measure to improve courthouse security measures and authorize the Chair of the Board to forward the Board's concerns in this regard to the Governor of California, the Speaker of the Assembly, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the minority leader of the Assembly, the minority leader of the Senate, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Bonded Indebtedness & Methods of Financing, the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Courthouse Finance & Construction and the members of this County's Legislative Delegation. G. Request the County Administrator and Sheriff-Coroner to report back to the Board of Supervisors by April 1, 1990 on the progress which has been made on these recommendations. BACKGROUND: To address the concerns expressed by the Board of Supervisors and the Court, in 1988 the Board of Supervisors, in conjunction with the Superior Court,Municipal Court and Sheriff-Coroner, sponsored legislation to permit the consolidation of the Marshal's Office with the Sheriff's court-related services. On August 20, 1988 the Governor signed into law this legislation, AB 3014 (Chapter 444, Statutes of 1988). One of the principal provisions of AB 3014 was the creation of a Court Services Oversight Committee. The Court Services Oversight Committee consists,in an even numbered year,of three municipal courtjudges and two superior court judges. This Committee currently includes Superior Court Judges Phelan and Minney and Municipal Court Judges Simons, Zuniga and Norris. Section 26625.3 of the Government Code, as added by AB 3014,defines the role and responsibilities of the Court Services Oversight Committee. Among these are subdivision (c) which reads: "To approve security measures and plans prepared by the Sheriff, through the Assistant Sheriff, Court Services Division." The Board of Supervisors, Sheriff-Coroner, Superior Court and Municipal Court implemented this legislation immediately after its approval by the Governor. As a result of the implementation of this legislation,the Board of Supervisors, Sheriff-Coroner, Superior Court and Municipal Court have cooperative taken the steps outlined in Section 2 above to improve the security in the County's Court facilities. Despite all of these improvements in the security inside the Court facilities of this County, on January 22, 1990 another tragic fatal shooting occurred,this time outside the Courthouse in Martinez. Again,this was apparently the result of a domestic relations dispute. The above recommendations are designed to explore the feasibility of increasing security in those cases which are generally agreed to be the most likely to involve sudden, violent, unpredictable reactions from the participants - domestic relations cases. However these measures,or any others in and of themselves, will never insure that there will not be another occurrence of this type of incident. - 4 - Y The Sheriff's records indicate that for calendar year 1989, in the unincorporated area of the County, the Sheriff's staff responded to 1306 domestic violence-related calls for assistance. In 26 of these cases a firearm,knife,cutting instrument or other dangerous weapon was involved. These figures represent only the unincorporated area of the County,which contains less than 20% of the total population of the County. Unfortunately,domestic violence is so widespread, whether it occurs in the home or on the street, that it is very difficult to prevent. We believe that in a domestic relations dispute,despite our best efforts,if there is a determined assailant,the assailant will eventually be successful. It is no more reasonable to expect that the law enforcement agencies can prevent 100%of such attacks that it is to expect that the Highway Patrol can prevent every drive-by shooting on a freeway simply because they have the responsibility to patrol the freeways. In the recent incident outside the Courthouse the weapon could always have been left in a car and retrieved when the couple left the Courthouse-quite possibly with the same tragic result. The Assistant Sheriff- Court Security Division notes that in criminal cases there is usually advance intelligence regarding the need for advance security. By contrast, domestic relations cases are the most volatile and least predictable. It is in this area that more security appears to be needed to address the lack of predictability, the possibility of sudden violence and the loss of emotional control. No one can absolutely guarantee that any citizen walking on the streets of any city will not be attacked. The rampant violence in our cities as shown daily in the newspapers and on television are ample testimony to the truth of this assertion. We must at all times reach a delicate balance between the need to protect the safety of the individual and the need to guarantee the ready availability of the judicial system to settle the most difficult disputes confronting individuals. Reaching this balance is never an easy task-perhaps less so when some individuals misuse the judicial system to vent their hatred of others. While they must be guaranteed their right to the judicial system, we must also protect the rights of all citizens to have access to the system in a way which protects their individual and civil rights. We believe the steps the Board of Supervisors has taken and are taking this morning will further the security of all individuals without stifling the rights of any individual. cc: County Administrator ° Presiding Judge, Superior Court Chairman, Municipal Court Judges Association Chairman, Court Services Oversight Committee Sheriff-Coroner Assistant Sheriff-Court Services Division County Clerk-Recorder County Counsel Risk Manager Director, Justice Systems Programs Finance Committee -5 - _