Models for Law Enforcement at Airports (2020)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

32 County Sheriff Model Some airports—such as Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport (Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office, 2019) and the Sacramento Metropolitan Airport (Sacramento County, 2019)— use a county sheriff model for airport law enforcement. Both the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office and the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department are the law enforcement presence at their respective airports and operate 24/7 (Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office, 2019; Sacramento County, 2019). The following respondents indicate use of the county sheriff as their law enforcement model: • Clovis Municipal Airport • Fayetteville Executive Airport • John Wayne Airport, Orange County • Miami International Airport • North Las Vegas Airport • Oakland International Airport • Paine Field/Snohomish County Airport • Palm Beach International Airport • Texas Gulf Coast Regional Airport. Additional airports using county sheriffs for their law enforcement requirements include the following: • Albany County, NY, airports • University Park Airport in Bellefonte, PA (Centre County Sheriff) • Gogebic Iron County Airport in Bessemer, MI • Key West International Airport (Monroe County Sheriff’s Office) • Minnehaha County and Sioux Falls, SD, airports • John Wayne Airport (Orange County Sheriff’s Department) • Pangborn Airport in East Wenatchee, WA (Douglas County Sheriff’s Office) • Sacramento Metropolitan Airport (Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department, providing law enforcement since the airport opened in 1967). Interestingly, sheriff’s deputies in Albany County, NY, are frequently cross-trained and designated as U.S. Customs Officers (Albany County, 2019). Category The security categories for airports using the county sheriff law enforcement model are Category I (3), Category II (3), Category IV (2), and Category X (1). C H A P T E R 7

County Sheriff Model 33 Ownership Model The ownership models of the airports using county sheriffs for law enforcement are county owned (7), city owned (2), and port authority (1). Interface between Ownership Agency and/or Airport Operator and the Law Enforcement Model The following questions were asked about the interface and coordination between the ownership agency and/or airport operator and the law enforcement model at the airport. Reporting Structure The reporting structure most often described is the county sheriff reporting ultimately to the mayor or to the city or county executive (4). A summary of other reporting structures is shown in Table 9. Managerial Control The level of managerial control exhibited by the airport owner or operator over law enforce- ment is most often reported as a cooperative or collaborative relationship (3) or as minimal to very little managerial control (3). Other responses indicate a considerable amount of control (2); a level of control dependent on the case, such as an emergency (2); budgetary control (2); and complete managerial control (1). Level of Integration into Airport Operations Most respondents describe a symbiotic or coordinated level of integration of the county sheriff law enforcement model with airport operations (6) or a high level of integration (5). Other responses include no to little integration (3) and exceptions during emergency situations (1). Level of Owner or Operator Control over Law Enforcement Policies Most respondents report no to very little control by the airport owner or operator over the county sheriff’s law enforcement policies (5) while others indicate a level of collaboration in policy development (3). Two respondents describe a moderate level of control; one lists a high level of control over law enforcement policies; and one notes exceptions made in emergency conditions. Discretion of Owner or Operator in Determining Access to Law Enforcement Equipment Most respondents indicate that the airport owner or operator does not have discretion in determining the law enforcement equipment (6), but some do (3). Response Frequency Airport police report ultimately to the mayor or the city or county executive 4 Airport law enforcement reports to airport management or TSA 2 Airport requests aid from the county sheriff force on a case-by-case basis 2 Mutual aid relationship between airport and county sheriff 2 Airport contracts with county sheriff for law enforcement 2 Table 9. County sheriff reporting structure.

34 Models for Law Enforcement at Airports The respondents who report that the airport does have some level of discretion in LEO access to equipment were asked to expand on their responses in a follow-up question. One respondent says that the “airport pays for all equipment used by law enforcement airport unit. As such, police need to articulate their needs and airport either approves or denies. Of course, certain equipment is essential for policing and so no debate required.” Another respondent indicates that “it [equipment needs] is discussed, if reasonable, then access is granted. Most equipment needed by law enforcement is supplied by the law enforcement.” Interface between TSA and Law Enforcement Many respondents note a cooperative and close relationship between TSA and the county sheriff assigned to the airport (4). All data are summarized in Table 10. Financial Aspects This section provides information on financial aspects of the airport unit of the county sheriff. For example, the Broward County Aviation Department at Fort Lauderdale–Hollywood International Airport contracts with the Broward Sheriff’s Office to provide law enforcement at the airport (Sheriff’s Office Broward County, 2018). The Broward Sheriff’s Office breaks down the proposed budget for law enforcement services at the airport in the following categories: personnel expenses, operating expenses, capital outlay, and transfers and reserves (Sheriff’s Office Broward County, 2018). Personnel services for Fort Lauderdale–Hollywood International Airport operations are estimated at only $18.4 million, with operating expenses at $1.1 million, capital outlay at $661,395, and transfers and reserves budgeted at approximately $700,000, for a total cost of $20.8 million for 125 full-time employees, including 100 sworn personnel (Sheriff’s Office Broward County, 2018). Capital expenses for airport operations cover the vehicle replacement program, computers, computer replacement program, and laptop replace- ment program (Sheriff’s Office Broward County, 2018). Administrative Costs Administrative costs are reported as unknown or not applicable (3) in the survey data, with one response indicating that administrative costs include salaries, overtime, raises, and benefits. Training Costs The training costs identified for the county sheriff law enforcement model entail continuing education and conferences (6), state-mandated training (1), and training-related travel costs (1). Liability One response regarding liability costs indicates that the sheriff’s office assumes all liability costs for its airport operations, with the airport operator reimbursing the county for the risk management costs at the airport. Response Frequency Cooperative/close 4 Daily working relationship 3 None, not applicable, do not know 3 Frequent meetings 2 Not very close 2 Table 10. County sheriff model interface between TSA and law enforcement.

