To: Criminal Justice Committee From: David S. Boesch, County Manager Subject: Criminal Justice Committee Meeting Agenda Meeting Date and Time: August 25, 2009, 2:30 PM Place: Board Conference Room, Office of the Board of Supervisors First Floor, Hall of Justice, 400 County Center, Redwood City AGENDA 1. Call to order 2. Public comment 3. Approval of the minutes for the meetings of July 15, 2009 – attachment 4. Sheriff’s Office - attachment A) Jail Overcrowding B) Jail Planning 5. County Re-Entry Update (County Manager’s Office) 6. Update on Proposition 36 7. CORA Emergency Response Program (County Manager's Office) - attachment 8. Adjourn A COPY OF THE SAN MATEO CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT THE CLERK OF THE BOARD’S OFFICE, HALL OF JUSTICE, 400 COUNTY CENTER, FIRST FLOOR. THE CLERK OF THE BOARD’S OFFICE IS OPEN MONDAY THRU FRIDAY 8 A.M. - 5 P.M, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY – CLOSED. MEETINGS ARE ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. INDIVIDUALS WHO NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE OR A DISABILITY- RELATED MODIFICATION OR ACCOMMODATION (INCLUDING AUXILIARY AIDS OR SERVICES) TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, OR WHO HAVE A DISABILITY AND WISH TO REQUEST AN ALTERNATIVE FORMAT FOR THE AGENDA, MEETING NOTICE, AGENDA PACKET OR OTHER WRITINGS THAT MAY BE DISTRIBUTED AT THE MEETING, SHOULD CONTACT ASHNITA NARAYAN, CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE CLERK, AT LEAST 72 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING AT (650) 363-4121 AND/OR [email protected]. NOTIFICATION IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE COUNTY TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THIS MEETING AND THE MATERIALS RELATED TO IT. ATTENDEES TO THIS MEETING ARE REMINDED THAT OTHER ATTENDEES MAY BE SENSITIVE TO VARIOUS CHEMICAL BASED PRODUCTS. If you wish to speak to the Committee, please fill out a speaker’s slip. If you have anything that you wish distributed to the Committee and included in the official record, please hand it to the County Manager who will distribute the information to the Supervisors and staff.
Transcript
To: Criminal Justice Committee From: David S. Boesch, County Manager Subject: Criminal Justice Committee Meeting Agenda
Meeting Date and Time: August 25, 2009, 2:30 PM Place: Board Conference Room, Office of the Board of Supervisors First Floor, Hall of Justice, 400 County Center, Redwood City
AGENDA
1. Call to order
2. Public comment
3. Approval of the minutes for the meetings of July 15, 2009 – attachment
4. Sheriff’s Office - attachment A) Jail Overcrowding B) Jail Planning
5. County Re-Entry Update (County Manager’s Office)
6. Update on Proposition 36
7. CORA Emergency Response Program (County Manager's Office) - attachment
8. Adjourn
A COPY OF THE SAN MATEO CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT THE CLERK OF THE BOARD’S OFFICE, HALL OF JUSTICE, 400 COUNTY CENTER, FIRST FLOOR. THE CLERK OF THE BOARD’S OFFICE IS OPEN MONDAY THRU FRIDAY 8 A.M. - 5 P.M, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY – CLOSED. MEETINGS ARE ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. INDIVIDUALS WHO NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE OR A DISABILITY-RELATED MODIFICATION OR ACCOMMODATION (INCLUDING AUXILIARY AIDS OR SERVICES) TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, OR WHO HAVE A DISABILITY AND WISH TO REQUEST AN ALTERNATIVE FORMAT FOR THE AGENDA, MEETING NOTICE, AGENDA PACKET OR OTHER WRITINGS THAT MAY BE DISTRIBUTED AT THE MEETING, SHOULD CONTACT ASHNITA NARAYAN, CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE CLERK, AT LEAST 72 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING AT (650) 363-4121 AND/OR [email protected]. NOTIFICATION IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE COUNTY TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THIS MEETING AND THE MATERIALS RELATED TO IT. ATTENDEES TO THIS MEETING ARE REMINDED THAT OTHER ATTENDEES MAY BE SENSITIVE TO VARIOUS CHEMICAL BASED PRODUCTS. If you wish to speak to the Committee, please fill out a speaker’s slip. If you have anything that you wish distributed to the Committee and included in the official record, please hand it to the County Manager who will distribute the information to the Supervisors and staff.
