Business Crime Prevention Report
2009-2010

Overview and Executive Summary
Crimes against business hamper economic vitality and reduce our quality of life. The Business Crime Prevention program is a unique partnership between Sonoma County public safety agencies and business owners. In 2009, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors authorized forming a short-term task force to review past activities, the newest survey findings, current crime trends, and best practices in similar California communities.

Before forming the task force to review available resources and to recommend improvements, the Economic Development Board (EDB) conducted a survey of local companies to assess the current status of crimes against businesses. The survey, which took place in the spring of 2009, was distributed to more than 300 businesses in Sonoma County by mail and in person in both Spanish and English, available online and in print. The EDB and the Sheriff's Office provided staff support to the task force. Twelve representatives of the business community and public safety agencies met in three task force sessions during May and June 2009 to review the survey results and discuss how businesses and law enforcement could work together to combat business crime and assist local companies in prevention strategies.

Economic Impacts on Businesses
Crimes against businesses hinder our ability to retain and attract new companies to the area. Local businesses need more information about how to deal with new types of crimes, while public safety agencies are hampered by difficult economic conditions resulting in limited resources to provide assistance.

Once incidents of criminal activity, such as graffiti, petty theft or vandalism, begin to occur in a neighborhood or in a commercial area, it affects the community as a whole. For small businesses struggling to survive, crime can tip the balance from success to failure.

Although business crime statistics are not recorded separately on a national level, businesses are twice as likely to be victimized as individuals. Crimes against businesses have a serious impact on the national economy,costing businesses several billion dollars annually. These losses can affect a company's growth, efficiency, customer base, employees and, at times, result in a business shutting its doors forever. The specific acts involving business crime are usually grouped in three categories:

1. Property Crimes: Most commonly include burglary; employee or vehicle theft; embezzlement; fraud; corruption and bribery; intellectual property infringement; Internet fraud or scams, and shoplifting.

2. Violent crime: robbery, assault, harassment, workplace violence.

3. Anti-social behavior: includes any aggressive, intimidating or destructive activity that impacts the business or its employees, such as graffiti and vandalism, verbal abuse, and threatening behavior.

Survey Results Report
(conducted in Spring 2009)

Summary

Approximately 130 surveys were completed and returned by fax, mail, and online. The types of businesses responding were: 37% retail and wholesale; 19% hospitality and tourism-related; 14% financial and professional services. The balance of respondents were about equally divided among agricultural, health, manufacturing, and transportation companies. The highest number of responses was from Santa Rosa, Healdsburg, and Petaluma, and more than 40% of these businesses are located in a downtown area. The next largest percentage of respondents have locations in a business park or strip center, and 13% in a retail center. Most respondents (28%) reported fewer than five employees. The next largest group (26%) had more than 50 employees.

Crimes against businesses are a problem for many companies in Sonoma County. For some, non-violent crimes, such as vandalism, graffiti, shoplifting, and petty theft are a daily occurrence at their business locations. Most Sonoma County public safety departments offer crime prevention advice to businesses that request it, either through on-site visits or online, but awareness of these of these services is low.

The survey addressed four major categories with about five questions per section. A summary of the results are below.

1.  Business Crime Experience

1. Almost 58% of all those participating said their business had experienced crime in the last 12 months with 64% reporting between one and five separate instances.
2. About 90% of respondents said they had initiated contact with the police during the past year, while 78% were pleased with the police response, 22% were not satisfied.
3. Respondents were asked if they feel safe walking alone in the area around their businesses: 73% feel very safe in daylight hours, and 56% feel fairly safe after dark, but 27% don’t feel safe at night.

2.  Reporting of Business Crime

1. The most common offenses reported are vandalism and graffiti (67%), followed by burglary and vehicle theft/damage at about 30%; fraud and embezzlement (25%), and employee theft and credit card fraud averaged about 21%.
2. About 34% reported 75% or more of criminal activities to the police, and 33% said they report up to 25% of the crimes experienced to the authorities.
3. When asked why 100% of crimes are not reported to the police, 65% of the respondents said that the damage or loss was small; another 39% said that their staff handled the problem.

3.  Cost and Impact of Crime on Your Business

1. 39% indicate that the crime incidents they experienced had no impact on their business.
2. 32% said security costs increased, while 22% said they experienced damage to their business image.
3. 21% said they made physical changes to their buildings, and 17% said they lost customers.
4. Higher insurance costs were cited by 10% as a direct result of crime.

