REPORT OF THE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

Transcription

1 REPORT OF THE CHIEF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST August 11, 2006 TO: Honorable Members of the Public Safety Committee FROM: Gerr F. Miller Chief Legislative Ana yst Assignment No C.F Mandated Training for Private First Responders SUMMARY This offce was directed by Motion (Garcetti-Weiss-Greuel, et al.) to examine the adequacy of training and emergcncy coordination with local private security offcers to assess whether the City should provide, require and certify additional training for on-site emergency response personnel at high rise commercial buildings and other specified highly traffcked venues during periods of high occupancy (C.F ). In researching this question, we met collectively and spoke extensively with representatives of the City Administrative Offcer (CAO); the Fire (LAFD) and Police (LAPD) Departments, the Emergency Preparedness Department (EPD); the Building Owners and Managers Association of Greater Los Angeles (BOMNGLA or BOMA); the four major local security companies: Universal Protection Service (Universal), American Commercial Security Services (ACSS), Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc. (Sccuritas) and Allied-Baron Security Services (Allied- Barton); the L.A. Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE); the Service Employees International Union (SEIU); the City Attorney's Offce; and, the Offce of the Mayor. With the assistance of City staff, we also researched training requirements for private security offcers in Baltimore, Washington D.C., San Francisco, Chicago and New York City wherc SEJU piloted its "Safe and Secure" training initiative. FINDINGS. Through comprehensive state-mandated training, additional voluntar training certified by BOMA and additional counter-terrorism training offered by LAPD, significantly more training is provided to local private security offcers in Los Angeles than any other jurisdiction we contacted;. however, SEIU and LAANE assert that the security companies may not be consistently providing state-mandated training to all securty offcers and that BOMA may be falsely certifying its enhanced training, -1- ek-~ ~ ~

2 which raises a question of enforcement;. all paries agree that training is valuable only to the extent trained security offcers remain on the job, which raises the question of retention, to be addressed in a subsequent report;. There do not appear to be any material deficiencies in the subject matter or comprehensiveness of existing training of local security offcers except possibly in certain areas of emergency preparedness, which is primarly addressed by the City's fire code, discussed further in this report;. Even if deficiencies in training for private security offcers were identified, the City is legally prohibited, or pre-empted by state regulation, from requiring different or additional training for private security offcers;. however, the City can legally designate certain on-site emergency response personnel and require additional training for them if necessary under an exercise of health and safety of it is found to be the City's police powers to protect the the public;. City public safety offcials believe the safety of the public would be enhanced if at least one trained "private first responder" were present during high occupancy times in densely populated commercial buildings to coordinate emergency preparation, prevention and response with emergency personnel within the building and in adjacent buildings, and with local law enforcement and emergency response personnel;. Excellent training is already provided and coordinated with the City's public safety agencies and should be used to provide any additional training required by the City for private first responders; and. EPD is the lead agency for coordinating emergency activities with the City's first responders and community responders, so verification or certification of any additional training required by the City for private first responders should be maintained by EPD. RECOMMENDA nons That the City Council: 1. FIN that the retention of a qualified and trained private security workforce would enhance the safety of the citizens of Los Angeles; 2. FIN that the safety of occupants in densely populated commercial high rise buildings -2-

3 would be better secured if each building maintained fully trained "private first responders" on site during high occupancy periods; 3. DIRCT LAPD and LAFD to continue participating in BOMA's Security and Preparedness Committee to ensure that BOMNGLA ACO's training requirements meet the training needs for counter-terrorism and emergency preparation, prevention and response for private security officers working in densely populated commercial buildings, with particular attention to whether BOMA's ACO certification should require training in first aid, evacuation procedures, use of fire extinguishers, and emergency preparedness and response; 4. REQUEST the City Attorney to draft an ordinance amending Section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMe) to require new or existing commercial high-rise buildings with over one million rentable square feet to maintain at least one primary and one back-up private first responder on site at all times between 9:00 a.m. and 11 :00 p.m. on weekdays; and amend LAMC Section to define "private first responder" as any employee whose BOMNGLA ACO certificate of training has been fied with and verified by EPD; 5. INSTRUCT the CAO, in consultation with the Offce of the Mayor, to report on efforts to reach an agreement with the state to enforce state-mandated training of private security offcers in Los Angeles; 6. INSTRUCT the CAO to report on the cost, if any, ofepd's oversight of this training requirement and the cost ofre-establishing LAFD's Fire Safety Education Unit to support the existing requirements oflamc Section as well as additional requirements proposed by Motions (Miscikowski-Weiss) discussed herein (C.F S1 and ); and 7. INSTRUCT EPD, in consultation with LAPD and LAFD, to report annually with recommendations to modify this training requirement for private first responders, including consideration of expanding it to other high-rise buildings and/or critical assets in Los Angeles. FISCAL IMP ACT None at this time. -3-

