Public Safety Realignment - Sonoma County

7/29/2019 Public Safety Realignment - Sonoma County

1/43

AB 109/117

Public Safety Realignment


2/43

AB 109

January, 2011 -Proposed in Governors budget

April -Passed by legislature, signed by Governor

June -Funding and clarifying legislation inAB 117, AB 118 with passage of State

Budget

October 1 - -Public safety Realignment became operative

November 1 -Board approved Sonoma County InterimRealignment Plan

July, 2012 -Board approved Sonoma County Year 2 Realignment Plan


3/43

Why Realignment

Coleman/Plataprison overcrowding lawsuit

State budget

Recidivism rate from CDCR

Research


4/43

Misconceptions

Realignment does not result in early release of any currently

sentenced felons.

Realignment does not transfer custody of any prisoner from

State Prison directly to County Jail.

Rather, it changes jurisdiction of specified populations from

state to local control, by changing sentencing and supervision

requirements


5/43

AB 109 Overview

Shifted responsibility of specific felons to county control

Established Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS)

Established new sentencing scheme

Tasked Community Corrections Partnerships (CCPs) with

planning for, and implementation of local plans


6/43

Non-non-non Offenders

These offenders are serving their sentences locally, sentencedunder PC 1170(h).

Typically, sentence structured as some combination of local jail

time, with period under Mandatory Supervision by Probation.

Current or prior offense must be:

Non-violent

Non-seriousNon-sex

Unless excluded by one of 70+ specified crimes


7/43

Post Release

Community Supervision

(PRCS)

Probation supervises these offenders upon release fromprison:

Current Non-violent offenders

Current Non-serious offenders

Some Sex offenders

Does include offenders with a serious/violent offense in criminal

history (as long as its not current offense). Does not include 3rd strikers


8/43

Local Impacts

CDCR estimates ofADP for Sonoma County, at full

implementation:

- PRCS - 164 supervised by Probation

- PRCS - 21 in County Jail on violation

- Non-non-non - 230 additional in the local system

(some in County Jail; some on Mandatory Supervision,

supervised by Probation)


9/43

Local Impacts - Unknowns

-How many PRCS offenders will we receive?

-What will their needs and risk be?

-How will system charge, sentence non-non-nons?

-How many will be sentenced?

-How will they be sentenced?

Custody? Mandatory Supervision? Split?

-How will new laws impact Felony Probation?-Impact of #s, credits, programming on County Jail ADP?


10/43

Realignment Challenge

Realignment provides limited funding for each County.

How will local system react?

Can we impact this?

How must our criminal justice system function to handlemany more offenders wisely, safely, and without losing

money?


11/43

Realignment Funding

Total funding at state levelCalculated from states experience/model

Distribution among 58 countiesCSAC created formula for FY 2011/2012

Local PlanCommunity Corrections Partnership recommends, BOS approves


12/43

Sonoma County Strengths

Criminal Justice Master Plan

Belief in upstream initiatives

Culture of collaboration


13/43

Criminal Justice Master Plan

Precipitant: Rising jail population, possible need for increased beds.

Projected cost: $300+ million

Quest for Plan B

Consultant spends year studying CJ system

Series of recommendations, fleshed out over a second yearCriminal Justice Master Plan approved by Board of Supervisors Jan, 2010

Key pieces:

-Use of EBP, assess level of risk, resources follow risk, etc.-Early Case Resolution Court

-Pre-trial program-Day Reporting Center

-Community Corrections Center


14/43

Local Planning Process

Community Corrections Partnership (CCP)

14-member committee, created by SB 678 in 2009, predating

Realignment

Realignment builds on SB 678, and defines CCP Executive

committee (voting members)


15/43

Community Corrections Partnership

Exec Comm Steve Freitas, SheriffJill Ravitch, District AttorneyJose Guillen, Court Executive Officer, as designee of Presiding JudgeKathleen Pozzi, Interim Public DefenderMichael Kennedy, Director of Mental Health/AODSTom Schwedhelm, Chief of Police, Santa Rosa

Robert Ochs, Chief Probation Officer (Chair)

Efren Carrillo, Board of SupervisorsVeronica Ferguson, CAORene Chouteau, Superior Court Presiding JudgeKaren Fies, Director, Employment and Training, Human ServicesMichael Gossman, CAO Analyst

Marlus Stewart , Director, DAACGina Burk, Victim Witness Director, DAs OfficeSteven Herrington, Superintendent, Sonoma County SchoolsJerry Dunn, Interim Director of Human Services


16/43

Organizing Principles

Use of detention beds should be minimized, in a manner that

is consistent with public safety, and the integrity of the

criminal justice system;

The system, and decisions, should be risk-based;

Research tested methods should be used, as much as

practicable.


