Chief justice wants more court security King rebuff spurs Saufley to lobby legislators

AUGUSTA – Maine Supreme Judicial Court Chief Justice Leigh Saufley asked for $700,000 in additional funds to upgrade security at courts across the state, but Gov. Angus King did not include her request in his supplemental state budget released this month.

So Saufley said she is bypassing the administration and asking the state Legislature for the money herself.

“I am very concerned about security in our courts and I disagree with the governor’s decision,” she said.

She said every day, judges, jurors, lawyers and members of the public are at risk in some of the state’s courts because of the lack of security screening equipment and personnel. She said the request was first made a year ago as part of the current state budget, but was not funded.

“I think we all learned on September 11th that we need to pay attention to security issues,” she said. “I am very concerned about this and I am determined to convince the Legislature we have a serious problem.”

Every day at the 15 courts in Maine that have metal detectors, court security personnel observe several individuals walk into the courthouse and turn around to walk out when they see the detectors, said state court administrator Ted Glessner.

“We call them turnarounds,” he said. “They see the detector, they turn around and they return a few minutes later, having left something they did not want us to detect in their car.”

Glessner said that every day many Mainers are stopped by the metal detector from carrying a pocketknife or other weapon into the courts. He shudders to think what is being taken into the 35 courts that have no detectors.

“This is a rural state and a lot of people carry a pocketknife and never think about it,” he said. “But in a courtroom, people can get very emotional and that pocketknife can become a dangerous weapon.”

Saufley said the King administration has assured her that capital funds for metal detectors for all the courts will be included in a homeland security bond issue that is being developed. The additional detectors will cost an estimated $84,000. The court system also wants $100,000 for four X-ray machines at the four largest courts.

“But we also need people to man these things,” Saufley said. “That is why we want the appropriation so we can contract for a security service to operate them.”

King’s spokesman, Tony Sprague, said the governor could not recommend funding all of the requests made by all of state government, given the revenue shortfall of nearly $248 million dollars. He said King did not recommend reducing any of the additional funding for court security that was approved last year.

“There will be a homeland security bond proposed and the governor believes that will address some of the chief justice’s concerns,” he said.

Appropriations Committee co-chair Sen. Jill Goldthwait, an independent lawmaker from Bar Harbor, said the courts will join the list of state agencies that believe they should get additional funds. She said it is not just the courts that have additional security needs.

“I expect we may have to have a separate package to deal with this new issue of homeland security,” she said. “But don’t ask me where we will get additional funds. This is going to be a very difficult process.”

Goldthwait said the bond proposal has not been completed, but can only deal with capital items. She said that after attending a meeting in Washington earlier this month, she is not optimistic the federal government will provide much help.

Sen. Peter Mills, R-Cornville, is a lawyer and a member of the committee. He said courthouse security varies widely across the state and Saufley is correct that more needs to be done.

“But it is a balancing act,” he said. “We can’t do everything we should in this area any more than we can in any other area of the budget.”

Rep. Charles LaVerdiere, D-Wilton, a lawyer and co-chair of the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee, said lawmakers provided additional court security funds last year and there have been many improvements made with the construction of several new District Court buildings. He said he is willing to consider a request, but he wants some specific reasons why certain courts may need a higher level of security than others.

“There is a point at which we can go to an extreme with regard to security,” he said. “We need to find that balance.”

Glessner said even with the budget and bonding request, every court will not have a high level of security every day. He said the courts already have taken steps to assign high-risk trials to courts that have detectors and more security staff.

Saufley said her proposal would have equipment and staff moved to different courts on different days depending on the security needed that particular day. For example, she said, when judges are dealing with protection-from-abuse orders, screening those people entering the court for weapons would be prudent.

“People deserve to feel safe when they are in a courtroom,” she said. “I am a judge, and I can tell you there are times when I don’t feel safe.”