2007-1327-Minutes for Meeting May 07,2007 Recorded 6/28/2007COUNTY
~NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKOS Q 2007-1327
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL
I III 06/28/2447 04;24;00 PM
II I I I II I I IIII II IIII II II I I I I
2007-1327
Do not remove this page from original document.
Deschutes County Clerk
Certificate Page
If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following
statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244:
Re-recorded to correct [give reason]
previously recorded in Book
or as Fee Number
and Page
~~T Eg C
gG 2
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
❑ 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ore
MINUTES OF MEETING
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 7, 2007
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building, Second Floor - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Judge Michael Sullivan; County Administrator Dave Kanner;
Commissioners Michael M. Daly and Tammy Baney; Jacques DeKalb, Defense
Attorney; Hillary Saraceno, Commission on Children & Families; District
Attorney Mike Dugan; citizen member Jack Blum; Ruth Jenkin, Sheriff's Office;
Sheriff Larry Blanton; Bend Police Chief Andy Jordan; Bob Smit, KIDS Center;
Becky Wanless, Parole & Probation; and Ernie Mazorol, Court Administrator.
Also in attendance were Scott Johnson, Mental Health; Rick Treleaven, Best Care
Treatment Services; Bob LaCombe, Juvenile Community Justice; Tom Kipp,
Oregon State Police; former Redmond Police Chief Jim Soules and newly
appointed Redmond Police Chief Ron Roberts; and guests Andrea Blum, citizen,
and Stephanie Alvstad of JBar J Youth Services.
No representatives of the media were present.
1. Call to Order & Introductions.
Judge Sullivan called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m., and the attendees
introduced themselves.
2. Approval of Minutes of Monday, April 2 Meeting.
SMIT: Move approval.
BANEY: Second.
The minutes were unanimously approved.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 1 of 9 Pages
3. Discussion of Structured Sanctions.
Becky Wanless distributed documents relating to structured sanctions. She
explained that over ten years ago the legislature passed a bill allowing parole
and probation offenders to be sanctioned. The only alternative before then was
to return them to court; usually the docket would get backed up and it could be
up to three months before the probationer appeared before a judge to explain his
or her violation. The theory behind sanctions was the ability to impose
immediate consequences.
Based on the risk of the offender reoffending, the Department of Corrections
requires that a risk assessment be completed when put under supervision and
then every six months. The higher the risk, the longer the sanction can be.
Violations could be anything from failing to report, to contacting a victim, to
committing a new crime.
Ms. Wanless asked LPSCC to endorse reducing the number of sanction points
as a result of matrixing. The District Attorney opposes this action and feels it
undermines the system; however, sanctions are not working because there is no
accountability. Reducing the number of sanction points might help to reduce
the use of jail beds. Ms. Wanless suggested cutting the numbers in half. She
added she does not like doing this, but by reducing the amount of time the
individual parole officer's can give in jail, it may bring back some
accountability.
Mr. Dugan asked if when the new jail is built, would the numbers be increased
again. He is concerned the current level will never come back.
Ms. Wanless said that when there is adequate ability to address non-compliant
behavior, it would come back to where it should be. Other counties have
adjusted this situation in different ways.
Tom Kipp asked why this couldn't just be done internally, with a maximum of
45 days. Ms. Wanless explained that Oregon Administrative Rule sets the
sanctioning grid. The numbers are maximums, and the counties have the ability
to make this type of change.
Jack Blum asked if a sunset rider could be added, with a review in a year. Mr.
Smit asked if all counties are affected by this situation, and how would an
individual county make this kind of choice. Ms. Wanless replied that the State
gives a range with maximums listed, and the individual counties have the right
to make changes within those parameters.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 2 of 9 Pages
Mr. Dugan stated that it would be an internal decision on the range used. Judge
Sullivan pointed out that this type of decision affects all of the LPSCC
members.
Mr. Mazorol asked what this would do to the matrix system, and whether the
offenders would get out of jail in the same amount of time as they do now.
Sheriff Blanton replied that it won't affect it 100%, but might make some
difference.
Ms. Wanless said that she and the Sheriff talked about restricting the number of
beds for sanctioned offenders. There have to be other changes made to get to
that point, based on statistics relating to the number of jail beds used for
sanctioning.
Sheriff Blanton noted that this would adjust the matrix system; it is the same
philosophy as renting extra beds. At the same time, there need to be some
adjustments in how available beds are being used. On the judicial side and the
law enforcement side, they have not yet reached worst-case scenario, and they
are two or three years away from having a new jail. Further adjustments will
have to be made in the matrix policy. Parole and Probation is trying to make
some impact on how they use beds for sanctioned and new charges.
Judge Sullivan stated that structured sanctions aren't the only sanctions; the
offender can still be cited before a judge. Immediate sanctions can be imposed
without going to court, and a warrant can still be requested. A failure to appear
could be a structured sanction or they can go before a judge.
Mr. Dugan said that a judge can require a hearing, and so can the District
Attorney. He asked when parole officers actually impose a 90-day sanction.
Ms. Wanless replied it happens quite often.
