BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1643|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1643
Author: Dickinson (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 5/8/12
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Calderon, Harman, Liu, Price,
Steinberg
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 67-3, 3/22/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Police security officers
SOURCE : Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs Association
DIGEST : This bill (1) expands the authority of the
Sacramento County Sheriff and the Chief of Police of the
City of Sacramento to hire sheriffs or police security
officers for the purpose of protecting any properties
owned, operated, or administered by any public agency,
privately owned company, or nonprofit entity contracting
for security services from the City or County of
Sacramento, whose primary business supports national
defense, or whose facility is qualified as a national
critical infrastructure under federal law or by a federal
agency, or that stores or manufactures material that, if
stolen, vandalized, or otherwise compromised, may
compromise national security or pose a danger to residents
within the County of Sacramento; (2) requires that any such
contract must provide for full reimbursement to the City or
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
2
County of Sacramento of the actual costs of providing those
services, as determined by the county auditor or
auditor-controller, or by the city; and (3) provides that,
prior to contracting for these services, the Sacramento
County Board of Supervisors or the governing board of the
City of Sacramento shall discuss the contract and the
requirements of this paragraph at a duly noticed public
hearing.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides for a variety of peace
officer categories and categories of public officers who
are not peace officers but who may exercise some of the
powers of a peace officer. (Penal Code (PEN) Section 830
et seq.)
Existing law creates a category of police or sheriff's
security officer - who is not a peace officer - as follows:
1. A police or sheriff's security officer is a public
officer - employed by the police chief or sheriff -
whose primary duty is the security of locations or
facilities as directed by the sheriff.
2. Duties may include physical security and protection of
facilities owned, operated, or administered by the
county or other entities contracting with the city or
county for police services.
3. A police or sheriff's security officer is not a peace
officer, nor a peace officer for purposes of Government
Code Section 3301 - Public Safety Officers Procedural
Bill of Rights Act.
4. A police or sheriff's security officer may carry a
firearm, baton, and other safety equipment as authorized
by the sheriff while performing authorized duties; he or
she may not exercise peace officer powers of arrest but
may issue citations if authorized by the sheriff.
5. Each police or sheriff's security officer shall complete
a course of training pursuant to existing Commission on
Peace Officer Standards and Training peace officer
training requirements within 90 days of assuming his or
her duties (Section 832 training - 64 hours of basic
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
3
peace officer instruction: 40 hours of classroom
"arrest and tactics" training and 24 hours of firearms
training.)
6. The authority of a police or sheriff's security officer
shall only be conferred while on duty.
7. No additional retirement benefits - safety officer
benefits - shall be conferred on police or sheriff's
security officers.
8. Police or Sheriff's security officers shall not be
required to comply with the Department of Consumer
Affairs training or permitting to carry a club or baton,
if they complete such a course of instruction approved
by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and
Training within 90 days of employment. (PEN Sections
831.4, 12002)
Existing law provides that a public officer or employee,
when authorized by ordinance, may arrest a person without a
warrant whenever the officer or employee has reasonable
cause to believe that the person to be arrested has
committed a misdemeanor in the presence of the officer or
employee that is a violation of a statute or ordinance that
the officer or employee has the duty to enforce. (PEN
Section 836.5(a))
Existing law provides that the board of supervisors of any
county may contract on behalf of the sheriff of that
county, and the legislative body of any city may contract
on behalf of the chief of police of that city, to provide
supplemental law enforcement services to:
1. Private individuals or private entities to preserve
the peace at special events or occurrences that happen
on an occasional basis.
2. Private nonprofit corporations that are recipients of
federal, state, county, or local government low-income
housing funds or grants to preserve the peace on an
ongoing basis.
3. Private entities at critical facilities on an
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
4
occasional or ongoing basis. A "critical facility"
means any building, structure, or complex that in the
event of a disaster, whether natural or manmade, poses
a threat to public safety, including, but not limited
to, airports, oil refineries, and nuclear and
conventional fuel powerplants.
4. Contracts entered into pursuant to this section shall
provide for full reimbursement to the county or city of
the actual costs of providing those services, as
determined by the county auditor or auditor-controller,
or by the city, as the case may be.
5. Such services, except as specified, shall be rendered
by regularly appointed full-time peace officers, as
defined in Section 830.1 of the Penal Code.
6. Peace officer rates of pay shall be governed by a
memorandum of understanding.
