National Academies Press: OpenBook

Policing and Public Transportation (2022)

Chapter: XIX. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION AND CONTRACTUAL STRUCTURES, INCLUDING INTER-AGENCY AND INTER-FORCE AGREEMENTS

« Previous: XVIII. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES EFFECTIVE USE OF COMMUNITY POLICING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"XIX. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION AND CONTRACTUAL STRUCTURES, INCLUDING INTER-AGENCY AND INTER-FORCE AGREEMENTS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policing and Public Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26652.
×
Page 46
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"XIX. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION AND CONTRACTUAL STRUCTURES, INCLUDING INTER-AGENCY AND INTER-FORCE AGREEMENTS." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Policing and Public Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26652.
×
Page 45

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.

46 TCRP LRD 58 • Community policing requires top-down agency-wide commitment to developing new skills through training and experimentation with new approaches to solving long-term community problems.657 MetroLink’s Police Assistance Services Agreement shows that one of MetroLink’s priorities is to integrate its transit polic- ing “with the City of St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department’s initiatives on community policing to encourage more direct po- lice involvement with our riders and employees and to have a visible ‘pro-active’ presence on and around [MetroLink’s] public facilities.”658 XIX. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES’ LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION AND CONTRACTUAL STRUCTURES, INCLUDING INTER-AGENCY AND INTER-FORCE AGREEMENTS Public transportation authorities have organizational and contractual structures that apply to or govern their policing, in- cluding inter-agency and inter-force agreements. The methods that public transportation authorities implement to organize and structure their law enforcement vary from agency to agency. Some public transportation authorities have promulgated rules that apply to their policing and myriad activities and situations that the authorities may confront.659 Some agencies have “their own security staff, while others contract with local departments or private security firms.”660 A System-Wide Security Assessment (Security Assessment or Assessment) conducted for MetroLink analyzed its security conditions based on the four principles of “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design” (CPTED): 1. Natural Access Control – The physical guidance of people com- ing and going from a space by the judicial placement of entrances, exits, fencing, landscaping and lighting. 2. Natural Surveillance – The placement of physical features, activi- ties and people in such a way as to maximize safety. 3. Territorial Reinforcement – The use of physical attributes that express ownership, such as fences, pavement treatment, art,- signage, and landscape. 657 Introduction to Community Oriented Policing, U.S. Department of Justice Community Oriented Policing Services, at 10 (2005), https:// cop.spcollege.edu/Training/Intro/EN/IntroInstructor.pdf (last accessed Jan. 31, 2022). 658 MetroLink, Police Assistant Services Agreement (Jan. 1, 2020), [hereinafter MetroLink, Police Assistance Services Agreement], Appendix A, Item 7 (Exhibit B, at 10). 659 See MTA Rules of Conduct and Fines, supra note 586, § 1050.1(a). 660 Jason Plautz, Transit agencies weigh security forces amid calls to defund police, SmartCitiesDive, (June 25, 2020), https://www. smartcitiesdive.com/news/transit-agencies-weigh-security-forces- amid-calls-to-defund-police/580324/ (last accessed Jan. 31, 2022). The article states that Portland’s TriMet uses security personnel from 14 dif- ferent agencies. It may be noted that a Pennsylvania court has opined that “divided police responsibilities can result in new questions as to passenger safety and adequacy of protective forces or measures.” Rom- isher v. SEPTA, 1974 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 566, at *15, 65 Pa. D. & C.2d 483, 494 (1974). 4. Maintenance – Allows for the continued use of a space for its intended purpose. It serves as an additional expression of owner- ship, prevents reduction of visibility from landscaping overgrowth and obstructed or inoperative lighting.661 Applying CPTED’s four principles, the Security Assessment found, for example, that many of MetroLink’s physical assets reflected practices of the 1990s, which had not incorporated CPTED principles.662 The Security Assessment is informative in many respects. For example, it explains that [a] robust security program is layered and requires strategies that draw from all categories of recommendations: a security strategy that establishes the framework; CPTED principles that use space and human behavior to reinforce a secure environment; technology that enables efficient and effective prevention and response; police/ security staffing that collaborates to support system security; proce- dures and training that enable informed and skilled personnel; and fare and fare enforcement that contribute[] to positive interactions between the system, security personnel, and customers.663 The Assessment recommended that MetroLink have a “secu- rity design criteria resource” that would apply “consistent design principles” to MetroLink’s security.664 The Assessment con- cluded that some of MetroLink’s stations, assets, and activities arguably conveyed an impression of “lack of ownership,” thus communicating a message that could undermine the security of the system.665 The Assessment’s recommendations included upgrading of MetroLink’s technology, such as its CCTV camera network, coverage, and data-storage capability.666 The Assess- ment, which identified staffing as a promising area for the im- provement of security, recommended that training be focused “on the elements important for transit security.”667 XX. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES’ AGREEMENTS AND STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TRAINING Some public transportation authorities provided copies of their police assistance service agreements, intergovernmental agreements (IGA), memoranda of understanding (MOU), poli- cies, and standard operating procedures (SOP) that organize and implement their method of policing, copies of which are included in Appendix A to the digest. A. Agreements and Intergovernmental Agreements for Police Assistance Services MetroLink has a Police Assistance Services Agreement with the City of St. Louis, Missouri, Police Division, for police pro- 661 Metrolink, System-Wide Security Assessment, Recom- mendations (Feb. 15, 2019), Appendix A, Item 1, at 7. 662 Id. 663 Id. at 19. 664 Id. at 7. 665 Id. at 8. 666 Id. at 9. 667 Id. at 14-15.