4.  Crime Prevention and Reduction (respondents could check as many answers that apply)

• Almost 90% of the responding businesses said they do not know of any community or business crime prevention programs near their business location.
• 45% said they have never received crime prevention advice from any organization.
• 31% received advice for preventing crimes from public safety departments.
• 30% have either received crime prevention information from chambers and trade groups or their insurance companies.
• 64% are interested in attending briefings with business crime experts to get practical tips.
• 81% said they had never worked with a public safety agency regarding business crime in their area.
• 70% said they would benefit from free security surveys.
• When asked to choose the best deterrents to crimes against businesses: 62% selected video cameras and surveillance systems; 39% said tougher sentencing of offenders; 35% chose better training for staff; 29% said the presence of private security patrols would be a deterrent.  About 27% selected crime prevention advice, business watch programs or faster police response, and 21% chose “restitution to victims by criminals.”

Task Force Members' Perspectives

Members of the task force were encouraged to provide their expertise by relating their own experiences dealing with crime at their business locations. The most common crimes they encountered include:

Shoplifting
—Employee-customer partnerships/collusion
—Employee theft
—Organized Retail Theft (ORT)
Fraud/Theft
—Petty theft and theft from car break-ins, job sites, after-hours
—Credit/debit card fraud
—Counterfeit checks
Other
—Gang-related activity
—Public drunkenness and underage drinking
—Panhandling, transient and homeless loitering
—Graffiti and vandalism
—Trespassing
—Personal security and employee safety
Reporting a crime
—Uncertainty about when or how to report a crime not in progress (after the fact);
—Once a crime is reported, what are the follow-up responsibilities of the business owner and law enforcement
—Uncertainty in some areas about which public safety department to contact: the local municipal department or the Sheriff’s Office.

Task Force Suggestions for Improvement

—How to remove and prevent graffiti.

—Where to find resources on how to prevent crime and employee theft.

—Establish a better working relationship with local law enforcement.

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Task Force co-chairs, Jennifer Yankovich, Sonoma Valley Chamber of Commerce, and Capt. Matt McCaffrey, Sonoma County Sheriff's Office, for expert guidance that led to realistic action steps to form public-private partnerships in fighting crimes against businesses in Sonoma County.

Business Crime Prevention Task Force members included: Linda Bertauche, Summit State Bank; Bill Brockley, Sonoma County District Attorney's Office; Victor Garcia, Hispanic Chamber of Commerce; Chet Graska, Food Maxx; Lowell Johnson, Hilton Sonoma Wine Country; David Kelley, Windsor Town Manager's Office, Chris Messina, Santa Rosa Chamber; Capt. Gary Negri, Santa Rosa Police Dept., David Proctor, Friedman's Home Improvements; Salvador Sahagun, Taqueria Santa Rosa; and Jason Smits, Black Rock Insurance Services.

Business Crime Prevention Survey Results
March 2002

Presented to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, August 20, 2002

Overview and Executive Summary
The Business Crime Prevention program—now in the second year of a multi-year initiative to effectively mobilize and utilize resources to fight business crime—is a unique partnership between Sonoma County public safety agencies and business owners and managers. The business crime prevention project brings together for the first time Sonoma County leaders from the business, agriculture, and public safety communities and the organizations that support them, with staff support provided by the Sonoma County Economic Development Board.

The mission of the task force is to assess the current extent of business crime and prepare an overview report on the ways to enhance the support and coordination of voluntary business crime prevention efforts in the county. Among these goals are:

• Enhanced coordination of existing crime prevention practices
  
• Greater awareness of business crime prevention resources
• Increased crime prevention training through a web site, workshops, and written materials
• Development of an education component for information sharing and creation of new prevention programs.

Crimes against business hamper economic vitality and reduce quality of life. Before proceeding with the planning of a business crime prevention workshop, set for Fall 2002, task force members designed a survey to find out what impact crime is having on Sonoma County businesses. Distributed in March 2002, the survey attempted to gauge the extent of crimes against businesses in the county. A variety of programs could be instituted to help prevent and mitigate business crimes. The Business Crime Prevention Task Force offers these findings to support the coordination of crime-fighting efforts in Sonoma County.

