HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 02042019 - PPC Agenda PktPUBLIC PROTECTION
COMMITTEE
February 4, 2019
10:30 A.M.
651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez
Supervisor John Gioia, Chair
Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference
of the Committee
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this
agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
3.APPROVE Record of Action from the January 28, 2019 meeting. (Page 4)
4.CONSIDER reviewing and approving the fiscal year 2019/20 AB 109 budget proposal
for the Sheriff's Office for inmate program services, as recommended by the Community
Corrections Partnership-Executive Committee, and accepting a report from staff related
to AB 109 fund balance. (Paul Reyes, Committee Staff) (Page 7)
5.PROVIDE input and direction to staff on the 2019 AB 109 Community Programs
solicitation process for reentry services. (L. DeLaney & D. Blue, ORJ) (Page 100)
6.CONSIDER approving the calendar year 2018 Public Protection Committee Annual
Report for submission to the Board of Supervisors. (Paul Reyes, Committee Staff)
(Page 114)
7.The next meeting is currently scheduled for March 4, 2019.
8.Adjourn
The Public Protection Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with
disabilities planning to attend Public Protection Committee meetings. Contact the staff person
listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and
distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Public Protection Committee less than
96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor,
during normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day
prior to the published meeting time.
For Additional Information Contact:
Paul Reyes, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 335-1096, Fax (925) 646-1353
paul.reyes@cao.cccounty.us
PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 3.
Meeting Date:02/04/2019
Subject:RECORD OF ACTION - January 28, 2019
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: RECORD OF ACTION - January 28, 2019
Presenter: Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Contact: Paul Reyes, (925) 335-1096
Referral History:
County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the
record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the decisions made in the
meeting.
Referral Update:
Attached for the Committee's consideration is the Record of Action for its January 28, 2019
meeting.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
APPROVE Record of Action from the January 28, 2019 meeting.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
No fiscal impact. This item is informational only.
Attachments
Record of Action - January 28, 2019
Page 4 of 127
PUBLIC PROTECTION
COMMITTEE
**RECORD OF ACTION**
January 28, 2019
2:00 P.M.
651 Pine Street, Room 107, Martinez
Supervisor John Gioia, Chair
Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair
Agenda Items:Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee
Present: John Gioia, Chair
Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair
Staff Present:Paul Reyes, Committee Staff
Tim Ewell, Chief Assistant County Administrator
Todd Billeci, County Probation Officer
Lara DeLaney, Acting Director, ORJ
Donte Blue, Deputy Director, ORJ
1.Introductions
Convene- 2:06 PM
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this
agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
The Committee received public comment.
3.APPROVE Record of Action from the November 13, 2018 meeting.
Approved as presented.
Chair John Gioia, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover
AYE: Chair John Gioia, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover
Passed
4.REVIEW and APPROVE a fiscal year 2018/19 AB 109 budget proposal, as recommended by
the Community Corrections Partnership-Executive Committee.
Approved as recommended by the Community Corrections Partnership - Executive
Page 5 of 127
Approved as recommended by the Community Corrections Partnership - Executive
Committee with the following modifications:
1. Fund an additional $191,996 to the Public Defender for 2 FTE Social Worker II
positions;
2. Deferred the approval of the Sheriff's Office request for $800,000 for Inmate
Welfare Fund.
The Committee directed staff to return to the Public Protection Committee at the
February 4, 2019 meeting to consider the following items.
1. The review and approval of the Sheriff's Office request for $800,000 for the Inmate
Welfare Fund;
2. Review of the contract term length for community program contracts and consider approving a
longer contract term of 5-years;
3. Review of the AB 109 fund balance and the CCP approved Fund Balance Reserve policy;
4. Consider the availability of addtional funding for community programs.
Chair John Gioia, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover
AYE: Chair John Gioia, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover
Passed
5.The next meeting is to be determined.
6.Adjourn
Adjourned 3:35 PM.
The Public Protection Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend
Public Protection Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a
majority of members of the Public Protection Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public
inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th floor, during normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting
time.
For Additional Information Contact:
Paul Reyes, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 335-1096, Fax (925) 646-1353
paul.reyes@cao.cccounty.us
Page 6 of 127
PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 4.
Meeting Date:02/04/2019
Subject:FY 2019/20 CCP RECOMMENDED BUDGET
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: AB109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT
Presenter: Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Contact: Paul Reyes, 925-335-1096
Referral History:
On September 28, 2018, budget instructions for the FY 2019/20 AB 109 budget were distributed
to the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) subscriber list, including Committee members,
staff and interested parties, requesting formal submission no later than October 19, 2018. This
year, staff had again requested budget submissions to illustrate (1) the true "status quo" budget,
(2) the "baseline" budget (i.e. the cost of simply maintaining the current level of service in
2019/20 dollars), and (3) a "program modification" budget to reflect any proposed program
additions or deletions for the upcoming year. A copy of the budget instructions are included in
Attachment A.
