Waupaca County Circuit Court security
By Trey Foerster
Two candidates are vying for the position of Waupaca County Sheriff in the Tuesday, Aug. 9, primary election. The winner of that contest will most likely win the position in the Nov. 8 election.
You can read the first part of this series on the candidate debate here. You can read the second part of this series on the Waupaca County Sheriff’s Department here. You can read the third part of this series on relationship with the District Attorney’s Office here. Questions were submitted to Waupaca County District Attorney Veronica Isherwood, but HeadspringIS.com has not received a response to date.
Courthouse Security: A recent history
Effective June 1995, Supreme Court Rule 70.38 and 70.39 established standards for circuit court security, facilities, and staffing in Wisconsin.
The rules required each county to establish a security and facilities committee, which is to report twice per year on the progress of implementing standards.
Persons serving on said committee must be comprised of: “one circuit court judge, the county board chair, the county executive, the clerk of circuit court, the family court commissioner, the district attorney, the sheriff, a lawyer from the county bar association, a representative of a victim-witness support organizations and a representative of the criminal defense bar.”
In March 2010, the Planning and Policy Advisory Committee of the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued its “State of Security” in Wisconsin Circuit Courts Report. Sixty-six counties of 72 responded to the survey. A total of 59 of the 66 (89%) counties responding had an active security and facilities committee.
SCR 70.39 specifies that such committee meet quarterly. At that time 10% met more frequently than quarterly, 57% met quarterly, and 33% met less frequently than quarterly.
Courthouse screening
According to the report, 21% of facilities have screening at the building entrance(s). Of those that do, persons who conduct the screening are law enforcement (53%), retired law enforcement (22%), county employee (19%), private contractor (16%), other (16%). A total of 19 percent of courthouses did not screen or only screened on an as needed basis.
What is the practice of screener if a person has a prohibited item at screening? Involve law enforcement if item is illegal (88%), allow individual to remove from building (84%), allow individual to dispose of item on site (53%), permit person to check and retrieve item (31%), other (28%). The report also found that 88% of facilities do not screen mail deliveries and/or packages.
Some courthouses permit various persons to pass security screening: media (10%), service personnel (11%), other elected officials (15%), public defender (20%), off-duty law enforcement (20%), other attorneys (22%), prosecutors (35%), facility personnel 38%), building employees (41%), commissioners (43%), judges (48%), on-duty law enforcement (54%), other (65%).
As far as a policy for distribution and collection of key cards, 92 percent of court had one. In addition, 95 percent had after-hours access to the building for designated personnel.
As far as firearms in a court facility, only 3% had no restrictions. Other courts limited firearms to court security officers (65%), law enforcement (95%), and off-duty law enforcement (37%).
Courtroom security
According to the report, these individuals provide security in the courtroom: sworn officer (57%), retired officers (11%), no security (9%), security on an “as needed” basis (9%), combination of sworn and retired officers (9%).
Court security officers provided for court case type were: all case types (45%), domestic violence and other injunction courts (73%), felony (72%), misdemeanor (69%), family (61%), civil (54%).
Courthouse security in other areas
District Attorney present in 79% of facilities with 69% having duress alarms.
Child Support present in 69% of facilities with 53% having duress alarms.
Probation and Parole present in 19% of facilities and 10% having duress alarms.
Victim-Witness area is another concern. A total of 60 of facilities had victim-witness areas separate from the district attorney’s office, 54% of those separate areas have restricted access, 45% of the separate rooms are secured when not in use.
As for the Jury Deliberation Room, 75% of such rooms are connected to the courtroom through a secured corridor, 55% of rooms are not searched prior to use, 49% of rooms are not secured when not in use.
For Prisoner Movement, 61% of facilities have secure holding areas in the courthouse, only 46% have direct access to courtrooms, 68% do not have a secure holding area for disruptive litigants to observe court.
For Parking, 62% of parking areas are unsecured; 55% do not have designated parking for staff, jurors, or witnesses; 15% have controlled access to secured areas or camera.
Sheriff candidate views on Circuit Court security
Cameron Durrant
What are your perceptions about courthouse security? What specifically would you improve on and what actions are needed by the Waupaca County Board of Supervisors?