7. A contract entered into pursuant to this section
shall encompass only law enforcement duties and not
services authorized to be provided by a private patrol
operator, as defined in Section 7582.1 of the Business
and Professions Code.
8. Contracting for law enforcement services, as
authorized by this section, shall not reduce the normal
and regular ongoing service that the county, agency of
the county, or city otherwise would provide.
9. Prior to contracting for ongoing services, the board
of supervisors or legislative body, as applicable,
shall discuss the contract and the requirements of this
section at a duly noticed public hearing. (Gov. Code
Section 53069.8.)
This bill expands the authority of the Sacramento County
Sheriff and the Chief of Police of the City of Sacramento
to hire sheriff's or police security officers, as described
above, for the purpose of protecting:
Any properties owned, operated, or administered by any
public agency, privately owned company, or nonprofit
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
5
entity contracting for security services from the City or
County of Sacramento,
Whose primary business supports national defense, or
whose facility is qualified as a national critical
infrastructure under federal law or by a federal agency,
Or that stores or manufactures material that, if stolen,
vandalized, or otherwise compromised, may compromise
national security or pose a danger to residents within
the County of Sacramento.
This bill provides that any such contract must provide for
full reimbursement to the City or County of Sacramento of
the actual costs of providing those services, as determined
by the county auditor or auditor-controller, or by the
city.
This bill provides that, prior to contracting for these
services, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors or the
governing board of the City of Sacramento shall discuss the
contract and the requirements of this paragraph at a duly
noticed public hearing.
Prior Legislation
AB 2626 (Jones, 2010), which passed the Senate (33-1) on
August 9, 2010, was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/8/12)
Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs' Association (source)
California State Sheriffs' Association
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Sacramento County Sheriff
Los Angeles County Sheriff
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/8/12)
California Association of Licensed Security Agencies,
Guards and Associates
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
6
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Sacramento County Sheriff Scott
Jones states:
This legislation will allow the Sacramento Sheriffs and
Police Departments to contract to specific private
entities whose primary business supports national defense
or whose facility falls under critical infrastructure or
national security concerns. There is not only value to
our departments in our ability to expand enterprise-based
services, but to the private customer as well, in that
they would have the ability�,] should they choose to
contract with us, to receive the additional expertise,
infrastructure and resources of the entire Department.
Importantly, Sheriff's security and police officers are
supervised by peace officers, and in cases of any
critical emergency they have the back up of sheriff's
deputies or city police officers, sworn supervisors, and
other Departmental resources, including SWAT, air
support, bomb teams, K9, etc.
Presently the Sacramento Sheriff's Department has
contracts using security officers for security at Folsom
Dam, the Sacramento International Airport, all State
Courts and Power Balance Pavilion.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California Association of
Licensed Security Agencies, Guards and Associates states:
We feel that AB 1643 is bad public policy fundamentally
because it places the public sector in competition with
the private sector in an area in which the private sector
is clearly very capable of providing the service
necessary. Additionally, the definition of sites at
which public security officers might be allowed to
compete with the private sector is so overly broad as to
include virtually any site. Finally, it gives the
perception that utilizing the Sheriff's public security
officers brings some greater authority to the facility
protection.
A security officer employed by the Sheriff of Sacramento
County is trained under California Penal Code �section]
832, which is inherently different from the training
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
7
curriculum that private security officers are required to
complete under California Business and Professions Code
�section] 7583.6.
PC 832 does not require fundamental security officer
training such as, weapons of mass destruction, access
control and hazmat awareness, to name a few. In fact,
the Bureau of Security & Investigative Services has
already opined that a private security officer cannot use
PC 832 training in place of the private security training
requirement under BPC 7583.6. ?
The Roles of a security officer protecting a facility are
inherently different from those of a peace officer, or
even a security officer trained under public law
enforcement authority. To place the two in competition
with each other creates perceptions, not always accurate,
that they are the same and that one would have greater
authority in the eyes of the law.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 67-3, 3/22/12
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall,
Bill Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos,
Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson,
Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Beth Gaines, Galgiani, Gatto,
Gordon, Hagman, Halderman, Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez,
Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight,
Lara, Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell, Monning,
Morrell, Nestande, Norby, Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel
P�rez, Portantino, Silva, Smyth, Solorio, Swanson,
Torres, Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A.
P�rez
NOES: Donnelly, Grove, Nielsen
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fletcher, Furutani, Garrick, Gorell,
Hall, Harkey, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Skinner, Valadao
RJG:kc:n 5/9/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
AB 1643
Page
8
CONTINUED