Planning for Emergencies: Immediate Events and Their Aftermath

35 Pages·2005·5.22 MB·English

StateJusti",lnstitute
SJI Court Emergency/Disaster Preparedness Planning Project
PlanningforEmergencies: Immediate Events and Their
Aftermath
A Guideline for Local Courts
November2005
Lawrence Siegel
CarolineS. Cooper
AllisonI. aastings
It
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
WASIoIIWGTOW.OC
Justice Programs Office,SchoolofPublic Affairs
American University
4400 Massachusetts Avenue N.W., BrandywineSuite100
Washington D.C. 20016-8159
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: Justice«Vamerican.edu
Web: www.american.eduljustice
Thisdocument wasdeveloped undergrant number SJI GrantNumberSJl-04-N-003
from the StateJusticeInstitute. 1bepointsofviewexpressedarethoseoftheauthorsanddo not
necessarily representtheofficial position orpoliciesof1beStateJustice Institute.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This Guideline is an outgrowth ofthe observations gleaned from technical assistance visits to 20+
state trial courts located in smaller populated areas in eight states during 2004 and 2005 and conducted
under the auspices ofthe State Justice Institute's (SJI) Court Security/Emergency Preparedness Planning
Project. The goal ofthe Project was to assist trial courts-particularly those in rural areas- in developing
court security and emergency preparedness plans and response capabilities. II was designed
(0
complement 5JI'5 Urban Court Emergency Preparedness Project conducted by the Justice Management
Institute (JM!), which focused on developing court emergency preparedness plans for COLIrts in
metropolitan areas.
The field ofcourt emergency preparedness isevolving constantly, as local officials and industry
experts gain more knowledge ofand experience with the intricacies ofemergency preparedness and
disasterrecovery. Thecritical components selected for inclusion in this Guideline are the product of
many hours ofresearch and review ofdozens ofgovernmental and non-governmental emergency
management resource and policy guides, numerous federal and state court model plans and templates. and
selected state and countycourt manuals, as well as visitsto a numberofcourts involved in variousaspects
ofcourt emergency preparedness planning. Manycourt and other professionals in the field - particularly
those who had experienced emergencies affecting court operations- were also consulted and provided
theirfeedback on critical issues and lessons learned.
We are particularly grateful for the insightful suggestions made by Marcus Reinkensmeyer, Trial
Court Administrator for the Maricopa County, Arizona SuperiorCourt and Vice Chairperson for the
Arizona Supreme Court Committee on Emergency Planning; Gregory Cowan ofthe Florida
Administrative Office ofthe Courts; Jay Martin, Court Security Planning Office for the Adminisrrative
Office ofthe Courts ofGeorgia; Melvia Kawashima, Court Security Planner, Office oflhe Administrati\c
Director-Planningand Program Evaluation Office, theJudiciary ofthe State ofHawaii: and Ralph
Swisherofthe U.S. Department ofHomeland Security. JudgeJohn Parnham and Wayne Peacock. Court
Administrator for the First Judicial Circuit in Escambia County (Pensacola), Florida provided invaluable
first-hand perspective on thetasks and issues confronted by local court officials and practical responses
that need to be devised when a disasteroccurs. Theircomments were corroborated by review of
preliminaryassessment reports from Louisiana and Mississippi following hurricanes Katrina and Rita,
which occurred as this document was being finalized.
Although no two "emergencies"are identical, the common thread that runs through both the
literature and the first-hand accounts is the critical importance ofhaving aplan that can be activated to at
least deal with the issues that can be reasonably anticipated to arise; and on-going communication among
all agencies (court and non-court) involved in making the plan work. We hope that this Guideline will
assist courts in both beginningthe processofdeveloping such plans as well as reviewing those already
developed and updatingthem as may be appropriate.
Caroline S. Cooper, Associate Director
Lawrence Siegel, Senior Fellowand Court Security Consultant;
Allison L. Hastings, Senior Research Associate;
Justice Programs Office, School ofPublic Affairs,
American University, Washington D.C.