4 BACKGROUND i. Coordination The City's public safety offcials believe that coordination among a vast array of different "eyes and ears," both public and private, makes possible both effective counter-terrorism intervention and effective emergency response in the City of Los Angeles. The lynchpin of coordination is regular training with follow-up communication, and the shared knowledge and relationships that arise from that. Training is discussed below. Here we mention several initiatives focused exclusively on coordination. With respect to counter-terrorism coordination, LAPD and LAFD have designated more than 30 sworn offcers to work directly with private security companies as part of the Terrorism Liaison Offcer (TLO) program. LAPD, with BOMA's assistance, has also enabled private security offcers in high-rise buildings to exchange real-time intelligence on a computer platform known as RPPICS (Regional Public Private Infrastructure Collaboration System). LAPD's newly formed Protective Security Task Force (PSTF) also works directly with private security offcers to protect the City's "critical assets." LAPD considers private security offcers to be essential "force multipliers" in collecting and sharng surveilance information to help safeguard residents of Los Angeles. With respect to emergency response coordination, the Fire Department works closely with building owners and operators to ensure emergency personnel sited at those buildings are trained in emergency preparedness, prevention and response. LAFD's primar role in emergency response coordination is mandated by the fire code, which designates Fire Safety Directors as the primary point of contact for emergency response in high-rise buildings. Most Fire Safety Directors are security offcers. With respect to overall emergency coordination of all City agencies and private first responders, the City's ultimate responsibilities lie with EPD. As previously discussed in your Committee, EPD is poised to assume an even more proactive role in preparing and coordinating community responders, including private securty offcers. EPD's primary role in planning for and coordinating emergency response in the City makes EPD the appropriate City agency for assuming the responsibility of ensuring quality training of private first responders. n. Training The State of California currently mandates training for private security offcers of high rise buildings. The training requirements were substantially expanded after 9/1 1, and are implemented by the four local security firms. In addition, the local association of building owners and managers, BOMA, has established an even more robust training program that exceeds state requirements. Additional training is also offered by City agencies, all of which is described below. -4-

5 State Training Requirements for Private Security Offcers California (40 initial hrs + 8 hrs annually) California law mandates 40 hours of initial training and eight hours of annual training for all contract security offcers licensed by private patrol operators! (California Business and Professions Code section (b)). An initial eight hour "power to arrest" course is required before registering to become a licensed security guard. Another 1 6 hours of mandatory course work is required in public relations (4 hrs), observation and documentation (4 hrs), internal and external communication (4 hrs) and liability/legal aspects (4 hrs) within 30 days ofreceiving a registration card. Another 16 hours of elective course work must be completed within six months. California's total initial training requirement is eight introductory hours plus 16 required hours plus 16 elective hours, for a total of 40 hours. Certified elective courses include: post orders and assignents (4 hrs max); company policies/orientation (4 hrs max); evacuation procedures (2 hrs max); officer safety (4 hrs max); advanced arrests, search and seizure (4 hrs max); access control (2 hrs max); trespass (4 hrs max); criminal laws (2 hrs max); first aid / CPR (4 hrs max); handling diffcult people (4 hrs max); work place violence (4 hrs max); chemical agents (8 hrs max); preserving the incident scene (4 hrs max); crowd control (4 hrs max); driver safety (4 hrs max); supervision (4 hrs max); courtroom demeanor (4 hrs max); parking / traffic control (2 hrs max); and radio procedures (2 hrs max). These training requirements - which increased the State's prior training requirement for private security offcers from three hours to 40 (plus eight additional hours annually) - were sponsored by SEIU, authored by Assemblymember Edward Chavez (La Puente) and signed into law by California Governor Gray Davis in The California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (BSIS) establishes the courses, or "modules," registers security offcers and enforces the training. Individuals who wish to register as security offcers must be at least 18 years old, undergo a criminal history background check, and complete the required training. Security companies are required to keep, and provide upon request, documentation of the training that is provided to private security offcers. BSIS can fine a security company for failing to provide the required training and even suspend or revoke the company's license to do business. New York (15 initial hrs + 2 hrs annually) Training for security offcers was mandated in New York State by the Security Guard Act of Like California, New York requires an eight hour pre-assignent course and eight hours 1 An "in-house" security guard is listed on the payroll of one employer whereas a "contract" security guard is any person employed by a licensed private patrol operator who provides services as a security guard and is registered as a security guard. -5-

