Loading...
2014-96-Minutes for Meeting December 03,2013 Recorded 2/24/2014 DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS hf 2014.96 • NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK W {� COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 02/24/2014 09:36:21 AM 11111111111111111111111 1441 Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes Count y Clerk Certificate Page :-:• ,:•:,,•,,,,,,,,,,,":: DESCHUTES COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL - 'crvL MINUTES OF MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2013 Deschutes County Services Building, 1300 NW Wall, Bend, OR Present were Judge Alta Brady, Retired Judge Michael Sullivan, Commissioner Alan Unger; County Administrator Tom Anderson; Ken Hales, Community Corrections; Scott Johnson, Health Services; Jeff Hall, Court Administrator; District Attorney Patrick Flaherty; Dave Cook, citizen member; Chief Jeff Sale, Bend Police Department; Tanner Wark, Parole & Probation; Donna McClung, Oregon Youth Authority; and Lt. Michael Gill, Sheriff's Office. Also present were Brian McNaughton, Redmond Police Department; Stephen Gunnels, District Attorney's Office; Denney Kelley, Black Butte Ranch Police Department; and citizen Marilyn Burwell (Immigrant Family Advocates); and media representative Elon Glucklich of The Bulletin. 1. Call to Order & Introductions Chair Michael Sullivan called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m., at which time the attendees introduced themselves. 2. Minutes Approval of the August 6 minutes was moved, seconded and unanimously approved. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 1 of 11 3. Public Comment Marilyn Burwell of Immigrant Family Advocates read a statement regarding detention quotas. (A copy is attached for reference.) She noted that she is disturbed by the lack of PSCC meetings this fall, and also by the absence of human services groups attending PSCC meetings. 4. HB 3194 Briefing Ken Hales provided an overview of House Bill 3194, a reform bill that identified a subset that will have the biggest impact on prison populations and another for analysis and funding programs. (See attached document for reference.) He noted that what is unknown is whether a person should be accepted for the lower sentencing. Guidelines have not yet been developed by the agencies. Probation Officers are given authority to propose modifications or post-prison supervision, and the offender would be subject to a risk needs analysis. Mr. Hales said that funding is the biggest concern. About 80% of these will sunset. There will be perhaps $15 million available for the biennium. Chief Sale added that it will be a competitive process in 2015 and funding won't be automatic. Scott Johnson asked how the funds would be apportioned. Mr. Hales replied that it will be based on community corrections allocations, on the offenders and numbers under supervision, and not the area population. The Criminal Justice Commission will provide information on the trends, new laws and established targets. Bend Chief Sale is on the review committee for these grants. Tanner Wark noted that some crimes will be excluded. It will mirror what the Parole Board does. This makes it more official, in lieu of enforcing a general condition. An assessment is done in any case. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 2 of 11 5. Justice Reinvestment Program Tom Anderson went over specifics related to the Justice Reinvestment Program. The first biennium there will be an allocation, and then it will be a competitive process. They will be required to apply and will be reviewed by the Allocation Committee, who will ultimately decide who gets what. The logistics at the time include a full review by PSCC. About 10% of the funds will go to victims' assistance and community organizations. The County elected as a policy decision to follow the guidelines of this allocation, so whatever is decided will flow into the next biennium. It will also serve as evidence that what is done this biennium works, and is compelling towards the future. He provided a handout showing the parameters. Mr. Hales and Mr. Wark did the bulk of the work on how this program is being implemented in the state, and passed information on to other potential partners. Parole and Probation is the largest potential participant, and there is a separate allocation for the jail that has already been received. No funds have yet been received under the Justice Reinvestment Program. The Board of Commissioners will make the final decision on how the funds are used, as part of an agreement with the State. They will let the Criminal Justice Commission know how they will be used locally, and the amounts. (He referred to bullet points in the staff report.) What follows would be two proposals, asking Mr. Hales and Jeff Hall to present how these funds would be used in the first biennium, and whether this is a model for funds to be applied for and used beyond that. This document is not necessarily the final version, but it has gone through a lot of vetting and presentations. The Sheriff's Office does not have a proposal as part of this first group. The Sheriff elected not to participate at this point, but his office is getting other funds through other 3194 mechanisms. Mr. Anderson said they are looking for comments, perspectives or other guidance from PSCC to document and bring back to the Board. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 3 of 11 Brian McNaughton of the Redmond Policy Department stated that law enforcement is not being taken into account, especially when these people come back. They won't decrease recidivism by just throwing money at this problem. He wanted to know who will deal with this result. It takes a while for law enforcement to get up to speed for this kind of change. Mr. Anderson said there was a lot of discussion about this when the bill was being considered, including from law enforcement and the D.A.'s. In terms of the mechanism on implementation, it could involve early release or avoidance of state prison in lieu of local programs. There are larger issues surrounding this bill. Mr. Hales said the Sheriff's Association and District Attorneys had a large presence there. Chief Sale stated that there is nothing in 2015 that prohibit requesting funding locally. This piece is pre-allocated for counties. He does not know what 2015 will look like. Theoretically, municipalities could