BOMA seminar explores security trends.

With the passage of the New York State Security Guard Act requiring licensing of security guards, corporate private security forces now number 2.5 times that of uniformed police, and private security costs mounting dramatically every year, The Building Owners' and Managers' Association of Greater New York, Inc. (BOMA/NY) turned the spotlight of its "Security Blanket" seminar onto the latest issues in crime prevention and security, exploring the cost/benefits of the new act, related trends and what deterrents work.

Serving as speakers were Milton (Mickey) Schwartz, Chief Operating Officer of Triumph Security Corporation (an affiliate of Park Tower Group) and a former Assistant Chief of Police of New York City/Commanding Officers Patrol Borough Manhattan South and Brooklyn South; Gene Samburg, President and Founder of Kastle Systems, Inc., and Al Palumbo, retired Coordinator of Operation Interlock/Interwatch and Crime Prevention Specialist for New York City Police Department, and now Vice President of Electronic Systems Associates, a subsidiary of the engineering firm of Syska & Henessey. Jeffrey Meaney, vice president of The Durst Organization, served as moderator and facilitator.

Today's emphasis on quality-of-life issues demands more security manpower and the police are overwhelmed, began Mickey Schwartz. Further, the private security equation has changed. Once the province of the "inside" of a building, private security now has a street presence, particularly in the BID's. Government can't afford to fund more municipal manpower, and so the task has fallen to private security. "With this trend, it's time to regulate," remarked Schwartz.

A major proponent of the New York State Security Guard Act, which was in effect since January 1, 1994 with staggered dates into 1995 for filing for employees, Schwartz strongly believes the pluses outweigh the minuses - despite the fact that the law does impose "nuisance paperwork" on landlords.

Fingerprinting, Firearms Training and Photo ID's

The law is necessary, he said, because all too often, security guards are given a uniform and told to do a job with no license, no training, no background investigation maybe only fingerprinting in the state in which they are hired. "They could be clean in New York, but an axe murderer in Connecticut. This is no way to protect your investment."

The law requires that employers provide the following:

* 8 hours of pre-assignment training per guard and 16 hours of on-the-job training during the guard's first 90 working days;

* Specialized training for armed guards, including a 47-hour firearms course and 8 additional hours of on-the-job training per guard;

* An annual 8-hour refresher course for every guard - including those currently employed;

In addition, the law requires that all guards must fingerprinted in the state and cross-checked with the FBI, as well as registered with a photo ID card.

The photo ID card costs the employer an initial $36 fee, plus $25 for renewal every two years. Further, the employer must supply recent photographs, fingerprints and certifications that pre-assignment training was completed and due diligence exercised in verifying the application.

Employers must provide comprehensive liability insurance and further, they must notify the Secretary of State within 15 days if any guard is hired, resigns, retires or is terminated. Schwartz warned that it is a misdemeanor if a guard is hired without proper procedure.

An Overdue Necessity

"Thirty-eight states before us have enacted and now follow much more stringent laws - yet New York is a major user of private security. With 100,000 private security officers in the slate, the rising crime rate and lack of controls, this law is a long overdue necessity," continued Schwartz. "Look at it from this perspective - as a conscientious owner and manager, you wouldn't have a refrigeration or fire safety officer on your staff that was improperly trained, even if it cost a few dollars more!"

The law also paves the way for creating security professionals and the opportunity for a security career, which ultimately results in better quality personnel and better service to the building, Schwartz said. Citing the possibility of reduced insurance premiums resulting from the more stringent controls now in place, Schwartz also volunteered to spearhead a group of individuals interested in working on this issue. Added Mr. Meaney, "Security is a lot like insurance - when you don't have it, and need it, you wish you did."

"If you don't have good security, you'll lose your tenants," Schwartz concluded. Questions from the audience of 100-plus sparked a lively debate on how the law affected employees performing security duties while serving as porters and cleaners, therefore holding union membership in 32BJ. While it was agreed the law held precedence, it was also recommended that employers carefully define job descriptions as to the amount of time spent on cleaning vs. security tasks so that union membership is undertaken only when appropriate.

Efficient System Design

Switching gears, Gene Samburg sketched out how to handle a typical security dilemma. "The product your firm is interested in does not precisely match your security needs. When the solution is not in the product, the best approach is to create a solution by offering, in conjunction with the product, a package of services that includes: administration, installation, monitoring of operations, maintenance and service, programming, design, and an awareness of and readiness to respond to changes when needed," Samburg said. "The bottom line is providing real estate solutions - not security solutions - enhancing not only the security of the building, but tenant retention, marketability and other such items."

Taking the podium next was Al Palumbo, who stated, "I believe in the Security Guard Act based on my 20 years of experience in crime prevention with the city police, and now as a consultant." Palumbo, who is "still working to prevent crime" by designing and engineering security systems, recommends the following as the most efficient and impartial procedure:

* Survey and requirement analysis;

* Recommendation of system, including a cost/benefit analysis;

* Development of implementation plan;

* Provision of full engineering system design.

There are many ways to integrate the system into existing facilities and management systems, Palumbo said, such as the intelligent building/building management system and fire/light safety controls. He strongly recommends specifying the job in as much detail as possible - "down to the last screw" - to obtain the right price in "an apples-to-apples comparison."

Criminals are Creative

The former police officer was also able to offer observations based on past experience as to what systems did - and did not - work. Using slides to illustrate, he offered these examples:

* Cameras are only as good as the people watching them - if they are watching them;

* A video alarming system can work around the "unwatched" camera dilemma;

* A computer-literate individual is a necessity for running the individual security consoles;

* Stairwells are "accidents waiting to happen." Screw-in bulbs are simply unscrewed. Invest in fixtures placed at heights and angles that are unreachable yet effective, use mirrors, CCTV and/or voice-activated alarms;

* Don't use a camera with exposed cable. Knives cut through cable easily. Bury the cable;

* Lock the doors to the roof, and light the area;

* A lock that operates with a key in the knob can be picked, a digital combination lock is more effective, as are magnetic locks with card access;

* Try to avoid doors with exposed hinges with pins as these can more easily be removed;

* Specify your lock by door type, and balance the architects's concern for aesthetics with the engineer's emphasis on utility and functionalism, and the owner's budget.