Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08152000 - C185 Con TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CostaX/ FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, County Administrator County DATE: August 15, 2000 _.. SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO GRAND JUDY REPORT NO. 0007 ENTITLED "MENTALLY ILL AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM" SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT the attached report prepared by the County Administrator, as the Board of Supervisors' response to Report No. 0007 of the 19992000 Grand Jury entitled, "Mentally III and the Criminal Justice System". BACKGROUND: The 1999-2000 Grand Jury filed the above report, which was reviewed by the Board of Supervisors and subsequently referred to the County Administrator various affected departments. After reviewing the report and receiving input from the Health Services, District Attorney, Public Defender, Sheriff and Probation Departments, the County Administrator prepared the attached response that clearly specifies: A. Whether the finding and recommendation is accepted or adopted; B. If the finding and recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date; C. A delineation of the constraints if a recommendation is accepted by cannot be implemented within a calendar year; and D. The reason for not adopting a finding and/or recommendation. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:YES SIGNATURE: - RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMEND I N OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD15, 2300 APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED XX OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN XX UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE AYES: NOES: SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED August 1515, 2000 CONTACT:JULIE ENEA(925)335-1077 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CC: GRAND JURY FOREWOMAN PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY COUNSEL COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR PARTICIPATING DEPARTMENTS VIA CAO B DEPUTY a Grand Jury Response 0007 8/15100 Mentally 111 and the Criminal Justice System Page 1 RESPONSE TO 1999-2000 GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 0007 MENTALLY ILL AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Findings 1. Contra Costa County has a large number of mentally ill offenders who are repeatedly incarcerated for misdemeanors or felonies. Of these "revolving door" offenders, up to 30 are housed in the mental health unit (M Module) of the Martinez Detention Facility, where they receive mental health services. Up to 70 others may be integrated with the general population. Response: Agree. 2. In 1998,jail statistics indicated a readmission rate of 25% for mentally ill offenders. Response: Agree. 3. A survey conducted in San Bernardino County found that the mental ill offender stayed in jail on an average of six times longer than other inmates (an average of 140-160 days as compared to 23-25 days for other offenders). Response: Partially agree. In Contra Costa County, severely mentally ill inmates are, on average, incarcerated for longer periods than their mentally healthy counterparts. Mentally ill offenders may be incompetent to stand trial or participate in their defense, causing court dates to be delayed and jail stays to be extended. Inmates with less serious mental disorders, requiting the use of antidepressants, for example, and who are housed on the general population modules, are generally not incarcerated for longer periods than inmates who are not receiving mental health treatment. 4. The incarcerated offender accepts psychiatric medication, which usually alleviates the symptoms of illness, e.g. paranoia and hallucinations. After release, however, the offender will often stop taking this medication. Consequently, a downward spiral begins with behavior that all too frequently culminates in another minor felony or misdemeanor. Response: Agree. 5. In this County, an aggressive adversarial stance taken by both prosecutors and defense attorneys often operates to the detriment of the mental health needs of the individual. There has been little effort to create effective interaction between the criminal justice and mental health systems. Consequently, incarceration, not treatment, becomes the only choice available. This phenomenon occurs repeatedly, as the mentally ill offender too often is punished over and over again for conduct beyond his control. Response: Disagree. Most people with mental illness do not commit crimes. With regard to the stances taken by prosecutors and defense attorneys, public prosecution is the first priority of the District Attorney. Criminal offenders are prosecuted and ultimately incarcerated for committing crimes, not for a perceived mental illness. The Public Defender's obligation is to zealously pursue the best possible defense and fight for the least onerous disposition of each case. Incarceration has not become the only choice available for mentally ill offenders. The courts presently have the ability to order treatment programs as a condition of probation. The courts can also dismiss misdemeanor cases when the defendant has been found mentally incompetent. Mentally I11 and the Criminal Justice System Page 2 6. In 1999, Contra Costa County applied to the State Department of Corrections for a Mentally III Offender Crime Reduction Demonstration Grant. The development of this application demonstrated a collaborative effort by the Sheriff, Probation and Mental Health Departments, along with the Judiciary of our County, to address the need for finding appropriate alternatives to incarceration for the mentally ill offender. Although the grant was not funded, it did describe in detail how our County agencies would work together, and may serve as a model for future collaboration. Response: Agree. Conclusions 1. The unique needs of the mentally ill offender have not been adequately addressed by the criminal justice system in Contra Costa County. Response: Agree, however, neither have they been ignored. Nearly half of the non- hospital portion of the Health Services budget is dedicated to services for the mentally ill, including mentally ill offenders (FY2000-2009 Recommended Budget). The limited resources in this County have been focused on meeting the emergency and ongoing care needs of the mentally ill, such as shelter, treatment and counseling through clinics and day centers throughout the county. The County also provides intensive mental health treatment and counseling for juvenile offenders through the Boys' Summit Unit and the Chris Adams Girls' Center residential programs. It is not constnrctive to make generalized conclusions about mentally ill prisoners without an analysis of each case for criminal conduct and history. 2. A mental health court in our County would create effective interaction between the criminal justice and mental health systems to meet the needs of certain mentally ill offenders. Response: Partially agree. There already exists interaction between the criminal justice and mental health systems regarding the mentally ill offender through the Criminal Justice Subcommittee of the County's Mental Health Commission. This subcommittee is an expansion of the Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Strategy Committee that crafted the grant proposal referenced by the Grand Jury. A mental health court may enhance coordination between the two systems. 3. There is a need for coordination and cross-training of the legal community (fudges, prosecution and defense attorneys), law enforcement and mental health agencies as to the unique needs of mentally ill offenders. Response: We agree that coordination and training are important. 4. It is in the best interest of the community at large to ensure that mentally ill offenders do not repeatedly cycle through our jails because of their mental problems. Response: Agree. However, according to the Sheriff, the establishment of a mental health court will not create offsetting cost savings through a reduction in security and mental health staff at the detention facilities. Mentally ill offenders are in jail for their criminal conduct, to not incarcerate them for solely mental illness reasons would be detrimental to public safety. Recommendations 1. The Board of Supervisors should urge the judiciary to establish one or more Mental Health Courts in Contra Costa County with the cooperation of the District Attorney, Public Defender, Probation and Mental Health Departments, in order to divert certain non-violent mentally ill offenders from jail into more appropriate treatment. -Grand Jury Response 0007 8115100 }Mentally III and the Criminal Justice System Page 3 Response: The recommendation is not accepted. The establishment of courts is not within the purview of the Board of Supervisors, therefore it would be inappropriate for the Board to presume what is the best organization for the courts. Furthermore, the County has no provision for the additional staffing necessary to make a mental health court operational. Additionally, the Mental Health Court concept does not address the problem of how the court can enforce treatment without custody. 2. Each Mental Health Court should consist of officers of the court who have been trained in mental health issues, and who will be assigned to cases in such a manner as to provide consistency and coordination in their disposition. Response: N/A. See response to Recommendation No. 9.