MEET & CONFER MEETINGS – MAY 26, 2010

Purpose of Meetings
As a reminder, these meetings are authorized by Executive Order and are designed to enhance communications between ADC and your organizations. Attendees are encouraged to express thoughts, ideas, concerns and questions in a professional manner. Minutes from this meeting will be posted to the ADC Intranet within the week.

COTA Presentations by QEO and OEO
Policy permits your ability to present information to COTA cadets in accordance with an approved lesson plan about your organization. Each organization is allotted equal time. Your job is to objectively impart information regarding your organization to interested cadets, not criticize the department. Active recruitment of cadets is prohibited at the academy – recruiting is authorized once the cadet graduates and reports to their assigned prison.

BUDGET CRISIS
Performance Pay
The 2.75% performance pay for state employees will cease in June. Alternative options discussed by the Legislature included a Reduction in Force (RIF) and/or a 5% across the board pay cut for all employees.

Furlough Program
Division Director Krause provided information regarding the administration of the furlough program via a PowerPoint presentation which will be available on the Intranet later this week. The program is required by HB2003 and includes all funding sources. Only CO I, CO II and DC Investigator III positions are exempt from the furloughs, while some other classifications will furlough on alternate dates. Management will select the alternate dates to ensure adequate shift coverage. Only the Director may revoke a furlough and it will be rescheduled. All employees will sign an acknowledgement form and are prohibited from performing any work on a furlough day. The power point will be available on the intranet and will be presented at all prisons.

Q - Why are CO’s on a TWA required to take a furlough day?
A – The exemption pertains to job classifications performing duties related to the direct security and custodial care of inmates. Employees are placed on TWA status due to a medical issue which prevents them from performing the full duties of their position. Because they are not fully performing all duties, they no longer qualify for the exemption. Once released to full duty by their physician, they will regain their exempt status.
Q – Why can’t supervisors choose their day off?
A – Management is required to ensure adequate shift coverage. The Wardens are working on plans which are due in two weeks that reflects a collaborative effort to ensure adequate supervisory coverage.
Q – Are employees on Military Leave required to furlough?
A – The DI will be revised. Employees on military leave will participate in the furlough program on the mandatory furlough days.
Q – How were exempted classifications determined and why were cadets (CO I’s) included when the Sergeants who conduct their training will be furloughed?
A - It was a very lengthy process. ADOA did not initially understand that our operation is 24/7. The CO I’s were included due to the need to staff the new 4K beds. The training schedule is strict and furloughing the cadets/closing down the academies would ultimately increase costs.
Q – Will employees on paid industrial leave be furloughed?
A – Payment to employees on industrial leave is also in law and research will be required as to which law applies. Further clarification will be forthcoming.
Proposition 100
The proposition passed and in essence will generate one billion dollars per year for three years. This means the state has avoided one billion dollars in cuts next fiscal year. Had it not passed, ADC would have been faced with an additional 63 million in cuts resulting in unit closures and approximately 1600-1700 layoffs.
Q – If the tax fails to generate the funding as expected, will we face more cuts in the future?
A – ADC worked hard last year to restrict the number of actual RIF’s and unlike some other agencies; employees were notified in advance in accordance with Personnel Rules. Every effort was taken to reassign them if at all possible. The 15 RIF’s were the result of the automation of some functions. The funding for the automation of functions was approved contingent upon the number of positions being reduced.

As for the future, we’ve done an outstanding job of cutting costs and limiting hiring, but we must watch this closely. Requests to fill vacancies will continue to require detailed justifications which will be scrutinized by management.

PRIVATIZATION ISSUES
Concession Agreement
3-10-9-2-0…does anyone know what that means? Yes, it’s the number of prisons identified for privatization throughout various stages of the legislative session. ADC, in good faith, did proceed with the RFI as directed, but ultimately withstood the attempt at privatization.
Arizona is one of the highest consumers of private beds with 22% of our population in private prisons. While ADC has been reasonably successful placing minimum and medium custody inmates in private beds, the Department will continue to oppose privatizing close custody, maximum security and death row inmates.

Health Services RFP
The RFP for the privatization of Health Services is still ongoing. The RFP was opened May 24, 2010 and consists of five areas: Medical and Nursing; Mental Health; Pharmacy; 3rd Party Administration; Dental.
It is a violation of procurement code to discuss the responses. An evaluation team will review the responses and provide the Director with a detailed analysis of their findings. We will then present the findings to the JLBC in an Executive Session, but it is ultimately ADC’s decision to make an award based upon the responsiveness of the proposals and compliance with the legislation. This will probably be a 60 day process.

RFP for 5,000 Private Prison Beds – Minimum and Medium Custody
These beds must be located in Arizona and are limited to minimum and medium security inmates. Vendors may submit quotes in 500 or 1,000 bed increments. The submissions are due on May 28, 2010. The review requirements and Executive Session presentation to the JLBC remain the same. This too, will probably be a 60 day process.

Out-of-State Private Prison Contracts
As the current contracts expire, the inmates are being returned to Arizona. Inmates housed in Colorado returned to Arizona in March. By May 28, 2010 all inmates in the CCA Oklahoma facility have been returned to Arizona. The second contract in Oklahoma will expire in September. Offender Operations and the Classification unit have successfully relocated 20,000 inmates during the last year. Some of this was the result of the realignment making Tucson the Health hub and Lewis the Protective Segregation facility.

4,000 NEW STATE BEDS
Activation
There is no funding for the new beds until July 1, 2010. ADC managed to identify sufficient funding to partially staff the new units pending full activation. The buildings are being manned in an effort to minimize issues resulting from lack of use.
Staffing
We are actively recruiting to fill the new positions. Lateral transfer requests will be honored to the extent possible; however, existing units cannot be stripped of staff and existing positions vacated. We will manage the transfers and refilling of vacant positions.

POLICY COMPLIANCE
Flex Time & Leave Balances
Management maintains the right to approve when time is flexed/used; however, we must adhere to FLSA rules and be consistent in the application of our policies. If issues arise, to the extent possible, try to resolve them at the complex level. This will aid in the timely resolution of complaints as records and information is maintained locally.

LEGISLATIVE AGENDA AND OUTCOMES
Consecutive Sentences
A bill was passed mandating sex offenders serve consecutive sentences before the state seeks civil commitment.
Wireless Devices
Possession of wireless devices is now a class 5 felony and ADC will pursue prosecution of violators, be they inmates, visitors, staff or contractors.
Sexually Violent Predators
The only bill not supported would have allowed the circumstances surrounding previous sentences to be used to determine Sexually Violent Predator status regardless of a plea agreement and the final charge/sentence.
Secondary Employment
The law originated in 1901 and was amended. It’s been updated and as long as the secondary job does not have the appearance of impropriety it will be allowed. Request for secondary employment must be submitted in accordance with policy and approved through the chain-of-command.

ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE POLICY REVISED
As a result of a records request, it was determined that between 5/2008 and 5/2010, 172 employees were placed on administrative leave for various reasons. Approximately half of these cases were related to issues beyond the employee’s control, such as exposure to chicken pox, or road closures due to snow, etc. The remaining cases fell into one of two categories, either pending disposition due to a felony charge(s) or the misconduct was deemed a high risk to security. These two categories totaled thousands of hours during that period, valued at several hundred thousand dollars.
A new DI has been published which limits the use of Administrative Leave. Employees can be reassigned to other units, shifts and schedules while investigations are being completed.

WEEKLY INTEL REPORT
This report tracks 10 -11 major security issues by institution. It is proving to be a valuable tool to track trends and indicators. It will be available on the Intranet once minor input issues are corrected.