There is little or no courthouse security. Former Sheriff Hardel tried to get a full-time security detail for the Courthouse. It did not pass the county board budget the year that he tried. Sheriff Hardel did continue to use part-time officers to check individuals at the main entry doors of the courthouse. Sheriff Hardel scheduled security at different times throughout the year. He wanted to protect everyone in the courthouse.
Sheriff Wilz has not provided security to the entire courthouse without it being requested. Sheriff Wilz budgeted $3000 for courthouse security for the 2021 and 2022 annual budget.
I would bring back what Sheriff Hardel had started. I would rotate days and times to have security detail protecting everyone in the courthouse. I will request through the county board to get a permanent courthouse security team.
Do you feel our county judges have adequate security while on the bench and in the community? What specifically would you improve on and what actions are needed by the Waupaca County Board of Supervisors?
The judges do not have adequate security while in the courthouse. The only time a courtroom has security is if they request it or an officer is in the courtroom to testify or monitor an inmate. Courtrooms have high emotions running through them with divorces, restraining orders, and criminal sentencing. Anyone can enter the courthouse without being checked. It can be an extremely dangerous place.
I would push to have a permanent courthouse security team. I would like to have two full-time deputies and a couple part-time deputies. I would lock down all entry doors to the courthouse. This would only allow individuals to enter through the main entry doors. Everyone will be checked for weapons at the time of entry. A deputy would be roaming all the floors of the courthouse.
Both you and Wilz indicated a frustration with the court system with regards to OWI convictions and the wearing of ankle bracelets even up to the 6th and 7th offenses. Both you and Wilz indicated the county is enriched by use of ankle bracelets. Can you explain that, how much money did the county make in 2021 due to ankle bracelets in lieu of incarceration in the jail? How many OWI convictions do you believe deserve incarceration instead of ankle bracelet use?
The Waupaca County Courts do not delegate inmates to GPS ankle bracelet monitoring. The sheriff makes that decision. The sheriff wants inmates to have Huber privileges granted to them at time of sentencing. If the inmate can afford the fees for the GPS monitoring they can pay to sit at home instead of jail. The sheriff’s office budgeted $126,414 of revenue for GPS monitoring. The Sheriff’s Office actually brought in $87,600 in 2021. The Sheriff’s Office budgeted $120,000 in revenue for 2022.
What do you perceive as the strengths/weaknesses of the county’s drug court? What improvement do you feel are necessary?
Strengths of drug court is that it gives the defendant an alternative to automatically going to jail or prison. Drug court works as rehabilitation rather than punishment. Drug court understands the issues of addiction and tries to help individuals break the addiction. One main issue that drug court often has problems with is there is no option for housing for female participants in Waupaca County. They have to either pay for housing or find family that will accept them.
Waupaca County Sheriff’s Office has not had a representative on drug court for more than three months. Detective Captain Thobaben resigned from drug court in March. The sheriff’s office is only one of three departments that have dedicated officers that work drug investigations primarily in Waupaca County. By not having a representative on drug court hinders the program’s ability to know important information to best help the defendants.
As sheriff, I would have a Detective Sergeant that oversees the drug unit participating on Waupaca County Drug Court. The Detective Sergeant works close enough with the Drug Detectives to know the information needed to help the program.
Timothy Wilz
Incumbent Sheriff Timothy Wilz declined to answer the questions.
“I will have to respectfully decline to answer your 35 questions. My operation of the Sheriff’s Office and my campaign are consuming my time. No disrespect to you or your paper,” he noted in an email.
The questions were as follows:
What are your perceptions about courthouse security? What specifically would you improve on and what actions are needed by the Waupaca County Board of Supervisors?
Do you feel our county judges have adequate security while on the bench and in the community? What specifically would you improve on and what actions are needed by the Waupaca County Board of Supervisors?
Both you and Durrant indicated a frustration with the court system with regards to OWI convictions and the wearing of ankle bracelets even up to the 6th and 7th offenses. Both you and Durrant indicated the county is enriched by use of ankle bracelets. Can you explain that, how much money did the county make in 2021 due to ankle bracelets in lieu of incarceration in the jail? How many OWI convictions do you believe deserve incarceration instead of ankle bracelet use?
What do you perceive as the strengths/weaknesses of the county’s drug court? What improvement do you feel are necessary?
Judge Clussman Court Security response
The Hon. Vicki L. Clussman of Circuit Court Branch II answered inquiries as to the safety of Waupaca County courts and the strengths and weaknesses of the county drug court.