Sheriff Blanton reminded the group that Ms. Wanless is seeking assistance in
setting policy to help direct subordinates. Judge Sullivan said that if there are
ten beds, matrix will still apply. A no bail warrant trumps. As soon as someone
gets a six-month sentence, he or she is eligible for matrix, and some are being
matrixed right out the door immediately. The Sheriff tried to meet with people
who have a say on how this works. There are a number of police offers coming
on board; between the cities and the county, there could be twenty new officers,
making at least three or four arrests a week, so there would easily be sixty
people being arrested, not counting cite and release. It is a crisis that needs to
be addressed.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 3 of 9 Pages
Sheriff Blanton stated that the situation will get worse before the jail is built.
Ruth Jenkin added that the percentage of those awaiting trial, who are not
eligible for matrix, is getting larger. Judge Sullivan stated that Ms. Wanless is
trying to not make this type of decision in a vacuum.
Chief Roberts said that he is concerned about behavior level 3, the high-level
issues. For instance, he asked if the number is reduced to 45 units, how many
of them would be released. In addition, he voiced concerns about the effect on
the capacity of mental health and other social services. Judge Sullivan replied
that they can still be matrixed out anyway. Ms. Wanless said that discussions
have taken place regarding exceptions for sex offenders and domestic violence
offenders.
Mr. Dugan asked if matrixing goes up depending on the length of the sentence.
Ms. Wanless replied that as they serve their sentence, the number goes down.
She added that the length of the sentence does not factor into it. There are
about forty offenders who were serving sanctions recently released. Sheriff
Blanton added that half of them had new charges, the other half didn't.
Ms. Wanless stated that with 1,600 offenders under supervision, having fifty in
jail is not excessive. However, if there are only 220 jail beds, it is a big impact.
Jim Soules observed that the issue is credibility for her staff. The offender gets
90 days but is out in three. He added that it appears she could direct her people
to do this, while setting up checks and balances for special instances. Ms.
Wanless stated that it is an internal position, but affects other law enforcement
and criminal justice agencies. She added that the District Attorney feels
strongly it is not the right way to go. She wants to keep a good working
relationship.
Commissioner Baney noted that this speaks to partnership. She pointed out that
this is a symptom of a bigger problem. She doesn't want to see the standards
lowered; in principle, it sets the wrong tone. If the Sheriff reduces the number
of beds available, how many can be sanctioned and for how long. There is a
bigger problem.
Judge Sullivan said that people want to rush to get before a judge; but if there is
a citation to appear, it could take six months. If there is a no bail arrest, they
have to go before a judge within fourteen days.
Mr. Mazorol stated that it all has to come together. He added he doesn't think
everyone understands matrixing as well as they should. He suggested perhaps
this be discussed at each LPSCC meeting.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 4 of 9 Pages
Sheriff Blanton said he will talk about this more after checking other
information. Judge Sullivan stated that they all need to understand the internal
nature of this proposal, and when they are out of options. Ms. Wanless will
refine the proposed plan.
4. Deferred Sentencing and Domestic Violence Court.
Mr. Dugan distributed memos regarding deferred sentencing and domestic
violence court. He said that this was administratively created through work
with domestic violence assistance providers. Judge Sullivan has agreed to be
the domestic violence court judge two days a month.
There were 450 domestic violence cases filed last year. The offenders are
usually released with restrictions. They typically don't enter a plea in these
cases. They can be ordered into intervention. This relates to domestic violence
assaults, not just menacing. They have to be eligible for the program and enter
a guilty please for the primary charge; a fee is charged. Parole and probation
will track how the offenders are doing. The victims have to be protected, and
there can be no prior probation failure.
Judge Sullivan added that this has been successfully done in other counties.
5. Discussion of a Request for LPSCC Membership by Stephanie Alvstad, J-
Bar-J.
Judge Sullivan said that Ms. Alvstad has asked if she could join LPSCC as a
member. This brought up other questions about membership; this has not been
examined for some time. Mr. Blum stated that the Board of Commissioners is
the appointing authority. Mr. Dugan added that the group may not have an
appropriate membership at this time.
Commissioner Baney said that a recommendation from LPSCC would be
helpful. She asked if Ms. Alvstad would have a seat as a citizen or as director
of J Bar J. Judge Sullivan stated that this brings up other questions about
membership. Should it be opened up to other providers? Would this dilute the
group too much? There is no limit to the number of public members; however,
they would not necessarily be voting members. The group needs to think
carefully about how to handle this is providers are included. It doesn't mean
that they are not welcome at meetings or can't present information to the group.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 5 of 9 Pages
He added, however, there comes a point when a committee can get too big to be
effective, to reach a quorum or come to consensus.
Commissioner Daly asked who the actual members are. Judge Sullivan read the
recent roster. Mr. Blum stated that the representative from the Oregon State
Police is non-voting, and is selected by the Superintendent of the State Police.
Mr. Dugan noted that there are no by-laws; the group is addressed entirely
within statute.
Mr. Kanner said that statute says that membership may include but is not
limited to certain positions. Other counties should be similar. He asked why
there are no by-laws in place. Mr. Blum replied that this came up once but was
very contentious. They tried to identify a quorum and couldn't come up with it.
Officer Kipp stated that Deschutes County has a multidisciplinary team with a
large document of protocols. These are not drafted overnight, and can be used
against the group. There are more than substance abuse providers to consider.
There is a whole list of groups that provide treatment; this could double the size
of the group.
Mr. Dugan said that LPSCC has a fairly limited role. The bigger issue is to get
policymakers together.
