County judges compromise with county officials on court security

The county’s judges are trying to compromise with the Lorain County Commissioners to implement security at Lorain County’s General Division.

Lorain County Common Pleas Court Judge Mark Betleski and Subodh Chandra, legal counsel for the court, filed a stipulated joint protective order Oct. 6 to allow the commissioners, through their legal counsel, to review a single copy of the Ohio Supreme Court’s Physical Security Assessment.

The stipulated order, proposed by Betleski and Chandra, was drafted in hopes that after examining the April security assessment, the commissioners would agree to pay for security at the county Adult Probation Center, formerly the old courthouse, and the Presentence Investigation Unit.

The order was re-proposed by the commissioners to allow county officials to obtain six copies of the assessment.

Under the proposed protective order, the commissioners, their attorney Robert Cahill, and County Administrator Jim Cordes are forbidden from letting anyone else view or make copies of the security assessment, are prohibited from disclosing its contents publicly and are ordered to destroy all copies of the document upon review.

While in use, the assessment is required to be kept under lock and key and any discussion from the commissioners regarding the security assessment must also be carried out in executive session, the order states.

The Ohio Supreme Court demands each court to have a court security plan.

Apart from a new metal detector at the old courthouse, Betleski said the old courthouse and presentence investigation building have no other form of security even though they are visited by hundreds of violators each week.

Currently serving as the county’s administrative judge, Betleski filed an amended order with the courts Oct. 3 requesting that the commissioners appropriate $124,953 for security needs at the two locations from October to December.

Prior to Betleski’s amended order, former Common Pleas Administrative Judge James Burge, indicted on charges of public corruption, and Sheriff Phil Stamitti sent letters to the commissioners requesting $396,000 annually to furnish the court locations with deputies, screening devices, and other security needs.

Despite numerous attempts to institute security at the two buildings, the commissioners have remained hesitant to provide funding, filing their own motions to forego payment of security; claiming that Burge acted outside his authority by ordering them to appropriate the funds, and asserting that Stamitti could use additional money in his general fund to provide security for the court buildings.

Stamitti disputed the commissioners funding claim, stating that there is not enough money in his general fund to supply the buildings with adequate security as per the Supreme Court’s rules.

Furthermore, the commissioners claimed that although they have discussed the security assessment with their counsel, they have not actually seen a copy of it.

Looking to remedy that, Chandra wrote in her affidavit that the joint protective order will satisfy the commissioners’ need to view the security assessment while also addressing county judge’s concerns about leaks of information regarding the assessment conducted by the Supreme Court.