All Systems Go

Larry Latimer is assistant director of engineering for the Georgia DOC. His responsibilities include the department’s annual budget, planning of new beds, and maintaining the state’s correctional infrastructure at both the central office and the regional levels. The Georgia DOC includes 122 facilities and more than 1,900 buildings.

Joe De Patta: You must be flattered that you’re considered the principal expert in your field and that your name is synonymous with security electronics-can you tell us how that has come about?

Larry Latimer: I’ve been in construction for 21 years. Most of that has been in detention construction and design; I started in this field 18 years ago with a small detention equipment contractor here in Atlanta. Their specialty was security systems, both physical and electronic. In addition to contracting security systems, we also started manufacturing so we got an education on how things are put together. Once you do that you begin to formulate opinions about what you like and what you don’t like. When I came to work for the Georgia DOC I had a lot of experience with security systems and had some pretty good ideas about what I wanted and what I didn’t want.

We’ve developed new ways of using existing technology that even the industry hadn’t thought about, and by doing so we’ve gained a reputation for having in-house expertise.

JD: You’re working on several projects for the Georgia DOC, including a statewide perimeter detection systems program. Can you talk about that project?

LL: The DOC made a decision in 1990 to remove tension perimeter security systems from the general contract. We were having huge problems with those systems because they were being installed by electricians, not by people who were experts in the field. We had a big construction program going on at the time and we pulled those systems out of the general contract. Now we wanted to do this very slowly. We wanted to build one system and do a lot of field research, put it in place, see how it worked, fine-tune our approach-but we didn’t have that luxury. At the end of 1990 the state was in a major financial crisis and the DOC was facing significant layoffs. We were tasked to find a way to save some of those positions. The program, which we call the Perimeter Detection Systems Program, was originally designed to de-man guard towers. We have, to date, de-manned officer towers at 28 facilities statewide.

In 1991 we went from trying to build one system to building 19 at one time. Our goal was to have 11 of those systems online and de-man the towers. It was a monumental goal and a huge challenge. This was a dramatic, quick change. In a year we had 11 facilities online, which saved over 200 jobs. We reassigned the tower positions, giving them back to the state and put the people in open slots elsewhere so they could keep their jobs. It worked out really well.

JD: What are the most effective ways to keep up with emerging technologies? What resources do you pursue or consult?

LL: Primarily it’s through magazines, like your own. We’d like to attend the big conferences such as ACA, CMI, and others but that depends on what the budget is like around here. We have a line item in every job description that requires staff to stay current on the technology in their field of expertise. We encourage that and we pay for it.

Mostly, we get lots of magazines. And this is not a self-serving pat on the back, but Correctional News is the best. We get a lot of good information about new products that are coming out on the market. I probably get 20 different types of periodicals that cross my desk every month and yours is one I read consistently. A lot I don’t read at all.

JD: How do you test new equipment to make sure it’s something in which you want to invest?

LL: We do a great deal of research up front and that includes user surveys. We’ll call anyone and anybody who has used a system, starting with the lists the manufacturers give us and then go from there.

We also do a technology review. We approach those who have technology we think will meet our needs and ask them to submit data, sample products, and give us demonstrations. Then we install some of the technology at a site for Beta testing. After we’re done, we put together a bid document that we think will attract those who we’ve ascertained as having the best technology.

JD: One of your specialties is physical and electronic security systems. What can you tell us about the state of the industry? Are most correctional departments keeping up?

LL: The industry is changing. We are seeing a lot of new stuff and R&D, which I think has resulted from the recent terrorist threats to our country. There are a lot of new players out there putting out new products.

Most corrections departments are definitely not keeping up with new technology, which is part corrections’ resistance to change. Also, funding is a problem. If we have a good idea, we are two years away from seeing it implemented.

JD: What advice would you give someone who asked you what they could do to improve security electronics on a limited budget? Are there quick/inexpensive tips or fixes?

LL: If we had a severely limited budget I would go back to simple electronics. We are actually doing that in Georgia, even though we’ve been blessed with a pretty good budget. We’ve been simplifying our system, becoming less high-tech and more user-friendly. If we don’t need a processor to open 30 doors in a housing unit, we don’t use one.

JD: How often are security electronic systems reviewed or updated? Are there any items you found just weren’t working for you?

LL: We review all our systems annually. We use an automated system to help us with evaluations and projections.

We expect security locks to last at least 10 years, which is more a matter of parts availability than the locks not lasting.