be included. Patrick Flaherty noted that the bill went through at least seven renditions. Most elected District Attorneys were not in the back room when this was formed. For what it is worth, everyone from this County voted against it. The Oregon District Attorneys Association opposed it strongly at first in relation to Measure 11 offenses. The D.A.'s made a decision not to ask for money. This will impact the local D.A.'s office as well. Office McNaughton observed that there are a lot of law enforcement problems in Redmond, due to the lower cost of living and other factors. Chief Sale said that the State hopes to balance the state budget by reducing the number of jail beds. Theoretically, the local municipalities and counties are to divert and prevent the next crime. There will be some evaluation of programs as to whether they work and whether they will be funded. This is yet to be determined. Mr. Flaherty stated that they are still in the rule-making mode for specialty courts. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 4 of 11 Judge Sullivan said that no one here made this decision since it was at the State level. It was opposed by law enforcement and the D.A.'s. This is a compromise. The Department of Administrative Services reduced many of the suggestions made by the sentencing committee. This is strictly to balance the budget; it is cost-shifting to the local level. The good side is, there is the ability to hold them now, and this area has alternative programs, plus a jail expansion. Other counties are not going to be nearly as successful. Mr. Anderson stated that they are not obligated to accept every inmate eligible for early release. There is some discretion on this, but it is not carte blanche. There is some assessment to this. Mr. Hales said there are several strategies. One of which is to address those offenders being released early, special case loads and special services being financed through grants, to help those individuals so they don't reoffend. They can do evaluations and transition work, and get as many of them released as is possible safely, but have available services afterwards. Second, a basic strategy, used as an example at the AOC meetings, is to go in pre-sentence and assess departure eligible cases, and identify those who can benefit by being in the community. The evaluation would be provided to the District Attorney and Courts, in an effort to help them be comfortable with a departure decision. The most likely to go back are those who are departure eligible and those who just got out. Regarding pre-sentence individuals, some you can get to but there may not be an opportunity to assess others. This needs to be done while they are still inside. An assessment would be provided to jail staff, for assignment purposes. Parole Officers doing the assessments can liaison with other inmates in the jail, prior to release. This helps with transition activity. Once someone is on probation, resources from grants would be used for transition and programs. They need to make sure the resources are locked in for these individuals. He queried everyone as to what is expected, but one primary measure is to be sure this is researched based. It also has to have an impact on prison population. They need to target those who are very direct and the most likely to end up in prison. It is the same strategy in most counties. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 5of11 He is curious about the competitive aspects, having to compete for a fixed amount against a vast pool of applicants. They will be competitive in quality control, but it might be broken out by population. Chief Sale stated that none of this has been thoroughly discussed. In theory, they will look at the population and recidivism. Those showing promise will get the funds. They are still early in the discussions and none of this has been completely hashed out. Mr. Hales said there will be an analysis on the likelihood of getting funds. He anticipates every county will be able to meet the target for three or four years. Sentencing reform is built in. They have to impact those who would be going to prison four years from now. There is some opportunity to get things to happen, but in four or five years, who knows. Chief Sale noted that they expect a certain failure rate. The question is how to build up local law enforcement to get those people snapped up more quickly. Mr. Anderson said family drug court and similar programs help. Mr. Hall stated that there will be a change in the demographics of the population. They fit all the criteria of the bill, with a continuity of care. Of the population served, some are post-release and some are conditional discharge or post-plea. They are hitting the right target group. There is already an employee assessment tool. Mr. Hales stated that the demographics have changed, from primarily female and DHS involved to more male participants, and more of them with current criminal history. They have leveraged dollars by increasing the peer mentor program. They engage and walk the participants through the process. There is a female mentor at this point. He wants to add a half-time male mentor to provide wrap-around services. There are funds for monitored programs, housing, medical and other basic needs. Filling those basic needs matters a lot in the success of the program. About 75% of the participants would match the target, so they can track the dollars with them. There is a good recidivism rate already. Judge Brady noted that they are shifting from moderate to high risk. This has the biggest impact on the highest risk. Some have already been to prison. They can be successful in this program. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 6 of 11 Mr. Hales said that the Federal Department of Corrections is regularly evaluated for best practices for Criminal Justice Commission funds. They have tested approaches. These individuals have a better employment rate than most. They help them to create a resume, train them on properly interviewing, and give them techniques to explain their history. By the time they graduate, they usually have employment or are in school. A lot of employers are willing to take a chance. Mr. Sale asked if they are not in drug court, are not supervised, but are a Y g convicted felon, how do they get a job. Mr. Wark replied that the employment department has staffing to handle this. Goodwill also has a successful program. Mr. Hales said that a robustly funded corrections department would also have someone doing this. They have to build a relationship between the agency and the employers, make sure the people show up, and build on this. The Department of Labor has done similar work. Mr. Flaherty stated that the employment question comes up a lot. A study was done that shows this can be a major gap, especially if there are mental health issues. Work release is important, but they need to pay attention to the programs in the jail. They have a full-blown GED program now, which is the first step in getting a job. The objective is to avoid having high-risk offenders in the first place. The first time they are incarcerated, their needs have to be assessed and addressed. The Grand Jury always asks about work release. Mr. Hales added that programs to prepare for work and transition are valuable, but they don't have the capacity to do this with every population serving time. Judge Sullivan said that the Sheriffs Office makes sure people have the medications they need when they go out the door. He hopes this continues because it makes a significant difference. This is not done in other places. Mr. Flaherty added that they are a model for the rest of the state, but he is concerned about the ramifications of HB 3194, when they might get punished for excellence. Mr. Hales noted that he would hate to see this area punished since the rate of incarceration is smaller than most due to successful programs. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 7 of 11 Mr. Anderson said that they need to track and measure what is being done on an individual basis, to demonstrate that programs have been successful; not basing this on the aggregate. They need to also segregate those who are going to jail no matter what you do. Mr. Sale stated that they have been innovative, and there should be incentives for that. He hopes they give some leeway for this and adequate time to try it out. The emphasis should not be just on scripting. Judge Sullivan said that there is an emphasis on best practices. They are not always open to pilot programs, and look for those that are tried and true. 6. Other Business Judge Sullivan asked Lt. Gill about the jail renovation project. Lt. Gill said that it is progressing well. He works four days on and four days off, and is surprised at the progress when he goes back to work. They have not started on the inside renovation yet. He added that Capt. Shane Nelson is the new point of contact there. Chief Sale stated that they put in a grant request for a CIT coordinator and got it, and the work starts in June. They are making headway on the information sharing piece, and also on the safety and technology side, through the schools. This provides state of the art considerations in an emergency situation. They committed $125,000 to buy hardware, and 9-1-1 committed about the same. They want to be ahead of the curve regarding school safety. They are starting out with the Bend-La Pine School District now. Jackson County has started this program and retrofit one middle school. Mr. Hales asked if they are changing the LEDS (Law Enforcement Data Systems) next fiscal year. Lt. Gill said there are more school resources officers in middle schools now. They have a fairly good system at the new high school, including some of the components. Mr. Flaherty noted that there is a dynamic environment at the District Attorney's Office. They are launching veteran intervention strategies, and paying more attention to veterans coming into the criminal justice system. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 8 of 11 There are ongoing conversations regarding veterans' treatment court. He wants to see these courts expanded to beyond family drug court. In the interim, they have launched a strategy to work closely with the jail to identify veterans there, work with telehealth and veterans justice. One vexing issue is the failure of law enforcement in general to identify veterans in the system. They are not doing this on the street. Many times they won't identify themselves as such. It is more effective now, taking a different approach if possible, and hooking them up with V.A. benefits to tap into those funds. They work with COVO (Central Oregon Veterans Outreach) to set up veterans with a mentor, which is more effective. They have had some successes with this, but need to find funding for the court program. Mr. Kropp said that Eric Marvin, a Deputy D.A., is attending the first ever veterans treatment court conference in Washington, D.C. for a week. He should come back with some good information and maybe some sources for funding. Mr. Anderson stated that over the past few months, the 9-1-1 Executive Board has reconfigured the oversight board, and proposed to limit its role to policy and direction, and not operations. They are incorporating this into a new management agreement that is being developed. They are also gearing up for recruitment for 9-1-1 Director. Recruitments for County Legal Counsel and Health Services Director are now in the works. Mr. Hales noted that Deevy Holcomb of his Department has been meeting with the judges regarding juvenile detention intake risk assessments. They are working towards identifying instruments that take the discretion and guesswork out of the intake decision. They want to make it more predictable and have a common understanding as to which juveniles should be intake, and also which to release if the facility is overpopulated. This is a difficult process that has been underway for some time. They also changed the policy regarding identifying who needs to go to the hospital and why. It is too discretionary now. There needs to be a common understanding on how drunk someone has to be to go to the hospital. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3,2013 Page 9 of 11 Mr. Johnson said he is focused on health reform work. They are trying to prepare for expectations on where this will go. About 30,000 people are on the Oregon Health Plan here and this number will go up to maybe 44,000. They are very supportive of the CIT work and remain as engaged as possible. The State historically reinvests more in mental health programs, but it has been more competitive. They have to take a different course. They have written fifteen grant applications to get funding for some programs, including mental health court. They are seeking more resources for the crisis team, to add capacity. The jury is out, and the competitive process is difficult. They are interested in a new approach being used in New Zealand, thinking of kids as youth in transition. They look at those ages 14-25 and engage them through transition. This is one grant request. Others are for alcohol, drug and family planning services. Donna McClung said that the Oregon Youth Authority statewide is developing an evidence based Youth Reformation System known as YRS. She could get someone from OYA research department to speak on this. They are able to get an ORRA (Oregon Risk of Recidivism) score on each youth, which predicts the likelihood of recidivism within three years of being placed on OYA Probation or Parole from a Correctional Facility. The data can also be looked at as a percentile compared to other juveniles in the system. They historically compared data to prior offender outcomes and found the data to be approximately 96% accuracy. They are piloting a project with the Juvenile Department to use the YRS risk data to recommend whether the youth would be best served on County probation, OYA probation in residential treatment, or OYA commitment to a Youth Correctional Facility. The pilot will look at the YRS data and make recommendations about a youth's commitment and placement based on risk and need, rather than just on the crime. They don't want to get to a point where just the statistics are making the decision. It is just part of the tool box. They need to know the cases, services needed, family situation, etc. for final recommendations. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 10 of 11 Mr. Hales noted that this is quite sophisticated. When they do a profile, it controls which kids go to which provider. It is promising in matching them up. Ms. McClung added that this helps them to better identify future cases and put the individuals where it is best. They are not just looking for an empty bed. Being no further discussion or items brought before the group, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 67nAitm.L. Bonnie Baker Recording Secretary Attachments • Agenda • Sign-in Sheets ▪ Comments from Marilyn Burwell • HB 3194 Summary • Justice Reinvestment Program Proposal Memo Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2013 Page 11 of 11 DESCHUTES COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL Tuesday,December 3,2013 at 3:30 PM Allen Room Deschutes County Services Building, 1300 NW Wall,Bend, OR AGENDA I Call to Order & Introductions Chairman Michael Sullivan II Minutes Attachment 1 Chairman Michael Sullivan Action: Approve August minutes III Public Comment Chairman Michael Sullivan IV HB 3194 Briefing Attachment 2 Ken Hales Provide Council HB 3194 briefing V Justice Reinvestment Program Attachment 3 Tom Anderson Present program plan to Council VI Other Business , n Le .-----J--, ii�r�v� O M I 0 cV M D C I N E �J i , , , : ,V 1 0 ! a. i: q, , , 1 , . ,-c, , I -�=, cr,-, s- , 4 , �II J .) I r ,j k.r.II Z I V LL] Lei i v Q 1 N W v I I a a y Or ----4 75L- V 1 a .. I•----r I . � I I to --i ,/' (...--. 9i , , dl I I i I II � II I,! 1 I I M 1 _._1___ I I I I 0 I c:' : .4.41 - N M I IC.a I �\ � I I E C I � 1 I A rl 0 c:\.)1--' III Vv ill I I' io ‘..‘,.4I 1 I i ri u I I I I I 1 DO C C'I w Z:: 0) i I E1 �, I 0,1 h to V s I V„ Ia ci O. II I LIII I 1 \ 1 C � I 1 o �I 1 \ . cIl I I I I Statement to LPSCC December 3,2013 I would like to bring your attention to an article about Detention Quotas* dated September 26, 2013. Basically,U.S. ICE is required to fill 31,000 Detention Center beds each and every day. To quote an outraged Congressman from Florida: "No other law-enforcement agencies have a quota for the number of people that they must keep in jail." I don't believe that elected officials here in Deschutes County would ever consider allowing the Sheriff to fill jail beds via a quota. Why then does the Sheriff continue to fully cooperate with ICE in Medford when ICE places an immigration hold on a local Latino whose charges are minor? Deschutes County should not feed people to ICE so that ICE can meet this completely wicked quota. Marilyn Burwell, Immigrant Family Advocates *Selway, William and Margaret Newkirk. "Congress's Illegal-Immigration Detention Quota Costs $2 Billion a Year." www.busincssweek.conl. September 26, 2013. p From: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-09-26/congress-illegal-immigration-detention- quota-costs-2-billion-a-Year Congress's Illegal-Immigration Detention Quota Costs $2 Billion a Year By William Selway,and Margaret Newkirk September 26, 2013 Eloy,Ariz. Noemi Romero, 21,was arrested on a charge of criminal impersonation while working at a Phoenix grocery store in January. Because she was in the country illegally,she'd used someone else's name to get the job. Romero came to the U.S. at age 3 and says she had hoped to earn enough to pay the$465 application fee for amnesty under a 2012 Obama administration program for people brought to the U.S. as children. She ended up in a 1,596-bed immigrant detention center in Eloy,Ariz., run by Corrections Corp. of America (CXW) under a contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement(ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security. Romero spent almost two months in the prison while ICE initiated deportation proceedings against her. She has been released and says the case against her has been dropped. Despite the Obama administration's policy of leniency toward some immigrants,a decline in illegal border crossings,and Republican pressure to cut the federal budget, ICE is locking up and deporting more illegal immigrants than ever before—and spending more money doing it.The reason can be traced to a particular obsession of the late Senator Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat,who once called an immigration reform measure"sheer lunacy." He inserted into Homeland Security's 2009 spending bill a requirement that ICE keep a minimum of 33,400 illegal immigrants locked up at all times.The bed mandate,as it is known on Capitol Hill, has helped fuel a 72 percent rise in daily detentions from 2005, when the U.S.gradually began stepping up enforcement in response to Sept. 11. "No other law- enforcement agencies have a quota for the number of people that they must keep in jail," Representative Ted Deutch, a Florida Democrat,said in June when he proposed an amendment in the House to eliminate the quota from next year's