Attorney Scott Rothstein and his Fort Lauderdale police security detail
Posted Under: Important Issues for Fort Lauderdale,Neighborhood Issues,Police Department Issues
Attorney Scott Rothstein and his Fort Lauderdale police security detail
It’s disappointing when we see an attorney use his private client contacts for personal gain (allegedly…). But the story about Rothstein hiring Fort Lauderdale police officers (versus private security) for his “round the clock” security detail was interesting to me, so I dug a little deeper. What I learned was a bit of an eye opener.
When I heard about Fort Lauderdale Police Officers providing private security for Scott Rothstein, my first question was: “How much is this costing us?” I was ready to hit the roof ! I called the Chief’s office and spoke to a Sgt Frank Sousa. This is what I learned…
1. First and foremost, the police officers assigned to Rothstein were all “Off-Duty”. We are NOT paying for these security details.
2. Second, I learned that any individual, neighborhood group or business can have an off-duty Fort Lauderdale police officer available to them if they request it and it gets approved.
3. Third, I learned that neighborhood organizations such as Rio Vista, Harbor Beach and many others regularly contract out for off-duty police officers to be present in their neighborhoods up to 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
4. Businesses too, do the same thing. (Go to Himmarshee on weekends and you will see them at the various bars and restaurants there). Hotels, special events, Broward General etc., all contract out for off-duty police officers. It’s big business.
5. In fact, (according to Sgt Souza), on weekends there may very well be more off-duty police officers on the street that those who are on duty!
6. Many police officers have regular gigs. In fact, Sgt Souza has a regular weekend stint at a Fort Lauderdale restaurant each week.
So here’s how the process works. You call the Police Department, make your request and you’ll be transferred to one of two “special event” sergeants. That person fills out a form for your request. It then has to get (signed) approvals from a Sergeant, then a Captain, a Major and an Assistant Chief, before an off duty police officer is assigned. Once a police officer is assigned to you, that officer and you have to agree on what you will pay him/her. It’s negotiated between the police officer and you. I asked what the going rate was and was told it varies but it’s somewhere between $25-$45 per hour. The police officer gets all of it, the city gets nothing.
And therein is a bit of concern to me. If our Police Department (who we are paying), is spending time on facilitating these hookups, then why aren’t we collecting an administrative fee from the clients?
Since there are (apparently) hundreds of these assignments a month, how much time is this taking away from police staff that should be working for the public (not private) good? And how much could we be collecting?
But there is another side to this. According to Sgt Souza, these off-duty police officers fulfill an important function to the public, free of charge. If an officer is providing security at a restaurant on Las Olas and a ruckus starts up a block or two away, that officer could theoretically go there, resolve it and file a report. Same thing if a neighborhood group or hospital has a regular off duty police officer present, then that officer would be the “first responder” if an issue there required their presence.
So what do you think? I like the fact that there are so many off-duty police officers around, especially on weekends that can handle calls that would otherwise have to be handled by on duty officers, but I still think the City may be missing some revenue that these clients (making the request) should be paying for.
Earl Rynerson
Reader Comments
Most cities charge a processing fee per hour . The issue here is a public policy issue ..should the city ( even if it makes money ) provide 24 x 7 coverage for a private purpose (citizen) , my answer is abolutely no . Special event details , entertainment ( bar details) serve a completely different purpose they protect the general public , not the case here . The purpose of a city is to provide the necessary support services the residents and guests reasonbly can not provide for themselves. I think Allied Barton or any one of 100 more firms could and should have done this joob . Question ..if our officer was hurt on this detail and perhaps worst case could not work again , who would pay that liaiblilty ? The tax payer and this was a private benifit detail …..
Pete-
This is a very good point you raise about the liability issue. Perhaps we should only allow these types of off duty police gigs when they are geared toward public organizations/functions, not private security details.