Planning for Emergencies: Immediate Events and Their
Aftermath
A Guideline for Local Courts
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I. Introduction
II. Developing ACourt EmergencyPreparedness Plan: Issues and Considerations I
• Whydevelop acourt p/all? 1
• Uthe stateand countyalready have plans.does thecourt need aseparate plan? 2
III. Getting Started 3
• Starting the processofdeveloping- and maintaining-the court's emergency
preparedness plan: Typical Planning Issues 3
»
Who needsto be involved?: The importanceofinteragency relationships 3
»
Schedulingan initial planning meeting(s) 4
»
Preparing for the meeting 4
~ Topics to includeon the meetingagenda 5
IV. Addressing Court-Specific Issues: Planning for the Big Picture 7
• Overviewofcritical components: deterrence,emergencyactions, recovery, and
continuity ofoperations 7
• Critical responseelements: training, decision making authority,
and communication 8
). Determining who has authority toact for thecourt in an emergency 8
• Statutoryand procedural requirements that need to beconsidered 9
}> Dealingwith issues relatingto applicablestatutesoflimitations orothcr time
requirements 9
}> Dealingwith other issues relating tostatutory and procedural requirements
ofthecase process 9
:> Dealingwith evidence being presented in a hearing when an emergency
is declared 9
). Addressingoperational issues 10
• Providing AdequateCourt Security 10
}> Security within the building 10
}> Securingadditional areassurroundingthe courthouse 11
»
Assuring that adequate security is provided for ALLcourt functions and
proceedings- civil as well ascriminal 11
• Preparing for Natural and Other Disasters 11
• Preparing for Public Health Emergencies 12
• Making SureJudges and StaffDevelop Personal/Family Disaster
Preparedness Plans 12
• Developinga COOP(ContinuityofOperations Plan) Plan 13
511 CourtEmergencylDisasterPreparedness PlanningProject. PlanningforEmergencies: Immediote E~'enlSandTheirAjiermath
AGuidelinefor LocalCourts. JusticeProgramsOffice, School ofPublicAffairs. American University. November2005.
PAGE
)0 Locating alternate facilities for conducting court functions 13
}l> Maintainingcommunications capabilities 14
)0 Maintaining records/information capabilities 14
);> Maintainingthecapability to managethe casenow 15
V. Training and RegularDrills 16
}l> Postingeasily readable building evacuation routes 16
}l> Conducting periodicemergencyevacuation drills 16
}l> Regulartestingofalarm systems 16
VI. Resources for Developing Adequate Court Emergency Preparedness Capabilities 17
Appendix A: Technical AssistanceSelf-Assessment PlanningGuide 18
Appendix B: Hypothetical Emergency Scenarios for Discussion/Planning Purposes 23
Appendix C: SupremeCourt ofFlorida: Emergency Court Operations Website 25
Appendix D: Annotated ListofSelected Resources Relatingto Court Emergency Preparedness
and Continuity ofOperations Planning (COOP) 28
S1ICourt EmergencylDisasterPreparednessPlanningProject. PlanningforEmergencies: Immediate EventsandTheirAjiernw/h
AGuidelinefor LocalCourts. lusticeProgramsOffice. SchoolofPublicAffairs,American University. November2005.
"
Katrina, which submerged most ofNew Orleans and
II. INTRODUCTION
much of the Gulf Coast as this repon was being
finalized.
This Guideline is designed for use by courts in roral
and smaller populated areas to highlight issues and While, historically. courts have managed 10
considerations relevant to court emergency and effectively address a variety ofemergenc) Situations,
disaster preparedness planning. The Guideline is which have temporarily affected facility access or
intended to provide a framework for courts to use, the wide range ofpotential sources ofdisruption
develop preparedness plans that can be activated 10 10 nonnal operations that couns no\\ face requires
address both the immediate impact of emergency broad-scale, coordinated planning - both internalh
~f
situations as well as ensure the cOnlinuity of court and with other agencies - 10ensure the continuit)
operations over a protracted period of time. The court operations during the immediate emergenc) as
Guideline should be used in conjunction with other \\ell as itsaftermath.
relevant reference materials addressing specific
issues relating 10 court emergency preparedness and
continuityofoperations. a few examplesofwhich are II. DEVELOPING A COURT I
described inAppendix D.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
PLAN: ISSUES AND
While the challenges entailed in developing a coun I
emergency preparedness plan for rural courts are not CONSIDERATIONS
much different from those large merropolitan courts
confront, rural courts must also address special
WHY DEVELOPA COURT PLAN?
additional issues, These relate to (I) me mulliple
coun and non-court users mat generally occupy the
Does the court really needa PLAN' It alreath' has
courthouse in rural areas, each ofwhom has its own
checklistsforemergencies. aphonetree. andan'
decision-making hierarchy and organizational
alarmsystem Whot moredoes itneed?