Homeland Security spending bill. Republicans balked and the amendment failed to pass. Keeping all those illegal immigrants behind bars costs$120 a day per inmate,or$2 billion a year. Congress has twice rebuffed White House budget requests to cut the quota so ICE can turn to less costly measures, such as ankle bracelets,to keep tabs on the immigrants it's trying to deport. It's"artificial," Janet Napolitano,former secretary of Homeland Security,said at an April hearing.Without the mandate the agency could free low-risk offenders and put them on supervised release to ensure that detainees show up in court for deportation hearings, she said. "We ought to be detaining according to our priorities,according to public-safety threats, level of offense, and the like," she said. ICE declined to comment for this story. The bed mandate has been lucrative for prison companies, which hold almost two-thirds of ICE's detainees.The stock prices of Corrections Corp. and Geo Group (GEO),the two publicly traded companies that dominate the private prison market, have roughly doubled since mid-2010. Last year Corrections Corp. collected $206 million,or 12 percent of its revenue,from ICE contracts; Geo's ICE contracts accounted for 17 percent,or$255 million,of its 2012 revenue. There's an upside for lawmakers too: It gives them a way to show voters they're getting tough about defending the border and serious about protecting jobs and businesses in their districts.At a March hearing, Representative Tom Marino, a Pennsylvania Republican, complained to former ICE Director John Morton about not getting enough inmates to fill beds in his district's jails. "Why not take advantage—more advantage—of facilities like this, and particularly in Pike County,who built a whole new facility just to house these individuals?" Marino asked. ICE has been trying to keep up with Washington's demands to send illegal aliens back home. In e-mails and memos from April 2012 sent between workers and a former ICE administrator David Venturella, employees were told to divert resources to increase their arrests and deportations because of concerns the agency wasn't meeting its quotas.The messages, obtained through an open records request, included suggestions to comb through old probation lists for foreigners who'd committed crimes,search driver license databases for aliens,and participate in roadblocks with local police.Venturella, now a Geo executive, referred questions to a company spokesman,who declined to comment. In late 2011,Congress increased the bed quota to 34,000.*The Senate immigration reform bill passed in June would give ICE greater discretion to release detainees who aren't a risk to the community, but a separate provision Republicans insisted on would likely continue funneling work to private prison companies. It calls for ICE to triple arrests in the Southwest,which could boost jail spending by $1.6 billion over 10 years. "That would drive demand for more beds," says Kevin Campbell, an industry analyst with Avondale Partners in Nashville. "That's one of the long-term positives for the industry." [An official at the U.S. Office of Management and Business recently said that this number is actually 31,000.] HB 3194 SUMMARY SENTENCING REFORMS • Eliminates mandatory prison sentences for certain drug and marijuana offenses • Eliminates mandatory prison sentences for certain driving while suspended offenses • Presumptive prison for identity theft and robbery III changed from 24 to 18 months • Increases transitional leave from 30 to 90 days • Authorizes earned time credits while on probation or post-prison supervision • Probation officers are given authority to propose modifications to special conditions • Includes sexting a minor as harassment ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROCEDURAL REFORMS • Allows creation of Reentry Courts for participating counties • Directs CJC1 to collect and disseminate best practices applicable to specialty courts • Requires DAS2 to include margin of error, other information, corrections population forecast • Modifies manner of evaluating evidence-based programs • Defines 'recidivism to include arrests • Sets requirements for criminal laws fiscal impact statements • Establishes Oregon Center for Policing Excellence, w/in DPSST 3to advance policing practices • Directs Department of Corrections to identify 5%/10 year cost-containment solutions • Establishes Justice Reinvestment Program, prison utilization reduction grant program • Creates Task Force on Public Safety to review findings and report on correctional practices RELATED FUNDING • $15 Million to Justice Reinvestment Grant Program • $17 Million for Community Corrections • $5 Million for Jail Support • $4 Million for Oregon Domestic and Sexual Violence Services Fund • $3 Million to support Oregon State Troopers • $2.9 Million to Public Defense Services • $1 Million Oregon Center for Policing Excellence JRP GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE • Senator Floyd Prozanski • Senator Jackie Winters • Representative Wayne Krieger • Clackamas County Commissioner Jim Bernard • Lane County District Attorney Alex Gardner • Klamath County Community Corrections Kiki Parker • Bend Chief of Police Jeff Sale • Multnomah County Sheriff Dan Staton 1 Oregon Criminal Justice Commission 2 Oregon Department of Administrative Services 3 Department of Public Safety Standards and Training HB 3194 SUMMARY SENTENCING REFORMS • Eliminates mandatory prison sentences for certain drug and marijuana offenses • Eliminates mandatory prison sentences for certain driving while suspended offenses • Presumptive prison for identity theft and robbery III changed from 24 to 18 months • Increases transitional leave from 30 to 90 days • Authorizes earned time credits while on probation or post-prison supervision • Probation officers are given authority to propose modifications to special conditions • Includes sexting a minor as harassment ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROCEDURAL REFORMS • Allows creation of Reentry Courts for participating counties • Directs CJC1 to collect and disseminate best practices applicable to specialty courts • Requires DAS2 to include margin of error, other information, corrections population forecast • Modifies manner of evaluating evidence-based programs • Defines 'recidivism to include arrests • Sets requirements for criminal laws fiscal impact statements • Establishes Oregon