Background
Business crime is often seen as "victimless" because of the perception that all businesses are profitable and insured. Although crime statistics are not recorded separately for businesses, they are twice as likely to be the victims as individuals. For small businesses struggling to survive, crime can tip the balance from success to failure. When businesses fail, communities are deprived of goods and services. Without successful small businesses, efforts at regeneration will flounder and employment and investment opportunities will suffer. An effective strategy for tackling crime against businesses is essential if the economy is to flourish and communities prosper.

In 2002, the FBI reported an overall increase in major crimes nationwide for the first time in a decade. An Associated Press article said that the reversal of nine years of declining crime numbers is certain to generate considerable interest in Congress, as well as among the law enforcement community. The latest release of statistics shows major crimes were up 2%, including increases in robberies, burglaries and car thefts in both urban and suburban areas. Most of the increase in 2001 was driven by jumps in various property crimes, led by car thefts at 6%, while the overall number of violent crimes rose by less than one percent. The number of murders rose 3.1% nationally in 2001 over the previous year, excluding the casualties from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Santa Rosa is included in the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program and shows approximate 15% increases in two major crime categories from 2000 to 2001: larceny-theft and motor vehicle theft. Incidents of robbery, burglary, aggravated assault and arson declined over the same period. The article said criminologists have been warning for some time that surges in the numbers of teenagers and released prisoners, along with recent economic declines, threatened a return to rising crime.

Survey Results

Public safety organizations throughout the county have limited resources and those resources are often concentrated in protecting all citizens against major crimes of violence and enforcement of laws against traffic violations, misdemeanor and felony fraud, theft, burglary, robbery, arson, and personal assault. The cities and their police departments work together with the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department, the District Attorney, and the California Highway Patrol to exchange information about crimes and suspects that fall under the jurisdiction of these public safety units. Often, however, crime prevention education falls to a single officer or one who also has other assigned duties. In smaller communities, public safety departments do not have the resources to assign crime prevention responsibilities to officers.

Recognizing these limitations, the Phase II Business Crime Prevention task force undertook to identify the extent of business crime and make recommendations that would address areas of concern that would not further tax existing resources. In the Spring of 2002, the Task Force undertook a survey of 1,400 businesses, with a response rate of 15%.

Key Findings include:

Business Crime Experience in the last 12 months:
61% reported one or more crime incidents; 39% of businesses reported no crime

Of those who reported crimes:
80% report 1 to 5 instances of business crime
13% report 6 to 10 instances of business crime
3% report 20 to 50 or over 50 instances

Choosing from a list of types of crimes, respondents were asked to select all offenses that have been committed against their businesses and estimate the frequency of instances in the last 12 months.

• ¨ 23% report experiencing both burglary (196 incidents) and graffiti (196 incidents) as the most frequent crimes
• ¨ 16% report experiencing vandalism as a frequent offense (143 incidents)
• ¨ 14% report physical damage to vehicles (126 incidents)
• ¨ 9% say that they have experienced employee theft (82 incidents)
• ¨ 6% report fraud (50 incidents)
• ¨ 3% report vehicle theft (24 incidents)
• ¨ 2% report incidents of workplace violence (16)
• ¨ 1% report incidents of attempted burglary (12) and the same percentage reports Internet/High Tech crime (11)
• ¨ A combined 3% report other types of crime that include robbery, arson, personal injury or violence, mail theft, loitering, and panhandling. The percentage of each category of offenses falls below one percent.

Reporting of Business Crime
When asked whether instances of crimes against their businesses were reported to the police, almost one-third of respondents did report 75% to 100% of all business crime. Another third only report up to 25% of the business crime they experience to police. Eighteen percent of respondents said they did not make a report. Nine percent report between 50% to 75% of business crime incidents. Five percent report between 25% and 50% of the crimes they experience.

Topping the list of the main reasons for not calling police about crimes against their businesses, 30% said that none or little damage or loss was incurred as a result of a crime incident. Respondents (29%) said their own staff or security personnel usually handled the problems. The third most frequent answer, that they had "no confidence in police response," was selected by 24% of respondents, followed by 12% who chose "time constraints" as their reason for not reporting crime incidents to the police.