County Sheriff Model 35 Other Costs The question about other costs elicited only one response: “the captain is in charge of the operational budget at the airport.” Jurisdiction Most responses indicate no jurisdictional issues encountered (6), with additional responses noting no problems or issues despite geographic or agency jurisdictional boundaries (2). One respondent mentions jurisdictional challenges with other agencies, and another respondent reports geographic jurisdictional limitations. Management of LEOs This section asked questions related to the management of the LEOs assigned to the airport. LEO Reporting Structure There are various responses to the question about the reporting structure of county sheriff’s LEOs assigned to the airport. Two respondents indicate a hierarchy of reporting (officer to sergeant to lieutenant to captain), with two additional respondents reporting a similar hierarchy. One respondent describes the reporting structure as “none,” and another simply states, “chain of command.” LEO Managerial Control In response to this question for the county sheriff law enforcement model, answers indi- cate that the police chief or police department is strongly in managerial control of the officers assigned to the airport (4), but one response notes no managerial control or not applicable, and another describes managerial control in an emergency situation or as needed. LEO Assignments within Airport For the county sheriff law enforcement model, the LEOs are assigned to the airport structure as a specialty assignment (3), as needed (2), and by proximity as needed (1). Access to Ancillary Resources for LEOs The respondents indicating use of the county sheriff law enforcement model state that access to ancillary resources is part of a mutual aid agreement (4), quick and easy (3), and a collaboration with other agencies, though not necessarily defined as mutual aid (2). Discretion in Selection or Placement of Officers The respondents report that they have very high or total discretion in the selection or placement of officers at the airport (3), followed by not applicable (2). LEO Operations Assignment of Officers to Airport Facility The cited methods used to select LEOs for assignment to the airport are by specialty assign- ment (2) and by the county sheriff office selecting and hiring the LEOs for placement at the airport (2).

36 Models for Law Enforcement at Airports Level of Expertise of LEOs Assigned to the Airport Both responses note the level of expertise required for an LEO to be assigned to the airport as previous law enforcement or military experience (2). Level of Airport-Specific Training The level of airport-specific training ranges from on-the-job training (3) to airport-specific training upon hire (3); continuing education (2); and special topics training such as security procedures, specific weapon usage, and tactics (2). Durations for airport-specific training include those for initial or upon-hire training (2 weeks and 40-hour aviation security training) and continuing education, including twice-yearly tabletop exercises to discuss relevant scenarios. Other specific training topics for LEOs assigned to the airport include aviation security, criminal and security awareness, explosives, FAA regulations, hazardous materials, and illegal narcotics (Orange County Sheriff’s Department, 2019). LEOs Stationed at Security Checkpoints Most respondents indicate that the LEOs are not stationed at airport security checkpoints (6); fewer note that they are (2). LEO Airfield Driving Many respondents affirm that the LEOs are trained to drive on the airfield (6). Some respondents, however, indicate that their LEOs are not trained to drive on the airfield (2). Other respondents note that their LEOs are allowed to drive on the FAA AOA (5), but some say they are not (3). In related data, some respondents report that their LEOs are allowed to drive on the non-FAA AOA (7). Police versus Airport Security This section asked questions about the difference between police and security at the respon- dents’ airports. More respondents indicate a difference between police and security (5) than report no difference (3). Many respondents also note a clear separation of power between the police and security personnel at their airports (5). Table 11 summarizes the differences. Access to Ancillary Operations and Resources Most respondents report that they have access to bomb squads, K-9 units, explosive detection, and SWAT (8); fewer indicate access to hostage negotiations (7). Response Frequency Airport security operates during hours airport police are not on property 2 Security is contracted out 2 Police and security have a discrete set of tasks each 1 Police are armed; security personnel are unarmed 1 Police are sworn public servants 1 Police have arrest rights; security personnel do not 1 Table 11. Differences between police and security personnel in county sheriff model.