To: Criminal Justice Committee From: David S. Boesch, County Manager Subject: Criminal Justice Committee Meeting Agenda
Meeting Date and Time: July 15, 2009, 1:00 PM Place: Board Conference Room, Office of the Board of Supervisors First Floor, Hall of Justice, 400 County Center, Redwood City
MINUTES
1. Call to order Committee Chair Adrienne Tissier called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. Committee
members Adrienne Tissier and Mark Church were present.
2. Public comment No member of the public wished to speak.
3. Approval of the minutes for the meetings of June 8, 2009 The minutes were approved as submitted.
4. Sheriff’s Office: A) Jail Overcrowding Assistant Sheriff Trisha Sanchez reported: Operational facilities average daily population this month was 1,119 inmates,
highest average one day population occurred on June 8th with 1,152 inmates. Maguire Correctional Facility - Average daily population for June was 962
inmates, highest one day population occurred on June 1st with 993 inmates. Women’s Correctional Center - Average daily population for June was 117
inmates, highest one day population occurred on June 28th with 125 inmates. Average Length of Stay – Overall is 28 days, Pretrial is 13 and Sentenced is
44. Custody Status – Pretrial is 64%, Sentenced is 35%. Eligible for Release Today – 39 inmates Modifiable Releases to Programs – 88 inmates
The CIJS migration is taking place this weekend. Re-Entry efforts have been working very well. Effective July 20th the Sheriff’s will
begin administering the quick screen assessments.
There was some discussion regarding the State release of prisoners. The Sheriff’s Office has not heard what the final implications will be.
B) Jail Planning Assistant Sheriff Sanchez: There are two Community Meetings scheduled on
July 21 in Redwood City and July 22 in San Carlos. The Jail Planning has finished a second issue of the Jail Planning newsletter. Once the site has been selected, the next step would be to select an architect. The plan is to narrow down the top two/three sites by August/September and issue the RFP by March.
5. Presentation on Jail Sites (Sheriff’s Office)
Assistant Sheriff Sanchez: Provided an overview of the site criteria and the site
matrix. There are seven have been determined as most viable, four are potentially viable and seven were determined not viable. The seven most viable sites are listed in rating order.
6. County Re-Entry Update (County Manager’s Office)
A) Reentry System Mapping County Manager David Boesch introduced the item and provided background
information. Ken Pesso explained the re-entry workflow process.
7. Adjourn Supervisor Church asked for a viable alternative to having the two mental health beds
in Santa Clara County moved to San Mateo County. County Manager Boesch recommended bringing this item back to the Criminal Justice Committee in September.
The meeting adjourned at 1:41 p.m.
Commitment ~ Integrity ~ Compassion Page 1 of 2
COUNTY OF SANMATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence
SHERIFF’S OFFICE
Date: August 17, 2009 To: San Mateo County Board of Supervisors
Criminal Justice Committee-August 25, 2009 Meeting From: Greg Munks, Sheriff Subject: Jail Overcrowding / Inmate Program & Re-entry Services / Jail Planning Jail Overcrowding Status: The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office operational adult correctional facilities include the Maguire Correctional Facility (MCF), the Women’s Correctional Center (WCC) and the Minimum Security Transitional Facility (MSTF). The combined rated capacity for these facilities totals 818 inmates. The operational facilities average daily population this month was 1,136 inmates and the highest one-day population occurred on July 20th with 1,175 inmates.
The MCF average daily population for July was 976 inmates (MCF rated capacity is 688 inmates). In review of the population trend this month, the MCF operated eight days under the color coded response level ORANGE and the remaining twenty-three days were operated under code level RED. As defined in the Continuity of Operations Plan, level Orange is when our population is above 895 inmates or 131% to 140% of rated capacity and level Red is above 964 inmates or 141% to 160% of rated capacity. The highest one-day population for MCF occurred on July 20th with 1,023 inmates.
The WCC average daily population for July was 121 inmates (WCC rated capacity is 84 inmates). The average daily population this month was 144% of the rated capacity. The highest one-day population for WCC occurred on July 29th with 130 inmates. The Overflow Housing Unit (OHU) was not put into service this month. Although, MCF still maintained an average female daily population of ten women.
