Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-02-16 PSCC Meeting Minutes Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Page 1 of 6 DESCHUTES COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2016 Deschutes Services Building, 1300 NW Wall, Bend, OR ______________________________________________________________ MINUTES OF MEETING 1. Call to Order & Introductions. Judge Sullivan called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m., and the attendees introduced themselves. Present were Commissioner Tammy Baney; Judge Michael Sullivan; Judge Alta Brady; Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Jane Smilie, Health Services; Shane Nelson, Sheriff; Jim Porter, Bend Police Chief; Jeff Hall, Court Administrator; Officer Brian McNaughton, Redmond Police Department; Ken Hales, Tanner Wark, Trevor Stephens and Sonya Littledeer-Evans, Community Corrections; Shelley Smith, KIDS Center; and John Hummel, District Attorney. Also in attendance were Jacques DeKalb, defense attorney; Barb Campbell, Bend City Councilor; Steve Reinke, 911 Director; Tanner Wark and Trevor Stevens, Parole & Probation; Amy Fraley and Bruce Waldrup of J Bar J Youth Services; citizen member Dave Cook; citizens Marilyn Burwell of the Restorative Justice Group and Roger Olson of NAMI; and media representative Claire Withycombe of The Bulletin. II November Minutes The November 2015 minutes were moved, seconded and unanimously approved. III Public Comment None was offered. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Page 2 of 6 IV Family Sentencing Alternative Program Tanner Wark provided an overview of the program, which is new to Parole & Probation, through House Bill 3503. It is a ten-year pilot program that deals with offenders who have minor children, and requires intensive supervision. The purpose of the program is to facilitate family reunification, and prevent children from having to go into the foster care system. It is requires increased offender accountability and is meant to also reduce prison utilization. Not all offenders are eligible. They must have custody of a minor child at the time of the offense, have a presumed sentence of more than one year, and cannot have convictions or being sentenced for a person-to-person felony, a sex crime, or an offense requiring specific sentencing. These individuals would be identified through a joint effort of the District Attorney, the Court, defense, the Oregon Department of Human Services and Parole & Probation. There are already some individuals who might be suitable for this program. This requires twelve months of intensive supervision, with increased reporting, family meetings and DHS involvement. There would be two home visits per month, with the focus to be on family issues. This is outside the normal scope of work. As appropriate, there will be wrap-around services that could include drug and alcohol treatment, life skills counseling, parenting skills classes, and housing services. Because of this workload, the maximum caseload would be fifteen. This will not be zero tolerance, but can involve sanctions. One officer has been hired for this work, and they have identified others. Jacques DeKalb asked if there is any way to share services, since some are doing a portion of this already. Mr. Wark explained that there might be some overlap, such as someone being involved in Family Drug Court, so they will work together on this. They anticipated that this could happen, but there is a small population that meets the overall criteria. Mr. Hales added that some might have offended for something other than drug crimes. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Page 3 of 6 Tom Anderson asked how they are going to measure success of the program. Mr. Wark stated that the Department of Corrections is still building the metrics, and the Department will need to react to those. They will want to know how many children are diverted from foster care. They should be able to tag-team on some of the resources. Officer McNaughton noted that they would be acting more as a facilitator for someone who needs a coach or a mentor. It is a good program even if it does have some duplication. Mr. Wark said that one thing that is unique is the home visit twice a month. There is no time for the officers to do this now. Commissioner Baney asked if the grant dollars would cover enough to free up other dollars. Ken Hales replied that the grant came with half an FTE and some wrap-around services. He hopes that DHS will provide regular services to their clients. Judge Brady said that Drug Court benefits from the cooperation of agencies. It is not a dollar-for-dollar scenario. Mr. Wark noted that the largest impact to resources is finding stable, clean and sober housing. Commissioner Baney agreed that it is difficult to find housing. They are seeing this obstacle when seeking mental health program dollars. Mr. Wark said that this program ties in with the JRP as well. Building and training for this is now taking place. Jeff Hall asked if the Court contact would be administration or a Judge. Mr. Wark responded that they prefer this be through a Judge, with the support of the D.A. and attorneys. Otherwise, they would be working outside the intent of the program. Mr. Hales added that there could be a sentencing option, but this is a small population. They are already working with the D.A. on this. Defense counsel has a role as well, and law enforcement needs to have input. V Update on Justice Reinvestment Program Quarterly Reporting Trevor Stephens explained the reporting requirements of the Justice Reinvestment Program. They received their first grant payment for the JRP and sent in their first report, which covers through December 31, 2015. The CJC reporting was a test run, and there could be changes. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Page 4 of 6 There are nine countywide data points plus others. These include downward departures, use of specialty courts, revocations, zero tolerance measurements and housing availability. The STTL Acceptance and Denial sample shows its greatest effect in prison bed savings. Mr. Hales added that 3194 passed two years ago and allowed for transitional leave for ninety days. Mr. Hales said that there is program specific data required, including supervision, assessments, reentry, housing, substance abuse or disorder treatment, and cognitive behavioral treatment. This has to be reported every quarter. Various reports can be produced to meet specific requirements. They are able to calculate how many prison nights are being saved, and can compare this to other counties’ numbers. Mr. Stephens added that they are making sure the data is successful and relevant. There are 39 counties using different programs, so there is an attempt to standardize this information. Judge Sullivan asked if they are penalized if this does not make enough of an impact; Mr. Stephens said ‘no’. Mr. Anderson asked how they deal with more offenders entering the system. Mr. Wark said that there are only two counties that CJC talked with because they were outside of the requirements. Others have had reductions. So they are not pulling funding at this point. Mr. Hales noted that legislation identifies how you get the funds and what you can do with it. The CJC can influence this. Everyone is participating at some level. John Hummel stated that he is very supportive of this. It will keep the community safer, and lets people out with more services available. He wants to track those metrics as well, and hear about the long-term effects beyond saving prison beds. He is confident this will result in less recidivism. Some of what was done in the past has not helped much. Shelley Smith added that this will also help the victims of crime. VI J Bar J “5” Program Sonya Littledeer-Evans introduced Amy Fraley and Bruce Waldrup, who briefed the group on the J Bar J program being handled within the Juvenile Detention Center. Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Page 5 of 6 Ms. Fraley said that this program was started in November. J Bar J has 28 beds adjudicated for sex offenders, but they are trying to keep it at 19 or fewer. They had moved some to The Dalles, but they are back in Deschutes County. They are allowed twelve beds. They are full now. The offenders are serving 30 to 90 days, and range between ages 13 to 19. All are adjudicated and are individuals who don’t do well in residential placement or at J Bar J. They are offered rehabilitation services, skill building and alcohol, drug and behavioral therapy. Bruce Waldrop added that they were moved from The Dalles to Bend over 24 days. All have since exited. Ms. Fraley said that they are putting out an RFP for additional beds. The work is more intensive than at the ranch. A warrant is issued if they run. It is not the same as detention, which is voluntary. This offers short-term stability. The population is all male. There is a girls’ facility but it is private and deals a lot with homelessness issues. They do not have space for a female needing a secure facility, but there is in Klamath County. All are from the tri-county area, and they do their school work through the Bend-La Pine School District. Commissioner Baney said this is a great partnership. When they are looking at the use of facilities, it is great to put the space to work providing a necessary service. VII Other Business Judge Alta Brady advised that there is another Family Drug Court graduation ceremony scheduled for Monday, February 6, at 3:30, in Courtroom C, and everyone is invited to attend. The next PSCC meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 1. Being no other business discussed, Judge Sullivan adjourned the meeting at.4:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bonnie Baker Recording Secretary Attachments · Agenda · Sign-in sheets · Family Sentencing Alternative Program presentation · JRP Reporting Requirements presentation Minutes of PSCC Meeting Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Page 6 of6 DESCHUTES COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL Tuesday, February 2, 2016 - 3:30 PM Deschutes Services