relationships; (2) the frequent geographic dispersion
of facilities and resources that are affected; and (3)
Checklists of actions to take when various
the often multiple counties, each with separate
emergencies occur and telephone trees with names
governmental and budgetary structures, with which
and telephone numbers ofpersons to notify when an
thecourt must frequently coordinate,
emergency exists are imponant elements of a court
emergency preparedness plan - but they arc only
A major impetus for initiating this project was the
elements and. in and of themselves, will not ensure
experience of September II, 2001, which brought
that the court is adequately prepared for emergencies.
home the urgent need for prompt, aggressive
What use is a telephone tree if telephone lines are
planning at multiple levels to ensure that the
down? What good is a checklist if the resources
institutions basic to our capacity to function as a
required to respond to the emergency mayor may not
civilized society - especially the courts - are
be available? Ifinstructions have been published on
maintained in the event of a terrorist or other
what to do if a suspicious package is noted, what
catastrophic emergency. As the project's activities
effect will actionstaken pursuanttothose instructions
unfolded during the period of its operation, couns
have ifthose required to act - first responders and
experienced other types of serious emergencies,
others - have not previously been trained to respond
including hurricane Ivan in 2004 that closed several
tothesilUation?
courthouses In Florida for months, disrupted
communication systems, and left many homeless; the
Moreover, most checklists and phone trees are
shooling in the Fulton County courthouse in Atlanta
designed for use during the immediate emergenc)
in March 2005 that resulted inthedeathsofajudge,a
event but have little utility for the potentiall)
court reporter and a sheriffs deputy; and massive
protractedperiod following the immediateemergenc)
floods in September 2005 resulting from hurricane
when court operations may still not have returned to
511 COUI1Emergenc)'lDisasterP~ness PlanningProject.Plannmg/orEmergeoc/ts_ Immediate El'enlSandTheirAftermulh
A GUide/me/orLocalCourts.JustIceProgramsOffice. SchoolofPublicAffairs. American Uni\CfSit). r\o\embcr2005
"normal". The process and resources necessarytore justiceagencies, as appropriate. However,10develop
create communications systems, locate alternate adequate court emergency preparedness plans
facilities, and re-schedule the court's dockets, for including continuity of court operations (COOP)
example, require an interagency effort at multiple components - courts need to develop working
levels. This entails developing collaborations, relationships with non-justice system executive
agreed-upon priorities, detailed planning, and branch agencies as well in order 10 assure their
interagency agreements to ensure that the resources ability to function in asafe and effective mannerover
and infrastructure essential for checklists and both the short- and long-term.
"telephone trees"to beeffecliveare inplace.
IF THE STATE AND COUNTY ALREADY HAVE
One of the first steps in developing a court PLANS, DOES THE COURT NEED A SEPARATE
emergency preparedness plan is, therefore, to
PLAN?
distinguish between developing checklists, phone
trees, or other procedural instructions for responding
In most locales, local emergency preparedness plans
to various emergency situations - a suspicious
have been developed by executive branch agencies in
package, an unruly defendant in the courtroom, a
which the court as afacilitymay- to varyingdegrees
poweroutage, a majorstorm, etc.- andhavingaplan
- already be incorporated. [n most cases, these plans
in place that includes not only procedures but also
address issues involving the courthouse building at
clearlyestablished:
the time of the immediate emergency (e,g., a fire.
flood, hazardous material infiltration, etc.), usually
• interagency relationships andagreements;
related to evacuation. Since most local courts are
• decision-makingauthority;
housed in facilities owned by the county. the
• mechanisms to access and deploy necessary
elements ofcourt emergency preparedness relating to
resources;
the emergency's impact on the coun facilit) are
• communication mechanisms; and,
generallycovered in the county's emergency plan.
• ongoingtrainingand testing.
A critical first step for local couns is, therefore, to
Regulartraining and testingofthe plan is as essential
determine:
as developing the plan itself because, regardless of
the plan's merits, its utility will be greatlydiminished
• what emergency preparedness planning is
ifcourthouse occupants are unfamiliar with it and/or
already underway in the locale:
if the emergency systems relied on are not
• howthese plans affectthe court; and
functioning.
• whatelementsofcourt operations are not
addressed in these plansand therefore need to
The wide range of "disasters" that have affected
bethesubjectofthecourt'sown emergency
courts over the past several years has highlighted the
preparedness planningeffon.
importance of developing court emergency
preparednessplansthat:
The results ofthis inquiry will provide the foundation
for the coun's development of its emergency
• canaddressa wide range ofsituations;
preparedness plan. Of particular importance in this
• can beput into operation instantaneously;
regard arethe following:
• provide effectiveresponsesto emergencies
for boththe immediate momentas well as
• what issues need to be addressed in regard to the
potentially longerperiods; and,
operation of the coun in the event of an
• provide assurance tothecommunitythatcourt
emergency?, and
operations will continue.