Refer to Appendix I: Inmate Population Analysis Report
Commitment ~ Integrity ~ Compassion Page 2 of 2
Re-Entry Efforts: The Re-entry Workgroup continues with its population mitigation efforts as demonstrated in the attached statistical report. They also continue to work on the broader county-wide reentry efforts, to which a response on the Second Chance Grant application should be reported to Director Steve Kaplan by the end of September, 2009. On Thursday, July 23rd, our Sheriff, Greg Munks, presented the Probation Department with certificates of appreciation for their excellent work, dedication, and collaboration they have consistently performed in our jail facilities regarding the modifiable sentenced inmates in conjunction with the Court to assist with managing our population and provided targeted inmate program placements. The following probation staff was acknowledged by the Sheriff; Deputy Chief Ken Pesso, Supervisor Rich Hori, and Probation Officer Laura Melendy.
Refer to Appendix II: Re-entry Statistical Report Jail Planning Update: Two community outreach meetings were recently held to further public participation in the replacement jail planning process. Hosted by Sheriff Greg Munks, the meetings were well attended and allowed the public to learn more about the jail planning process and brought together elected officials, city government staff, Sheriff Office representatives, neighborhood groups and other concerned citizens and members of the community to work towards the common goal of a safer San Mateo County. In addition to Sheriff Munks, an expert panel consisting of Sheriff’s Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Functional Programming Consultant Dennis Liebert and Architect Roger Lichtman answered questions and provided valuable information to all in attendance. The meetings were facilitated by the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center. Also in attendance were Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos, Assistant Sheriff Trisha Sanchez, and Captain Quinlan along with other key stakeholder staff members. One meeting was held in Redwood City at the San Mateo Credit Union Administrative Offices and the second was at the San Carlos library. In total, well over 250 people attended. Over 150 questions were submitted by members of the public. As a follow up, the Sheriff’s Jail Planning Unit has updated its web page to include all the Q and A from the community meetings along with two new informational videos, relevant reports from the National Institute of Corrections and specific possible site information. The link to jail planning web page is www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/jailplanning
ADP ADP % of Facility ADP976 Male 205 18.0%121 Female 8 0.7%390
*All Facility ADP 1,136 ADP % of Facility ADP
420 Min 272 23.9%6 Med 585 51.5%
Inmate Total ADP 1,562 Max 279 24.6%
1,005 ADP % of Facility ADP131 Pretrial 746 65.7%
Sentenced 390 34.3%
Total Avg Daily BkgsFel 674 21.7
Misd 855 27.6Inf 2 0.1
Total 1,531 49.4ADP %
Felony 928 81.7%Misd 208 18.3%
Inmate Population
**Pretrial
Average Length of Stay
MAGFacility
Male
*Gender ADP
WCC
EMPSWP
WKRMSTF
*Custody Status
Bookings
*Gang Affiliation
*Security Classification
Inmate Population Analysis SummaryJuly-09
San Mateo County Sheriff's Office
*Charge Level
**Overall ALS
**Sentenced
Female
** Information not available this month
Charge Level information is not specifically tracked. Figures are an estimated average.
ALS measured in Days.
Comprehensive Re-entry Statistics (including all Modifiable Inmates)
December 16, 2008 through June 15, 2009 Number of inmates processed
Release status for all modifiable inmates closing Dec 16 2008 to Jun 15 2009
Release to program—facilitated by Re-entry Workgroup Team 72 41%
Release to program—without Re-entry Team intervention 16 9%
Time served 86 50%
Total modifiable releases 174 100%
Of the 174 released inmates:
• 131 (75%) were male, 43 (25%) female. • 75 (43%) were in Choices or the Gender Responsive Program on their
release date. • 38 (22%) had holds or were serving other sentences, which complicated
their re-entry placement. About 29 new modifiable cases are received in an average month. About 15 inmates were released to a program each month. Released to a program The following table shows the distribution of inmates released to a program by Choices participation and sex. Choices inmates were much more likely to be placed in a program than non-Choices inmates (69% versus 36% for men, 45% versus 31% for women). Inmates going to a program were released an average of 63 days before their scheduled release date.
