HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02262013 - SD.3RECOMMENDATION(S):
INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2013-09 amending and repealing sections of the County Ordinance Code to
change the appointing authority of the County Probation Officer-exempt from the Judge of the Juvenile Court
to the Board of Supervisors and make other non-substantive changes, waive reading, and FIX March 12, 2013
for adoption; and
1.
2.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 02/26/2013 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Ted Cwiek,
925-335-1766
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: February 26, 2013
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc: David Twa, County Administrator
SD. 3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Ted Cwiek, Human Resources
Date:February 26, 2013
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Amend Ordinance Code Section 33-5.345 – County Probation Officer Appointing Authority and Clarify reporting
relationships to County Administrator
RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
ADOPT Resolution 2013/114 clarifying the reporting responsibilities between Department Heads and the County
Administrator to update the lines of reporting relationships and to include the County Probation Officer-exempt in
the list of Department Heads for whom oversight and performance evaluation responsibility are delegated to the
County Administrator, effective April 12, 2013.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact occasioned by this realignment of appointing authority and reporting relationships.
BACKGROUND:
This Board Order and Resolution are due to the implementation of the State’s Criminal Justice Realignment under
AB 109. Realignment legislation was conceived as a partnership between the State and county government.
County Supervisors were very involved with the Governor in its design and enactment. The law specifies that
responsibility for Criminal Justice Realignment program design shall occur through the facilitative leaderships of
each County’s Chief Probation Officer, in partnership with other county departments and a broad group of
community stakeholders. It also requires that the Realignment Plan and financing be governed by the County’s
Board of Supervisors, who may choose to delegate specific administrative and oversight responsibilities to the
County’s Chief Administrative Officer.
Currently in Contra Costa County, the County Probation Officer is under the oversight and management of the
Juvenile Court, although the Board of Supervisors authorizes the departmental budget. This reporting arrangement
and oversight no longer appears structurally ideal because of the very clear responsibilities placed on the Board of
Supervisors through the Public Safety Realignment legislation. However, the County continues to see the benefit
of a strong relationship between the Superior Court and the County Probation Officer; therefore, prior to the
future appointment of any new County Probation Officer, the Human Resources Department will invite the
Superior Court to designate a person from the Court to sit on a screening committee to interview a select number
of candidates for the position. The screening committee will select the final candidates or candidate whose names
will be submitted to the County Administrator for final interviews before appointment by the Board of
Supervisors. The determination as to whom to appoint as the County Probation Officer will be a decision to be
made by the Board of Supervisors in its sole discretion.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County will be hampered in its implementation of AB 109.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 2013/114
Ordinance No. 2013-09