On November 2, 2018, the CCP held a budget workshop, giving departments and funded agencies
an opportunity to present and discuss budget proposals. The workshop included a review of the
following:
Historical Base and Growth allocations as provided by CSAC (Attachment B),
The FY 19/20 budget schedule (updated version included as Attachment C),
Summary of department budget requests (Attachment D),
All individual budget submissions which included any letters of support (Attachment E),
The Board of Supervisors approved FY 18/19 AB 109 budget (Attachment F),
An analysis of base revenue allocations compared to ongoing expenditure allocations if
ongoing programs were funded with 2-4% annual increases (Attachment G)
The full agenda packet for the November 2, 2018 CCP meeting can be found at this link:
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55343/Nov-2018-Packet-v2
On December 7, 2018, the CCP met to consider approving the FY 19/20 AB 109 budget. At this
meeting the CCP received a presentation on the AB 109 Budget (Attachment H). The
CCP-Executive Committee held a final vote to adopt a FY 19/20 AB 109 budget. The CCP
recommended budget is included as Attachment I.
The full agenda packet for the December 7, 2018 CCP meeting can be found at this link:
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/55665/Dec-2018-Packet-CCP
Page 7 of 127
On January 28, 2019, the Public Protection Committee (PPC) considered approving the budget
approved by the CCP. The PPC approved the budget as recommended by the CCP with the
addition of $191,996 for the Public Defender's Office for 2 Social Worker positions and deferred
the approval of the Sheriff's Office baseline request of $800,000 for the Inmate Welfare Fund
(IWF). The PPC directed staff to return at the next meeting to consider the Sheriff's Office request
of $800,000 for the IWF, a report on the AB 109 fund balance, and the CCP's fund balance
reserve policy.
Referral Update:
Sheriff's Office Budget Request for Inmate Program Services
The Sheriff's Office AB 109 budget request for FY 2019/20 included a baseline request of $800,000 for inmate
program services. In FY 2017/18, the Sheriff's Office started utilizing this allocation to purchase transit passes for
released inmates and to fund inmate education services provided by the Contra Costa County Office of Education,
which includes programs such as GED preparation, parenting, adult basic education, and DEUCE (substance abuse,
anger and stress management, and job development).
A history of the funding allocation and actual costs claimed is provided below:
AB 109 Allocation History for "Inmate Welfare Fund"
• 2015/16: Not included in budget request
• 2016/17: $731,000 (approved by CCP, PPC, BOS)
• 2017/18: $755,000 (approved by CCP, PPC, BOS)
• 2018/19: $755,000 (approved by CCP, PPC, BOS)
• 2019/20: $800,000 (approved by CCP, pending PPC)
Actual Costs for AB 109 Inmate Program Services
• 2017/18: $530,980
• 2018/19: $283,883 (year to date)
The topic of "Inmate Welfare Fund/Telecommunications/Visitation Issues" has been on referral to the PPC since
2013. The 2017 PPC Annual Report again referred the issue to the 2018 PPC and was to be scheduled at the
request of the Sheriff-Coroner.
Fund Balance
On September 7, 2018, the CCP adopted a Reserve Policy that set a 50% floor for the level of fund balance to be
maintained to ensure availability of funds in case of emergency (such as another negative change to the allocation
formula) or need for one-time dollars. The adopted policy allows for the use of funds resulting in a fund balance
below the 50% threshold, but would require that a justification statement accompany that recommended to the
Board of Supervisors and the Public Protection Committee. A copy of the Reserve Policy as adopted by the CCP is
included as Attachment J.
The FY 2018/19 ending fund balance is estimated to be approximately $21 million. The FY 2019/20 ending fund
balance is estimated to be approximately $18 million (excluding estimated growth funding). The FY 2019/20
minimum fund balance, basd on the CCP Reserve Policy, is approximately $14.9 million, assuming the CCP
approved AB 109 budget is fully approved. A detail of the FY 2018/19 and FY 2019/20 fund balance calculation is
included in Attachment K.