Commissioner Baney stated that LPSCC is unique and she finds value in what it
does. The group can expand on the work it already does. Judge Sullivan said
that LPSCC can make other recommendations.
Rick Treleavan said that he shows up regularly, and reminded the group that
alcohol and drug abuse issues are part of criminal justice. He pointed out that
he doubts a flood of providers would show up.
Chief Jordan stated that he would stay away from by-laws, but as a group, the
members should identify a quorum. There are usually enough members present
at each meeting.
He also suggested that the new Redmond Chief be recommended as a member.
Judge Sullivan stated that the police chiefs are traditionally recommended, but
he would like to have the members think about the rest. There could be one or
two providers, but the group should avoid unintended consequences. There are
some LPSCCs in the state that work well while others don't. This group
functions fairly well, and it is a good forum for law enforcement in the area.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 6 of 9 Pages
DUGAN: Move recommendation of the appointment of Redmond Police Chief
Ron Roberts as a LPSCC member.
BLUM: Second.
The vote was unanimous in favor.
Mr. Kanner stated that he is not sure who the voting members are, as the
records were maintained by the courts previously. The Commissioners needs to
make formal appointments of all members so it is consistent. Certain positions
will have no term limit but others should have. There needs to be a record of
these actions.
Mr. Mazorol said that he has a letter of appointment, and all of the members
should have one. Judge Tiktin and the Board of Commissioners went through
the membership issue when the LPSCC rules changed. There should be a letter
in the file for each member.
Judge Sullivan agreed this needs to be done. It would be a good opportunity to
look at the makeup of the group. Some positions are always included. They
need to follow statute and have a paper trail. The other issue is how far to open
up the membership. Commissioner Baney suggested this be informally
discussed further, and a recommendation made to the group.
Stephanie Alvstad said that she wrote the letter requesting membership at the
request of Judge Sullivan. Her interest is in the juvenile justice system. She
understands the stress on jail beds and the jail system, and wants to stop the
flow of kids getting into the system.
Judge Sullivan stated that this should be discussed at an opportune time. The
meetings are always open to the public and comments are always welcome.
Mr. Smit said that this is similar to the Commission on Children & Families'
advisory committee's discussions. Judge Sullivan noted that there could be
different members asking for different things, excluding the needs of others.
He suggested that this be discussed further at the next meeting. In the
meantime, he would like to speak with the Commissioners to review the
situation and to establish a paper trail.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 7 of 9 Pages
6. Other Business and Items for the Next Meeting (Monday, June 6).
Dave Kanner stated LPSCC has a minimal ability to make budgeting
recommendations to the Board of Commissioners. Perhaps the group should
have come to them with recommendations on the distribution of 1145 money.
Mike Dugan said he is unsure how much 1145 money and funds for juvenile
come from the state.
Jack Blum stated that he was recently present at Judge Brady's drug court, and
is amazed at what is going on. He emphasized it is doing some good things and
the county will benefit. Scott Johnson added that nineteen individuals are
currently involved.
Judge Sullivan said that the county's family court has received national
recognition, as has the mental health and domestic relations court. However,
they are tapped out. There is no slack in the courts' work and they are having
difficulty staffing courtrooms. These programs are meeting critical needs in the
community, and are alternatives to incarceration.
They are having difficulty staffing mental health court as well, and often run
out of resources. Mr. Dugan agreed; they are at the maximum level and are not
sure what to do with those people they cannot accommodate.
Sheriff Blanton said law enforcement and Mental Health are working on a
mental health response team. Mr. Johnson may bring information on this
undertaking to the next LPSCC meeting.
BLUM: Move adjournment.
BANEY: Second.
Approval was unanimous.
Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 8 of 9 Pages
Respectfully submitted,
(Fov~
Recording Secretary
Attachments
Exhibit A: Sign-in sheet
Exhibit B: Agenda
Exhibit C: Chart - structured sanctions
Exhibit D: Memoranda - Domestic violence/deferred sentencing program
Exhibit E: Letter from Stephanie Alvstad, J Bar J Youth Services
Minutes of LPSCC Meeting Monday, May 7, 2007
Page 9 of 9 Pages
z
z
v
LU
Q
W
J
a
O
N
04
A
ccoo
+r
C
c
A
L
O
C
y
g
ao
c
N
4J
E
V
Z
-y
V
a
J
z
V
Jr-
c
0
m
v
00
v
C
Exhibit
Page ! of f
~`JT E S ~
g~ 2
A Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
❑ .0, 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MEETING AGENDA
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL
3:30 P.M., MONDAY, MAY 7, 2007
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building, Second Floor
1300 NW Wall St., Bend
1. Call to Order & Introductions
2. Approval of Minutes of Monday, April 2 Meeting
3. Discussion of Structured Sanctions - Becky Wanless
4. Deferred Sentencing and Domestic Violence Court.- Mike Dugan
5. Discussion of a Request for LPSCC Membership by Stephanie Alvstad, J-Bar-J
6. Other Business and Items for the Next Meeting (Monday, June 6)
Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board of
Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated.
If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.
Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
Exhibit L
Page / of
ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS SANCTIONING; rRln
Supervision
Level
SYSTEM RESPONSE
BEHAVIOR LEVEL I
BEHAVIOR LEVEL II
BEHAVIOR LEVEL III
Fails to report truthfully Prohibited use of alcohol
Crimes with Crime
Crimes with Crime
or notify Probation and/or drugs (1 or 2
Seriousness Scale of 3 and
Seriousness Scale of 4
Officer as directed. times) or fails to submit
less (Sentencing Guidelines
and above (Sentencing
to testing.