REQUESTS FOR COPIES OF INVESTIGATIONS
Public Records Requests
A request for information pursuant to A.R.S. 38-1101, does require that the disciplinary investigative report be provided to an employee within 3 business days after the request is received by the employer. I am aware of two recent requests made pursuant to this particular statute; one employee was dismissed from state service, the other received an 80 hour suspension. The Department received these requests from the State Personnel Board who forwarded the information to the Attorney General's Office who then forwarded the documents to the Department's Employee Relations Unit in accordance with standard protocol. As a result of this circuitous route, the receipt of the request for the copy of the investigation was delayed.
In the future, when requesting information covered under A.R.S. 38-1101, pursuant to D.O. 601.09 the employee must request the investigation from the Inspector General's Office 1831 W. Jefferson, Phoenix 85007 or glauchner@azcorrections.gov. If the request is made by an attorney and not the employee then it will need to be accompanied by a release so that the Department is not violating any privacy concerns to which the employee may be entitled. Upon receipt of the request the investigative report will be reproduced and sent through legal services to the employee and/or his or her attorney. This will ensure requests are received timely and further ensure information is received by the requestor within statutory time frames.

STAFF ROTATION
History
This issue has been evolving for more than a year. A review of a series of significant incidents occurring in May 2009 revealed a pattern of compliance issues and staff complacency. In July 2009 a multidisciplinary team consisting of more than 60 staff from all cross sections of the agency was convened. Their goal was to establish a process to institute a fair and consistent rotation schedule. Their workshops resulted in the modification of

DO 512.
Implementation
Affected employees were advised in writing in November 2009 that “to the extent possible”, shift and RDO’s would not be changed. The implementation was intentionally delayed until after the holidays to limit the impact to employees with scheduled leave/plans.
The first round of rotations consisting of 642 employees was completed during the first quarter of 2010. Of the 642 employees rotated, only 10 did not maintain their shift. A report by complex is available for review on the Intranet.
While employees can’t grieve shifts/RDO’s, the manner in which changes are administered can be grieved. Decisions must not be arbitrary or capricious. Employees should attempt to resolve complaints/issues at the lowest level. A revision of the policy has been issued instructing employees to first attempt to resolve the issue with the Complex Warden.
Florence/Eyman Geographical Stipend
Current Florence/Eyman employees voluntarily rotating within Florence/Eyman will retain the stipend; this is not a reason not to rotate.
Q – If RDO’s do change, what is the process to request changes?
A – The DI addresses this issue. They should submit their request and be placed at the top of the list.
Q – Will previously approved/scheduled annual leave be honored at the new assignment?
A – It should be honored -- manipulation of the process will not be tolerated.
Q – What if an employee currently has a memo requesting a shift or RDO change submitted? Will it be honored at the new unit?
A – There appears to be conflicting information in the applicable DO/DI’s. Clarification will be forthcoming.
Q – Will staff assigned to specialty posts retain their specialty post at the new unit?
A – That is not the intent. If properly managed, rotations will enable staff to work different custody levels, physical plants, shifts and specialty assignments. The end result will be well-rounded experienced employees capable of working in multiple environments.
Q – Will graveyard shift return to 4/10 schedule?
A – No, funding is not available to cover the overtime

HOSPITAL SECURITY COVERAGE
Contracts
ADC is attempting to establish new contracts under the AHCCCS rates with several hospitals. We are working toward establishing secure wards in order to cluster the inmates and maximize efficiency. Additionally, we hope to create a cadre of experienced officers who are familiar with hospital protocols/routines, as this will provide consistency in coverage. Employees must remain professional and are not to argue with hospital staff.
Staff Toilet Usage
Employees should use the public/visitor restrooms.

POLICY CHANGES
Computers are available for staff to review policy changes. We do not have the manpower to relieve officers. A formalized plan is being developed. Your input to the Warden is welcome and will be presented following the Warden’s meeting in June 2010.

EMPLOYEE AWARDS
ADC will conduct an employee awards ceremony at COTA in October. The previous administration’s awards for Life Saving, Meritorious Service, Employee of the Year and CO of the Year were inadequate. Recipients of these awards are encouraged to submit verification/documentation of the award and a proper replacement will be issued.

QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Q – Will uniforms for maintenance staff still be provided?
A – Yes
Q – Can we get additional training for maintenance, electrical safety, lock and key and safety training for refrigerants?
A - We have trained several maintenance staff as locksmiths. We will continue this program as funding permits. I have tasked Shelly Sonberg to work with Training to determine if there are other opportunities for staff.
Q – RUSH is advising recruits to request hardship transfers. Is this acceptable?
A – This information has not been validated. However, as a recruiting strategy, it would not be appropriate to advise a recruit to apply for a hardship transfer upon arriving at their first duty assignment.
Q – Why aren’t existing rosters being utilized?
A - It is not our intent to completely exhaust the list. The promotional lists are assembled in an effort to ensure promotional coverage is available to all institutions statewide. Because there are numerous steps and so many candidates for each of the classifications there is no viable way to wait to open testing until the list is exhausted without ensuring there is always a qualified candidate available when a position opens.
Q - Why can’t Supervisors work 2-3 days on shift?
A - This is just the opposite of most of the complaints that have been received from around the state. We drastically reduced the number of operations supervisor positions last year and most Wardens are running their vacancies in the few remaining ones. This causes shift supervisors to also oversee operations. We may convene a multi-disciplinary team to review posting issues. Forward your suggestions.
Q – Rynning unit is consistently down 8-12 staff due to cross leveling, yet we are still running normal operations. This is a staff safety issue. Why can’t we feed in the cells when this happens?
A – DD Patton will look into this issue, but we can’t operate general population yards like lockdown units. Also, it has been suggested that we evaluate reassigning TWA’s away from the maximum units. This is something that will be considered in the posting analysis.

All ADC Employees:

The following is to provide assistance in the completion of annual
mandatory employee evaluations for the PACE Rating Period of July 1,
2009 through June 30, 2010.

Annual Appraisals

A PACE Evaluation is required for all covered status employees who are
not on original or promotional probation.  (Uncovered employees, Pool
Nurses and/or Clerical Pool employees are exempt and do not require a
PACE.)  Employees who are on Military Leave must be evaluated upon their
return from active duty, if applicable.

For any reason, if the rater is not available to produce an annual
evaluation, the task of evaluating the employee falls on the reviewer to
complete the rating. 

If a PACE Evaluation has been submitted for an employee within 60 days
of June 30, 2010, a 60 day evaluation may be used to complete the rating
period.  A 60 day evaluation consists of a PACE Score Form that has been
recreated duplicating the initial evaluation.  On the top right-hand
corner in red note, “60-day evaluation”, ensuring the dates on the
evaluation score form encompass the 60 day period.  Please note: The
signatures of the employee, rater and reviewer must be original.

Annual training requirements are to be included in the PACE Evaluation
for this annual rating period. 

All evaluations need to be reviewed, approved and signed by the
reviewer (second line supervisor) prior to meeting and discussing the
evaluation with the employee.

PACE Evaluations involved in a PACE Grievance must be resolved and
finalized prior to submission of the PACE document. 

Completing the Score Form and Factor Rating Sheets

Social Security Numbers are not to be used on the PACE Score Form.
Instead, insert the Employee Identification Number (EIN) in the SSN
block.

Prior to submission to your HR Liaison, please review the PACE Score
Form to ensure the employee’s name is legible and is the full legal
name.  No nicknames or abbreviations are to be used. 

For the purposes of an annual rating, check off the “not
applicable” box in the block, “Recommendation Regarding
Probation” located about a third of the way down on the Score Form. 
For “Appraisal Type” check off “Annual” only.   

It is the responsibility of the employee, rater and reviewer, to ensure
the mathematical calculations on all PACE Factor Rating sheets and the
PACE Score Forms are accurate and correctly calculated prior to signing
the documents.  HR Liaisons should not be asked to check the math on any
PACE forms and are not allowed to make any corrections to the scoring on
the individual Performance Dimension Forms or on the PACE Score Sheet.