6 ofrefresher training annually. However, New York requires only 16 hours (rather than 32 hours) of mandatory on-the-job (OTJ) training. New York's total initial requirement is eight preassignent hours plus 16 OTJ hours, for a total of24 hours of training. However, with the exception of one added class (report wrting), New York's 16 hour OTJ courses are the same as the eight hour pre-assignment courses: introduction (.25 hr in the preassignment course); role of a security guard (1.25 hrs in the pre-assignent course and 2.5 hrs in the OTJ course); legal powers and limitations (1.25 and 2.5 hrs, respectively); emergency situations (J and 3 hrs respectively); communications and public relations (J and 2 hrs respectively); access control (.5 and 2 hrs respectively); ethics and conduct (1 and 1.5 hrs respectively); and report writing (1.5 hours, offered only in the OTJ course). One hour of the 16 is allocated for examination and testing. The total substance of training required in New York is only 15 hours. With the exception of two hours of elective courses, the subject matter of New York's annual refresher training is also identical to the initial training. Other States We have not been able to find another state that requires more training than California. According to the National Association of Security Companies (NASCO), 29 states do not require any training for private security offcers. Additional Local Training of Private Security offcers Los Angeles (additional 28+ hours): BOMA ASO (24+ hours) and SOTAC (4 hours) BOMA represents a majority of high rise building owners who contract with four major security companies. These four firms provide security for about 98% of high rise buildings in Los Angeles. BOMA recognizes that security personnel are often already on site when incidents occur and, in response to security concerns post 9/1 1, developed an additional training program for security officers, referred to as the Accredited Security Organization (ASO). The BOMNGLA ASO certification requires an additional eight to 16 hours of training for security offcers working in buildings between 250,000 and 500,000 rentable square feet; eight to 24 hours oftraining for security offcers in buildings that are between 500,000 and one milion rentable square feet; and over 24 hours of additional training for security offcers in buildings that are over one million rentable square feet. These additional requirements can be met through training in the elective courses identified by the state and/or through additional course work developed by the local security companies in association with representatives from LAPD and LAFD. These courses include terrorism awareness and response, bomb and terrorist threats, critical incident response and emergency preparedness. The BOMNGLA ASO program focuses particularly on private communication with public first responders and on emergency response that is tailored to, or coupled with, site- -6-

7 specific "post order" training. As a completely separate initiative, LAPD's Operation Archangel, which operates within LAPD's Counter-terrorism Criminal Investigation Bureau (CTCIB), provides a four hour terrorism awareness and response Securty Offcer Training Course (SOT AC) for private security offcers in high-risk buildings. SEIU's survey oflocal security offcers found that 40% have already had counter-terrorism training. Operation Archangel continues to be well funded and supported by the City and plans to expand its reach of training even further this year. New York City (additional 18 hrs): Safe and Secure The "Safe and Secure" training program developed in New York City by SEIU for private security offcers of participating employers attempted to fill the gaps in the training not mandated by the state. The Safe and Secure currculum offers the same courses mandated by the state additional training on the following (extended from 15 hrs to 2l hrs) as well as l8 hours of topics: crime prevention for security professionals (3 hrs); terrorism awareness and response (3 hrs), safety and fire prevention (3 hrs), use of fire extinguishers (3 hrs), American Red Cross CPR (3hrs); and American Red Cross AED (3 hrs). The Safe and Secure training program took three years of collective bargaining to establish, and began as a pilot program with two participating property owners. Each participating employer contributes to a joint labor / management training fund $312 per securty offcer and pays approximately $400 in wages for each offcer trained, in exchange for a $3,000 tax credit. By early May, 2006, approximately 600 private security offcers had been trained in this program. Other Cities We were not able to find any other cities that mandate training. Also, other than SEIU's efforts in New York City to establish additional training, we were not able to find any other cities in which management has agreed to pay for or provide it. One limited SEIU-sponsored training course occurred in San Francisco this year. As reported in the local press and on SEIU's website, SEIU is actively in the process of organizing security offcers here in Los Angeles as well as Boston, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. In San Francisco, approximately 90% of private security offcers are represented. It is clear from discussions with the City's EPD and Fire and Police Departments that a professional and stabilized private security offcer workforce could only enhance public safety in Los Angeles. The City's role in supporting SEIU's efforts to accomplish that wil be addressed in another report. -7-