Willfully fails to meet
Grid).
Guidelines Grid) and all
payment schedule. Misses appointments (1
Participates irregularly and
Person-to-Person crimes.
or 2 times) for treatment
fails to successfully complete
Possession or use of
NOTE: SYSTEM programs.
prescribed treatment
dangerous/deadly
RESPONSE TO BE
USED WHEN OTHER Refuses to accept
programs, takes prescribed
psychotropic medications
weapons.
RESPONSES ARE personal responsibilities.
irregularly.
Prohibited contact with
NOT APPLICABLE
minors/victims/survivors.
Fails to take antabuse.
Refusal to take prescribed
Prohibited use of alcohol
psychotropic medications.
and/or drugs or fails to
submit to testing (3 or more
Refusal to participate in or
times).
com
l
with conditions of
p
y
Level of'Authorityfor ParolelPPS
Fails to recognize the
prescribed treatment
ro
ram
ParotelPt+otsatiort Officer: 0-30 units
A
authority of the Releasing
p
g
s.
gevincy/H~rings Officer. 34-6Q units
Super
sory Authority/Board: 61-90 units
Authar~ty or Probation Officer
*Refuses to com /pY with
and consistently fails to
imposed sanctions.
follow the directives of the
Level of Authorial for Probation
Releasing Authority and
'Absconds supervision
Agency: up to 60 units
Probation Officer related to
(see notation below).
Court over 60 units
conditions of supervision not
otherwise listed
SECTION 1 CRIME SERIOUSNESS/CRIMINAL
HISTORY GRID (7A, 8A-8D 9 10 11)
HIGH
0-5 UNITS
0-25 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
MEDIUM
0-2 UNITS
0-20 UNITS
0-30 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
LOW
0-2 UNITS
0-15 UNITS
0-25 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
a lion SECTION 2 CRIME SERIOUSNESS/CRIMINAL HISTORY GRID (4A-4B, 5A-5F, 6, 78-71, 8E-81)
HIGH
0-5 UNITS
0-20 UNITS
0-25 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
MEDIUM
0-2 UNITS
0-15 UNITS
0-20 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
LOW
0-2 UNITS
0-10 UNITS
0-15 UNITS
0-30 UNITS
Supe
rvision SECTION 3 CRIME SERIOUSNESS/CRIMINAL HISTORY GRID (1, 2, 3, 4C to 41, 5G-51)
Level
HIGH
0-5 UNITS
0-15 UNITS
0-20 UNITS
0-90 UNITS
MEDIUM
0-2 UNITS
0-10 UNITS
0-15 UNITS
0-30 UNITS
LOW
=e., ...st....A
0-2 UNITS
L- a.
0-5 UNITS
0-10 UNITS
0-25 UNITS
weevi - Co„ uC requnav Lu complme ire balance of a previously imposed sanction that was not complied with, in
ddition to receiving a new sanction for failing to comply with imposed sanction.
'Abscond: Changed residence, do not know whereabouts; supervising officer has exhausted all reasonable means to locate
and has requested a warrant.
O'The sanctioning units are caps only. The sanctioning authority may impose sanctions below the cap.
Version date: September 24, 1999
Exhibit
Page of t-
Bonnie Baker
From: Becky Wanless
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 9:41 AM
To: Dave Kanner; 'board@co.deschutes.or.us'
Cc: Larry Blanton
Subject: Structured Sanctions
I have put the issue of Structured Sanctions on the agenda for our Monday, May 7, LPSCC meeting. I wanted to provide
you with a bit of background prior to the meeting and also ask for your support.
Over 10 years ago, the legislature passed a bill allowing parole and probation officers to "sanction" an offender for non-
compliance with their parole or probation. Part of the logic behind allowing PO's to sanction offenders was based on
research which showed that the quicker a consequence for non-compliance was imposed, the more meaning it had to the
person being "punished." Before PO's had the ability to sanction offenders, in the case of a probationer, we would refer
them back to Court and it might be 3 or 4 months before they appeared before the Judge who had sentenced them. Any
consequence imposed by the Court appeared to have little meaning. In some cases, the offender didn't even remember
how they had violated their supervision by the time they appeared before the Judge.
Every County has a different "menu" of sanctions they may impose based on the resources in their area. Some counties
have work crew, work release, etc. In Deschutes County, our sanction options consist of increased reporting to PO,
cognitive classes (designed to assist offenders in changing their thinking and thus, their behavior) community service,
electronic monitoring and jail.
Regardless of whether one of our PO's selects community service, electronic monitoring or jail, there is a "Sanction Grid"
that tells a PO the length of time that a sanction may be. The length of time that a PO may impose per the Sanction Grid
is at the intersection of two points on the Grid. The first issue that determines the length of the sanction is the type of
violation that the offender committed and the second issue that determines the length of the sanction is the risk that the
offender poses to reoffend (low risk, medium risk, high risk). Under the current Sanction Grid, the length of sanction that
may be imposed ranges from 2 to 90 days. In putting the issue of Structured Sanctions on the LPSCC agenda, it is my
plan to ask that the Public Safety Coordinating Council endorse our cutting the sanction grid in half. In other words, if a PO
could impose 60 days jail currently, after reducing the sanction grid, the same offender could receive a maximum of 30
days in jail. I would recommend that in some cases (sex offender or domestic violence offender having contact with
victim), exceptions be made.