• what capabilities and planningdoesthecoun
As the independent third branch of government,
need in orderto ensure its continuity of
courts have traditionally developed plans for various
operationsoncethe immediate emergency is
aspectsofcoun operations in collaboration with other
SJl CounEmergencylDisasterPreparednessPlanningProject. PlanningforEmergencies. Immediate EventsandTheirAftermath
AGuideUneforLocalCourts. Justice ProgramsOffice, SchoolofPublicAffairs,American University.November2005
2
over? also to decision-making, policies, procedures, and
communication mechanisms related to managing the
The emergency preparedness issues courts now face flow of people and their belongings, which move
entail those traditionally part of court emergency through courtsdaily.
planning, suchas:
• recordpreservation;
III. GETTING STARTED
• buildingsecurity and access;
• mail and package deliveryscreening; and,
• potential relocationoffacilities. STARTING THE PROCESS OF" DEVELOPING
AND MAINTAINING THE COURT'S
However, arange ofadditional issues, highlighted by EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLAN: TYPICAL
the enonnity of the impact on the court process of PLANNING ISSUES
both "9/11"and recent natural disasters and their
aftermath, havealsoemerged. These include: One of the most overriding problems confronting
local courts interested in developing court emergency
• availability of alternative communication preparedness plans has been figuring out how to start
systems/mechanisms; theprocess.
• installation ofreplacementtelephonesand phone
lines; };- Who needs 10 be involved?; The importance
• assistingattorneys who may have losttheir ofinteragency relationships
offices in recreatingcase files;
• schedulingand reschedulingcriminal casesthat Three levels of agencies need to be involved in the
often involve "absent" police officers whomay process:
bedetailed to"more pressingassignments";
• dealing with filing andappeal deadlines and • majordepartments involved in the coun's
situationsentailingstatutes oflimitations operations, including: coun administration,
issues; and information technology, indigent defense. the
• managingjuryservice, particularlyin areas in prosecutor,the clerk ofcoun, human resources,
which transportation routes andlorpopulation and payroll;
centers maybedisrupted. • allcourtsandagencies housed in the
courthouse;
Across all the emergency planning issues, acommon • thoseadditional local and state agencies and
need manyjudicial system officials have also noted is organizations whose participation in preparing
the imponance ofclearly articulated communication and executing the court's emergenq
procedures and decision-making authority and preparedness plan is essential.
responsibility - e.g., designations of who makes
decisions in emergencysituations~ including: These include agencies charged with serving as first
responders and providing emergency assistance,
• thedecision thatanemergency has, in fact, including, the sheriff and local police, fire and
developed; emergency services, court security, and emergency
• thatthecounhouse mustbe evacuatedor medical services. Any other agencies involved with
contained, asthesituation maywarrant; and, courthouse maintenance and facility management
• howthe decision toclose- and laterre-open should also be involved. County and/or city
- the facility iscommunicated tootherstaff, government should also be represented, including
to litigantsandattorneys, and (0the public. elected, administrative and public information
officials. Some ofthese agencies may have already
The anthrax scare ofseveral years ago, for example, developed policies and procedures relevant to the
raised a wide range ofissues relating not only to the court's plan or into which the coun's plan will need
handling of mail and packages sent to the court, but tobe integrated.
Sl1CounEmergencylDisasterPreparednessPlanningProject.PlanningforEmergencies.- Immediate E~'enlsandTheirAftermath
AGUidelineforLocalCourts. JusticeProgramsOffice, SchoolofPublicAlTairs. American University. November2005.
)
local courts in the state may have also developed
»
Schedulingan initial planning meeting(s) materials thai could be useful to review and adapt. as
appropriate.