Building, Allen Room, 1300 NW Wall, Bend, OR AGENDA I Call to Order & Introductions Chair Sullivan II December Minutes Attachment 1 Chair Sullivan Action: Approve minutes III Public Comment Chair Sullivan IV Family Sentencing Alternative Program Attachment 2 Tanner Wark Provide Council program briefing V Justice Reinvestment Quarterly Reports Attachment 3 Trevor Stevens Explain reporting requirements VI J Bar J “5” Program Amy Fraley and Bruce Waldrup Briefs Council J Bar J program within the juvenile detention center VII Other Business Chair Sullivan What is the Family Sentencing Alternative Program? The Oregon Legislature in 2015 approved HB 3503 which created a pilot program that allows some nonviolent offenders who have minor children to be eligible for an intensive supervision program in lieu of a prison sentence. This program was designed with the goals of promoting family reunification, preventing children from entering foster care, holding offenders accountable, and reducing prison bed utilization. Which offenders are eligible?  Offenders must have physical custody of their minor child or children or be the legal guardian of a minor child with physical custody of that child at the time of the offense.  The offender’s presumptive prison sentence must be greater than 1 year.  The offender has not previously been convicted of and is not currently being sentence for: o A person to person felony. o A sex crime. o An offense requiring a specified sentence under Oregon Law. What does the program provide?  12 Months of Intensive Supervision. o Increased Reporting. o Family meetings and logs. o Department of Human Services Contact  Parenting Skills Classes.  Drug and Alcohol Treatment.  Housing Services.  Mental Health Treatment.  Life Skills. Family Sentencing Alternative Program Deschutes County Adult Parole and Probation Please contact David Guerrero with any questions. David Guerrero FSAP Supervisor 541-330-8254 David.Guerrero@deschutes.org Tanner Wark Parole and Probation Administrator 541-330-8260 Tanner.Wark@deschutes.org Ken Hales Director of Community Justice 541-317-3103 Ken.Hales@deschutes.org  Pilot Program created by HB 3503. Diverts qualified offenders who have primary custody of a minor child at the time of the offense from prison to intensive supervision. Intent of the program. Promote family reunification. Prevent children from entering foster care. Hold offenders accountable. Prison bed usage is reduced. FSAP Program  The presumptive sentence is a term of imprisonment in the physical custody of the Department of Corrections for more than 1 year. The defendant has not previously been convicted of and is not currently being sentence for: A person to person felony as defined in the rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission; A sex crime as defined in ORS 181.805; or An offense requiring a specified sentence under ORS 137,635, 137.700, 137.707, 164,061, 475.907, 475.930, or 81.010. The defendant is the parent or legal guardian of minor child and had physical custody of the child at the time of the offense. Qualifications  Offenders will be identified through interactions with the Court, DA’s office, the Defense Bar, Department of Human Services, and the Parole and Probation Division. Two avenues for acceptance. Sentenced to the FSAP program. Downward Departure sentenced individual who also meets the other criteria. FSAP Identification  12 month intensive supervision program. At least 2 PO in home contacts a month with the offender and their children. DHS contact. Family time, family logs, prosocial requirements. Maximum caseload of 15 offenders. Wrap around services. Parenting skills classes. Drug and alcohol treatment. Housing Services. Mental health treatment. Life skills classes. Sanctions. Electronic monitoring, community service, jail, etc. FSAP Caseload  1st Report was due Jan 31, 2016. Reporting period October 1, 2015 thru December 31, 2015. Originally Jan 10th, 2016. Report changed and will likely change again. Lots of feedback from counties all over Oregon. Test run. 9 County Wide Data Points. STTL Acceptance and Denial List. 23 Program Specific Data Points. CJC Reporting Requirements  9 Data Points Downward Departures. Specialty Courts. Revocations. Zero Tolerance. Housing Availability. County Wide Data  STTL Acceptance and Denial  Supervision. Caseload ratios, case plans, and contacts. Assessments. Number of assessments and supervision levels. Reentry. Number of reach ins, needs assessments, and reentry planning. Housing. Housing programs, successes, and failures. Substance Use Disorder Treatment. Treatment programs, successes, and failures. Cognitive Behavioral. MRT enrollment, successes, and failures. Program Specific Data   We submitted our report and we were able to report on all of the desired reporting metrics. It is very likely that the report will be condensed with less reporting requirements. We are working closely with our JRI Grant representative to ensure that we meet the reporting requirements and provide useful data for analysis. Reporting Conclusion