TCRP LRD 58 45 However, various news outlets have reported that, for a variety of reasons, police forces in some areas have been unable, or even unwilling, to enforce such mandates and orders.647 In February 2021, The Washington Post described some of the difficulties that transportation authorities were having in complying with the fed- eral order requiring masks on trains and buses.648 An earlier ar- ticle, dated July 17, 2020, in The Wall Street J ournal, reported that in some area police forces were not enforcing mask mandates.649 PART VIII – Public Transportation Authorities’ Effective Use of Public Relations, Law Enforcement Organization and Contractual Structures, and Administration of Law Enforcement and Training XVIII. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES’ EFFECTIVE USE OF COMMUNITY POLICING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS As discussed in this section, public transportation authori- ties are striving to make effective use of community policing and public relations to improve their policing. Some public trans- portation authorities provided documents and other informa- tion for the digest that demonstrate the authorities’ emphasis on including their community in law enforcement.650 A U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) article stresses the im- portance of the relationship between the police and the affected communities they serve to achieve more effective policing. The article recommends that law enforcement agencies be transpar- ent and accountable in their policing and that communities acknowledge and discuss the challenges facing them. The DOJ recommends that police forces take “steps to reduce bias and improve cultural competency,” focus on collaboration and visi- bility in the community, and promote “internal diversity and en- sure professional growth opportunities within police forces.”651 As for what is meant by the term community policing, the Bi-State Development Agency (MetroLink) notes that the DOJ’s 647 See Tom Knight, Why law enforcement isn’t enforcing mask man- dates, The Hill (July 30, 2020), https://thehill.com/changing-america/ opinion/509859-why-law-enforcement-isnt-enforcing-mask-mandates (last accessed Jan. 31, 2022). 648 Luz Lazo, Lori Aratani, and Justin George, Transportation agencies wrestle with new federal mask mandate (February 1, 2021), https://www. washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/transportation-mask- mandate/2021/02/01/32aa36d8-64b8-11eb-8c64-9595888caa15_story. html (last accessed Jan. 31, 2022). 649 Jim Carlton, Mandatory Mask Laws Aren’t Enforced as Coronavi- rus Continues to Spread, The Wall Street Journal (July 17, 2020), https://www.wsj.com/articles/mandatory-mask-laws-arent-enforced-as- coronavirus-continues-to-spread-11594978200 (last accessed Jan. 31, 2022). 650 See Appendix A, and Items and attachments thereto that are ref- erenced in this Section XVIII of the digest. 651 U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Community Relations Services, Toolkit for Policing, Why Police-Community Relationships Are Important, https:// www.justice.gov/crs/file/836486/download (last accessed Jan. 31, 2022). Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) describes com- munity policing as “a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving technique[s], to proactively address the im- mediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime.”652 King County Metro defines community policing as a con- cept that requires police officers, transit employees, and cus- tomers to work together in creative ways [to] help solve contemporary transit security problems related to crime, fear of crime, social and physical disorder and transit system decay. The philosophy is predicated on the belief that achieving these goals requires that police departments develop a new relationship with people in the community, allowing them greater voice in setting local priorities, and involving them in efforts to improve the overall quality of life on mass transit. It shifts the focus of police work from handling random calls to solving problems.653 MetroLink advises that community policing especially applies to transit security for which “the primary goal” is to secure “the system through proactive and collaborative ef- forts to change negative behavior on public transportation systems. . . . [C]ommunity policing is proactive and focuses on developing and maintaining relationships between officers and riders to build mutual trust and respect.”654 Community polic- ing has been described as a collaborative partnership between a “law enforcement agency or agencies and the individuals and organizations—including public transit agencies—that they serve, and anyone with a stake in the community. The public should be involved in prioritizing public safety problems.”655 As for the impact of public relations on the success of public transportation authorities’ policing, MetroLink states that “the media can be a powerful conduit [to affect] public perception of law enforcement, security, crime, and fear of crime. The media can assist with publicizing community concerns and available solutions.”656 According to the DOJ, the concept of community policing embraces, for example, the following principles and objectives: • Shifting the focus of police work from responding to individual inci- dents to addressing problems primarily identified by the community and the police. Community stakeholders can employ problem-solv- ing approaches to supplement traditional law enforcement methods. • Citizen and Officer empowerment is paramount. Officers must be permitted to work with the community so that the responsibility of problem solving can be shifted to the community. This process takes time, trust and commitment from all levels of the agency. 652 MetroLink, Technical Memo – Security Training, [here- inafter MetroLink, Security Training], Appendix A, Item 4, at 3 (internal quotation marks omitted). 653 King County Metro, Transit Resource Officer, Standard Operating Procedures (Sept 1, 2017), Appendix A, Item 14, at ¶ 6.1. See also, Appendix A, Item 14 (Appendix 1, Community Meetings). 654 MetroLink, Security Training, supra note 652, Appendix A, Item 4, at 3. 655 Id. at 4. 656 Id.

Next: XX. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES AGREEMENTS AND STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TRAINING »
Policing and Public Transportation Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Compliance with transit-equipment and operations guidelines, FTA financing initiatives, private-sector programs, and labor or environmental standards relating to transit operations are some of the legal issues and problems unique to transit agencies.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Legal Research Digest 58: Policing and Public Transportation provides a comprehensive analysis of constitutional issues and summarizes current laws and practices that apply to policing by public transportation agencies.

Supplemental to the Digest is Appendix A: Agreements, Policies, Reports, and Other Documents Provided by Public Transportation Authorities for the Report.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!