Page 8 of 127
Assuming just a 2% increase each year to expenditures over the next 5 years, the County would be required to draw
$10.5 million from CCP fund balance to fund AB109 programs over that period. The fund balance would be
reduced to $10.9 million at the close of FY 23/24. This 5-year analysis is illustrated in Attachment L.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
1. REVIEW and APPROVE the fiscal year 2019/20 AB 109 budget proposal from the Sheriff's
Office in the amount of $800,000 for inmate program services, as recommended by the
Community Corrections Partnership-Executive Committee.
2. ACCEPT a report on the AB 109 Community Corrections fund balance.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
Ongoing Expenditures
As currently approved by the PPC, the FY 2019/20 AB 109 Recommended Budget would increase expenditure
appropriations by $1.1 million, from $27,885,959 to $28,991,546. Approval of the Sheriff's Office budget
request of $800,000 for inmate program services would result in a total increase of $1.9 million, for a total of
$29,791,546.
Revenue
The Governor's Proposed Budget includes an estimated increase to the County's Base allocation of $1,606,289,
from $24,980,233 to $26,586,522. This figure will likely change in the May Revision and Enacted Budgets.
Attachments
Attachment A - AB 109 Budget Instructions
Attachment B - CSAC Historical Base & Growth Allocations by County (FY 2014-18)
Attachment C - FY 2019/20 AB 109 Budget Schedule
Attachment D - FY 2019/20 Budget Request Summary
Attachment E - FY 2019/20 Budget Requests
Attachment F - FY 2018/19 AB 109 Budget
Attachment G - Base Revenue vs Ongoing Allocation
Attachment H - CCP AB 109 Budget Presentation
Attachment I - FY 2019/20 CCP Recommended Budget Summary
Attachment J - CCP Reserve Policy
Attachment K - FY 18/19 & 19/20 Fund Balance
Attachment L - 5-Year Fund Balance Analysis
Page 9 of 127
Attachment APage 10 of 127
Attachment APage 11 of 127
Attachment APage 12 of 127
2014-15 and 2015-16 Allocations
Base and Growth
County 2014-15 Base 2014-15 Growth 2015-16 Base 2015-16 Growth 2016-2017 Base 2016-17 Growth 2017-2018 Base
Alameda $ 31,497,960 $ 4,100,990 $ 40,861,385 1,776,165$ 42,856,842$ 2,422,666$ 45,787,995$
Alpine $ 167,152 $ 13,366 $ 224,809 3,481$ 235,787$ 4,595$ 251,913$
Amador $ 1,368,104 $ 516,243 $ 1,378,795 382,541$ 1,446,128$ 75,669$ 1,545,035$
Butte $ 6,466,722 $ 1,697,507 $ 6,931,223 219,961$ 7,269,708$ 552,340$ 7,766,913$
Calaveras $ 992,402 $ 255,449 $ 1,114,713 90,663$ 1,169,150$ 54,214$ 1,249,113$
Colusa $ 589,667 $ 243,850 $ 693,231 20,003$ 727,085$ 49,694$ 776,813$
Contra Costa $ 20,669,679 $ 8,765,532 $ 20,831,204 727,382$ 21,848,491$ 1,195,045$ 23,342,798$
Del Norte $ 721,629 $ 436,564 $ 983,957 47,756$ 1,032,008$ 61,952$ 1,102,591$
El Dorado $ 3,586,615 $ 1,818,367 $ 3,614,643 234,813$ 3,791,163$ 222,252$ 4,050,456$
Fresno $ 24,164,305 $ 2,558,069 $ 32,711,894 941,281$ 34,309,372$ 2,975,703$ 36,655,930$
Glenn $ 846,022 $ 134,849 $ 1,153,582 321,454$ 1,209,917$ 100,668$ 1,292,668$
Humboldt $ 3,695,189 $ 806,028 $ 4,330,130 356,079$ 4,541,591$ 140,475$ 4,852,209$
Imperial $ 3,501,228 $ 409,231 $ 4,777,351 218,106$ 5,010,652$ 565,417$ 5,353,350$
Inyo $ 541,209 $ 61,046 $ 691,756 46,526$ 725,537$ 56,564$ 775,160$
Kern $ 31,628,367 $ 4,872,538 $ 36,104,558 3,753,017$ 37,867,716$ 1,399,164$ 40,457,643$
Kings $ 6,894,852 $ 2,618,439 $ 6,948,733 652,823$ 7,288,072$ 843,929$ 7,786,533$
Lake $ 1,934,887 $ 192,832 $ 2,497,419 105,656$ 2,619,380$ 112,486$ 2,798,530$
Lassen $ 1,080,925 $ 185,516 $ 1,358,884 152,545$ 1,425,245$ 54,397$ 1,522,723$
Los Angeles $ 290,538,549 $ 23,778,008 $ 344,481,162 17,755,186$ 361,303,819$ 22,298,545$ 386,014,858$
