Task Force on Courthouse Facilities Survey Report BRANT COUNTY Group 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS BRANT COUNTY SUMMARY:...... 2 SUPERIOR COURT (BRANTFORD) SUMMARY:...... 3 REPORT:...... 4 ONTARIO COURT (BRANTFORD) SUMMARY:......10 REPORT:...... 13
County or District: Superior Court of Justice 70 Wellington Street Brantford, Ontario Reported on by: Collaborating Parties: Karl K. Beyer Karen Amaron-Rogelstad Paul James Wayne Vipond Robert Parsons David Partridge The Honourable Justice Kent Ontario Court of Justice 44 Queen Street Brantford, Ontario Reported on by: Collaborating Parties: Karl K. Beyer Karen Amaron-Rogelstad Paul James Wayne Vipond Robert Parsons David Partridge The Honourable Justice Lenz John Renwick Stephen Guiler 1
County or District: Summary: Six survey questionnaires were received from providing details on one Superior Courthouse (Brantford); eight survey questionnaires were received providing details on the one Ontario Courthouse (Brantford) in. In addition, five questionnaires were received providing details on the overall county situation. The lack of consensus among respondents creates a lack of clarity where many issues are concerned. In these instances, the reporting is described as unclear. The size of in square miles is unclear as only two respondents gave details, which were conflicting. One reported the size as 50 square miles while the other reported the size to be 900 square miles. The geographical locations of the courthouses are described as both adequately and very well suited to the needs of the local population. Although requests were made for a new Superior Court building in the Courthouse questionnaire, this was not elaborated on in the County section of the survey. In response to the issue of a Task Force for investigating strategies to obtain capital commitments for courthouses development from non-government sources, one person commented, Courthouse development is a public obligation. Government should not be permitted to evade its responsibility. Superior Court (Brantford) There are a few areas of concern: lack of lawyers facilities and lawyer-client-meeting rooms, poor or inconsistent air quality, and the declining state of the exterior of this heritage/historical building. Security issues were also raised with regards to the holding cell facilities: proper electronic monitoring is non-existent, can only access through public areas. One respondent reports that county jail is immediately adjacent to courthouse and serves as a holding facility" while another comments, escorting person to/from cells to court brings officers and prisoners through public hallways. Ontario Court (Brantford) In general, this Courthouse provides adequately maintained facilities, is in a good state of repair, and will accommodate the justice needs of the Country of Brantford for at least five years. One respondent comments that the building was just built within the last five years and is functional and in a good state of repair. Issues raised with regards to this facility include the inadequacy of lawyer-client conference facilities, and inconsistent air quality control systems. Another issue that is raised is the slow pace at which repairs are attended to. One of the respondents comments that prompt repairs as and when needed are required to meet anticipated future needs. 2
County or District: Level of Court: Courthouse Address: Superior Court of Justice 70 Wellington Street, Brantford Summary: The courthouse is a historical/heritage building, which has undergone minor modifications to the rear of the building. While the external original structure has been respected, it is reported to be in a declining state of repair. Interior facilities are in a state of adequate repair and are being adequately maintained. Due to multiple and contradictory responses, a general overview statement on the adequacy of this courthouse is not feasible. Issues that were reported on by the majority of participants (three or more persons) include the need for updated security systems within the holding cells, and expanded accommodations for lawyers Three courtrooms are available at the courthouse, however it appears that only Courtroom Number One provides adequate facilities. Courtrooms Number Two and Three are reported to be lacking private entranceways/exits for the judge and accused in custody, jury boxes and video conferencing capabilities. Features that are described by the majority to be poor include public seating capacity, general state of repair, as well as air conditioning. It is also noted by one of the respondents that space in both Courtrooms Number Two and Three is insufficient. Also, there is reported to be noise in Courtrooms Number Two and Three if air conditioner is on. It is noted that all of the courtrooms are described as adequate in their cleanliness. In terms of facilities for lawyers, the courthouse generally provides adequate accommodations, with the exception of private lawyer-client meeting rooms. There are no such rooms, and this is described as a deficiency of the building. In general, facilities for witnesses, persons accused and the public are adequate with the exception of eating facilities, which do not exist in the building. It is suggested that a snack bar at minimum is required to meet the needs of the public. Access for disabled persons are generally adequate with the exception of public washrooms. This is a multiple level facility with an operating elevator While security at this courthouse is generally described as adequate for users, it noted by one respondent that updated cells, electronic monitoring facilities for these are required for the security of those in custody. However, there have been no incidents in the last three years that could have been better managed with better security. According to at least one of the six respondents, a new courthouse facility is required to adequately meet the future justice requirements of the community. 3