What are your perceptions about courthouse security? What specifically would you improve on?
We don’t have any formal courthouse security except for injunction hearings. When any of the judges perceive that a hearing might be problematic, we call the Sheriff’s department to ask for security in the courtroom. They have always provided security upon request. I believe we could improve on security in the courthouse and/or courtrooms. Many courthouses have metal detectors located at the entrance of the courthouse. Some have designated security officers assigned to the courtrooms.
Do you feel our county judges have adequate security while in the community? What specifically would you improve on?
There is no security provided to judges in the community. We are fortunate to live and work in a fairly safe county. I would expect that if a situation arose where extra security was needed, law enforcement would provide us with services.
Both sheriff candidates indicated a frustration with the court system with regards to OWI convictions and the wearing of ankle bracelets even up to 6th and 7th offenses. How are those decisions made?
This question is confusing because it’s the decision of the sheriff’s department and/or jail (which is run by the sheriff’s department) whether an individual is released on an electronic monitor. The courts don’t make that decision. If the sheriff’s department is frustrated about individuals being released on an ankle bracelet, they’re frustrated with their own decisions, and can choose to change them.
What do you perceive as the strengths/weaknesses of the county’s drug court? What improvements do you feel are necessary?
We started the county drug court program in November of 2017. It takes at least 14 months to complete the program and may take much longer than this. We currently have 11 active participants in the program and have had as many as 18. Since beginning the program, we have had 25 graduates, and 21 of those individuals have had no additional charges. When we are successful, we prevent overdoses and deaths, families are reunited, drivers are licensed and insured, participants are employed and independent members of the community, and we stop the revolving door of addiction and criminal activity related to addiction. We have provided our participants with thousands of hours of treatment services and thousands of random observed drug tests. Additionally, we have saved our community over $500,000 for graduates and current participants vs. incarceration. This does not include the costs saving for things such as court and legal time, hospital costs, victim costs, CPS services, etc. The NADCP (National Association of Drug Court Professionals) says $26 is saved for every dollar spent in evidenced based drug court services. However, we have faced community-based challenges such as lack of treatment services, transportation issues, safe and sober housing, employment opportunities for people with felony records trying to turn things around. Like many chronic, non-curable disorders, people with substance use disorders can have relapses. Hopefully, during their time in the program they learn what to do and how to find a way back into recovery before things spiral out of control.
Judge Raymond Huber interview
The Hon. Raymond S. Huber of Waupaca County Circuit Court Branch III was interviewed on Monday, July 11, about courthouse security. He is a member of the Courthouse Security Team.
According to Huber, the team had met quarterly prior to the COVID outbreaks and since there have been no “successful” meetings.
The team is required to report security breaches to the director of State Courts on a quarterly basis. Huber indicated that there are under five incidences per quarter.
According to Huber, there is a statute provision that the sheriff must be available in court for security purposes. There are no fulltime bailiffs for jury trials to keep things in check in Waupaca County.
Years ago, the county purchased magnetometers and visitors and employees had to get processed through them. That last about 9-12 months, according to Huber, but was stopped by the county because of the cost of staffing.
The director of State Courts has a goal to have security at all main entrances to courthouses.
Huber indicated that the standard operating procedure now is that the judge can request entrance screening or for an individual courtroom for high profile cases. This procedure takes several officers at the screening site. He indicated this happens about “half a dozen” times a year.
Lawyers can also contact a judge and request security for cases in the courtroom.
There is a presence of law enforcement officers for domestic abuse screening and for those individuals in custody of law enforcement.
“The vast majority of proceedings do not have security in the courtroom,” Judge Huber said.
Each courtroom is equipped with emergency or panic buttons accessible to the judge and the clerk for law enforcement response. He indicated a 3–5-minute response time for law enforcement to get into the courtroom.
There is also security training which has happened over the past couple of years, the latest being on July 12 for active shooter and hostage situations.
Huber indicated that Waupaca County Circuit Courts are a whole lot more secure that other courts in rural areas of Wisconsin: Staff are behind locked doors and people can’t get into those areas, prisoners are transported through secure hallways, and there are main entrance security features and cameras. “We’re far from perfect,” he said while adding that Waupaca County is better than some other counties as well.
“We’re blessed to have a good county,” Judge Raymond Huber added.