Earl
When these police are working for, say a construction company, they seem to give their loyalty to the company, not the public. I was witness to a police officer abusing a man who the construction workers told him were trespassing. The man was lost, trying to get through to his new home, but the police officer handled him violently, called for back up, and then arrested me for not leaving so he could beat the guy up in private. The officers broke the man’s wrist, pepper sprayed him & roughed him up. This was while he was hobbled & handcuffed. Ft. Lauderdale police are out of control. They should not be allowed to wear the uniform of a public servant while serving a private agenda.
I’m more concerned that officers will be tired working two or more jobs. I suppose they can work 16/7 if they choose, but should the city promote such long work hours?
As pointed out, these private details put more officers on our streets so not only are the areas they work safer, but the regular duty officer assigned to that area can cover more ground. As we all know, the Ft. Lauderdale Police Department is well understaffed and overworked. This puts more officers on the street, increases the income of the officers without a penny from the City, and makes the whole city safer. This is a win / win for everyone, leave it alone.
I was a cop and worked lots of details. The city always took a few bucks an hour for admin & liability. All our details were arranged thru the dept & all paid thru the dept to ensure there was no tax cheating. BUT every city is different in their policies and procedures. Most have a rule limiting the number of off duty work hours. Some get overtime raates, some get a flat rate, usually above regular pay. Some bars are required by cities to have cops as a condition of their license. The plus side is only those who create the need for police presence pay for it (bars, events, added neighborhoods). The down side is that only those who can afford extra protection actually get it.
Everyone has this service available to them from the police department. I would assume that the dispatcher has a list of what establishments have an off duty officer working so that incoming officers to a call know tha there is an armed human being working ht ecall on private duty.
I think we owe it to the police departments to do the record keeping without charging a few dollars to the business or event that is giving these officers extra cash that they need so desparately to feed their families.
This arises the question, who is liable for actions by the officer and what insurance covers his/her injuries or actions? Is the city on the hook insurance wise? Is there insurance supplied by the persons/business hiring the officer?
These questions need be addressed by the city attorney.
The city should not be paying for this.
I can see the potential of lawsuits against the city for actions by an officer that may be questionable.
I, as a taxpayer, should not be held liable. A separate insurance should be paid by the hiring business or person covering the city from lawsuits.
Somone needs to determine what the actual size of our
police force really needs to be minus the off duty committments. What is the required FTE to adequately cover the City of Fort Lauderdale. I am willing to bet that the off duty committments create scheduling issues that inflate the true number of full time equivaleants needed to adequately cover Fort Lauderdale.
Don’t misunderstand…. I think a Fort Lauderdale Police Officer working at a bank in uniform is a real deterent to a robber. Lets just make sure the tax payer is getting reimbursed for the excess cost of these aditional officers and everyone should be happy!
Wish I decided to become a police officer and not gone to college.
Always have a good job no matter what. Good pay both ways. Insurance. Car. Gas. Car Maintenance. No matter how expensive it gets. All this even when I retire plus a great pension. It’s a win/win situation.
Fire Fighters have pretty much the same deal.
MEHollywoods: Since when are police officers so desperate for money? According to the newspapers, many patrolmen get paid more than $100,000 a year. Give us a break.
scott rothstein has bigger problems than security detail now. the darling of fort lauderdale society has cooked the bernie (madoff) goose. he’s going away to the big house, for a long time. poor boy.
I was married to a police officer for 18 years, he has been on the force since 1985 and he has yet made it to 100,000 a year. He was an off- duty admin officer in Miami and the way they do it is they charge for example lets say 45.00 an hour the office might get 25.00 and the county/city will get the rest. Maybe Ft.Lauderdale should implement this.