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't endorse such a plan; however, given the current overcrowding issue at the jail and
the number of inmates presently being matrixed, it is difficult to see another path. I have spoken with Judge Sullivan about
this plan and he is supportive. Unfortunately, Mike Dugan is not and believes that it will further erode our system and send
a message to offenders that they will not be held accountable. I disagree. Sanctioned offenders are being matrixed daily.
What kind of a message does that send? Why not impose a shorter sanction and reduce the probability of the offender
being released early?
On a related note, Sheriff Blanton has proposed to provide our department with funding for ten GPS/cell phone monitoring
units so that our PO's will have the ability to place an offender on GPS monitoring in lieu of using a jail bed as a sanction.
Typically, when an offender is placed on electronic monitoring, they are required to pay for the service and this revenue
supports our operation. Because offenders requiring sanctioning more often than not are unable to pay, we have not used
electronic monitoring too often. Under Sheriff Blanton's plan, his department will pay the cost of the offender being
sanctioned to electronic monitoring in lieu of jail.
If you have any questions about this issue, please let me know. I'm at x 4383.
Exhibit Cl-
Page Z,, of Z
i
0 ¢
Memorandum
Date: May 3, 2007
To: Deschutes County Defense Attorneys
From: Jason Kropf
Re: Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program
The Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program starts this month. Judge
Sullivan agreed to dedicate two Mondays per month from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. for the
Domestic Violence Court. This month, the cases will be heard on May 14th and May
28th
I have distributed to all the defense firms at least one set of the documents associated
with this program. The top yellow sheet will appear with the discovery in new cases
that we believe are eligible for the program. Eligible cases will begin receiving dates
in the Domestic Violence Court. Those dates will be for the first Domestic Violence
Court date following arraignment, but will not be sooner than 10 days from
arraignment. The court date given will be the client's one oppurtunity to decide
whether or not that they want to enter into the program.
All pending cases that meet the criteria for the Domestic Violence Court will be
allowed to enter the program. All eligible pending cases will be able to enter the
program during the month of May. At the end of May only new cases will be able to
enter into the program.
Our office is beginning the process of reviewing our pending cases to determine
which cases are eligible. I strongly encourage each defense attorney to review their
own pending cases to determine which cases they believe meet the criteria of the
program. If an attorney has a case that fits the criteria and the client is interested in
entering the program, please contact the Deputy District Attorney assigned to the
case and call Judge Sullivan's scheduler at extension 2200 to put that case on the
docket for either May 14th or May 28th
If you have general questions feel free to contact me, my direct line is 317-3159 or
my email is Jason kropf(a),co.deschutes.or.us. If you have questions regarding a
particular case, please contact the Deputy assigned to that case.We look forward to
working with you to make this program a success.
Exhibit P
Page / of
G O
p {
f
Memorandum
Date: May 7, 2007
To: Deschutes County Circuit Court Judges
From: Jason Kropf
Re: Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program
Attached please find a copy of all the documents connected to the Domestic
Violence Deferred Sentencing Program and a copy of the memo sent to the defense
bar.
New cases which are eligible for the program will have a DSDV stamp on the
District Attorney's Information. (See stamp on bottom of the page). After
arraignment, we would ask that all of these cases be given a date in Domestic
Violence Court. The cases should be placed on the docket of the next date of the
Domestic Violence Court. If the next Domestic Violence Court date is less then 10
days from the date of arraignment then please set the case for the subsequent
Domestic Violence Court date. Each eligible Defendant will be given one
opportunity to enter into the program. If a defendant declines the program at their
Domestic Violence Court hearing, they will not be given an additional enrollment
opportunity.
If you have any questions or comments feel free to contact me, my direct line is 317-
3159 or my email is jason kropfaco.deschutes.or.us . Thank you for your help with
this new program.
1
Exhibit
Page Z of T
DESCHUTES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DEFERRED SENTENCING PROGRAM
NOTICE TO DEFENDANTS
The Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program allows eligible persons charged with a
domestic violence misdemeanor or certain Class C felonies to avoid conviction by participating in
a Batterers' Intervention Program and if appropriate alcohol or substance abuse treatment. If you
satisfactorily complete treatment and comply with all conditions of the Domestic Violence
Deferred Sentencing Program, the criminal charges against you will be dismissed with prejudice.
The Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program is a privilege you may exercise only once.
You are eligible for this program only if you meet the criteria listed in the Affidavit of
Eligibility, you appeared for your initial arraignment date, and the Deschutes County District
Attorney's Office considers you appropriate for the program. The District Attorney's Office has
discretion in determining a person's eligibility for the Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing
Program. A person can be deemed ineligible for the program for reasons not enumerated in the
affidavit of eligibility.
After your arraignment, you will be given a court date in the Domestic Violence Court. At that
court date you must decide whether you want to enter the Domestic Violence Deferred
Sentencing Program. The period of time between court dates gives you an opportunity to consult
with an attorney, review the police reports, and review. the District Attorney's understanding of
your criminal history.