Report: 1. Use of this Courthouse The courthouse is used for criminal, family, civil matters and small claims. Below are the supplied user statistics for the years 1996 to 1999. Proceeding Commenced Cases Tried Cases Pending (year-end) 1996 1997 1998 1999 4808 4475 3794 3620 203 117 134 152 113 78 93 95 2. External/Internal Features and Repairs The courthouse is classified as a historical/heritage building. The original structure has been respected through minor modifications "at the rear" of the building and is generally described by most of the six respondents as being in a state of good repair. One respondent, however, reported a declining state of repair. In response to the state of repair of the internal features, three respondents reported that the internal aspects are of "adequate" standing, while two others reported internal features to be in "poor" condition. 3. Ownership and Control Three respondents indicated the building is publicly owned by the Ministry of the Attorney General and operated by the Ontario Realty Corporation. The facility is not subject to a lease. Major renovations occurred in 1995 and 1997. The value of these renovations was unknown. Two of the respondents indicated that renovations to the library, in order to improve facilities, will be implemented over the next two years, while the remaining respondents reported that no improvements are forthcoming. Estimated costs of this renovation were not reported. There is no user committee in place. Relations between the Ontario Realty Corporation and those lawyer users of the facility are unclear due to the contradictions in the reporting; two respondents considered the relations to be reasonable and one described them as bad. The remaining three did not respond. No issues involving encroachment on the use of the facility for the administration of justice were reported. The top issues relating to the facility varied by respondent, however, five respondents stated the issue of poor security. 4
Other issues reported include: Robing facilities-insufficient. (one person) Poor accommodations for lawyers and inadequate space. (one person) (Im)proper external and internal maintenance. (one person) Courtroom space -2 and 3- are too small. (two persons) Noise in Courtrooms 2 and 3 if air conditioner is on. (one person) Uniformity of internal appearance. (one person) Public waiting areas are non-existent. (two persons) It appears unlikely that any of these issues will be addressed in the next three years. 4. Courtrooms The majority of respondents report that there are three Superior courtrooms housed in the building. Whether the number of courtrooms is sufficient to accommodate reasonably foreseeable growth is unclear as three respondents stated yes, two others stated no and one person did not answer. Superior Courtroom Number One is agreed upon by a majority of four or more persons to be adequate in regards to the bench, clerk/reporter facility, jury box, public seating capacity, phone for clerks, cleanliness and general appearance, electronic security alarm for the judge as well as the counsel table. Five respondents agreed that prisoner box is poor. Opinions were split and therefore inconclusive with regards to the adequacy of air-conditioning, access for the disabled, acoustics, private exit and retiring room for the judge as well as the witness box. Superior Courtroom Number Two is agreed upon by a majority of four or more persons to be adequate in regards to the Bench, counsel table, clerk/reporter facility, phone for clerks and acoustics. Four or more of the respondents graded the following as poor : witness box, prisoner box, public seating capacity and air-conditioning. Adequacy of the remaining features for this courtroom is inconclusive due to reporting inconsistencies. Superior Courtroom Number Three is agreed upon by four or more persons to be adequate in terms of cleanliness, access for the disabled, acoustics and telephone for the clerks. Non-existent features include prisoner and jury boxes, private exit for judges and accused in custody as well as video conferencing capacity. Four or more persons rated the following as poor : public seating capacity, general appearance or state of repair, and air-conditioning. The effectiveness of all other elements in this courtroom is inconclusive due to contradictory responses from the six respondents. 5. Lawyer-Client Meeting Rooms The facility does not provide lawyer-client meeting rooms, which is described as a deficiency. 5
6. Jury Facilities Jury facilities exist for each court equipped for jury trials. Jurors have a private entrance to the courtroom. However, due to the reporting method it is unclear whether the room(s) is adequately furnished or has a washroom facility. Only three persons responded to the issue of the jury s exposure to the other users of the courthouse. They are in agreement that juries use facilities in common with the general public. They indicated the following problem with such exposure: Security-safety. Members of the jury are said to have contact with witnesses, lawyers and other trial-related parties in entrances, hallways and stairways. It is reported that this could lead to the potential for threats or assaults. 