Madera $ 4,087,031 $ 640,018 $ 5,576,210 318,582$ 5,848,523$ 639,914$ 6,248,528$
Marin $ 4,900,330 $ 2,569,053 $ 4,938,624 182,798$ 5,179,800$ 408,743$ 5,534,068$
Mariposa $ 472,956 $ 92,075 $ 566,924 169,734$ 594,610$ 16,152$ 635,278$
Mendocino $ 2,205,821 $ 711,297 $ 2,322,880 156,857$ 2,436,317$ 79,842$ 2,602,947$
Merced $ 5,692,045 $ 1,444,201 $ 7,763,704 539,041$ 8,142,842$ 714,281$ 8,699,764$
Modoc $ 235,208 $ 45,018 $ 321,108 88,070$ 336,789$ 15,502$ 359,823$
Mono $ 428,294 $ 70,606 $ 584,103 44,113$ 612,628$ 64,198$ 654,528$
Monterey $ 8,633,838 $ 844,532 $ 11,159,775 647,463$ 11,704,760$ 756,797$ 12,505,297$
Napa $ 2,673,402 $ 551,811 $ 3,240,370 676,311$ 3,398,613$ 283,400$ 3,631,058$
Nevada $ 1,918,350 $ 783,916 $ 1,933,341 80,310$ 2,027,755$ 194,020$ 2,166,441$
Orange $ 63,045,168 $ 17,399,444 $ 70,813,993 2,931,181$ 74,272,178$ 6,055,331$ 79,351,954$
Placer $ 6,659,794 $ 1,930,434 $ 7,176,968 259,768$ 7,527,454$ 636,454$ 8,042,287$
Plumas $ 551,023 $ 197,629 $ 609,538 59,307$ 639,305$ 25,139$ 683,029$
Riverside $ 47,744,372 $ 5,381,263 $ 65,141,764 2,142,476$ 68,322,947$ 6,709,911$ 72,995,831$
Sacramento $ 30,485,341 $ 3,679,007 $ 41,572,174 1,337,531$ 43,602,342$ 2,532,450$ 46,584,483$
San Benito $ 1,203,382 $ 428,214 $ 1,593,050 203,766$ 1,670,846$ 143,765$ 1,785,122$
San Bernardino $ 68,145,357 $ 12,157,309 $ 83,729,133 4,712,958$ 87,818,026$ 5,398,263$ 93,824,259$
San Diego $ 63,164,783 $ 16,578,200 $ 68,458,956 1,518,743$ 71,802,133$ 5,740,690$ 76,712,973$
San Francisco 18,337,440$ 6,285,751$ 20,359,877$ 965,739$ 21,354,147$ 1,240,372$ 22,814,644$
San Joaquin $ 16,066,726 $ 1,771,257 $ 21,513,379 1,142,909$ 22,563,980$ 989,100$ 24,107,222$
San Luis Obispo $ 5,644,308 $ 545,788 $ 7,164,312 284,364$ 7,514,180$ 691,713$ 8,028,105$
San Mateo $ 14,450,429 $ 5,863,388 $ 14,563,353 885,694$ 15,274,551$ 956,884$ 16,319,240$
Santa Barbara $ 8,657,369 $ 1,118,182 $ 11,078,836 551,843$ 11,619,868$ 993,525$ 12,414,598$
Santa Clara $ 36,404,725 $ 8,409,131 $ 41,313,799 1,543,990$ 43,331,349$ 3,580,025$ 46,294,956$
Santa Cruz $ 5,637,055 $ 748,732 $ 6,832,189 612,916$ 7,165,838$ 764,181$ 7,655,938$
Shasta $ 6,741,871 $ 2,487,750 $ 6,794,556 342,732$ 7,126,367$ 256,950$ 7,613,768$
Sierra $ 178,831 $ 91,603 $ 231,033 5,697$ 242,315$ 16,329$ 258,888$
Siskiyou $ 1,110,942 $ 356,271 $ 1,296,058 52,299$ 1,359,351$ 86,398$ 1,452,322$
Solano $ 9,077,651 $ 3,143,755 $ 10,466,801 402,396$ 10,977,944$ 386,517$ 11,728,771$
Sonoma $ 9,657,516 $ 4,530,253 $ 9,732,986 371,092$ 10,208,294$ 604,266$ 10,906,481$
Stanislaus $ 13,899,952 $ 1,440,268 $ 17,764,873 1,180,382$ 18,632,416$ 1,530,289$ 19,906,763$
Sutter $ 2,692,639 $ 1,024,819 $ 2,713,681 287,448$ 2,846,203$ 161,826$ 3,040,867$
Tehama $ 2,824,325 $ 3,101,850 $ 2,846,396 46,705$ 2,985,399$ 266,558$ 3,189,582$
Trinity $ 427,173 $ 220,005 $ 580,154 26,124$ 608,486$ 27,350$ 650,103$
Tulare $ 12,723,594 $ 2,227,867 $ 15,875,860 587,520$ 16,651,153$ 1,502,507$ 17,789,994$
Tuolumne $ 1,389,149 $ 183,692 $ 1,776,122 133,987$ 1,862,858$ 145,887$ 1,990,266$
Ventura $ 16,115,645 $ 6,183,310 $ 16,300,317 439,395$ 17,096,339$ 931,118$ 18,265,628$
Yolo $ 6,506,453 $ 3,279,053 $ 6,689,128 221,316$ 7,015,790$ 644,623$ 7,495,628$
Yuba $ 2,424,248 $ 1,447,764 $ 2,443,192 126,925$ 2,562,505$ 70,526$ 2,737,765$
California $ 934,100,000 $ 173,428,945 $ 1,107,528,945 54,085,919$ 1,161,614,864$ 79,447,570$ 1,241,062,434$
* The 2014-15 growth numbers include an additional $64.8 million per Government Code
section 30027.9, subdivision (a), paragraph (3). Although the Governor’s May Revision
realignment estimates displays $998.9 million for base and $108.6 million for growth, this