Due Dates

All supervisors will complete and submit their completed annual PACEs
to their HR Liaisons by COB, Friday, July 23, 2010.  All HR Liaisons
will submit all PACEs to Central Office HR Operations by close of
business on Friday, July 30, 2010.

Please disseminate this information to your staff.  If you have any
questions or need further guidance, please contact Diann Staymates at
(602) 771-2100 x200.

Thank you, 

Charles L. Ryan
Director
Office (602) 542-5225
FAX    (602) 364-0159
cryan@azcorrections.gov

Member Updates

With the slow changeover in medical services, there seems to have been an increase in medical transport needs placed on ADC.  Florence/Eyman, Lewis and Phoenix Complexes have been impacted.  These issues are being worked at several different levels and the following is a Florence Complex update.

Florence Complex Update

Last Tuesday I had my monthly meeting with Mr. McWilliams.

I discussed the issue of Mountain Vista Medical Center (MVMC) Security Officers attempting to pat search DOC officers. Some background on this:

Gabriel brought it up that he had been told by some staff that there were attempts by MVMC Security to pat search DOC officers. He could not give me any definitive examples only rumors. On the ride home last Monday night, I threw the same question out to the van riders and one (from Eyman) complex informed me that this had happened to them. They informed me that when this was attempted to be done to them, they contacted their unit Chief of Security who talked directly to the MVMC Officer and made it perfectly clear to that officer that the DOC officer was NOT to be pat searched (allegedly for a cell phone) and the DOC officer was to be allowed to continue to their post.

Mr. McWilliams expressed the same sentiment at the meeting. MVMC Security Officers CANNOT pat search DOC officers. I am working closely with CPT Kane, the Florence Complex Chief of Operations on MVMC issues.

As for your latest issue, this reared its ugly head again last night when a transport team had NO viable communications of ANY kind while sitting on an inmate at MVMC in their emergency room. There was no cell phone for that team, and the state wide radio's did not work. MVMC personnel refused to relieve the officers so they could use the phone (which is following the MVMC Security Officer directives, MVMC is NOT supposed to relieve law enforcement, it is supposed to be the departments responsibility) nor would they allow them to use a hospital phone.

An information report was written on this situation, and I will be sending an email to CPT Kane to discuss this issue with him as soon as possible.

Monthly Meeting
 
On 3/23/2010 I, along with the two other labor organizations had our monthly meeting with the Florence Complex Warden.

Matters discussed where:

1. Budget issues
2. Rotation issues
3. CO II's deciding who were going on transports or which posts to collapse
4. Level 5 staffing issues

1. One of the other organizations was stating that they were being told that there was a done deal on the table to "use the special interest money people have donated to the state, to pay down the state budget shortfall." There were several questions on this as none of the other people in the room have heard of this even being put on the Special Election Ballot, but the other member was adamant that this was going to occur.

2. The rotation is actually ahead of schedule.

3. CO II's should NOT be deciding who is going on transports, or which posts to collapse. Mr. McWilliams was provided with examples of how this was actually occurring and stated he would look into it.

4. I brought up the fact that out our meet and confer meeting, how Mr. Ryan and Mr. Patton had both adamantly stated that Lockdown units where to be staffed at 100%. Warden McWilliams stated that that had been the policy during the former director's tenure, but that that had changed and Lockdown units do not need to be staffed at 100% due to the inmates being locked down. All three organizations present rebutted that, stating that Mr. Ryan had made that statement at our latest meet and confer. Melissa Wallace, FOP ADC Labor Council Director, will discuss this issue with the Director.

Lee Potteiger
Florence Complex Representative
FOP Lodge 44 for Corrections

New Mesa Police Chief Wants to Focus on Fugitive Problem
04/01/2010

MESA, AZ –Minutes after being sworn in as Mesa's police chief, Frank Milstead said he hoped surrounding agencies would work with his department to haul scores of fugitives to justice.

Speaking to a roomful of city leaders and police officials from throughout the state, Milstead said law enforcement agencies need to work together to apprehend those wanted on felony warrants.

Those wanted from the law "place an incredible risk to those in uniform," Milstead said. "We need to figure out a way to bring those numbers down."

Since 2000, at least seven Arizona police officers and deputies have died in the line of duty at the hands of fugitives with outstanding warrants. Officers have taken point-blank gunfire and have been struck with vehicles driven by desperate fugitives intent on holding on to dwindling minutes of freedom.

"Some of them are bad people," said Sgt. Bryan Soller, president of the Mesa and state chapters of the Fraternal Order of Police. "When you pull someone over and they think they're going back to jail, they make bad choices and people die."

There were about 38,000 outstanding felony warrants in Maricopa County as of January, according to the county Sheriff's Office. That number has dipped since last year, when about 40,000 were outstanding.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio has taken heat from residents and local police agencies who believe deputies should focus on rounding up wanted fugitives rather than participating in immigration sweeps.

"I'm glad (Milstead's) saying he wants to focus on warrants and arrest people in Mesa," the sheriff said after Milstead's swearing-in. "Not all of these are just the sheriff's responsibility. We arrest people with warrants all the time."

During the Sheriff's Office's most recent crime-suppression sweep last week, 400 deputies and sheriff's posse members arrested 111 people on suspicion of various crimes.

Seventy-eight of those arrested were suspected of being in the country illegally, and 57 of those were booked on felony state human-smuggling charges, according to the Sheriff's Office.

The two-day operation also led deputies to 600 pounds of marijuana in Mesa, the sheriff's office said. Ten arrests made during the sweep involved outstanding warrants.

Soller, whose labor organization represents about half of Mesa's officers, said Milstead's plan to meet with other police agencies was a positive decision.

"I think we need to do that," Soller said. "We need to combine our resources. If you do that and get these people off the street, crime goes down."

The Mesa Police Association, which also represents Mesa police officers, has for years argued for the Sheriff's Office to be the lead agency to round up wanted suspects. That would help ensure officer safety, because about one-third of Mesa's officer-involved shootings involved suspects with outstanding warrants, according to MPA figures.

From 2000 to 2008, there were 54 officer-involved shootings in Mesa, according to MPA. In 19 of those incidents the suspects had outstanding felony warrants, and six were wanted on misdemeanor warrants.

Gonzalez, Nathan. "New Mesa Police Chief Wants to Focus on Fugitive Problem". The Arizona Republic. March 26, 2010. http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/2010/03/26/20100326-mesa-fugitive-problem.html

Firefighters, police unions OK cut in pay of 3.2%
Move would save jobs, $16 mil
by Michael Ferraresi - Feb. 11, 2010 12:00 AM The Arizona Republic .
 
The union representing most Phoenix firefighters agreed tentatively Wednesday to a 3.2 percent salary cut, and the city's primary police union said it supported the same deal, to save a combined $16 million annually over two years to spare public-safety jobs.
 
City leaders announced the concessions one day after they estimated that a food tax that goes into effect in April would save as many as 180 sworn public-safety jobs slated to be cut through the city's $140 million proposed budget cuts through fiscal year 2011. If approved, the union concessions would save an additional 110 police and fire jobs.
 
City Manager David Cavazos said any agreements would still have to be ratified by union members but added that if the 3.2 percent wage reduction were adopted by all seven employee-bargaining units, it could save the city a combined $32 million a year.
 
"That is a huge number because if everybody in the city does that, we're going to have a very significant savings over what we currently have," he said. "And we are working very hard with all the other employee groups and the general consensus is that we have a very good feeling everyone will step up."
 
Mark Spencer, president of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association - which represents 2,571 of the city's roughly 3,400 sworn officers - said his board agreed in principle with the salary reductions. A final deal has not yet been worked out with PLEA.
 
The United Phoenix Firefighters Association signed its agreement Wednesday after working for weeks on how to save money with furlough days over the next two years to save most of the six engines and 144 jobs originally slated to be cut.
 