7. Public/Witness Accommodation (There was no consensus in this section because not all of the six respondents answered every category.) Five of the six respondents described seating for the public and witnesses outside the courtrooms as insufficient. All six reported that the building is a multiple level facility and five reported there is a functioning elevator/escalator in the building. Three respondents replied to the issue of refreshment facilities. There are none available to the public and this is inadequate. One of the respondents offered that a snack bar at minimum is required. Due to the reporting method, it is unclear if washroom facilities are adequate in terms of availability, maintenance, cleanliness, and access to disabled persons. It is also unclear if there are any health and safety issues associated with this facility or if persons in custody are required to pass through public areas to access the courtrooms. It is not agreed upon whether there are any public access problems associated with this facility. One respondent offered the following detail, It is not easily located. Public access to the courthouse is provided by public transit and there are also adequate paid parking spaces for the public. However one respondent indicates the proximity of parking is an issue, the distance is too great. Another issue raised with regards to parking is the inconvenience of having to renew parking throughout the day. 8. Accessibility for Disabled Persons Due to the reporting method, it is unclear if disabled persons have adequate access into public washrooms, the courtrooms, library, elevator and other public areas. However, entry to the courthouse is agreed on, by five of the six respondents, as being adequate. The courthouse is a multiple level facility, and does have a functioning elevator (see Section 7). 6
9. Holding Cells There was little consensus in this section and not all of the six respondents answered every category. Due to the reporting method, it is unclear how many holding cells are housed in this facility. It is also unclear whether they are segregated, separated by gender, if they have washroom facilities, lawyer-client conference areas, or if the existing facilities raise any security issues. In regards to security issues, one respondent commented, Escorting person to/from cells to courts brings officers and prisoners through public hallways. Another commented, Proper electronic monitoring (is) nonexistent and (these facilities) can only be access(ed) through public areas. A third respondent made the following statement, County jail is immediately adjacent to courthouse and serves as a holding facility. 10. Lawyers Facilities The courthouse provides adequate facilities in general for the exclusive use by lawyers. These facilities are also described as adequate in terms of maintenance. The facilities include private phones for use by lawyers, separate gowning and washroom facilities for male and female lawyers. There are no separate lockers for female lawyers. 11. Judges Chambers/Facilities acilities The courthouse has two chambers for Superior Court Judges. These facilities are deemed "insufficient" to accommodate reasonable, foreseeable growth. The chambers provide secure and private access to and egress from each court. It is unclear if chambers are adequately furnished. The chambers do not provide secure and private access to and from each court. 12. Crown Attorney Offices The courthouse provides Crown attorneys offices, which are insufficient to accommodate existing needs. No report was made with regards to requirements for improvements, nor was information provided on security systems in place. 13a. Other Administrative Space/Use: Court Administration The building provides an office for court administration officials and it is described as "inadequately" meeting the needs of court administrators due to the fact that it is too small. 13b. Other Administrative Space/Use: Court Reporters Offices. Offices are provided for court reporters, however, it was not reported as to whether such facilities are adequately meeting needs. 13c. Other Administrative Space/Use: Duty Counsel The building does not have facilities for duty counsel. As one of the respondents notes, Nothing required in Superior Court. It is not reported whether the courthouse provides a Family Law Information Centre. 7
13d. Other Administrative Space/Use: Legal Aid The building does not require a Legal Aid office. It was not reported whether the building currently houses an office of this nature. 13e. Other Administrative Space/Use: Victim/Witness Assistance Program The building does not require a Victim/Witness Assistance Program (VWAP) office. It was not reported whether such a program currently exists. It is not known whether this courthouse can currently accommodate integrated justice facility requirements. 13f. Other Administrative Space/Use: Media It was not reported whether rooms for the media are present or required at this facility. 14. Libraries The courthouse requires library facilities for use by the Bar, Crown attorneys and the Bench. The majority of respondents agreed this need is being adequately addressed by the building s library facilities. However, one respondent noted there is insufficient space. Library facilities include computers available to users, a librarian, and workspace. The County and District Law Association and the jointly administer the library. 15. Other Security Matters The majority of the respondents described the level of security overall as adequate for courthouse staff, persons under custody and the general public. The clear exception was the level of security for the judiciary, which was reported as insufficient. The building does not have a metal detector system available. There are approximately two police officers posted at the facility on court days to provide court security, which is considered sufficient. There is no functioning burglar alarm system, nor do security officers service the building 24-hours. There have been no security-related incidents in the last three years that were not handled by existing security resources, and there has been no diminishment in security systems and resources over the same time frame. 16. Prospects and Future Needs Only two respondents addressed the prospects and future needs of this facility. They offered the following statements: Arrange a new facility. The present building is so old, the cost to make it safe and secure would be astronomical. Renovation could easily address all deficiencies updated cells, electronic monitoring facilities. 8
It is not reported if plans to address these details are underway, nor is an estimate of costs provided. 9