If you comply with all the terms of the Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program,
including successful completion of your treatment programs and all court orders, your case will
be dismissed in 18 months. Successful completion of the program requires full participation in a
Batterers' Intervention Program, drug/alcohol treatment, and polygraphs as maybe requested by
the treatment provider or probation department. You must pay all treatment costs, probation fees,
program fees, restitution and comply with all the conditions of the program.
Exhibit 0
Page -3 of
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE. OF OREGON
2
FOR THE COUNTY OF DESCHUTES
3
STATE OF OREGON, ) CASE #
4
)
Petitioner, ) AFFIDAVIT OF ELIGIBILITY
5
vs.
)
6
)
7
)
Defendant. )
8
Being duly sworn to tell the truth, I, the undersigned, do hereby swear that I am
9
10
eligibl
e to participate in the Deschutes County Deferred Sentencing Program and that:
I 1
1.
I have been charged with a. domestic violence related offense;
12
2.
None of the offenses that I am currently charged with involved the use or
13
threatened use of a dangerous or deadly weapon or serious or substantial injury to
14
the victim as defined by the Oregon Revised Statute 161.015
15
16
3.
The victim of the crime was at least 14 years of age;
17
4.
No child under the age of 14 years of age was placed at risk of physical injury
18
during the commission of the crime;
19
5.
I have not participated in a prior Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing
20
Program or similar program in Oregon or any other jurisdiction;
?21
6.
A restraining order was not in place at the time the crime was committed .
22
23
protecting the victim of the crime;
.24
7.
A release agreement, stalking order, temporary stalking order or other valid court
25
order was not in place at the time of the crime protecting the victim of this crime;
26
Page
Exhibit
Page 0 f 1_
8. I have not been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony crime, including an
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Page
attempt, a solicitation, or a conspiracy, classified as a person crime (as defined by
Oregon Administrative Rule 213-003-0001) or an equivalent out of state
conviction within the last 15 years;
9. f have -not been previously convicted of the crime of Harassment, or out of state
equivalent, where the victim was a family or household member as defined by
Oregon Revised Statute 135.230 within the last 15 years;
10. I have not been convicted of more than two felonies in the last ten years;
11. I do not have any other pending criminal charges that meet the above criteria;
12. I have advised the District Attorney's Office of all my known convictions from
the State of Oregon and all other jurisdictions.
DATED: This day of
200
DEFENDANT
State of Oregon )
ss
County of Deschutes )
Signed and sworn to before me on
by:
Notary Public for Oregon
Court Clerk
20
Exhibit___ )
Page of
I IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
2 FOR THE COUNTY OF DESCHUTES
3 STATE OF OREGON, ) CASE #
Voluntary Domestic Violence
4 Petitioner, ) Deferred Sentencing Program
vs. ) Agreement, Waiver and Order
5 )
6 )
7 Defendant. )
8 I, the undersigned, ask the court to a grant admission into the Deschutes County
9 Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing Program. If allowed admission into the Deferred
10 Sentencing Program, I agree to complete the below conditions and comply with all conditions of
II release.
12 1. I voluntarily agree to plead guilty to the required domestic violence charges in the charging
13 instrument.
14 2.1 voluntarily agree to waive in writing the right to have any felony charges brought before the
15
grand i ury.
16
3. I voluntarily agree to give up any former jeopardy rights if any subsequent actions upon this
17
charge or any offenses based upon the same criminal episode are initiated.
18
4. I voluntarily agree to immediately enter and complete a Batterers' Intervention Program with
19
20 the treatment provider designated by the Deschutes County Probation Department to the
21 satisfaction of the Court and the Probation Department. I agree to complete any polygraphs
22 related to this program as requested by my treatment provider or the Probation Department.
23 5. Ivoluntarily agree to complete a diagnostic evaluation for any drug/alcohol treatment and
24 complete any recommended treatment, if ordered by the Court or Probation Department.
25 6. I voluntarily agree to not have any contact with the victim in this case unless authorized in
26 writing by the Court or the Probation Department.
Page
Exhibit
Page of_
7. I voluntarily agree to pay a supervision fee of $35 per month unless waived by the Court or the
l
Probation Department.
2
8. I voluntarily agree to pay for all costs associated with my treatment programs, including the
3
4 cost of polygraphs.
5 9. I voluntarily agree to pay for the cost of my court-appointed attorney fees, if applicable.
6 10. I voluntarily agree to pay the Program Participation Fee of $25.
7 11. I voluntarily agree to sign releases of information so the Court, Probation Department, and
g District Attorney's Office may receive information from my treatment providers.
9 12. I voluntarily agree to keep the Probation Department advised of my current address and
10 employment during the Deferred Sentencing Program.
l l 13. I voluntarily agree to pay any restitution amount as ordered by the court.
12 14. I voluntarily agree that I will not possess any firearms during the pendency of the Deferred
13 Sentencing Program.
14
15. I will obey all laws.
15
16. I will comply with the standard conditions of probation.
16
17. I will not consume or possess any alcohol. I will not possess any controlled substances
17
without a valid prescription.
18
19 18. I voluntarily agree that the court has the discretion to terminate me from the Deferred
20 Sentencing Program upon the commission of a new crime, violation/non-compliance of my
21 treatment programs, or violations of the conditions of the Deferred Sentencing Program. If
22 terminated from the Deferred Sentencing Program by the court, I will be sentenced and convicted
23 based upon my earlier entered guilty plea.