Fire union President Pete Gorraiz said he expected members to ratify the salary cuts.
 
"They've already expressed to me their willingness and desire to make concessions to save engines," Gorraiz said.
 
Spencer and union board members rallied Wednesday with union leaders and neighborhood activists from Citizens For Phoenix to support the city's 2 percent food tax. He said PLEA's agreement marked a step toward refining contract negotiations to make the concessions to prevent officers from being laid off.
 
"It's easy to say you agree with (citizens') philosophies, but it's another thing to see it applied," Spencer said. "We don't know what that will look like until we get a little bit further into negotiations."
 
PLEA agreed to the concessions as it coped with losing more than 130 of its members last month, which union leaders characterized as typical as members shift to the ebb and flow of members trying to penny-pinch in a stagnant economy.
 
As more officers joined the Fraternal Order of Police, the union's rival said it was poised to challenge PLEA for the rights to negotiate the city's police contract in future years.
 
Since 1975, PLEA has served as the official bargaining unit for police. The union negotiated a 7.1 percent salary hike two years ago, allowing officers to start at more than $50,000 for the first time.
 
Spencer said his rival's claims about challenging his union for the rights to negotiate the city's police contract had come up in the past but never materialized.
 
"This is nothing new," said Spencer, who was re-elected last summer as PLEA president after he and the current board ran unopposed.
 
But others said the 130 members who left in January marked a lack of confidence in Spencer and the union's leadership.
 
Lou Manganiello, president of the Phoenix lodge for the Fraternal Order of Police, said his organization signed 85 members last month - mostly disgruntled PLEA members who fled to the rival union after PLEA's biannual drop period. He and other unions like the Phoenix Sergeants and Lieutenants Association believe it reflects younger officers' frustration with union politics or who simply want to pay less for legal representation.
 
"In the past couple of years, we've gone away from this being the bingo hall," said Manganiello, who became a Phoenix police officer 13 years ago.
 
Manganiello said his group would consider pushing a vote of police officers to determine whether the majority of the city's officers would prefer FOP to negotiate their contracts.
 
"If that does happen, we will be totally ready and prepared," he said. "We don't have enough people in place (right now) to have this done properly for the members."
 
PLEA members generally pay about $65 a month for legal services.
 
The FOP offers a similar job-insurance service at $35 a month.

Arizona budget cuts would eliminate more Corrections Corporation of America contracts
Phoenix Business Journal - by Brandon Gee

 
Arizona's $4.6 billion budget deficit through fiscal 2011 is reaching across state lines.
Nashville-based Corrections Corp. of America (NYSE:CXW) announced Thursday that proposed budget cuts by Arizona state government may eliminate contracts totaling $56.5 million in revenue.

The nation’s largest private prison operator houses Arizona inmates at facilities in Colorado and Oklahoma. But budgets proposed by both Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and the Arizona Legislature would phase out the use of out-of-state beds.

If the prisoners are moved, CCA will likely close both a 752-bed prison in Walsenburg, Colo. and a 2,160-bed in Watonga, Okla.

“Although we are disappointed with the proposed budgets’ initiative to eliminate utilization of out-of-state prison capacity, we understand our partner’s fiscal concerns in a very difficult budgetary environment,” Corrections Corp. CEO Damon Hininger said in the news release.

Hininger went on to say that the company hopes to win a contract for the construction and management of 5,000 prison beds in the state. CCA already owns and operates six prisons in Arizona, which primarily house immigrant detainees and prisoners from other states such as California.

Earlier this month, Corrections Corp. announced the loss of a federal contract to house inmates at its 2,304-bed California City Correctional Center to a competitor. The contract would have been worth $553 million over 10 years. That loss was partially offset by the renewal of a contract worth $306.5 million to house a population primarily made up of immigrant detainees in New Mexico.

In December, CCA announced that it would close a Minnesota prison due to declining populations from the states of Minnesota and Washington.

In an interview with the Nashville Business Journal late last year, Hininger said the budget woes of state governments would pose a short-term challenge to the company. However, he said prospects were good for the long-term as issues such as overcrowding and the cost of constructing new prisons would encourage governments to consider private sector partnerships.

Analyst T.C. Robillard of Signal Hill Capital Group in Baltimore, noted that only 8 percent of the nation’s prisons are privately managed.

“There’s clearly a lot of runway in terms of growth,” he said.

At 11 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, Corrections Corp. shares were down $2.26 to $20.39.

Brandon Gee is a reporter for the Nashville Business Journal

State gets $735 million in sale-leaseback deal
7 comments by Mary Jo Pitzl - Jan. 14, 2010 12:31 PM
the Arizona Republic

Arizona's treasury soon will be $735.4 million fatter after the successful sale-leaseback of a slate of state buildings.

The two-day sale concluded Wednesday and drew both institutional and casual investors, the state Department of Administration.

The state sold certificates of participation in the buildings on the public bond market, promising investors a 4.57 percent interest rate over the life of the investments. Most certificates are good for 20 years.
"We'll have the money in state coffers by Jan. 26," said Alan Ecker, a spokesman for the administration department.

The cash infusion, coupled with regular tax collections, should be sufficient to get the state through the June 30 end of the fiscal year, Treasurer Dean Martin has said.

Repayments to the certificate holders will come from the lease payments only and not tap into the state's taxing power, according to the prospectus the state issued on the sale.

The state also retains control of the buildings, which it will continue to occupy and lease back from the investors.

Buildings that are now technically owned by investors include the state hospital, state legislative offices and the governor's office.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/01/14/20100114arizona-sale-leaseback-deal.html

Please welcome Norm Moore to our FOP team at the State Capitol. Our FOP lobbying firm is now called Isaacson and Moore.

House clerk given retirement party
300 honor his 33 years at Capitol

The Arizona Republic .

In an era of term limits, quick turnover and stair-stepping politicians, Norm Moore is an institution.

After serving 30 years in the Arizona House of Representatives, Moore is wrapping up his duties as clerk of the House. For the past 17 years, he has served as chief clerk, overseeing the House's legislative process, tracking bills, logging statistics and dispensing advice.

Another, unofficial, part of his job has been to stock the heavily visited candy counter in the Clerk's Office, a fact that has been noted by many a Capitol regular.

Moore, 54, first arrived at the House in fall 1976, when he was hired as a page. That marked the start of a string of 33 years of serving in the House, interrupted only by three years away for law school. Not as impressive a string as the home-sellout record of his beloved Nebraska Cornhusker football team (47 years), but exceptional in the churning world of the state Capitol.

Last week, his staff borrowed a page from lawmakers' playbooks and tapped lobbyists to help stage a going-away fete for Moore, whose retirement is effective Dec. 31. The event drew close to 300 people, from Gov. Jan Brewer to past and current legislators to staffers who have worked with Moore over three decades.

"You're like an extended family," Moore told the crowd. "You are part of my family."

He recalled the historic events that have marked his tenure: Sandbagging the Capitol against floodwaters, living through the impeachment of Ev Mecham, watching the AzScam political-corruption scandal unfold.

Moore won't go far from the Capitol: He plans to return as early as next month as a lobbyist, working with veteran lobbyist Don Isaacson.

So beloved is Moore, Isaacson said, that he was unable to pry him away from the Capitol in the 1990s.

The chief of staff to then-House Speaker Jane Hull called him off, Isaacson recalled, warning him that if he took Moore, then an assistant clerk, that Isaacson would never be welcome at the House. Isaacson backed down, Moore remained and eventually became chief clerk.

His send-off ceremony was marked by a top 10 list Moore's "real" reasons for leaving the House, and capped off with a goodbye ditty from Secretary of State Ken Bennett and former lawmaker Rusty Bowers, set to the tune of "Bad, Bad, Leroy Brown."

"The one, the only Norman Moore/

Finest man on the whole House floor/

Keeping all the trains on time/

Retiring on the state's last dime!"