17/43

Early CCP Decisions

Countys Criminal Justice Master Plan should be foundation

Programming should be provided for in-custody, as well asout-of-custody offenders

A Day Reporting Center should be a fundamental componentof the Plan

Plan should be considered Interim


18/43

Sub-Committees

SupervisionCarla Maus, Chair

Sentencing

Judge Dana Simonds, Chair

Detention Alternatives/Programming/Reentry

Michael Kennedy, Sheralynn Freitas, Co-Chairs

Data Management and Evaluation

Kim Gilmore, Chair


19/43

Plan Development Considerations

Realignment legislation itself CCPs adopted Organizing Principles

Sonoma Countys CJMP

Sub-Committee recommendations

Projections of local ADP numbers

Assumptions about offenders risk and needs

Anticipation of how criminal justice system will react

Recognition that needs exceed resources, requiringprioritization


20/43

Realignment Funding

Realignment legislation assumes Counties will manage thesepopulations differently than the State, through a combinationof jail time, supervision, detention alternatives, andprogramming.

In fact, we must manage the new populations differently.Funding will not be sufficient if we follow the State, i.e.:

-lock up offenders for significant periods

-not address needs and risk

-simply release


21/43

Interim Realignment Plan, 11/12

Programming $1,109,000

In-custody 282,000

Out-of-custody 827,000

Supervision 1,106,000Custody 570,000

Detention alternatives mgmt 160,000

Data management 117,000

Criminal Justice Consultant 50,000Start-up/admin 250,000

Contingencies 257,000

Total: $3,619,000


22/43

Non-non-non Experience

As of 1/25/12:

Court sentenced 238 offenders under 1170(h)

140, or 59% of these have been split, i.e., part custody, part Mandatory

Supervision Length of sentences have varied, with maximum 13.5 years.

63 non-non-non offenders have been released and are currently being

supervised on Mandatory Supervision. These numbers will continue to

increase.


23/43

Jail ExperienceAs of 1/25/2012:

Increased Population

158 inmates currently serving sentence under 1170(h)

52 % assessed as High Risk to re-offend

63% with split sentences will be released to Mandatory Supervision

Parolee increase from Average Daily Population (ADP) of 7 inmates

prior to AB109 to ADP of 32 inmates

PRCS ADP of 12 inmates

Inmate Search in Sonoma County, CA
http://www.inmatecountyjail.com/http://www.inmatecountyjail.com/cat/sonoma-county/http://www.inmatecountyjail.com/cat/sonoma-county/http://www.inmatecountyjail.com/


24/43

Jail Experience

Increased In Custody Programming

Target High to Moderate Risk to reoffend based on STRONG assessment

Enhanced Starting Point program

High Risk Group started March 2012 with a total enrollment of 57 individuals

Moderate Risk Group started April 2012 with a total enrollment of 49 individuals

Introduced MRT (a cognitive based therapy) to curriculum in September 2012:

High Risk Group with a total enrollment of 24 individuals

Moderate Risk Group with a total enrollment of 28 individuals

Detention Alternatives Electronic Monitoring Program

Implemented December 1, 2011

One Correctional Deputy assigned

191 inmates enrolled since implementation with 30 participants active as of 12/31/12.

Approximately 90% enrolled are working, enrolled in school and/or participating in

rehabilitative programs in the community (i.e., AA, NA, Anger Management, etc.)


25/43

PRCS Experience

As of 12/31/12:

Supervised by 10 Probation Officers, plus Sheriffs Deputy, and CHP officer

349 PRCS offenders released to Sonoma County

267 active in the community

Of 349 released to Sonoma County, 24 failed to appear for initial report

147 were on warrant status

80 individuals have committed total of 114 new offenses

57 have been revoked 109 have been incarcerated with use of flash incarceration

Risk levels: 72% high-risk to reoffend


26/43

Day Reporting Center Experience

As of 1/25/12:

Began operations January 2012 with a target maximum ADP of 100

individuals

Capacity expanded in September 2012 to raise the maximum ADP to 150individuals

Anticipated to take 9-12 months for individuals to complete all 3 phases of

the DRC program

A total of 308 offenders have enrolled since inception:

140 are currently active (approximately 60% are PRCS or 1170h) 17 have successfully completed the program


27/43

Realignment Funding - Year 2

Total state funding - $842 million (Year 1, approx $350 million)

CSAC again negotiated formula, expected to be used for years2 and 3

Sonoma County projected to receive $9.027 million for FY

2012/2013, plus $150 k planning money.


28/43

Development of Year 2 Plan/Budget

CCP recommends continue with Interim Plan and Programs

Interim plan directs study, and begin Pre-trial, if feasible

Recommendations for additional funding:

Data Management and Evaluation Sub-committee Detention Alternatives/Programming Sub-committee

Other departments, via CCP meetings

Funding predominantly recommended for custody, supervision, detentionalternatives, and programming.