We haven’t used membrane switches on faceplates in a long time. We’ve had a lot of trouble with them and have gotten completely away from that sort of thing. We are now using very hardy switches. Our panels suffer a lot of abuse from standard use. That’s an example of a product that doesn’t work and one from which we’ve moved away.

JD: If there’s an escape at a Georgia facility, is that cause to review security at all facilities?

LL: Yes, we review security at all facilities. When we have someone get out of a facility, it’s a big thing. We have 30 facilities that have the perimeter security system. Over the last eight years we’ve had 25 escape attempts and only three were successful. The system is a tremendous deterrent. Each of the three successful escapes were not a result of electronics failure, they were the result of the design of the fencing system itself. Inmates will look at something and figure a way to defeat it. If you’ve experienced the “inmate network,” you know that they are almost as fast as we are at communicating flaws in a system.

JD: What encourages you about the state of the security electronics industry?

LL: I’m very encouraged by what I’m seeing come out of R&D. I’ve been in this for a long time and I’ve never seen so many new products. A lot of it is really good stuff, not just bells and whistles. These are products that meet real needs. I see changes in the entire prison maintenance market where suppliers are realizing that maintenance dollars are hard to come by and they’re trying to help us get as much longevity as possible out of our current product.

JD: Are you seeing any trends within the security electronics field?

LL: I see users going back to simplified technology. Users are getting away from extremely complicated processor-based, software-driven electronics where simpler products will work. That’s a trend I think you’ll see. Whether the market will respond, I’m not sure.

JD: We’re hearing a great deal about maintenance and upgrades these days, as opposed to new construction. What are some of the biggest hurdles when making major improvements to an existing facility?

LL: We’d rather build new any day, for obvious reasons. A small retrofit can tie up one of my project managers as long as new construction can, but the market seems to be developing products that help us.

For instance, we have a facility with an old mechanical sliding door device for about 80 cells. Those cells have become almost useless because the parts have long since become unavailable. We asked some people in the industry what they were doing in the retro market. We were very pleased to see that several big names in the industry are building bolt-on electrical and mechanical components that can be installed in an existing housing. They have figured out how to make that as universal as possible and for a fairly reasonable cost. I can now bring 80 cells back on line. I think it’s smart for the industry to respond to the retro market.

JD: What do you consider to be the most critical matters in the security electronics field? How about in correctional security in general?

LL: I don’t think it’s technology. There is so much technology that if you have the money, you can find technology to meet your needs. I think the most critical area in physical and electronic security is maintenance. Keeping things operating and buying products that have a good solid lifecycle. Throwing dollars into maintenance as opposed to spending on new products is the way I think things will go.

JD: If I’m correct, a part of your job is making space allotments-do you see the need for many more facilities or have populations evened out?

LL: We’re projecting a need for more space. We are in the middle of a four-year program to add 7,000 beds. We’ve found that our projections haven’t been sufficient and we will need more. We’re asking for the authority to go forward with at least one new state prison in the next five years. Maybe more than that. We don’t see construction stopping.

JD: What’s in store for the Georgia DOC? Is construction moving along? How many projects are in the works?

LL: We currently have more than $120 million worth of work in progress. We have 150-plus projects that vary in range from major facility construction to lock replacement. The $120 million includes no major state prisons; one state prison project would increase the budget by 50 percent. We think we’ll see those numbers grow significantly over the next few years.

JD: Where do you see the industry in the next 10 years? 20 years?

LL: The industry is going to ride a wave. I think you’ll see a lot of new work in specific areas of the country. The massive amount of construction we saw in the late 1970s and early 1980s won’t happen again. The industry will have to get smarter and figure out how to take advantage of the work at the end-user’s level. We get tons of inquiries all the time from people who want to build new facilities for us or offer new technology. We get very little inquiry from people who want to help us manage the facilities. That’s what we’d like to see.

JD: What effect has the events of September 11, 2001, had on correctional security?

LL: Directly, I would say, very little. Obviously we are in an environment that emphasizes security. I have seen from an engineering standpoint, however, a rush to find technology to meet unique needs and I think that’s a result of 9/11 and terrorism in this county. We benefit from the changes that have occurred as a result of 9/11. We probably get most of our technology from military efforts.

JD: Do you have anything to add or any final comments?

LL: I’ve been in this business now for almost 20 years and I’ve been in a lot of facilities all over the county. One of my duties has been consulting. I’ve seen the good and the bad of state and city and county correctional facilities and, for what it’s worth, I’ve been really impressed during my tenure here in Georgia to see the professionalism with which the Georgia Department of Corrections approaches its efforts. We have the finest bunch of folks working here and I’ve been really pleased to work with such a professional group.