District or County: Level of Court: Courthouse Address: Ontario Court of Justice 44 Queen Street, Brantford Summary: In general, there appears to be no major issues pertaining to the current facilities at the courthouse among the eight respondents. Concerns expressed focus mainly on the need to react to the growing population of this county. As one of the respondents explained, Brantford s industrial base is rapidly expanding. This will translate into a population growth in the next five to ten years. If so, this court facility will not be sufficient. We will need to expand the judicial complement and therefore the courthouse to hold them. There are four courtrooms in this facility and each provides adequate facilities. One exception is a lack of sufficient public seating in Ontario Courtroom Number Three. None of the courtrooms have a jury box or video conferencing capability. There are no areas of the building devoted exclusively for lawyers use, however, this is not reported as a deficiency. There are six meeting rooms for lawyers use to meet with clients. Private telephones are available for use by the lawyers. The holding facilities appear to be one area of concern. Some respondents indicated expansion of these facilities is necessary in order to meet existing and future needs. While there are segregated holding cells for males and females, there are none for youth in custody. Also noted is the lack of privacy in the "cubicles" reserved for lawyer-client conferences. Three respondents reported there are security issues within the holding facilities: No locking boxes for escort officers firearms. There are no camera/intercom equipment at the sally port, creating a safety hazard when persons knock/bang on door for entry. Entrance to all but Courtroom Number One is through an underground tunnel which presents both security issues and wastes time. There appears to be no other security issues at this courthouse and there have been no security-related incidents reported within the last three years. Despite an overall favourable rating of the courthouse, respondents indicated some requirements are necessary to meet future judiciary needs of the community: Several more client/lawyer meeting rooms. Enlargement of holding facilities. Within 10 years, at least one more secure court room. More cells, larger custody office and room for security staff. 10
Report: 1. Use of this Courthouse The courthouse is used for criminal and family law matters. User statistics are detailed in the following chart: YEAR CRIMINAL CHARGES RECEIVED DISPOSED FAMILY COURT INTAKE 1996 10,051 9,025 1061 1997 9,555 10,434 1084 1998 9,002 9,052 1227 1999* 6,788 6,838 789 * period ending 1999 2. External/Internal Features and Repairs The building is not classified as a historical/heritage building and is described as being in both good and excellent states of external repair. The general state of repair for internal features is adequate. Housekeeping and maintenance are also described as adequate. 3. Ownership and Control The building is privately owned and the courthouse is subject to a lease that expires in approximately 2006. It is unknown who owns and operates the building. No information was provided regarding lease payments or square footage of facility. Major renovations have not taken place within the last 10 years nor are there any known plans for renovations within the next two years. It was not reported if there is a user committee in place at this facility. There were no reported issues regarding encroachment on the use of the facility for the administration of justice Top issues relating to this facility include: Air quality. There seems to be minor problems with climate control in the courtrooms from time to time complaints have been made concerning air quality. Holding cells. Inadequate security facilities when and if the country jail is closed, the holding cells will be insufficient. the interview area in the holding cells is grossly inadequate for the traffic and conversations are not private. Repairs take considerable time for completion. One of the respondents stated that the building (was) just built within the last five years and is functional and in a good state of repair. 11
4. Courtrooms The majority of the respondents stated that there are five courtrooms in the facility that can accommodate existing demand. However, it is unclear whether this number will accommodate reasonable foreseeable growth. As one of the respondents indicated, Brantford s industrial base is rapidly expanding. This will translate into a population growth in the next five to ten years. If so, this court facility will not be sufficient. We will need to expand the judicial complement, and therefore, the courthouse to hold them. In general, facilities in all of the courtrooms were rated favourably. The exception is, a small number of respondents take issue with air conditioning, acoustics and public seating capacity in Courtroom Number Three. 5. Lawyer-Client Meeting Rooms The building does house lawyer-client meeting rooms, however, due to inconsistencies in the reporting method, the exact number of rooms is unclear. It is reported that the rooms are within reasonable proximity to the courts they serve, provide reasonable privacy and are adequately furnished. 6. Jury Facilities Not applicable. 7. Public/Witness Accommodation Accommodations for the public and witnesses are generally described as adequate, and there are no public access problems. The courthouse is accessible by public transit and there are an adequate number of paid-parking spaces within close proximity. Problems associated with parking are described as minor due to coin-fed apparatus requiring change. There are no refreshment facilities available at the courthouse and the respondents indicated that these are required. One of the respondents replied, there is a small kitchen that sells coffee, drinks, lunch food, etc. right around the corner." There are no reported health or safety issues associated with this facility and persons in custody are not required to pass through public areas in order to access any courtrooms. 8. Accessibility for Disabled Persons In general, access for disabled persons into the Courthouse, public washrooms, courtrooms and other public areas is described as adequate. The building is a multiple level facility and functioning elevators are available. 9. Holding Cells Due to the reporting method, it is unclear how many holding facilities are available for persons in custody. It is agreed upon that there does exist separate and segregated 12