Center for Policing Excellence, w/in DPSST 3to advance policing practices • Directs Department of Corrections to identify 5%/10 year cost-containment solutions • Establishes Justice Reinvestment Program, prison utilization reduction grant program • Creates Task Force on Public Safety to review findings and report on correctional practices RELATED FUNDING ■ $15 Million to Justice Reinvestment Grant Program ■ $17 Million for Community Corrections • $5 Million for Jail Support • $4 Million for Oregon Domestic and Sexual Violence Services Fund • $3 Million to support Oregon State Troopers • $2.9 Million to Public Defense Services • $1 Million Oregon Center for Policing Excellence JRP GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE • Senator Floyd Prozanski • Senator Jackie Winters • Representative Wayne Krieger • Clackamas County Commissioner Jim Bernard • Lane County District Attorney Alex Gardner • Klamath County Community Corrections Kiki Parker • Bend Chief of Police Jeff Sale • Multnomah County Sheriff Dan Staton 1 Oregon Criminal Justice Commission 2 Oregon Department of Administrative Services 3 Department of Public Safety Standards and Training ea Deschutes County Department of Administration �G L� P. O. Box 6005,Bend, OR 97708-6005 Q/ ,� 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend OR 97701-1960 T "► (541)388-6565 - Fax (541) 385-3202 www.deschutes.org Tom Anderson, County Administrator Tom.Anderson @deschutes.org MEMORANDUM DATE: December 3, 2013 TO: Local Public Safety Coordinating Council FROM Tom Anderson, County Administrator SUBJECT: Justice Reinvestment Program Proposal Background: The Justice Reinvestment Program was established by House Bill 3194 during the 2013 legislative session, including a financial incentive (grant) program for local government. The purpose and objective of the JRP grant program are set forth in HB3194 Section 53 that specifies JRP funds are to be awarded to counties for: • Establishing a process to assess offenders; and • To provide a continuum of community-based sanctions, services and programs. The above mentioned objectives are for the purpose of: • Reducing recidivism; and • Decreasing the county's utilization of imprisonment. The legislation also describes what kind of activities the funds may be used for by giving examples of"Community-based programs"that includes: • Work release programs • Structured, transitional leave programs ▪ Evidence-based programs that include sanctions, supervision and treatment • Reentry courts or specialty courts aimed at medium and high-risk offenders. Additionally legislation specifies that no less than 10 percent of the JRP grant shall be distributed to community-based nonprofit organizations that provide services to victims of crime. Administration of the JRP and grant program has been assigned to the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission (CJC). Discussion: Deschutes County is eligible for $321,192 in grant funds for each fiscal year FY14 and FY15. Staff from Community Justice-Adult Parole & Probation, the Sheriff's Office, the District Attorney's Office as well as the State Circuit Court have been meeting as necessary over the past several months, and developing proposals for use of the grant funds in accordance with the criteria outlined in the bill. Beginning in the next biennium, LPSCC will be required to review and approve the proposal from each county. In the current biennium, the Board of County Commissioners has elected to seek the review and advice of LPSCC, even though it is not required. The following elements are presented for your consideration and discussion. Community Justice-Adult Parole & Probation The Deschutes County Community Justice Department Adult Parole and Probation Division's (department) proposal has three key components, each to address three inmate and offender populations targeted by HB3194 and the JRP. One impact of HB3194 is that a subset of prison inmates will be released on conditional release and to the Alternative Incarceration Program ninety days rather than thirty days prior to the completion of their prison term. Strategy 1 is to have a parole and probation officer(PPO)assigned to the JRP caseload to intervene with these inmates prior to release and based on the prison release counselor's LS/CMI prepare the offender's supervision plan. If a LS/CMI has not been completed or is out of date the PPO will conduct one. This activity will establish a process to assess offenders as specified in Section 53 of HB3194. Additionally the case plan shall call for a continuum of community-based sanctions, services and programs that include a balance of sanctions, supervision and treatment as specified in Section 53 of HB3194. The sanctions will include the full gamut of graduated sanctions including but not limited to electronic monitoring, to be financed from the JRP. Supervision will be applied according to the offender's risk profile and compliance, and the department will assist as needed, within the limits of JRP budget funds, to finance alcohol and drug treatment, sex offender treatment, or batters intervention treatment. Important to the success of this strategy is to maximize the number of eligible prison inmates accepted into the community by the department on the 90-day conditional release or the Alternative Incarceration Program. Statewide approximately 20% of the Short Term Transitional Leave or Alternative Incarceration Program eligible inmates are accepted by the local parole and probation department for return to the community. The impediment to accepting these inmates is often the lack of housing and inability to get the offender into treatment. Funds for transitional housing and treatment for these inmates will be financed from the JRP. Strategy 2 is a diversion from prison strategy. The activity is for the JRP PPO to intervene at pre-sentence with offenders convicted but not yet sentenced for a crime eligible for downward departure to probation in lieu of a prison sentence. The JRP PPO will conduct a risk assessment and do initial supervision planning in an effort to assist the prosecuting attorney and the court to agree to a downward departure sentence. This activity establishing a process to assess offenders; allows for case plan development based on the LS/CMI that includes a balance of sanctions, supervision and treatment as specified in Section 53 of HB3194. Sanctions, supervision and treatment will