Program placement rate for Choices and Non-Choices inmates, by sex
Choices Men Non-Choices
Men Total Men Choices/GRP
Women Non-Choices
Women Total Women RTP facilitated by RWT* 39 19 58 9 5 14
RTP without RWT intervention 2 8 10 3 3 6
Subtotal RTP 41 27 68 12 8 20
Time served 12 51 63 10 13 23
Total Releases 53 78 131 22 21 43
Percentage released to a program 77% 35% 52% 55% 38% 47%
* RTP = released to a program; RWT = Re-entry Workgroup Team
Inmates released to a treatment program—location of program
In-County programs
Out-of-County programs Total
Facilitated by Re-entry Workgroup Team 58 14 72
Without Re-entry Team intervention 15 1 16
Time-served releases 86 inmates (50% of the 174 released inmates) were released after serving their full sentence. 29 of these inmates had outside holds or non-modifiable cases blocking their release. The other 57 served out their time because programs did not have beds for them, or the inmates were unwilling to commit to a program. Recidivism As a measure of recidivism, we test for County re-bookings within 90 days, 180 days, and 365 days of the inmate’s release. Cumulative 90-day rebooking data is given for inmates released between January 1 and March 15, 2009. 180-day rebooking data is given for inmates released between January 1 and December 15, 2008. 365-day rebooking data is available for inmates released between January 1 and June 15, 2008.
Inmates rebooked within 90 days of their release
(released between 01/01/08-03/15/09) Type of release Number of
releases Number
rebooked Percentage rebooked
To a treatment program— facilitated by Re-entry
Workgroup Team 185 25 14%
To a treatment program— without Re-entry Team
intervention 53 12 23%
Time served 261 41 16%
Total 499 78 16%
90-day re-bookings: For the 37 inmates who were rebooked after being released to a treatment program, the causes were:
• Probation/parole violations: 28 (76%) • Warrants or remands: 3 (8%) • New open charges: 6 (16%)
For the 41 inmates who were rebooked after a time-served release, the causes were:
• Probation/parole violations: 17 (41%) • Warrants or remands: 7 (18%) • New open charges: 17 (41%)
Inmates rebooked within 180 days of their release
(released between 01/01/08-12/15/08) Type of release Number of
releases Number
rebooked Percentage rebooked
To a treatment program— facilitated by Re-entry
Workgroup Team 153 33 22%
To a treatment program— without Re-entry Team
intervention 46 15 33%
Time served 217 62 29%
Total 416 110 26%
180-day re-bookings: For the 48 inmates who were rebooked after being released to a treatment program, the causes were:
• Probation/parole violations: 29 (60%) • Warrants or remands: 9 (19%) • New open charges: 10 (21%)
For the 62 inmates who were rebooked after a time-served release, the causes were:
• Probation/parole violations: 18 (29%) • Warrants or remands: 19 (31%) • New open charges: 25 (40%)
Inmates rebooked within 365 days of their release
(released between 01/01/08-06/15/08) Type of release Number of
releases Number
rebooked Percentage rebooked
To a treatment program— facilitated by Re-entry
Workgroup Team 82 29 35%
To a treatment program— without Re-entry Team
intervention 28 13 46%
Time served 111 52 47%
Total 221 94 43%
365-day re-bookings: For the 42 inmates who were rebooked after being released to a treatment program, the causes were:
• Probation/parole violations: 23 (55%) • Warrants or remands: 13 (31%) • New open charges: 6 (14%)
For the 52 inmates who were rebooked after a time-served release, the causes were:
• Probation/parole violations: 21 (40%) • Warrants or remands: 15 (29%) • New open charges: 16 (31%)
Current Re-entry Caseload as of July 15, 2009
Total Modifiable Inmates 74 Holds Inmates with Parole, ICE, or out-of-county holds, or with other sentenced cases needing court review
-20
Refused Placement Inmates who have declined to participate in re-entry process after being oriented by Sheriff’s Office, Service League and DPO
-6
Not
elig
ible
for
rele
ase
Sentenced to Minimum Jail Time before Modification Inmates who cannot be released because their Court sentence requires them to serve county jail time before becoming eligible for program release.