Cost and Impact of Business Crime
Asked to estimate both the costs of crime incidents and loss of business, almost 50% estimated the cost at less than $1,000 over the past 12 months. One-third of respondents said the cost was between $1,000 and $10,000. Only one business reported losses of more than $100,000 and two reported losses in the $50,000 to $100,000 range. Five percent estimated losses at $10,000 to $50,000. Nine percent said they did not know what expense they incurred as a result of crime.

Respondents were asked to choose as many answers that may apply when reporting what impact crime has had on their businesses.

• ¨ 37% said that the crime they experienced had no impact on their business
• ¨ 28% said crime incidents resulted in increased security costs
• ¨ 9% experienced crime that resulted in higher insurance costs
• ¨ 7% made physical changes in building layout and design after experiencing crime
• ¨ 6% reported damage to their business image and low staff morale
• ¨ 4% said instances of business crime resulted in loss of customers

Among other negative impacts on their businesses as a result of crime, respondents cited postponement of business investment, expense of repairs, internal policy changes, loss of productivity, delay in delivery of goods to customers, and difficulties in recruiting/training staff.

Business Crime Prevention and Reduction
Only 13% of respondents were aware of any type of community or business crime prevention programs in the vicinity of their location, specifically mentioning community watch, sheriff and police patrols, and the DA's bad check program. The other 87% said they didn't know of any business crime prevention programs.

When asked if they had ever received crime prevention advice, 28% of respondents said they had not. Topping the main sources of information about crime prevention were police/public safety departments at 27%. Respondents cited security services and insurance companies as the second best sources of information. Tied in third place were local chambers of commerce and business advisors/consultants. Other sources of crime prevention advice added by respondents were banks, trade associations and attorneys.

The next three questions related to initiatives already underway by the Business Crime Prevention task force. When asked if they would take advantage of a crime prevention workshop or a web site focused on business crime prevention, if available, more than 75% said they would. If a printed handbook of crime prevention information was available, 90% said they would use it to establish or change business practices and train current and new employees. Those who indicated they would not take advantage of any prevention education said their losses were too insignificant and cited time constraints or no computer access at their businesses.

The final question asked businesses to choose from a list of deterrents commonly thought to be among the best at reducing crime. Although requested to choose only one, many chose several. Most believed that video camera/other surveillance was the best deterrent, closely followed by private security patrols/on-site presence and better staff training. These three choices made up 59% of responses. Another 37% of businesses cited crime prevention advice, tougher sentencing of criminals and restitution to victims by criminals as being the best crime deterrents. Faster police response and a business watch program were chosen by 17% of respondents.

Survey Methodology and Demographics

The intent of the survey was to provide a general "snapshot in time" of crimes experienced by businesses during the last 12 months. Consequently, any factor or interest, including company size, has not weighted the averages. The data is as accurate as non-scientific polling and anonymous response survey methods permit. Those surveyed were asked to respond by fax or mail, but no paid reply envelope was included in the mailing. Surveys were mailed to lists compiled by the Sonoma County Economic Development Board that covered all sectors of the County's economy and given to several task force members to distribute to their customers and clients.

The largest number of surveys was distributed to manufacturers and retail/wholesale operations, but an effort was made to include all types of businesses from large to small and agriculture to high tech that contribute to the County's economy. This resulted in replies from a sampling of those involved in hospitality/tourism, such as hotels, wineries and restaurants, in addition to a sampling from sectors such as development and financial services, high tech firms, exporters and car dealers. It is estimated that approximately 1,400 surveys were distributed. The rate of return was unusually high at 15% or 217 responses.

Of the 217 surveys received, the majority was from Santa Rosa (46%), followed by Healdsburg (10%), Petaluma (10%), Rohnert Park (6%), and Sonoma (6%). Seven percent of businesses were located in unincorporated areas. Santa Rosa, divided into four quadrants, showed the highest number of replies from Northwest Santa Rosa, followed by Northeast Santa Rosa and downtown.

Retail/wholesale operations dominated the types of businesses that responded with 26% followed by manufacturing at 22% and agriculture at 13%. Most businesses were located in an industrial, warehouse or business park (34%). The second largest number occupied office or retail space in a downtown area or retail center (27%), and rural locations came in a close third.

The majority of businesses employed between 10 and 19 employees, slightly ahead of those who employed between 20 and 49 employees. Fifteen percent of businesses have more than 100 employees. Eighty-seven percent of those who responded have been in business for more than 10 years.