24 19. Upon notice to the District Attorney's Office of me committing a new crime, violation/non-
25 compliance of my treatment programs, or violations of the conditions of the Deferred Sentencing
26 Program, a warrant for my arrest may be requestedA will have a hearing within 15 days in front
Page of the Court to determine if I am going to be terminated from the Deferred Sentencing Program. I
Exhibit Z
Page -7 of q
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Page
voluntarily agree that the State may use, and the Court may rely upon written reports or
affidavits for the purpose of establishing my non-compliance or violation by a
preponderance of the evidence and I waive any statutory or constitutional rights related to
the Court's reliance upon written reports or affidavits.
20. I will provide to the Court and District Attorney's office proof of completion of my treatment
programs prior to the end on the Deferred Sentencing Program.
21. If I successfully complete and comply with all conditions of the Deferred Sentencing
Program, the court will dismiss the charges against me with prejudice and the District Attorney
may not prosecute me in the future for these crimes.
22. If I successfully complete the Deferred Sentencing Program, the record of my arrest and
completion of the program will not be expunged for at least 5 years.
23. I will report to the Probation Department by the end of the next business day of my entering
the Deferred Sentencing Program.
DATED: This day of 1200
DEFENDANT
ORDER: :
GRANTED ADMISSION
DENIED ADMISSION
Dated this day of , 200
Honorable Michael C. Sullivan
Circuit Court Judge .
Exhibit
Page of
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
FOR THE COUNTY OF DESCHUTES
STATE OF OREGON,
Petitioner,
vs.
Defendant.
CASE #
RELEASE ORDER
AND CONDITIONS
CONDITIONS:
As conditions of my release from custody, I promise and agree that:
I will have no contact with the victim without written permission of the Court or
Probation Department. VICTIM
I will comply with all the conditions of the Deferred Sentencing Program,
standard conditions of probation, and all court orders.
I will obey all laws.
I will keep the court, probation department, and treatment providers informed of
my current address at all times.
I will not depart this state without permission of the court and if I am
apprehended outside the State of Oregon, I hereby waive extradition.
I will report to the Deschutes County Probation Department by the end of the
next business day from today's court hearing.
I will appear at all times and places ordered by the court until final order of the
court.
Any breach of the agreement may result in a warrant for my arrest, may result in
my termination from the Deferred Sentencing Program, and/or additional prosecution
for contempt of court and/or failure to appear.
I have read this agreement, or had it read to me, and I understand the terms contained
herein. I will comply with every respect with the terms of this agreement.
DATED: This day of 5200
DEFENDANT
NEXT COURT DATES:
60 Day Review
Completion Review
Courtroom B
Courtroom B
Exhibit
Page _ q of
April 25, 2007
11 udge Michael Sullivan
)eschutes County Courthouse
100 NW Bond
www.ibari.org Bend OR 97701
Dear Judge Sullivan:
It was a. pleasure speaking with you the other day regarding the Local Public
J Bar J Youth Services
www.jbarj.org Safety Coordinating Council (LPSCC)• As I mentioned on the phone, in a
Administrative Office conversation with the former Sheriff Les Stiles regarding public safety, he
62895 Hamby Road thought it may be a good fit for me to join the LPSCC given my interest in
Bend, Oregon 97701 public safety, m expertise in juvenile criminal justice treatment and past
(541) 389-1409 Y 1 (541) 389-9348 Fax experience with victim's issues.
J Bar J Boys Ranch
62895 Hamby Road
Bend, Oregon 97701
I have been Executive Director for J Bar J Youth Services since 1997, and last
(541) 312-4022
year, J. Bar J received commendation from the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA)
J Bar J Learning center
for our treatment with adjudicated male juveniles ages 13-18 (please see
62895 Hamby Road
Bend, Oregon 97701
enclosed commendation). Additionally, we assisted the OYA in startup of the
(541) 389-1409
Burns correctional facility in the area of treatment for juvenile sex offenders. J
Cascade Youth &
Bar J Youth Services is a member of the Deschutes County Juvenile Sexual
Family Services -
Offender Task Force, a member of the Oregon Adolescent Sex Offender
Sky Lakes Shelter &
Evaluation Program
Treatment Network, a member of the Deschutes County Safe Schools Alliance,
19 S.W. Century Drive
Bend, Oregon 97702
and a member of Darkness to Light, child sexual abuse prevention training.
(541) 382-0934
(541) 383-3024 Fax
I have been involved as a board member for the Central Oregon Battering and
Big Brothers Big Sisters
of Central Oregon
Rape Alliance (COBRA), a board member for the Northwest Network of Youth
1900 N.E. Division St.
Services, a member of the Governor's Task force on Runaway and Homeless
Suite 202
Bend, Oregon 97701
Youth, a board member for the Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs
(541) 312-6047
(President - 2005-2006), a member of the Rotary Club of Greater Bend, a
541)312-6052 Fax
edmond Office
member of the National Association of Therapeutic Schools and Programs, a
541) 923-2676
rineville Office
member of the Professional Advisor Committee to the Deschutes
Y (PAC)
(541) 447-3851 Ext. 333
County Commission on Children and Families, and currently sit as a board
Madras Office
(541) 475-2292 Ext. 351
member for Meadowlark Manor, a girl's residential treatment program.