be financed from the JRP. Key to the success of this strategy is constant monitoring of eligible cases, and quick communication between the District Attorney's office and the department in order to identify as many eligible cases as possible and to respond with the assessment and report promptly. At times the entire process could be initiated and concluded within a day or two. Strategy 3 is to intervene with the departure cases serving a sentence in jail prior to release to probation. Many defendants will agree to a plea bargain for a departure to probation. In these cases there is no opportunity or need for a presentence assessment. Therefore for these offenders the JRP PPO will do the LS/CMI and initial case planning while the offender is in jail prior to release onto probation. The actual probation cannot start until the offender is released from jail. In addition to getting a head start on the offender's case planning, the assessment and case plan information will be made available to the jail's programs officers to assist him or her in inmate classification and program assignment decision making. This activity establishing a process to assess offenders; allows for case plan development based on the LS/CMI that includes a balance of sanctions, supervision and treatment as specified in Section 53 of HB3194. Sanctions, supervision and treatment will be financed from the JRP. To implement the proposed the department seeks $229,072 annually to cover startup costs, finance two personnel and to purchase electronic monitoring, transitional housing, drug and alcohol treatment, sex offender treatment, and batterer's intervention treatment for JRP program participants. One personnel position will be responsible to perform prison inmate prerelease planning, release investigations, and assessments; provide liaison with the District Attorney's Offices on departure eligible cases; do presentence assessments, make reports and provide testimony as requested; and do jail based assessments on departure sentences; and perform all customary probation, parole or post-prison supervision requirements and duties for the JRP program participants. The second personnel position will, among other duties manage the department's justice reinvestment program, and supervise the JRP PPO; participate on the Supervisory Authority Board (SAB)Administrative Committee; assign staff and track completion of Morrissey Hearings on jail inmates to ensure they are processed in a timely manner; liaison with jail staff and SAB to coordinate imposition of jail sanctions for offenders' on community supervision with population management needs of the jail; draft revised SAB policies and procedures related to new law, the above mentioned population management activities, new processes for SAB warrants, and issuing the pending sanction report; coordinate information with jail regarding those who are being reviewed by the SAB, and insure that PPO's are submitting necessary information to the jail for the SAB hearings; coordinating and as needed assign back up PPOs to complete the presentence assessment on dispositional departure cases; and coordinate offender services with jail programs officers on JRP program participants. Purchased services for JRP participants will include electronic monitoring as a sanction, or as an alternative to jail incarceration for inmates pending release to probation; transition housing; drug and alcohol treatment; sex offender treatment; and batters intervention programming. Deschutes County Family Drug Court Deschutes County Family Drug Court (DCFDC) is a court-supervised, intensive treatment program serving parents in Deschutes County who have current or pending criminal charges, and have had their children removed from their custody or are at risk of having their children removed as a result of substance abuse. Upwards of 75% of drug court participants fall within the target population of HB 3194, defendants who can be diverted from a sentence to State Prison. Of the current FDC caseload 20% have or will be on a downward departure sentence, 8% are currently on post-prison supervision, and an average 40% - 50% have received a conditional discharge deferring a presumptive prison sentence if they successfully complete the program. In alignment with best practice standards set forth by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP), DCFDC only admits medium to high risk offenders as determined by the LS-CMI and/or criteria established by the NADCP. The use of this assessment and eligibility criteria also align with the programmatic intent of HB 3194. The program has established processes for assessing individuals referred and providing a continuum of community-based sanctions, services, and programs designed to reduce recidivism, effectively treat offenders with substance abuse disorders in the community who may otherwise face extended jail or prison time, and hold offenders accountable for their decisions and behaviors. The mission of DCFDC program is to promote accountability and substance abuse recovery for parents and ensure the safety and welfare of their children. Using a team approach, the program provides close judicial supervision, intensive substance abuse treatment and comprehensive wraparound services. The goals of the DCFDC program to: (1) lessen the impact of illegal drug use on the community, law enforcement agencies, courts and corrections, (2) reduce community rates of addiction and substance abuse, (3) help drug addicted parents and pregnant women become sober and responsible caregivers, (4) create environments in which children are healthy and safe from abuse and neglect, and (5) promote positive, pro- social behavior. The average length of time to successfully complete the program is 18 months. Funds provided through the Justice Reinvestment grant will enable DCFDC to (1) fund a 1.0 FTE Certified Recovery Mentor, and to (2) increase access to wraparound services for family drug court participants. Utilization of funds received will be tracked by the FDC Program Coordinator and reported to the County on a quarterly basis. Data collected will include the number of individuals served by category (i.e. post prison/downward departure/conditional discharge), services provided by unit, and participant outcomes. Use of wraparound funds will be limited to support services to individuals identified as high risk/high needs who are on post- prison supervision, downward