In addition to the high survey return rate, 47 % included contact information on this anonymous survey to indicate their interest in receiving the survey results.

Overview of the Business Crime Prevention Partnership
Beginning with a crime prevention workshop in 1995 that drew more than 100 attendees, the Sonoma County Economic Development Board has been involved in efforts to work with businesses, public safety agencies, insurance companies and other firms that provide security services or equipment. Recognizing that crime can deter business development and expansion, the EDB has supported business and law enforcement partnerships to address and find solutions to the changing needs of the community. The phases of implementation are detailed below:

Phase I (2000-2001): In its first year, the Business Crime Prevention task force was highly successful in meeting its objectives:

• Formed a task force with members from both the business and law enforcement sectors to make recommendations
• Researched, prepared, produced and distributed a Business Crime Prevention Handbook
• Using the above material, proposed development of a web site
• Investigated methods of short or long term funding support for the program

Phase II (2001-2002): Some of the following goals for the Phase II task force were identified during the first year of the Business Crime Prevention initiative:

• Increase the emphasis on high-tech crime and target those sections in the business crime prevention handbook that need development
• Help develop and update a new web site based on the Business Crime Prevention Handbook, hosted by the County of Sonoma site
• Explore ways to develop a Crime Crushers e-mail relay/bulletin system initiated from the web site that can warn businesses of current or continuing threats/incidents of crimes committed against similar businesses or commercial areas
• Explore methods to print and more widely distribute copies of the Crime Crushers Handbook
• Raise awareness of business crime prevention by planning a business crime prevention workshop
• Develop a youth component of the crime prevention program that raises awareness among teens about the costs and the devastation that can be caused by criminal activity against businesses
• Make presentations to community groups, such as Chambers of Commerce, about business crime prevention resources

Phase III (2002-03): Planned goals for the third phase may be altered based on findings and recommendations of the Phase II task force:

• Form a task force to develop ideas created by previous participants consisting of members of law enforcement, citizens groups, businesses, educators and youth groups
• Establish an ongoing, coordinated program to utilize the resources of law enforcement and businesses to produce voluntary training programs and "best practices" certification programs
• Set up an ongoing voluntary business/public safety/citizens group that will serve as a resource for law enforcement and educational training. The objectives of this ongoing group will be to:
  • Research and develop a voluntary certification program for businesses that recognizes those who have taken additional or extraordinary steps to educate their staff or raise awareness of crime prevention.
  • Continue to update and improve the Crime Crushers web site to meet the changing needs of the business community and public safety organizations
  • Continue to develop new sources of funding to support business crime prevention education, training and initiatives

Key Opportunities
Based on survey results, the Business Crime Prevention task force and the Sonoma County Economic Development Board wish to recommend consideration of the following:

• Continue the efforts of the Business Crime Prevention task force to provide ongoing support and coordination between local public safety agencies and businesses
• Raise awareness of business crime prevention strategies by producing a workshop for business owners and managers focused on the areas of concern expressed by survey respondents
• Help small businesses train employees in recognizing criminal activity (such as ID theft and credit card fraud) by offering workshops in the spring and fall before busy commercial seasons
• Develop a youth component that educates teens on the costs and the lasting, far-reaching impact that can be caused by criminal activity against businesses
• Establish an ongoing review committee of volunteers to update a business crime prevention web page now being developed on the County of Sonoma site
• Work with local public safety departments and businesses to develop an email relay system that would advise business owners and managers of crime trends in their particular areas.
• Offer programs to local chambers and service groups on ways to combat business crime to raise community awareness
• Continue to investigate short and long-term support for business crime prevention education

The business crime prevention program has the full support of the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department, the District Attorney's office, and the Sonoma County Law Enforcement Chiefs Association. Among those who have contributed to the Business Crime Prevention Partnership are the following:

• Advent Office Furniture
• Agilent Technologies
• California Highway Patrol
• Coddingtown Regional Mall
• Exchange Bank
• Historic Railroad Square Association, KOMAG
• Long's Drug Stores
• Luther Burbank Savings
• Matsen Insurance Brokers
• McDonald Leavitt Insurance Agency
• Merrill, Arnone & Jones LLP
• Price Pump Co.
• Santa Rosa Fire Department
• State Senator Wesley Chesbro's Office
• Sonoma State University

Back to top of page