New findings from FBI about cop attackers & their weapons

New findings on how offenders train with, carry and deploy the weapons they use to attack police officers have emerged in a just-published, 5-year study by the FBI.  
   
Among other things, the data reveal that most would-be cop killers:  
•           show signs of being armed that officers miss  
•           have more experience using deadly force in "street combat" than their intended victims;  
•           practice with firearms more often and shoot more accurately;  
•           have no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger.
 
"If you hesitate," one told the study's researchers, "you're dead.   You have the instinct or you don't. If you don't, you're in trouble on the street.."

These and other weapons-related findings comprise one chapter in a 180-page research summary called "Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation's Law Enforcement Officers." The study is the third in a series of long investigations into fatal and nonfatal attacks on POs by the FBI team of Dr. Anthony Pinizzotto, clinical forensic psychologist, and Ed Davis, criminal investigative instructor, both with the Bureau's Behavioral Science Unit, and Charles Miller III, coordinator of the LEOs Killed and Assaulted program.

"Violent Encounters" also reports in detail on the personal characteristics of attacked officers and their assaulters, the role of perception in life-threatening confrontations, the myths of memory that can hamper OIS investigations, the suicide-by-cop phenomenon, current training issues, and other matters relevant to officer survival. (Force Science News and our strategic partner PoliceOne.com will be reporting on more findings from this landmark study in future transmissions.)

 
Commenting on the broad-based study, Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, called it "very challenging and insightful--important work that only a handful of gifted and experienced researchers could accomplish."

From a pool of more than 800 incidents, the researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers-drug traffickers) and 50 officers, for in-depth exploration. They visited crime scenes and extensively interviewed surviving officers and attackers alike, most of the latter in prison.

Here are highlights of what they learned about weapon selection, familiarity, transport and use by criminals attempting to murder cops, a small portion of the overall research:

 
Weapon Choice

Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally , usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. What was available "was the overriding factor in weapon choice," the report says. Only 1 offender hand-picked a particular gun  "because he felt it would do the most damage to a human being."

Researcher Davis , in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was "hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws."

Familiarity

  
Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing "most of the time." Gang members especially started young.  Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% "regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year," the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and "street corners in known drug-trafficking areas."

One spoke of being motivated to improve his gun skills by his belief that officers "go to the range two, three times a week [and] practice arms so they can hit anything."

In reality, victim officers in the study averaged just 14 hours of sidearm training and 2.5 qualifications per year. Only 6 of the 50 officers reported practicing regularly with handguns apart from what their department required, and that was mostly in competitive shooting. Overall, the offenders practiced more often than the officers they assaulted, and this "may have helped increase [their] marksmanship skills," the study says.

The offender quoted above about his practice motivation, for example, fired 12 rounds at an officer, striking him 3 times. The officer fired 7 rounds, all misses.

More than 40% of the offenders had been involved in actual shooting confrontations before they feloniously assaulted an officer. Ten of these "street combat veterans," all from "inner-city, drug-trafficking environments," had taken part in 5 or more "criminal firefight experiences" in their lifetime.

One reported that he was 14 when he was first shot on the street, "about 18 before a cop shot me." Another said getting shot was a pivotal experience "because I made up my mind no one was gonna shoot me again."

Again in contrast, only 8 of the 50 LEO victims had participated in a prior shooting; 1 had been involved in 2 previously, another in 3. Seven of the 8 had killed offenders.

Concealment

The offenders said they most often hid guns on their person in the front waistband, with the groin area and the small of the back nearly tied for second place. Some occasionally gave their weapons to another person to carry, "most often a female companion." None regularly used a holster, and about 40% at least sometimes carried a backup weapon.

In motor vehicles, they most often kept their firearm readily available on their person, or, less often, under the seat. In residences, most stashed their weapon under a pillow, on a nightstand, under the mattress--somewhere within immediate reach while in bed.

Almost all carried when on the move and strong majorities did so when socializing, committing crimes or being at home. About one-third brought weapons with them to work. Interestingly, the offenders in this study more commonly admitted having guns under all these circumstances than did offenders interviewed in the researchers' earlier 2 surveys, conducted in the 1980s and '90s.

According to Davis , "Male offenders said time and time again that female officers tend to search them more thoroughly than male officers. In prison, most of the offenders were more afraid to carry contraband or weapons when a female CO was on duty."

On the street, however, both male and female officers too often regard female subjects "as less of a threat, assuming that they not going to have a gun," Davis said. In truth, the researchers concluded that more female offenders are armed today than 20 years ago--"not just female gang associates, but female offenders generally."

Shooting Style

Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study says.

"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained. "They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're not working with no marksmanship. We just putting it in your direction, you know. It doesn’t matter. As long as it's gonna hit you.if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs, whatever. Once I squeeze and you fall, then.if I want to execute you, then I could go from there."

Hit Rate

More often than the officers they attacked, offenders delivered at least some rounds on target in their encounters. Nearly 70% of assailants were successful in that regard with handguns, compared to about 40% of the victim officers, the study found. (Efforts of offenders and officers to get on target were considered successful if any rounds struck, regardless of the number fired.)

Davis speculated that the offenders might have had an advantage because in all but 3 cases they fired first, usually catching the officer by surprise. Indeed, the report points out, "10 of the total victim officers had been wounded [and thus impaired] before they returned gunfire at their attackers."

Missed Cues

Officers would less likely be caught off guard by attackers if they were more observant of indicators of concealed weapons, the study concludes. These particularly include manners of dress, ways of moving and unconscious gestures often related to carrying.

"Officers should look for unnatural protrusions or bulges in the waist, back and crotch areas," the study says, and watch for "shirts that appear rippled or wavy on one side of the body while the fabric on the other side appears smooth." In warm weather, multilayered clothing inappropriate to the temperature may be a giveaway. On cold or rainy days, a subject's jacket hood may not be covering his head because it is being used to conceal a handgun.

Because they eschew holsters, offenders reported frequently touching a concealed gun with hands or arms "to assure themselves that it is still hidden, secure and accessible" and hasn't shifted. Such gestures are especially noticeable "whenever individuals change body positions, such as standing, sitting or exiting a vehicle." If they run, they may need to keep a constant grip on a hidden gun to control it.

Just as cops generally blade their body to make their sidearm less accessible, armed criminals "do the same in encounters with LEOs to ensure concealment and easy access."

An irony, Davis noted, is that officers who are assigned to look for concealed weapons, while working off-duty security at night clubs for instance, are often highly proficient at detecting them. "But then when they go back to the street without that specific assignment, they seem to 'turn off' that skill," and thus are startled--sometimes fatally--when a suspect suddenly produces a weapon and attacks.

Mind-set

Thirty-six of the 50 officers in the study had "experienced hazardous situations where they had the legal authority" to use deadly force "but chose not to shoot." They averaged 4 such prior incidents before the encounters that the researchers investigated. "It appeared clear that none of these officers were willing to use deadly force against an offender if other options were available," the researchers concluded.

The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team "did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don't hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant."

"Offenders typically displayed no moral or ethical restraints in using firearms," the report states. "In fact, the street combat veterans survived by developing a shoot-first mentality.

"Officers never can assume that a criminal is unarmed until they have thoroughly searched the person and the surroundings themselves." Nor, in the interest of personal safety, can officers "let their guards down in any type of law enforcement situation."

New findings from FBI about cop attackers & their weapons

New findings on how offenders train with, carry and deploy the weapons they use to attack police officers have emerged in a just-published, 5-year study by the FBI.  
   
Among other things, the data reveal that most would-be cop killers:  
•           show signs of being armed that officers miss  
•           have more experience using deadly force in "street combat" than their intended victims;  
•           practice with firearms more often and shoot more accurately;  
•           have no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger.
 
"If you hesitate," one told the study's researchers, "you're dead.   You have the instinct or you don't. If you don't, you're in trouble on the street.."