Carry-over balance of $1,201,744 - recommend use for contingencies

CCP approved year 2 recommendations on 7-0 vote May 22


29/43

Custody

Continue AB 109 funding of 1 unit in NCDF

Continue AB 109 funding of Electronic Monitoring Program

Sheriffs SERT (Specialized Emergency Response Team)

train 2 new members


30/43

Supervision

Continue supervision with POs, assistance of Sheriff, CHP;

-add 50 k for local LE assistance

-add .5 DA Gang Task Force Investigator

Enhance PO ratio to 35:1 (currently 40:1).

Add POs incrementally as number of offenders grows


31/43

Programming - In-custody

Mental Health $234,632

1370 restoration services 374,000

Starting point 150,000

Program manager 146,631 Jail programs 138,412

cognitive behavioral, anger mgmt, non-violent comm,

parenting, employment preparation, etc.

PO 1170(h) offender assessment 127,596Total: $1,171,271


32/43

Programming - Out-of-custody

Day reporting center $1,535,000

Mental Health 214,475

Substance Abuse Treatment 452,500

DV programming 27,120 Housing 45,000

GED prep 43,000

Job training and job search assistance 165,489

Business rep 37,500 General Assistance 70,000

Total $2,590,084


33/43

Additional Recommendations

Pre-Trial $1,012,410

Detention alternatives 717,407

Data management 135,000

Criminal justice consultant 80,000 County Counsel 15,000

Administration (department analyst) 137,789

Contingencies 1,286,941


34/43

Pre-trial

Criminal Justice Master Plan:

Pre-trial program necessary for County to fully realize benefit of Early CaseResolution Court

Early Case Resolution Court 2009 CGF

Day Reporting Center 2012 AB 109

Pre-trial program 2013 AB 109

Community Corrections Center ? SB 1022?

Interim Realignment Plan:

Directed Pre-trial study, with anticipated implementation in year 2.


35/43

Pre-trial

Core system function providing universal front-end screening

Recommendations from Criminal Justice consultants:

-base on evidence-based risk principle

-develop locally derived pre-trial risk tool

-develop locally derived matrix - input from CJ stakeholders-create hybrid program:

-Sheriff classification staff provide assessment

-Probation Officers provide supervision

Benefits:

-facilitates efficient case processing

-supports jail management

-risk-based decision making

-expedited access to available services

-increased effectiveness, by reducing pre-trial failure


36/43

Contingency Funds

CCP identified several areas that may deserve/need funding in

year 2:

DUI Court

Sheriff LPAdditional unit in NCDF

Recommend use of carry-over funds ($1,201,744)

Recommend total contingency fund of $1,286,941, or 12.3%

of total available funding for year 2.


37/43

Realignment Plan and CJMP

-Day Reporting Center

-Pre-trial

-Use objective risk-assessment instrument

-Probation to use STRONG assessment in MADF

-Employment assistance

-Target higher-risk offender-Mental health evaluation and services

-Substance abuse treatment

-Expedite entry into treatment

-Ensure treatment continuity

-Cognitive skills programs-GED classes

-Build on data collection


38/43

Proposed Year 2 Realignment Budget

Programming $3,761,355In-custody 1,171,271

Out-of-custody 2,590,084

Detention alternatives 717,407

Supervision 1,988,052

Custody (including SERT) 1,104,970Data management 135,200

Pre-trial 1,012,407

Local Law Enforcement support 50,000

DA Gang Task Force Investigator 90,000

Criminal Justice Consultant 80,000

Administration 137,789

County Counsel 15,000

Contingencies 1,286,941

Total: $10,379,121


39/43

Data Collection

Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) working with:

Administrative Office of Courts

California State Association of Counties

State Sheriffs Association

Chief Probation Officers of California

Developing and implementing first phase baseline and ongoing data

collection instruments


40/43

Data Collection

State Sheriffs collecting for each county:

PRCS:

Total booked, booked on flash, booked on new charge

Serving jail time for revocation

1170h sentences:

Number sentenced to local custody

Offenders released to sheriffs alternative custody program

Number from alt custody program returned to custody

State parolees:

Booked on parole violation, new charges, serving local sentence


41/43

Data Collection

Chief Probation Officers collecting for each county:

PRCS: 1170h sentences:

Released from CDCR jail only

On warrant split sentences

Closures active

Recidivism

Active

New felony probation grants


42/43

Data Collection

Sonoma County

Recommend hiring consultant to assist in establishing long-term

evaluation for Sonoma Countys Realignment plan.

Based on best-practices Determine data elements

Determine evaluation questions

Hire Business Intelligence Programmer to build data gathering

process and reports to implement the above plan.

Inter-department data sharing pilot between Probation, Health, and

Human Services, to match individuals across disparate data sources.


43/43

This plan:

-Protects public safety

-Is balanced

-Is an upstream approach

-Is consistent with Criminal Justice Master Plan

-Is consistent with Sonoma Countys values

-Fits within anticipated resources

Public Safety Realignment - Sonoma County

Documents

Transcript of Public Safety Realignment - Sonoma County