departure, or on a conditional discharge with a presumptive sentence of prison time. Certified Recovery Mentors (CRM) provide peer support and services to individuals engaged in addiction treatment. CRM's assist individuals transition through the continuum of addiction treatment by mentoring, providing life and vocational skills, maintaining regular telephone and face-to-face contact, conducting home visits, assisting participants in accessing community- based services(childcare, health and social services, transportation), and facilitating contacts with other people and groups to promote pro-social skills and a sense of belonging within the community. DCFDC currently has funds to support a part-time (.37 FTE)through BestCare Treatment Services. Despite the program's growth and evolving population served, funding for this position has been static since the program's inception in 2006. Within the last year, the program has maintained at or near capacity of 25 active participants compared to a previous caseload of 14- 16 individuals at any one time. Additionally, the program has experienced an influx of male participants from an average of 18% of the participants served to 33%and an increase in the criminal risk levels of individuals served. Additional FTE's for a Certified Recovery Mentor will enable DCFDC to meet the increased demand of the number, gender, and criminal risk of individuals served. The CRM will work closely with the assigned Probation Officer and Drug Court Team to coordinate home visits, curfew checks, drug testing, and overall compliance monitoring. Funds designated for'wraparound services' will be used to assist FDC participants to access clean and sober housing, medical/dental care, transportation, GED classes/testing, clothing/personal care items, childcare, and other goods or services shown by research to improve treatment outcomes, reduce relapse and improve outcomes for families. More than 67% of participants are homeless at admission and more are living in unsafe homes affected by substance abuse, domestic violence, and criminal activity. Access to stable, clean & sober housing is vital to their recovery and to providing for their children's safety, well being, and permanency. Less than 8% of participating parents are employed upon admission. On average, sixty percent have no medical insurance upon admission. Of those with medical coverage, 50% have no dental benefits. Research conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NI DA) demonstrates that to be effective, treatment must address the individual's drug abuse as well as associated medical, psychological, social, vocational, and legal problems.' The provision of wraparound services increases treatment retention and improves outcomes for individuals, families, and the community. Integrating a continuum of rehabilitative services, including medical and dental care, into substance abuse treatment decreases substance use but also improves patients' health, social adjustment, criminality, employment, and health care utilization.2 Individuals engaged in substance abuse treatment who have access to primary medical care show significantly less addiction severity at 12-month follow-up compared with those who with no primary medical care. 3 Residents of sober living homes showed improved outcomes on the Addiction Severity Index and Brief Symptom Inventory scales, 12-step engagement, and had fewer arrests.4 Based on prior year requests for financial assistance, DCFDC anticipates spending funds allocated for Wraparound Services as follows: • 50% - Housing Assistance: Assistance to participants in securing stable, clean & sober housing after being released from custody and/or discharged from residential treatment • 25%-Transportation Assistance: Providing bus passes or gas vouchers to assist individuals in getting to treatment related appointments and/or other obligations (court, school, employment). • 15% - Medical/Dental Services: Assistance with medical/dental copays or services and prescription assistance for individuals who are uninsured or underinsured • 10% - Other Services: childcare, court/work appropriate clothing, GED classes/testing, and other recovery-related needs Annual Allocation Certified Recovery Mentor (1.0 FTE, Wages& Benefits) - 41,000.00 Certified Recovery Mentor—Mileage 2,400.00 Wraparound Services 16,600.00 Total 60,000.00 National Institute on Drug Abuse.Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment: A Research-Based Guide.Third Edition. (2012). -D'Amore MM,Cheng DM, Kressin NR,et al. (2011).Oral health of substance-dependent individuals: impact of specific substances—Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,41(2), 179-85. 3 Friedmann,Peter D.,Zhang,Zhiwei, Hendrickson,James, Stein,Michael D.,&Gerstein,Dean R. (2003). Effect of primary medical care on addiction and medical severity in substance abuse treatment programs.Journal of General Internal Medicine, 18, 1, 1-8. °Polein,D.L.,Korcha,R.A.,Bond,J.,&Galloway,G (2010)Sober living houses for alcohol and drug dependence: 18-month outcomes.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment,38(4),356-365, Victim's Assistance (District Attorney's Office) From HB 3194-Section 54(b): Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, no less than 10 percent of grant funds awarded under this section must be distributed to community-based nonprofit organizations that provide service to victims of crime. Although not eligible to receive and use the funds within its own Victims Assistance Program (VAP) the District Attorney's Office has offered to coordinate the distribution of JRP funds to local nonprofit organizations such as The Kids Center and Saving Grace. It is expected that $32,120 will be available in both FY 13-14 and FY 14-15 for this purpose. Although the JRP does not provides specifics on how the money is to be used to provide services to crime victims, The D.A.'s Office has indicated that eligible organizations will be required to submit annual application proposals, and that a review will be conducted to ensure that the grant funds will be used in the most efficient and beneficial manner possible. Requested Action: Review and discuss the proposal elements contained herein. Staff will document your comments and present them to the Board of Commissioners for their information in in finalizing the County's participation agreement with the State Criminal Justice Commission.