These and other weapons-related findings comprise one chapter in a 180-page research summary called "Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation's Law Enforcement Officers." The study is the third in a series of long investigations into fatal and nonfatal attacks on POs by the FBI team of Dr. Anthony Pinizzotto, clinical forensic psychologist, and Ed Davis, criminal investigative instructor, both with the Bureau's Behavioral Science Unit, and Charles Miller III, coordinator of the LEOs Killed and Assaulted program.

"Violent Encounters" also reports in detail on the personal characteristics of attacked officers and their assaulters, the role of perception in life-threatening confrontations, the myths of memory that can hamper OIS investigations, the suicide-by-cop phenomenon, current training issues, and other matters relevant to officer survival. (Force Science News and our strategic partner PoliceOne.com will be reporting on more findings from this landmark study in future transmissions.)

Commenting on the broad-based study, Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, called it "very challenging and insightful--important work that only a handful of gifted and experienced researchers could accomplish."

From a pool of more than 800 incidents, the researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers-drug traffickers) and 50 officers, for in-depth exploration. They visited crime scenes and extensively interviewed surviving officers and attackers alike, most of the latter in prison.

 
Here are highlights of what they learned about weapon selection, familiarity, transport and use by criminals attempting to murder cops, a small portion of the overall research:

 
Weapon Choice

Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally , usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. What was available "was the overriding factor in weapon choice," the report says. Only 1 offender hand-picked a particular gun  "because he felt it would do the most damage to a human being."

Researcher Davis , in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was "hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws."

Familiarity

  
Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing "most of the time." Gang members especially started young.  Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% "regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year," the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and "street corners in known drug-trafficking areas."

One spoke of being motivated to improve his gun skills by his belief that officers "go to the range two, three times a week [and] practice arms so they can hit anything."

In reality, victim officers in the study averaged just 14 hours of sidearm training and 2.5 qualifications per year. Only 6 of the 50 officers reported practicing regularly with handguns apart from what their department required, and that was mostly in competitive shooting. Overall, the offenders practiced more often than the officers they assaulted, and this "may have helped increase [their] marksmanship skills," the study says.

The offender quoted above about his practice motivation, for example, fired 12 rounds at an officer, striking him 3 times. The officer fired 7 rounds, all misses.

More than 40% of the offenders had been involved in actual shooting confrontations before they feloniously assaulted an officer. Ten of these "street combat veterans," all from "inner-city, drug-trafficking environments," had taken part in 5 or more "criminal firefight experiences" in their lifetime.

One reported that he was 14 when he was first shot on the street, "about 18 before a cop shot me." Another said getting shot was a pivotal experience "because I made up my mind no one was gonna shoot me again."

Again in contrast, only 8 of the 50 LEO victims had participated in a prior shooting; 1 had been involved in 2 previously, another in 3. Seven of the 8 had killed offenders.

Concealment

The offenders said they most often hid guns on their person in the front waistband, with the groin area and the small of the back nearly tied for second place. Some occasionally gave their weapons to another person to carry, "most often a female companion." None regularly used a holster, and about 40% at least sometimes carried a backup weapon.

In motor vehicles, they most often kept their firearm readily available on their person, or, less often, under the seat. In residences, most stashed their weapon under a pillow, on a nightstand, under the mattress--somewhere within immediate reach while in bed.

Almost all carried when on the move and strong majorities did so when socializing, committing crimes or being at home. About one-third brought weapons with them to work. Interestingly, the offenders in this study more commonly admitted having guns under all these circumstances than did offenders interviewed in the researchers' earlier 2 surveys, conducted in the 1980s and '90s.

According to Davis , "Male offenders said time and time again that female officers tend to search them more thoroughly than male officers. In prison, most of the offenders were more afraid to carry contraband or weapons when a female CO was on duty."

On the street, however, both male and female officers too often regard female subjects "as less of a threat, assuming that they not going to have a gun," Davis said. In truth, the researchers concluded that more female offenders are armed today than 20 years ago--"not just female gang associates, but female offenders generally."

Shooting Style

Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street combat veterans, "claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights," the study says.

"They practice getting the gun out and using it," Davis explained. "They shoot for effect." Or as one of the offenders put it: "[W]e're not working with no marksmanship. We just putting it in your direction, you know. It doesn’t matter. As long as it's gonna hit you.if it's up at your head or your chest, down at your legs, whatever. Once I squeeze and you fall, then.if I want to execute you, then I could go from there."

Hit Rate

More often than the officers they attacked, offenders delivered at least some rounds on target in their encounters. Nearly 70% of assailants were successful in that regard with handguns, compared to about 40% of the victim officers, the study found. (Efforts of offenders and officers to get on target were considered successful if any rounds struck, regardless of the number fired.)

Davis speculated that the offenders might have had an advantage because in all but 3 cases they fired first, usually catching the officer by surprise. Indeed, the report points out, "10 of the total victim officers had been wounded [and thus impaired] before they returned gunfire at their attackers."

Missed Cues

Officers would less likely be caught off guard by attackers if they were more observant of indicators of concealed weapons, the study concludes. These particularly include manners of dress, ways of moving and unconscious gestures often related to carrying.

"Officers should look for unnatural protrusions or bulges in the waist, back and crotch areas," the study says, and watch for "shirts that appear rippled or wavy on one side of the body while the fabric on the other side appears smooth." In warm weather, multilayered clothing inappropriate to the temperature may be a giveaway. On cold or rainy days, a subject's jacket hood may not be covering his head because it is being used to conceal a handgun.

Because they eschew holsters, offenders reported frequently touching a concealed gun with hands or arms "to assure themselves that it is still hidden, secure and accessible" and hasn't shifted. Such gestures are especially noticeable "whenever individuals change body positions, such as standing, sitting or exiting a vehicle." If they run, they may need to keep a constant grip on a hidden gun to control it.

Just as cops generally blade their body to make their sidearm less accessible, armed criminals "do the same in encounters with LEOs to ensure concealment and easy access."

An irony, Davis noted, is that officers who are assigned to look for concealed weapons, while working off-duty security at night clubs for instance, are often highly proficient at detecting them. "But then when they go back to the street without that specific assignment, they seem to 'turn off' that skill," and thus are startled--sometimes fatally--when a suspect suddenly produces a weapon and attacks.

Mind-set

Thirty-six of the 50 officers in the study had "experienced hazardous situations where they had the legal authority" to use deadly force "but chose not to shoot." They averaged 4 such prior incidents before the encounters that the researchers investigated. "It appeared clear that none of these officers were willing to use deadly force against an offender if other options were available," the researchers concluded.

The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team "did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don't hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant."

"Offenders typically displayed no moral or ethical restraints in using firearms," the report states. "In fact, the street combat veterans survived by developing a shoot-first mentality.

"Officers never can assume that a criminal is unarmed until they have thoroughly searched the person and the surroundings themselves." Nor, in the interest of personal safety, can officers "let their guards down in any type of law enforcement situation."

New Laws Effective September 30, 2009

A number of new laws were effective September 30, 2009. One of the most significant for police officers is the new law entitled Defensive Display of Firearm. The new statute reads as follows:

SB 1243: justification; defensive display of firearm
• A person may defensively display a firearm when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
• "Defensive display of a firearm" includes:
o Verbally informing another person that the person possesses or has available a firearm.
o Exposing or displaying a firearm in a manner that a reasonable person would understand was meant to protect the person against another's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
o Placing the person's hand on a firearm while the firearm is contained in a pocket, purse or other means of containment or transport.
• A person may not defensively display a firearm if he has provoked another to use or attempt to use unlawful physical force.

