LAKEPORT, Calif. – Citing his own concerns about the Lakeport courthouse's security measures, the Lake County sheriff on Tuesday asked the Board of Supervisors to weigh in on options for improving the safety of court users, personnel and judges.
Sheriff Francisco Rivero asked the board for input ahead of a Wednesday meeting he's set to have with court Chief Executive Officer Mary Smith and a state Administrative Office of the Courts official.
Rivero's memo to the board had offered two options: one, in which all people – including county staff – would be screened when entering, and the second, which proposes moving screening equipment from inside the main entrance of the N. Forbes Street building and up to the fourth floor, where the Lake County Superior Court's Lakeport Division is located.
Rivero started off by correcting the second line of his memorandum to the board. The memo had stated that during a recent meeting of county department heads there was a unanimous vote in favor of the second proposed option.
He said that was not correct, that there was one vote against the option – that vote coming from District Attorney Don Anderson, who was in the audience for the discussion.
As for Rivero's take on the situation, “I'm relatively neutral on whether we secure the entire building or just secure the fourth floor,” he told the board.
He added that he wasn't neutral on giving the impression that the building was as secure as it should be.
Rivero – who as sheriff is statutorily responsible for providing court security – said he has spent a great deal of time considering the fourth floor's security measures before discussing them with Smith and County Administrative Officer Kelly Cox.
“It is my opinion that we are really not providing proper security for the courts or the building,” he said.
Having actual security will require “a fair bit of inconvenience,” said Rivero. “Everyone will have to be screened and you're probably going to get some complaints.”
He suggested that the alternative was moving it to the fourth floor, which he expects to discuss with Smith and the state representative on Wednesday. In advance of that meeting he wanted to bring the matter to the board and get its input.
Supervisor Rob Brown, who said he and Rivero have discussed the matter previously, stated, “I don't think it's any secret about how I originally felt about having the whole program here, and nothing's changed that,” he said, pointing to his opposition to the screening.
Brown said he's spoken to security staff, who have acknowledged deficiencies. “It's not effective. It's purely symbolic.”
The fourth floor is where the measures are needed, said Brown. However, he said he didn't feel it was time to give direction ahead of Rivero's meeting with court officials.
One option, said Brown, is to wait until the new Lakeport courthouse is built and have proper security established effectively there.
He said there appear to be space constraints in putting the screening station on the fourth floor, and relating to Rivero's proposal to let only one elevator access the fourth floor, said it gets very crowded now when only one elevator can go there.
“I don't know exactly what the answer is,” said Brown, adding it's important to meet with court staff.
Rivero wanted to clarify that he wasn't criticizing the screening process, explaining that the building was “porous,” with people holding doors open and allowing others to enter unscreened.
“To the extent that the problem can be fixed, we have to give it a try,” said Rivero.
His proposal to fix the situation is multifaceted, including limiting the number of people accessing he fourth floor, using video arraignments and moving some hearings to the Clearlake courthouse on Dam Road Extension. “That's a lot easier facility for me to secure than the fourth floor of this building.”
In order to secure the entire Lakeport courthouse building, Rivero said he will incur expenses not covered by the funds appropriated to him by the state for court security.
“I hope the board understands that I have a constitutional obligation to do the best I can to make sure the judges are safe,” he said.
Rivero added that he doesn't feel safe signing the memorandum of understanding with the state for the judges' safety. “There's no security up there to speak of at this time.”
Supervisor Anthony Farrington said safety isn't just an issue on the fourth floor, pointing out there is bulletproof glass on the counter windows at the tax collector's office on the second floor.
Building security is “not as tight as it should be,” said Farrington, adding that he feels the screeners do a good job.
Brown said that, given the two options of locking down the entire building or putting the screening equipment on the fourth floor, “I'm not interested in locking this place down.”
He added, “I think we were fine to begin with.”
Supervisor Denise Rushing asked about the consequences of Rivero not certifying the building as safe.
“The major consequence is having someone get injured or killed on the fourth floor,” Rivero replied. “It's a real possibility.”
Rushing said one of the reasons the state is building a new courthouse is that the Lakeport courthouse facility was found to be inadequate.
Rivero said he felt his proposals for video conferences and moving hearings would alleviate security concerns. “The judges would have to cooperate.”
Cox told the board that when Rivero brought the matter to him, he explained that when the board originally was approached about the security concerns the board “was less than enthusiastic about it,” preferring screening be on the fourth floor.
He said the county was advised that it was impossible to locate the screening equipment on the fourth floor due to space.
“The sheriff believes there is a way to do it,” and if so the department heads would prefer it, said Cox. “I tend to think that's what the board preferred when you originally approved this.”
He said the main concern has not been so much about county employees having to be screened but how the general public is affected.
“There is some impact on the general public that is not doing business with the courts, and I am concerned about that,” said Cox. “We want the public to feel welcome in this building. It's their building.”
Cox encouraged Rivero to look into it further.
Board Chair Jim Comstock suggested that if everyone needs to be screened, they're inhibiting people from conducting business at the courthouse.
Supervisor Jeff Smith wanted to give Rivero a chance to meet with the judges and see if screening can be moved to the fourth floor.
In weighing in on the matter, Anderson told the board that it was his understanding that the state wouldn't allow the screening equipment on the fourth floor, and cited potential problems with fire codes and the lack of Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant bathrooms on the fourth floor.
He said that would mean people in wheelchairs would have to go back down to the first floor to use restrooms there, necessitating multiple trips through the screening station.
His biggest problem was no exception to screening, which he said would require victims, witnesses and investigators to stand in line along with the criminal element they're going up against in court.
Anderson also was concerned that his investigators don't have direct access to the fourth floor. He said at any one time his department has seven to eight armed officers, which he suggested would be the largest and quickest law enforcement response available if something happens in the courthouse.
But he didn't like that his officers would have to access the fourth floor by elevator. “I'm not going to put my officers in jeopardy.”
He said he also didn't want his armed officers to be screened. “We're willing to work with you but I don't like the no exceptions proposal for the screening process,” he said, because he believed it would jeopardize victims, witnesses and district attorney staff.
Brown said he had seen a child witness having to to through the screening process once, as that originally was going on but since has been modified.
Rivero said in response to Anderson's statement about ADA compliance, “Limiting screening to the fourth floor does not limit that at all,” and that it wouldn't violate ADA guidelines.
He continued that he doesn't know that the state won't allow the screening equipment to be moved upstairs. “They're the ones putting the obligation on me to protect the judges,” Rivero said, adding he would sleep better if the onus for the judges' security were taken off of him.
Rivero said it's “preposterous” to screen armed investigators, but said all other county employees would be subject to it. Everytime there is an exception to the rule there is a breakdown, he said, adding that families and friends of victims have been known to kill people in courtrooms.
Brown said the county looked at those kinds of incidents and found that most had happened in buildings with security measures.
In response to Anderson's statement about his staff being first responders to courthouse emergencies, Rivero said his bailiffs are the first responders in such cases.
As Anderson explained how he wanted his staff to be able to access the courthouse from another entrance as they usually do, Rivero replied, “You're asking me to lessen the security that I’m saying isn’t enough.”
Comstock suggested Rivero and Anderson needed to discuss the matter one on one.
Brown told Rivero, “I think we would be open to any option” once he's met with court staff.
Rushing said the board did vote for the security measures initially with the understanding that there would not be long lines of county employees.
“If we need to go there we need to reconsider that decision,” she said.
E-mail Elizabeth Larson at
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