8 Enforcement of Existing Training BOMA and the security companies have worked closely with LAPD and LAFD, offer voluminous currcula, spcak knowledgeably on the training requirements and affrm their documentation of mandated training. However, LAANE and SEIU have raised concerns about the consistent delivery of that training. Their concerns arse from their knowledge of the industry and LAANE's interviews with 190 private security officers which resulted in the following findings: 40% of the security offcers surveyed said they were given test answers in advance; 36% reported that they have been registered as an offcer for more than six months but had not received the required 32 hours of training following the initial eight hour course; 56% stated they had not received training in CPR or first aid (an optional module); 37% had never received training on what to do in their building in case of an earthquake; and 60% had not received training in detecting and preventing acts of terrorism in their building. While LAAE and SEIU believe these deficiencies in training are best overcome by establishing a separate training program administered by SEIU, we would recommend that the City first pursue the possibility of working with the state to enforce existing requirements. Since the training of private security officers is not only an essential component of public safety but also, particularly, of homeland security, we have discussed with the CAO the possibility ofrequesting state homeland security funding to ensure that all private security officers receive at least the level of training mandated by the state. Potential Need for Additional Training In addition to their overall concern about providing required training to all private security officers, LAANE and SEIU identified three discreet areas of training which they believe should be enhanced: counter-terrorism; first aid; and, earthquake / emergency preparedness, including evacuation procedures. Counter-terrorism training is adequately addressed by several optional state modules, additional ACO modules, and LAPD's effective and expanding SOTAC training. Counter-terrorism training will be further enhanced when BSIS finalizes its proposed requirement to include four hours ofrequired training in weapons of mass destruction, described as follows: Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) & Terrorism Awareness (4 hours) Objective: To familiarize and instruct the individual on the subject matter and observation skills required to identify and report precursor activities to a terrorist event, react appropriately, report the occurrence of a terrorist event, and remain safe while helping control the scene after a terrorist event. The training wil utilize the Department of Consumer Affairs' Weapons of Mass Destruction & Terrorism Awareness for Security Professionals course consisting of a Digital Video Disk (DVD), Student Workbook and -8-

9 Facilitator ManuaL. This training, combined with LAPD and LAFD's TLO program and LAPD's RPPICS communications and PSTF collaboration discussed above, establish Los Angeles at the forefront oflocal public-private efforts in counter-terrorism training and coordination. There does not appear to be a need for additional training in this area. First Aid First aid (including CPR and AED) is authorized by the state as an optional course which can be taken to meet four of the additional required 16 hours of initial training or eight hours of annual training. The City could consider requiring high-occupancy commercial buildings to maintain staff on-site trained in first aid. It is offered as part of the Safe and Secure currculum and is also required of the City's contract security offcers, which is addressed in a separate report. Earthquake / Emergency Preparedness / Prevention / Response Though optional under state guidelines, as a practical matter, on-site "post order and assignment" training is provided to securty offcers when they begin work in a building. Post order training includes training in emergency response as well as training in the use of certain monitoring and communications equipment, alarms and elevators. Security offcers may also take an optional course in evacuation procedures. In addition, voluntar courses developed with the assistance oflapd and LAFD for BOMNGLA ASO certification include training in both emergency preparedness and critical incident response. These are important. In Los Angeles, the City requires its contract security offcers to attend four hours of training in fire protection, life safety and emergency procedure. Courses in safety and fire protection and the use of fire extinguishers are also offered as part of the Safe and Secure curriculum. Many City public safety officials believe that security offcers, at a minimum, should be trained in the use of fire extinguishers if they are not already. Importance of the Emergencv Plan. The quality of site-specific emergcncy response training delivered through post order training or any other training for security officers is primarily based on the quality of that building's emergency plan. The local fire code requires owners of high-rise buildings (over 75 feet in height, or about 7 storics) to designate a Fire Safety Director to work with the Fire Department to establish, implement and maintain the emergency plan (LAMC Sections and ). The emergency plan must specify emergency plans and procedures; identify the location of required evacuation signage; maintain a current list of handicapped persons located within the building who would require assistance during an emergency evacuation or relocation; designate a Floor Warden on each floor to oversee and ensure safe and complete evacuation or relocation of occupants during a fire, other emergency or fire drill; ensure that all new occupants are trained -9-