The cadre of agencies/individuals identified above
can provide the nucleus for an initial meeting called o Makingpreliminaryconract withAOCI
by the court to begin developing the court's SupremeCourtstaff
emergency preparedness plan. The invitees to this
meeting can also provide the nucleus for a Court Regardless ofthe extent ofcourt emergency planning
Emergency Preparedness Planning Task Force or that the Supreme Court or AOC has undertaken. it
Committee. Depending on the size ofthe locality, a will be important for any local court embarking on
smaller working committee may be desirable in developing a court emergency preparedness plan 10
addition 10 the full planning committee, and some maintain close coordination with the state Supreme
courts also may want to assign specific tasks to ad CourtlAOC duringthe plan development processand.
hocgroups, as dictated byschedules. particularly, to alert state officials of actions and
resources that need to be addressed at the state level
In most situations, it will be important for the chief (e.g., court orders, statutes. decision-making
judge ofthe court to call the meeting and to extend authority, etc.) in order for the local plan 10 be
the invitation to attend to the heads of the agencies effectuated.
that needtobe involved.
a Researchingexistinglegalauthority
Preparing for the meeting regarding responses to court emergenc),
situations
a Compilingrelevanrmalerials developedbystate
andlocalagencies A review should also be made of existing statutory
and/or rule proVIsions relating to emergenc)
Tosupplementthe materialsthat agencies invited to situations affecting court operations. As noted
the meetingmay provide,an effortshould be made to earlier, any court orders that have been issued to
compile materialsand plans developed bystateand address emergency situations should also be
local govemmentagencies charged with emergency identlfied and compiled.
management responsibilitytodetennine what
elementsofthese plansapply and/orhave relevance a Compilingrelevantpre-eJ:istingCaliri maieriaf~
tothecourt. relatingtoemergencyresponse
As noted earlier, many localities have developed Most courts have developed various instructions,
general emergency preparedness plans of which the checklists and/or procedures for responding 10
court is a part. However, it is not unusual for the specific types ofemergencies - suspicious packages.
courtto be unawareofthese plans and to have hadno fire, weather, etc. These should be compiled and
prior communication about them with the local reviewed in tenns of their currency, adequacy. and
agencies (sheriff and others) involved in their completeness. In addition, the status of their
developmentandcritical totheirexecution. distribution 10 court staff and related training
activities undertaken should also be determined. As
In addition to compiling information on planning in noted earlier, some courts, like many organizations.
the locality, it will also be importantto find out about develop "telephone trees", which assign
planning activities at the state level. In many states, responsibility for contacting staff throughout the
the Supreme Court and/or the State Administrative courthouse and ancillary facilities when an
Office of the Courts (AOC) have developed emergency situation arises. These should also be
guidelines or other materials relating to court reviewed and updated to reflect personnel changes as
emergencies and, in somestates, standingorders have well as changes in contact infonnation. All ofthese
been issued providing authority to the local court to documents, revised and updated as appropriate. will
take requisite actions in emergency situations. Other
SJI CounEmergencylDisasterPreparednessPlanningProject. PlanningforEmergencies: Immediale EventsandTheirAftermalh
AGuidelineforLocalCourts. Justice ProgrnmsOffice, SchoolofPublicAffairs. American University. November2005.
4
become elements of the court emergency • memorandaofagreement;
preparednessplanthat isdeveloped. • risk assessmentreports;
• stafftrainingorprocedural directives, such as
o Compilinghistoricaldataonemergency those relatingto buildingaccess:
situationsandresponses • policies regarding mail and packagedeliveries:
• policies regardingevacuation, as well as
Many courts have experienced some type of checklists, "telephone trees", and standing
emergency situation in the past - fire, flood, instructions regarding communication during
suspiciouspackage, violent flare-up, etc. Information weatherand otheremergencies: and,
on the nature ofeach emergency and the response to • trainingmaterials that have been developed.
it should be compiled. In many instances, there will
be no comprehensive records in one single location o IdentifyingcOllrt-specificissues thaineedto
documenting the nature of the emergency and the be addressed
court's response. In many instances, the process may,
therefore, reqUire interviewing knowledgeable One of the early agenda items for the planning
personnel to supplement the information available. meetings should be to bring to the attention of the
Compiling infonnation on these emergency situations agencies involved some of the issues related to
is important for documentingthe range ofemergency executing county plans, which are particular to
situations the court has faced, how these emergencies courts, includingthe legalities involved, such as:
have been responded to, and, if relevant, lessons
learned. • closingand evacuatingcourthouses;
• closingdown courtrooms with cases in progress:
o Assessingthestateofcourtemergency dealingwith and safeguardingrecords, evidence.
preparedness in thelocalcourt otherdata, and cash; and,
• respondingtothe manyconstraintsofstatutes,
In preparing for the initial planning meeting, it will case law, and courtrules,
be helpful for court officials to identify the strengths
and weaknesses in the court's existing emergency o Developingacommonframeworkfor planning
preparedness plan. In developing this assessment,
court officials may find the "Technical Assistance It may be useful to develop several alternative
Self-Assessment Planning Guide" in Appendix A scenarios to present at the planning meeting to
useful in highlighting majorplanning issues that need provide "hands-on" illustrationsofthe types ofcourt
to becovered. specific issues that need to be addressed in various
emergency situations. Several examples are provided
)0 Topics to includeon the meetingagenda in Appendix B.