POLICY

The Defensive Display of a Firearm is one of the latest changes in Arizona Criminal Law. This new statute permits a victim to defensively display a firearm when a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect themselves against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force. Unlike the justification statutes of old, this new law permits victims to escalate the level of force deployed against a criminal in a variety of ways. For instance, the victim is legally permitted to inform the criminal that he or she has a firearm in their possession. The victim may legally expose or display a firearm in a manner that a reasonable person would recognize as being effected to protect the victim from the illegal force used by the criminal. And the victim may place his /her hand on the firearm when the weapon is in a pocket, purse or other means of containment or transport. Police officers should note that this justification is not available to any criminal who provokes another or attempts to use unlawful physical force. Nor does this statute permit the actual discharge of the firearm should a would be criminal merely use unlawful physical force against a victim. A victim may only legally use deadly force (i.e. point the weapon or discharge the firearm) if the victim is imminently facing serious physical injury or deadly force. As always, please do not hesitate to contact your department's legal advisor for advice regarding this or any other legal questions.

Don’t Give Them a ‘Pass’

A common thread that has been reported almost statewide is supervisors using the threat of ‘601’s’.  A good supervisor has no use for threats, let alone threatening a ‘601’.  An investigation is either needed or not, and should never be used to threaten or intimidate staff.  Those supervisors that utilize threats and intimidation tactics should have such behavior documented and provided up the chain of command in an appropriate manner.  The use of your FOP Representative may be appropriate to keep such documents confidential and ensure they reach the proper management level.

   
A Supervisors Complain Worksheet (loosely called a 601) has a specific need.  If an employee has been documented several times in their PACE to have failed or need improvement in a specific area, then a Supervisor Complaint Worksheet may indeed be appropriate.  Specific incidents within ADC where employees may not have followed Directors Orders or Instruction and local procedures may also call for a Supervisors Complaint or Memorandum of Administrative Investigation.  When a situation or incident is resolved and the outcome was less than management expected, these avenues also provide a basis for review to discover if policy or employees may have affected the outcome.  These investigations do not always result in discipline but sometimes result in corrected Post Orders, polices or corrections/repairs to the physical plant.

 
ADC has a variety of means at their disposal to correct inappropriate employee behavior or work habits; verbal counseling, PACE entries and Necessity to Improve are all common.  Supervisors that ‘yell’, threaten, intimidate or demean employees may be inappropriately placed as supervisors and may need PACE entries, a Necessity to Improve or a Supervisors Complaint Worksheet or Memorandum of Administrative Investigation themselves.

Supervisors and management have a job to do within certain expectations and performance factors.  Inappropriate behavior by any employee is simply that and should be documented.  Don’t give your ‘boss’ a pass just because their your ‘boss’; inappropriate and unprofessional behavior by any employee should be documented and reported.

Networking Since 1915 – It Won’t ‘Fix’ Itself

Now it’s called ‘networking’, but when the FOP started it was simply talking to your fellow Officers.  That’s how it started in 1915 and that is still how it’s done.  We can change the name to networking, but it is really just talking about the same subjects, finding employees with the same interest in those subjects, and working together to influence those subjects.  Since we spend one third of our time at the job in ADC, those subjects invariably are connected with ADC.

  
The basic premise of the FOP, or any union for that matter, is to simply make things better at work, to improve working conditions.  The FOP provides a framework for that networking to influence our working conditions.  That is why the FOP is called a ‘grass roots’ organization; it starts with a single Officer who observes a problem, seeks out others to discuss that common problem and find a solution.

ADC is full of employees that complain of the problems they discover or see every day, but only a few employees provide solutions.  The idea then is to connect the many who observe the problems with the few who have ideas for solutions.  Then the problems with possible solutions must be brought to the management at ADC.  Very often, management has already identified the problem and is working on solutions.  Now we simply need to keep the problem ‘center stage’ until a solution is worked out and implemented.

The FOP ADC Labor Council’s role is simple.  It provides a mechanism to evaluate the problems discovered and ascertain if they are local issues or are experienced at all, or a majority, of the Complexes.  It further provides the employees with a means by which the problems and possible solutions can be kept ‘center stage’ at management levels, both locally and in Central Office.  This provides the employees the opportunity to have a direct impact and influence the decision making process.

This is how it works in the ‘trenches’; employees report problems verbally and in writing to their Unit or Complex representative.  Employees can assist the process by speaking to their fellow shift, getting input from others who have also identified a problem.  The Unit Representative seeks out the input from other shifts to establish if this is a common problem among all shifts at the Unit.  The Complex Representative ascertains if the problem exists at all Units.  Once the parameters of the problem are established and possible solutions provided, the Complex Representative, with the assistance of the Labor Council, takes the issue to the Complex Warden.  If the problem has been reported statewide, then the Labor Council takes the issue to the Directors Office.

Many employees have stated that because of their assignment or personal obligations, they simply cannot make it to a FOP or Labor Council meeting for two hours a month.  Those employees seem to be missing the point of a ‘grass roots’ organization.  The ‘meeting’ is really happening on your shift as you discuss problems and solutions with your fellow members.  The ‘meeting’ continues as you and other members take these issues to the Unit and Complex Representatives who in turn, report it to the Labor Council.

Many employees would find the formal meeting once a month a bit mundane, dealing with the same issues of running a corporation over and over again.  Some people must volunteer their time to put the framework in place and keep it active, but every member does not need to attend every formal meeting if they are doing their part on the job, meeting with fellow members to seek out ways to improve working conditions, to make the job better.

The money you pay to the FOP goes to pay for your own law firm, your lobbyists and P.R. firm.  You must provide the problems and possible solutions for your money to work for you.  ‘Grass roots’ means right there on the job, meeting and working with fellow members, volunteers and elected officials of the FOP and FOP ADC Labor Council for a common end.  For the member in the ‘trenches’ it really doesn’t take any extra time because it all takes place on the job; that’s where the problem exists, is identified, solutions discussed and brought forward.  Even volunteers as Unit and Complex representatives are working on job related issues that should be addressed on the job time.

You’ve all heard the old saying ‘Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?’  Stop complaining and start networking!  It won’t cost you any more money or time to start using the framework that we have provided and be part of the solution.

We know there is a lot to ‘fix’ in ADC, but if we don’t get started, it won’t ‘fix’ itself!

Call First

Every ADC employee should be able to determine whether or not they have been involved in a significant incident at work.  If a Supervisor asks you to write a report, the incident will be reviewed and that means it is significant.  Copies of reports like these should be retained by the employee, along with any documentation, key logs, journals etc., which might be pertinent.

Any time an employee receives a Supervisors Complaint or Notice of Administrative Investigation, they should immediately notify their FOP Representative.  That representative or Labor Services will assist the employee in the preparation of a response, provide insight on the ramifications of the investigation and provide policy expertise.  Employees have three (3) days to respond to a Supervisors Complaint.  Your FOP Representative may also assist you as an observer, or help obtain one if desired, for any AIU Investigation.  At the very least, the employee should tape record any AIU Investigation, and your local FOP Representative and Labor Services will arrange for you to have a recorder.

 
Many investigations result in disciplinary action by the Department.  When employees are served with discipline, they should again advise their FOP representative or Labor Services immediately.  All discipline will become part of your permanent employment record with the State.  PACE entries, a Notice of Necessity to Improve and verbal counseling are not considered discipline.  All discipline should be reviewed by Labor Services for appropriate grievance action.  Even though you may have admitted to any infraction, the severity of the penalties imposed may be grieved if inappropriate.

   
Part of what you pay member dues for is the member services in the work place.  Those services locally include representation in Deputy Warden and Wardens meetings and assistance with PACE and discipline grievances.

Unit Representatives

Question – “Why aren’t there FOP representatives on each shift?”

Of course, that is the ultimate goal.  We had our training in "Basic Representation, Discipline and Grievance" last month, expanding the number of local members providing representation.  We currently have most complexes covered with a Complex Representative and are actively seeking members to step up and be Unit Representatives.  Most Complex Representatives also act as their respective Unit Representative.
 