-10
Eligible for Release Today 38
Breakdown of why 38 eligible inmates remain in custody
Gender Resp. Prg. Other Waiting for in-county treatment beds Inmate has been accepted by an in-county treatment program but no in-county bed currently available
4 0
Waiting for out-of-county treatment beds Inmate has been accepted by an out-of-county treatment program but no out-of-county bed currently available
3 0
No program identified Inmate has been oriented and is in the process of applying to programs but has not been accepted
5 6
DPO Review DPO decides inmate needs more structured program or inmate needs to remain in custody
1 2
Medical/Mental Health Issues Issues that preclude inmate from being placed in a treatment program
0 0
New Inmate is being oriented by DPO, Sheriff’s Office and Service League, booked within the last 30 days
4 13
Total 17 21
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
Inter-Departmental Correspondence
County Manager’s Office
DATE: [Type Here] BOARD MEETING DATE: September 15, 2009
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: N/A
TO:
Honorable Board of Supervisors
FROM:
David S. Boesch, County Manager
SUBJECT:
Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse (CORA) Funding Report Back
RECOMMENDATION: Accept this report back regarding the funding for CORA Emergency Response Program (ERP) within San Mateo County. BACKGROUND: During the June budget hearings, your Board requested that the County Manager’s Office conduct a review of the current funding distribution by Cities and Unincorporated San Mateo County for the CORA ERP. CORA ERP is a vital lifeline collaboration with 21 police departments in the County and the Sheriff’s office. In conjunction with law enforcement, trained CORA counselors provide 24-hour emergency, critical incidence response and advocacy to de-escalate crisis situations involving domestic violence. DISCUSSION: The current method that CORA uses to distribute ERP funding is based on a formula where cities provide 50% of the funding based on population and assessed valuation and Unincorporated San Mateo County pays the remaining 50%. In FY 2008-09, the total ERP funding was $172,000 of which $86,000 was shared amongst twenty one cities and the County paid the other $86,000. As a comparison, the City of Redwood City with a slightly larger population and a similar assessed valuation, contributed $10,010 based on CORA’s current ERP funding distribution plan.
Based on the population and assessed valuations and use of CORAs funding distribution for ERP, the following three alternatives are offered for FY 2009-10 funding distribution:
1) Continue to use the current cost share formula. See Table 1 for reference. 2) Utilize a similar cost share formula that includes cities and Unincorporated San
Mateo County to share in the cost according to population and assessed valuations. Had the cities and Unincorporated San Mateo County shared proportionally in the cost of $172,000 in FY 2008-09 based on the assessed value and population, then the County’s contribution would have been $17,200, or 10%. As a comparison, City of Redwood City’s contribution would have been $18,016, or approximately 11%. See Table 2 for reference information.
3) Distribute costs based on the number of calls to the Emergency Response Program. In calendar year 2008, the total calls originating within the County were 2,176 for a cost per call of $79.04. Under this proposal and a call volume of 67, Unincorporated San Mateo County’s contribution would have been $5,296 or 3.1%. See Table 3 for reference information.
Table 4 provides a comparison look at the costs for each scenario. Accepting this report back item contributes to the Shared Vision outcome of a Collaborative Community, where leaders forge partnerships, inform and engage residents and demonstrate fiscal stewardship by sustaining core services for future generations and for the most vulnerable members of our community. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with accepting this report.
Table 1 - Current Allocation
Agency Base Share = $43,000 Cost Share Factors Population Factor: $43,000/723,453 0.065246518 Assessed Value Factor: $43,0001 $115,865,885 0.000417437
I
Agency . Fl'6pulation population Percent Populatiof1 Cost
·Other calls were distributed amoung the agencies using a ratio of agency call volume divided by total call volume mUltiplied by total other calls ··Sheriff is designated as unincorporated San Mateo County
Table 4 - Side by Side Comparison of the Three Cost Allocation Scenarios
" I I :
Agencv
I Scenario 1;
Current Allocation Cocsts
Sfenarlo 2: Glties tCounty
SChara- Total Cost
Scenario 3: Cost per C~ II
Volume Atherton $2,358 $4,214 $345 Belmont $3,252 $5,855 $3,799 Brisbane $813 $1,457 $691 Broadmoor $0 $0 $0 Burlingame $4,231 $7,603 $3,367 Colma $345 $618 $345 Daly City $9,945 $17,983 $53,016 East Palo Alto $2,766 $5,011 $8,721 Foster City $4,261 $7,662 $1,382 Half Moon Bay $1,638 $2,948 $2,677 Hillsborough $2,890 $5,170 $345 Menlo Park $5,342 $9,586 $432 Millbrae $2,484 $4,475 $1,641 Moss Beach $0 $0 $345 Pacifica $4,053 $7,317 $10,966 Portola Valley $1,059 $1,896 $0 Redwood City $10,010 $18,016 $19,514 San Bruno $4,477 $8,081 $14,333 San Carlos $4,161 $7,479 $1,727 San Mateo $11,819 $21.285 $21,414 Sheriff / Unincorporated County $86,000 $17,200 $5,785 South San Francisco $8,364 $15,048 $21,155 Woodside $1,732 $3.096 $0
