FINAL REPORT - San Bernardino Superior Court

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2011‐2012 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report BACKGROUND MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OVERVIEW Ten of the 24 incorporated cities within the County of San Bernardino employ their own police departments. The remaining cities contract with the San Bernardino County Sheriff-Coroner Department (SBCSD) for law enforcement services. The Grand Jury determined that it would be prudent to conduct an overview of these ten agencies to survey the level of public safety provided within their jurisdictions. It is universally understood that due to the economic climate, budget constraints and pension costs, law enforcement agencies are adversely affected. The major budget component to these agencies is in labor costs, and when funds are cut, officers are laid-off. Fewer officers on the street affect both the safety of patrol officers and citizens. Therefore, the Grand Jury commenced this overview and each of the respective police chiefs was interviewed. The following matrix shows routine data about each of the police departments provided by the Chiefs that were interviewed. NUMBER OF RATIO OF PATROL OTHER THAN PUBLIC CITIZEN COMPLAINTS CITY POPULATION* SWORN OFFICERS OFFICERS TO SUPERVISORS SAFETY DUTIES in 2011 BARSTOW 22,639 37 5:1 None 15 complaints; 0 substantiated CHINO 77,983 103 6:2 None 13 complaints; 1 substantiated; 1 under investigation COLTON 52,154 46 7:1 Animal control/code 2 complaints; 1 substantiated enforcement/rental housing inspections and business license issuances FONTANA 196,069 185 6:1 Animal Control 11 complaints; 1 substantiated MONTCLAIR 36,664 52 4:1 None 13 complaints; 3 substantiated ONTARIO 163,924 220 10:1 None 33 complaints; 2 substantiated REDLANDS 68,747 79 6:1 Animal Control 20 complaints; 3 substantiated RIALTO 99,171 99 8:1 Animal Control/ Parking 13 complaints; 2 substantiated Enforcement SAN BERNARDINO 209,924 291 6:1 Animal Control 70 commplaints; 12 substantiated UPLAND 73,732 76 6:1 None 17 complaints; 3 substantiated *2010 Census The police chiefs conduct monthly meetings to develop inter-departmental relationships and policing methods to assist one another. These cooperative relationships are primarily in the areas of suspect apprehension and enforcement of drug and gang activities that may overlap jurisdictions. A shared data-based program, called CopLink, connects police agencies throughout the County with suspect information. 78
2011‐2012 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The Cities of Ontario and Rialto have their own air support helicopters, while the City of Fontana contracts for helicopter services. The helicopters are used to provide support to ground patrols for effective and efficient suspect apprehension. The City of Redlands has a fixed–wing aircraft that is operated by a contract pilot who flies a police officer during peak hours or emergencies for surveillance. In emergencies, a police department that does not have access to a helicopter can contact the closest law enforcement agency, including the SBCSD, for air support to be dispatched. The Fontana Police Department has co-sponsored a program with the Fontana Unified School District known as the Fontana Leadership Intervention Program (FLIP). This program focuses on at-risk teens and their parents, providing classes and activities to develop self-esteem and skills that are aimed at re-integrating the teens as productive members in school and within the societal environment. The Redlands Police Department has equipped a majority of the downtown areas of the city with cameras, including with the permission of local vendors, to have camera surveillance access to wide areas of the City. Dispatchers monitor these closed-circuit cameras from a central location and direct patrol officers to various types of crime scenes. When some crimes are in process or some crimes having just occurred, the dispatcher informs officers. The use of this new technology has reduced the need for patrol officers and has increased the rates of convictions. CONCLUSION The police chiefs interviewed demonstrated dedication and professionalism in their approach to managing the police force within their cities. Each is actively seeking new technologies and regional alliances to enhance their efforts to become more efficient and cost effective. Their combined stated priority is to ensure public safety is at the highest level of achievement for their populace. The reviews were successful in that the 10 municipal law enforcement agencies are effectively managing their departments, in some cases administering more responsibilities than law enforcement activities, and continue to provide comprehensive public safety. Responding Agency Recommendations Due Date No Response Required 79
Page 1 and 2:
FINAL REPORT COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDI
Page 3 and 4:
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE From left to ri
Page 5 and 6:
Honorable Ronald M. Christianson, P
Page 7 and 8:
2011-2012 GRAND JURY SAN BERNARDINO
Page 9 and 10:
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2011-2012 GRAND J
Page 11 and 12:
CITIES/SPECIAL DISTRICTS COMMITTEE
Page 13 and 14:
2011‐2012 San Bernardino County G
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
May 15, 2012 Ted Burgnon, Foreman a
Page 25 and 26:
Executive Summary Harvey M. Rose As
Page 27 and 28:
Executive Summary year to prevent b
Page 29 and 30:
Executive Summary never completed a
Page 31 and 32:
Executive Summary purposes that dir
Page 33 and 34:
Introduction Harvey M. Rose Associa
Page 35 and 36:
Introduction Victorville was establ
Page 37 and 38:
Introduction Exhibit 1 City of Vict
Page 39 and 40:
Introduction boundaries of the Vict
Page 41 and 42:
Introduction The SCLAA operated und
Page 43 and 44:
Section 1: Financial Condition In t
Page 45 and 46:
Section 1: Financial Condition Tabl
Page 47 and 48:
Section 1: Financial Condition Cash
Page 49 and 50:
Section 1: Financial Condition Char
Page 51 and 52:
Section 1: Financial Condition has
Page 53 and 54:
Section 1: Financial Condition Char
Page 55 and 56:
Section 1: Financial Condition City
Page 57 and 58:
Section 1: Financial Condition Impa
Page 59 and 60:
Section 1: Financial Condition Tabl
Page 61 and 62:
Section 1: Financial Condition Reco
Page 63 and 64:
Section 2: Inter-fund Loans and Use
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
3. Power Plant Developments Th
Page 81 and 82:
Section 3: Power Plant Developments
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Section 4: SCLA Hangar Development
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Section 5: SCLAA Bond Expenditures
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
2011-2012 San Bernardino County Gra
Page 125 and 126:
COUNTY COMMITTEE Back row: Darrell
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Back row:
Page 143 and 144:
2011-2012 San Bernardino County Gra
Page 145 and 146: 2011-2012 San Bernardino County Gra
Page 147 and 148: LAW AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE COUNTY OF
Page 149 and 150: 2011‐2012 San Bernardino County G
Page 195: 2011‐2012 San Bernardino County G
Page 211 and 212: RESPONSE ACCOUNTABILITY COUNTY OF S
show all

FINAL REPORT - San Bernardino Superior Court

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?