10 within 14 days of occupancy in the building (and annually thereafter) on the procedures to be followed in the event of fire, earthquake or other emergency; and, mandate a minimum of one fire drill annually on individual floors. The Fire Department is less involved in the preparation, review and maintenance of emergency plans for each building than suggested by the fire code. Because emergency procedures for all building occupants, including security offcers, are based on the building's emergency plan, the the Fire Deparment City first should ensure those plans are established with the direct input of and are maintained in such a way that they continue to be meaningful working blueprints for the training of all persons in a high-rise building, including security offcers. Related Efforts to Enhance the Emergencv Plan. Motions from 2002 and 2004 (Weiss- Miscikowski) have asked the City Attorney to draft ordinances to enhance the fire code as follows:. In addition to the evacuations currently required to be performed annually on individual floors in high-rise buildings seven stories or higher, conduct total building evacuations once every three years in all commercial high-rise buildings that are 35 stories or higher (approximately 22 buildings) (C.F S 1);. To ensure that emergency plans are current, require every high-rise building to file an "accurate and complete" plan with the Fire Deparment every six months;. To ensure that Fire Safety Directors and Floor Wardens are effectively equipped to protect the safety of occupants in high-rise buildings, require them to receive training anually;. To cnsure that building occupants are effectively equipped to respond to emergencies, require that one of every 500 building occupants be trained in the Fire Department's extensive and nationally adopted Community Emergency Response Training (CERT) program;. Increase the required period for evacuation drills from one year to at least once every six months;. Establish on-site duties for designated building personnel to be present during certain hours; and. Make any violation of these provisions a misdemeanor (C.F ). Each of these enhancements would contribute substantially to the safety of occupants in the City's high-rise buildings. In addition, the City should encourage each building's on-site emergency personnel- trained occupants, Floor Wardens, Fire Safety Directors and private security offcers - to collaborate and communicate effectively with each other, with emergency personnel in adjacent buildings, and with the City's law enforcement and emergency response personnel. This collaboration is already partially facilitated by private security offcers often serving as Fire Safety Directors. -10-

11 The Preemption Restriction The City Attorney has advised, and SEIU concedes, that the City is legally preempted from regulating the training of private security offcers. To survive a preemption challenge, SEIU's legal counsel advised that any additional training required by the City should not be for security offcers but only for employees posted at certain times in identified high-risk buildings who are well positioned to be on-site emergency responders. SEIU suggested that this is best accomplished through an amendment to the fire code. A Partial Solution The City could amend the fire code to include the safety enhancements suggested by the Motions discussed above. Also, as a modest step towards enhancing already superior training and coordination, the City could require the most densely populated commercial buildings to maintain during high occupancy periods at least two employees on site who are fully trained as the building's primary private first responders. Ideally, this training would be provided by the four security companies who already collaborate with LAFD and LAPD, and all site-specific training would be fully integrated with solid emergency plans developed and maintained by building owners in close association with LAFD. Recognizing the essential role played by private security offcers as force multipliers in the overall homeland security efforts in Los Angeles, LAPD and the four security companies should continue to provide the existing high level of counter-terrorism training, and the City should strongly encourage the state to establish and fund the enforcement in Los Angeles of existing, rigorous, state-mandated training requirements for all private security officers. ~ t &Lt. yst Brence Culp? -r~ C L /Analyst f7 Felipe Chavez J GFM: SMT: LMO: BKC: FVC N:\CLA Report Safe and Secure (Final).wpd -1 l-