The Academy at Sisters
P.O. Box 5986
I believe I ..have an in depth understanding of criminality, mental health issues,
Bend, Oregon 97708-5986
(541) 389-2748
drug and alcohol issues and victim's issues after working in uven.ile treatment
J
(541) 389-2897 Fax
1-800-910-0412
for the last 25 years. I believe this experience and knowledge relates directly to
a broader understanding of the public safety issues for our community.
Regional Toll-Free
Teen Crisis Hotline
1-800-660-0934
As per our conversation, I would like to request the LPSCC give consideration to
24 Hours
a seat for me on the LPSCC. Thank you.
Sin erely, w", ~A43 sfaQ
Stephanie Alvstad
Executive Director Stephanie Alvstad,
Fred Saporito, Ph.D. Executive Director
Clinical Consultant Exhibit
Page / of 3
Stephanie J. Alvstad
2493 NW Hemmingway
Bend OR 97701
(541) 382-3991
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
Executive Director, (Feb.' 97- present) J Bar J Youth Services, 62895 Hamby Road, Bend OR 97701.
Financial: Responsible for financial turn-a-round for corporation from a $200,000 deficit yearly to a profit of
approximately $200,000 yearly. Restructured financial out sourced system to an in house system with clear
divisions and departments, adhering to OMB Circular 122A regulations. Brought corporation from failing
bi-annual audits to yearly audits with excellent management letters.
Board Development Responsible for total revision of board members and board structure utilizing John
Carver's Board Governanc e Model. Current board strong with solid board training program and manual.
Policies and Procedures: Responsible for working with Board, corporate attorneys, and management staff
to retool policy and procedure manual to be accurate and withstand lawsuits and legal proceedings.
Working on an ethics policy for corporation as well as a good idea policy to encourage innovation among all
staff with financial rewards attached.
Insurance and Benefits: Added retirement benefits through a 401K program with a company match for all
employees, a short term and long term disability policy, and increased medical coverage to include vision,
dental, and chiropractic. Responsible for upgrading professional and general liability coverages for agency
along with other additional coverage to be all-inclusive for the corporation.
Team Building: Established a management team approach with established divisions, working in
cooperation with Board of Directors. Managers are now responsible for levels of approval system within
their respective budgets, bottom lines for their division, and program needs.
Program Manager (March '90- Jan. '97), Cascade Youth and Family Center, 842 N.W. Wall St., Bend OR
Professional Administrative Position. Hiring, Evaluating, and Supervising Staff. Grant Writing and Budget
Development for Grants. Fundraising. Responsible for Design, Development, and Implementation of eight
program areas within CYFC; 1) Chaparral Runaway Services Project, 2) Youth Investment Program
including, 3) Youth Service Teams, 4) Flexible Fund Program, 5) Positive Youth Development Activity
Groups, 6) PACT - Peer Approach to Counseling by Teens, 7) Case Management, 8) Sky Lakes Shelter and
Evaluation Program, and 9) Big Brothers and Big Sisters of Central Oregon. Redesigned and restructured
Sky Lakes Shelter and Evaluation Program to be financially successful and address concerns from State
Offices for Services to Children and Families.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: Board Member, 2004- present Oregon Alliance of Children's
Programs, President, 2005-2006, Board Member, 2006- present, Meadowlark Manor Inc., Board Member,
2000- present, State Equal Access for Girl's C oalition, Board Member, 1991-1994, Central Oregon Battering
and Rape Alliance, Bend OR 97701. Board Member, 1993-1996, 1998-2001, Northwest Network for Youth, 603
Stewart Ave., Suite 609, Seattle WA 98101-1229. Governor's Task Force on Runa way and Homeless Youth,
1996. Greater Bend Rotary Member, 1997-present, P.O. Box 6561, Bend OR 97708
HOBBIES/SPECIAL SKILLS: Private Pilot's License , Scuba Certification, break and train horses, can
instruct western riding, enjoy reading, hiking, backpacking, skiing, tennis, bicycling, kayaking, and piano.
Married with one son and one daughter.
EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts Degree in Social Work, Cum Laude, from the University of Montana, 1981.
Exhibit G
Page Z_-Of
1
,C o
c~
c
O o
(U 4-J 0
a~-.+ U U c
V) 0
0 _0 co
C Z N 2
Q) -0 co
0 Q a- [2
- 4-J L E
O 4-j u
O a S U a) L
1-, S'
-0 0 -0
'c o f .N o u d N V)
cn 4- -r- o
4-J o 4-J u
0
V (2) C (1) > •L > (n NN c
ro L L L 1
L- (u E
4-J 4-J
=3 (U U V) (0 c LL
Q
O O -0 V) C
L- _0
u (o (1) OL
LLI =3 V)
O ^ m c: E O-r- O V)
a
O fu E 4 ra cu ~ cn
U 0 U fu fu :E
0 0 4-J Q)
) .L L O
C L
v fo CL 0) 0 4-J U Q) v
co
4-J 4-J C) ro
~ :3 -0 0
C L-
O Q O C cu
w C 0 U fa cn cn
U 0) L- 0) ~ 0 v
C O O L
L ~
O _ U 0
Q 00
(n L 0 U)
u :E CL
fo ~ L C
O:6oo
.C p~ Q.
~ a
Exhibit E
Page 3 of