facilities for males and females, all containing washrooms. There does not appear to be segregated holding facilities for youth in custody. The general state of repair of these holding facilities is adequate and direct private access from the holding cells to the courts is provided. To this matter, one of the respondents replied, entrance to all but Courtroom Number One is through an underground tunnel which presents security issues and wastes time. Other security issues concerning these holding facilities include: There is no camera/intercom equipment at the sally port, creating a safety hazard when persons knock/bang on door for entry. No locking boxes for escort officers firearms.. The facilities provided for private, secure solicitor-client conferences are in the form of cubicles. One respondent explained, they are secure, but they are not private. Prisoner or lawyer in next cubicle, as well as court security, can hear conversations between solicitor and client. As indicated in section 16, expansion is required in order for the holding facilities to accommodate existing and future needs. 10. Lawyers Facilities The courthouse does not provide separate space or a lounge devoted exclusively to lawyers, although there does appear to be private or quasi-private phone facilities for the lawyers. The building does not offer gowning facilities, lockers, or washrooms for lawyers, however, this is not reported as a deficiency. 11. Judges Chambers/Facilities Due to the reporting method, the exact number of judge's chambers at this facility is unclear. According to the eight respondents, there are as little as two, and as many as six chambers for Ontario courts, and at least one chamber available for the Justices of the Peace. It appears that the chambers for both Ontario judges and Justices of the Peace provide adequate furnishings and private and secure access to and from each court. 12. Crown Attorney Offices The Courthouse provides offices for use by Crown attorneys. There are currently plans to expand these offices within the next three years. It is not known if the Crown attorneys offices are adequately secured. 13a. Other Administrative Space/Use: Court Administration The building provides offices for court administration officials that are considered by five of the respondents to be adequate. The one respondent who answered that these offices do not meet exiting needs, also responded they are insufficient in number. 13
13b. Other Administrative Space/Use: Court Reporters Offices. Due to the reporting method, it is unclear whether offices are provided for court reporters or whether any are required. 13c. Other Administrative Space/Use: Duty Counsel The building does provide offices for duty counsel. They are described as six offices shared and an interview room. The building does not have a Family Law Information Centre. 13d. Other Administrative Space/Use: Legal Aid The building has a Legal Aid facility although seven of the respondents report that such an office is not required. 13e. Other Administrative Space/Use: Victim/Witness Assistance Program The building does not have an office for the Victim/Witness Assistance Program. Due to the reporting method, it is unclear whether such an office is required. It is also unclear if the facility has a witness room. It is unknown if this courthouse can currently accommodate integrated justice facility requirements. 13f. Other Administrative Space/Use: Media There is no media room and no information was provided as to whether one is necessary. 14. Libraries ies Due to the reporting method, it is unclear whether the courthouse provides library facilities and, if so, whether these facilities meet the needs of the Bar, Crown attorneys or the Bench. 15. Other Security Matters The overall sufficiency of security to users of this courthouse is unclear due to inconsistencies in reporting by the respondents. For example, the number of police officers posted at the courthouse varied by respondent. While one replied there is "one per courtroom in operation another answered the number of police officers posted varies according to court/prisoner needs. Other respondents indicated there is one per courtroom and detention offices, 4-8 and six security officers. However, most respondents agreed there is a sufficient number of court security and police on duty. It is unclear whether there is a functioning alarm system, although security officers do not service the building 24-hours. There have been no security-related incidents reported within the last three years. There has been no diminishment in security resources in the same time period. 14
16. Prospects and Future Needs The two respondents who reported on this section provided the following replies with respect to requirements needed to meet existing needs in this facility: Enlargement of holding facilities. Several more client/lawyer meeting rooms. No cost estimates for these improvements were listed. Three respondents offered upgrading details necessary for the courthouse to meet anticipated future needs: Within 10 years, at least one more secure courtroom. Increase cell/custody area (presently not adequate). Cells/custody areas unable to be expanded upon as the facility presently exists. Prompt repairs as and when needed. One respondent indicated expansion is required in order for the facility to meet future needs. 15