While the take on the initial subject is very serious & grim. As far as the police & additional private assignments they take on my feelings are mixed: 1) I do agree (or feel) strongly that there are probably liability issues here. Are they covered in the two agency agreements? I think that there should be some agreement in the “private” contract that removes the city from liability &/or visa versa…(if I were to guess, somewhere that statement would &/or does exist?) 2) If it does not exist, then yes, since the initial assignment “opportunities” go through the city somewhere in that criteria this clarification needs to be covered….(it may already. Personally, I think that it does, as these are all businesses (99.5%+) that don’t need to have ‘open ends’ either, as then what, the “city” sues them for a disabled officer??…I do not think that given the rather – would rather take on the officer’s family / personal attorney or on the other hand the city with the “total lump sum” of damages for family, city, etc….? I would imagine it is there (somewhere) or they sign a “disclaimer” with the department (or the business) for any “personal” details they take upon themselves?)
3) I agree that okay may be the city could make a bit of a fee, but it is not the “true” point to this…the “true” points are; security of the public in their activities while out in Fort Lauderdale, Liability, & “Scheduling”….the other fee issues would just support/detract business & commerce (for that to be cooperative) & should be a win-win for all as the officers are under paid for their risks/liability, etc. (& may be even for the officer’s tolerance to the overall “mess” of things)…
I also agree with Cara’s comment that the hours they are working are a concern… In some industries it becomes a mandate the maximum number of hours worked for occupational safety reasons.
I feel the same as many do. We the people pay taxes which then pay for a cadet to go through the academy and training to just use it later to make extra cash, which is fine but we need some back. If the Officer gets hurt as stated above then what. So now this Officer is now acting as an Off Duty Police Officer and his powers of arrest ect will have to be used differently, the Officer cant just state, I am a Police officer of Ft.Lauderdale. That is not the function they are performing at that time. Other local PD’s, I believe get five dollars per Hour that the Officer makes the rest goes to the Officer.
The comments made by Pete initially sum up the major issue with this type of service bein offered. It’s all too much of a fine line and opens many doors for inappropriate actions on many levels.
We have private security companies that provide these services and that’s how it should be…period!
In the unfortunate event of a police officer being injured or worse killed creates a liabilty on multiple levels that potentially and more than likely, the tax payer must bear. Not to mention the emotional and financial stress the family would also have to endure considering the officer was NOT acting in the “line of duty” at the time.
The comments are all excellent and the question posed is worthy of bein addressed fully as well!
Thank you Earl…
Well to answer some of your concern, like “Since there are (apparently) hundreds of these assignments a month, how much time is this taking away from police staff that should be working for the public (not private) good?” Ok, when police officer (off-duty detail) is posted on his/her gig they are there to guard for all kind of criminality. They are not only looking after for those person(s) or businesses that request for them to stand on their properties, they are on guard for all criminal activities around the general area they are serving.
Secondly with regard to the revenue the city would be missing, that is not true. If the city takes over the whole operation of off duty revenues, the cops are going to be left out in the cold. It is well known fact that city halls are full of hungry alligators waiting to pounce on any money they could get their hand into. If they control this operation there will be less cops that would participate on this type of EXTRA work. This in turn would deny the city’s resident of that extra police visibility and protection which they would have if the system remain as it is.
I don’t think the city should be able to charge an additional fee for off duty officers. That would be like a bus driver paying a fee for driving his friends around on his off days, one thing has nothing to do with the other.
Police presence is the first step in the use of force continuum. Having uniformed police is a deterrent to crime. However, The problem with these sorts of details is the liability the municipality and it’s staff take on if there is an incident involving it’s officers off duty. Not to mention the personal liability the officer incurs on himself. The proximity to lewd and illicit behavior, Stockholm Syndrome, the fiduciary responsibility issues between the off duty employer and the City/Dept issuing the officers commission, are not worth it in my eyes. There is a good chance if an officer acts outside the law governing the municipality or violates someone’s rights the city’s risk management and the department will turn a blind eye and not cover them under the umbrella of the law. either way the city and the officer can expect some hefty legal fees. Heaven forbid there is a questionable use of deadly force on one of these detail. Everyone will lose civilly regardless of the criminality found by Grand Jury.