Any member willing to 'step up' and be a Unit Representative would be provided training at no cost and a support system.  Unit Representatives interface with their respective Deputy Wardens and assist the Complex Representative.  Unit Representatives would be expected to cultivate a working relationship with their Deputy Warden, attend Officer/Deputy Warden meetings as provided by policy, and attempt to 'head off' or correct grievance and discipline issues by working informally with the Deputy Warden before they become formalized.

Unit Representatives would work ‘hand in hand’ with Labor Services and at times the ALC to provide assistance with grievance issues, responding to discipline and providing ‘observers’ to comply with AIU investigations policy.  These representatives would also play an important role in member recruitment.  One of their biggest responsibilities would be to provide a manner in which individual employees could get questions or issues answered by the administration as well as bringing forward issues that impact the staff in general.  Their ‘working relationship’ with the Deputy Wardens provides the means by which both solutions and problems can be advanced through the chain of command.

The advantages of being a Unit Representative are straight forward.  As we have seen in the past, Officers that are Visitation or Canine often seem to have a ‘leg up’ in advancing their careers.  That is simply because they have become more familiar with a more diverse part of the Departments policies and procedures and have become comfortable working with the administration.  Unit Representatives, simply by the nature of their position, would become more familiar with a wider variety of policies and procedures, have worked directly with the administration on solutions, and would have displayed a desire to be integral and beneficial to the Department.

Once members have ‘stepped up’ to the responsibility of representing their units, members to provide input, advice and interface with those Unit Representatives will be needed on each shift, to provide a smooth flow of information, both for problem solving and distributing the success stories of the unions members.  Then, as members promote and retire from positions, a large ‘pool’ of prospective members is in place to ‘move up’ in the representation chain, all the way to the Executive Board of the FOP ADC Labor Council.

Every step of the way, from local representation to participating in collective bargaining agreements, the FOP and ALC will provide training, expertise and leadership at no cost to the participating members.

Members interested in exploring the possibility of being a FOP Unit Representative should contact Labor Services and their local Complex Representative.

Stephen R. Vandegrift,
Labor Services
FOP ADC Labor Council
sectreas44@yahoo.com
602-677-7822

President’s Message

For the last two years, select members of the FOP Lodges for Corrections have been preparing for true collective bargaining.  With the proposal of “The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” by the FOP, and with the backing of the IFF (International Fire Fighters), we knew help would be coming to public safety Officers in the right to work states.

Selected members have participated in grievance and discipline training at both the state and national level.  I’m proud to announce that Lodge 44 for Corrections has finished its own training plan in grievance and discipline specifically designed for ADC.

These select members that have volunteered their time for the membership will continue their training by participating in national level training programs designed specifically for both basic and advanced collective bargaining.  The Corrections Lodges will leave no ‘stone unturned’ to provide the education our membership needs.

These are critical times for line staff and both uniformed and non uniformed staff will need support and guidance to persevere.  Let no one misunderstand, our mission still maintains staff safety and the financial well being of staff and their families as our number one priority.  Just keeping you safe is not enough, you must still be able to go home to your family and ‘make ends meet’.

Those that work for FOP at both the Congress and the State Legislature have our prayers and unyielding support.  Only through their hard work and talents will our agenda for public safety, and in particular Corrections, be fulfilled.

The FOP ADC Labor Council will make every effort to work with Director Ryan and ADC, but everyone must accept that professional Officers must keep their families well being equal to their commitment to corrections.  The choice between family and ADC should never be a choice that an ADC employee must make.

Every possible cut to the budget must be made before cuts to employee wages or benefits are even considered.

One thing that I have learned over the years is that nothing is written in stone.  Nothing is permanent in our profession; policies, laws and budgets change.  FOP will always endeavor to simply tell you the unvarnished truth and we will never promise anything that we can’t guarantee.  Our commitment to honesty and integrity makes us the professionals we are.

Joseph Tremont, President, Lodge 44 for Corrections

FOP Opposes "Card Check" Bill
03/11/2009

Chuck Canterbury, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police, called on Congress to reject the so-called "Employee Free Choice Act," which was introduced today in both the House and the Senate.

"Without Federally supervised private ballot elections democracy would not exist. The United States is the world's model for democratic government," Canterbury said. "If passed into law this bill would set a dangerous precedent for our nation, and send a dangerous message for the rest of the world that the democratic system can be put aside in the service of selfish interests."

The legislation as proposed would replace the current process of secret ballots with a "card check" system that would rob employees of their privacy, power, and voice in deciding who should represent and defend their rights. Under this process, the identity of workers who signed—or refused to sign—union organizing cards would be known to the union organizers as well as to the worker's employer and co-workers, leaving these individuals vulnerable to threats and intimidation from union leaders, management, or both. The most common method for determining whether or not employees want a union to represent them is a private ballot election overseen by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB provides detailed procedures that ensure a fair election, free of fraud, where employees may cast their vote confidentially without pressure or coercion from unions, employers, or fellow employees.

"The only way to guarantee worker protection from coercion and intimidation is through the continued use of a Federally supervised private ballot election so that personal decisions about whether to join a union remain just that—private, "Canterbury stated.  "There is no justification that exists which allows for the erosion of our nation's democratic principles."

Un American!

Nancy Pelosi was elected to Congress by a private ballot election, and then became Speaker of the House by a private ballot election.  President Elect Obama won election by private ballot.  One would think that they support the private ballot process.  So why do they support the ‘Employee Free Choice Act’ which, for all intensive purposes, will do away with the private ballot election process for determining employees union representation?

The AFL-CIO, of which the CWA is a part, as well as other major unions, donated millions and millions of dollars to PACS of all kinds exclusively and directly involved with electing Democrats to elected positions, especially those that would be influential in setting national policy.  This legislation would benefit union expansion at the expense of employee’s true free choice.  

Putting all business considerations aside, well known author and TV personality Ben Stein called the act ‘distastefully un-American’ to which well known CEO and author Jack Welch agreed – ‘to do away with private ballot elections is un-American’.  [Neil Cavuto, Fox News, Jan. 10, ’09]

This nation was founded with the principle of private ballot elections to which every elected official has embraced.  The FOP does not support this deceptively named ‘Employee Free Choice Act’ and should it be brought before Congress, we will post the national Congressional switchboard number so that you may voice your opinion.  Doing away with the private ballot process for unionization is un-American.

Know who to call!

No, not ghost busters.  When you feel like you are about to get ‘jammed up’ by the Department, it’s important to know what to do and who to call. There are serious structural differences between the CWA Local 7077 AZCOPS and your FOP.  With the CWA, if you feel you may need help, you must start with your local AZCOPS representative.  To even get an attorney, their policy states you must get authorization through your AZCOPS representative.  Many of the employees in Labor Relations, where grievances are tracked, are AZCOPS.

The FOP gives its members multiple choices to meet their needs.  You may contact your local representative and deal directly with that person.  You may call Labor Services and utilize the services of retired ADC employees.  You may call the ADC Labor Council members for assistance, even the Director of the ADC Labor Council if you like.  Perhaps your issue is sensitive, and in that case you may contact your attorneys directly.  They are your attorneys and you have their card just for such services. The only thing to keep in mind is that ADC internal policy remedies must first be attempted before legal action is possible.  FOP members may utilize any or all of the services for their ADC matters to maximize the outcome in their favor.  Often members utilize the local representative in conjunction with Labor Services and the ADC Labor Council for grievances and discipline.

The FOP and the ADC Labor Council was structured this way so that members who may experience EEO complaints, discrimination, sexual harassment, etc., have the option to speak to someone that is not assigned at their unit or complex.  The structure further ensures that when dealing with supervisory matters, someone outside your unit and chain of command is available to assist you.  Certainly it is difficult to call the administrations Labor Relations when it is the administration you are having a problem with.