Among the topics to be addressed at the initial o Determininggaps that needtobeaddressed
planning meeting(s) include the following:
The materials developed by each of the agencies
o Findingoutwhat's beendonetodale participating in the initial planning meeting should be
reviewed preliminarily in termsof:
The initial planning meeting(s) will provide
opportunities for detennining the natureand extent of • theiradequacy in addressingthe range ofissues
emergency preparedness planning already underway relevant tothe court's emergency
and for assessing which functions other agencies preparedness planning; and,
perfonn that may assist the court in developing its • identified gaps that need to be the initial focus of
emergency preparedness plan. Each invited agency the planningprocess,
should bring 10 the planning meeting whatever
relevant materials it has developed. These may
include:
511Court Emergency/DisasterPreparednessPlanningProject. PlannlngforEmergencies: Immediate EventsandTheirAftermath
AGuidelineforLocalCourts. 1usticeProgramsOffice, SchoolofPublicAffairs, American University.November2005
5
o Developingasystemforregularincidenl more individuals should be designated with
reporting inthefuture responsibility for preparing meeting minutes. sending
meeting notices, compiling committee materials, and
It will also be important to establish a formal related committeetasks.
mechanism for lhe future reporting of all incidents
that present security threats to lhe court and potential o Determiningwhohasdecision-makingau/hom)'
(orreal)emergencysituations. Each incidentreponed forthecourt
should include information on the nature of the
incident, the response and the outcome. Regular As the committee meets and its members begin to
feedback should be provided to judges and staff as state their positions on various aspects of coun
well asotheroccupants ofthe courthousebuilding. emergency preparedness functions, it has been
common for misconceptions on all sides to emerge
Establishing a mechanism for reponing such regarding the responsibility and authority for dealing
incidents is critical to developing the coun's plan. with courthouseemergencies, especially in a building
Such a mechanism will not only help the coun jointly occupied by one or more couns and other
adequately respond to emergency/security situations agencies of state or count) government. These
as lhey arise, but it will also serve to document their misconceptions frequently focus on acritical issue:
nature and frequency. This documentation will help
the coun determine which elements of response • What agencyand which person can actually
prove effective, which do not, and what revisions declare that acounhouse emergencyexists
should bemade for the future. particularly ina building in which multiple
couns,otherjusticeagencies. and e'<ecuti...e
While not all of the agencies represented at the branchandotherofficesare housed?
meeting may be involved in the incident reporting
system, some oflhem - particularlythe sheriff, other Many county governments have assumed that they
law enforcement agencies, and those housed in the have the authority to determine when an emergent)
courthouse - will play an important role in assuring in the counhouse exists because the counhouse is
that the incident reponing system is as owned and maintained by the county. and they
comprehensive aspossible. assume they can delegate their responsibilities as
building owners 10 the local sheriff. Most couns. on
o Developingascheduleoftusb, timeframes, Ihe other hand, have a somewhat differenl view' that
andresponsibilitiesforfurtherwork they alone have legal responsibility for and authorit}
over their proceedings, including Ihe materials and
Several meetings may be required in order for the persons involved in them. In situalions in \\hich
committee to identify: multiple couns and other agencies occupy the
counhouse - a situation common in many small/rural
• all ofthe necessary agencies that needto be counjurisdiclions- addressingthis issueofdecision
involved in the plan preparation process; making authority will entail reaching agreement
• therangeofissuesthatneed to beaddressed; among the counhouse occupanls. Reaching such an
""d, agreement is one of the critical first steps in
• the information(e.g., countyordinances, coun developingacounemergency preparedness plan.
orders, plan documents, etc.) needed for the
Committeetoproceed with its work. The issue of determining who has decision-making
authority to act for the coun is discussed in greater
A schedule for performing these tasks and detail in the following section.
designation of responsibilities for performing them
should be developed at the initial meeting and
modified, as necessary, as subsequent developments
dictate. The chiefjudge or hislher designee should
serve as chairperson of the comminee and one or
SJI CounEmergencylDisasterPreparednessPlanningProject.Planning/orEmergencies: Immediate EvelllSalldTlrelrAftermath.
AGUideline/orLocalCourts. JusticeProgramsOffice, SchoolofPublicAffairs. American Universit}. No...emb~r 2005.
6