chart reflects the restoration in the growth column as it was distributed using the growth
formula. While the display is different, the total statewide and individual county allocations
are the same.
Attachment A
Page 1 of 2
Attachment A
Page 13 of 127
September 12, 2017
Detailed Description of Growth Allocation
For the growth formula to function as an incentive system, as it is designed to be, the incentives must be clear enough
that counties know which outcomes are rewarded.
The formula is broken down into three categories in which there are sub-categories. The three are:
1. 2nd Striker Reduction= $28,726 per reduction (10% from the top)
2. Probation= 80%
3. Incarceration= 20%
In each of these categories, the formula rewards both ongoing success and yea r-over-year success.
2nd Striker Reduction
The first step in calculating growth allocations is to determine which counties sent fewer felons to prison with second-
strike designations than in the previous year. Counties get a direct allocation of $28,726 for each one fewer second striker
than the previous year. This allocation is taken off the top, so it is not part of the portions allocated based on incarceration
or probation. Due to the low growth revenue, there will be a cap of 10% from the top for 2nd striker reduction allocations.
Probation – 80%
Felony Probation Success – 60%: Sixty percent of growth funds are allocated by taking a county’s annual felony
probation population and subtracting the number of those revoked to prison or jail. The number of each county’s non-
revoked probationers is then calculated as a share of the number statewide and the county receives that share of these
funds.
Felony Probation Improvement – 20%: Twenty percent of growth funds are allocated to counties that improve their
felony probation failure rate from one year to the next. A county’s failure rate is determined by dividing its annual felony
probation population by the number of probationers revoked to prison or jail. If that rate decreases from one year to the
next, then the difference is multiplied by the county’s total felony probation population . This gives the number that would
have been revoked under the previous year’s higher revocation rate . That number is then calculated as a share of the
total number among all counties that qualify and the county receives that share of these funds.
Incarceration – 20%
Incarceration Reduction – 10%: Ten percent of the growth funds are allocated to counties that send fewer felons to
prison on new convictions from one year to the next. The difference is then calculated as a share of the total difference
among all counties that qualify and the county receives that share of these funds.
Low Incarceration Rate – 10%: Ten percent of the growth funds are allocated to counties that have a lower rate of
incarceration per capita than the statewide rate. The rate is calculated by taking a county’s number of felon admissions for
new convictions and dividing it by the county’s adult population (those aged 18 to 64). That rate is then compared to the
statewide rate to determine how many more people would be imprisoned if the county’s rate were not lower than the
statewide rate. That number is then calculated as a share of the total number for all counties that qualify and the county
receives that share of these funds.
Attachment A
Page 2 of 2
Attachment A
Page 14 of 127
ATTACHMENT B
Major Activity Due Date CCP Date PPC Date BOS Date Completed?
Distribute 2019/20 CCP Budget Packet 9/28
Departments Submit Preliminary Budget Proposals 10/19
November 2018 CCP Agenda Packet Published 10/26
November 2018 CCP Meeting - Budget Workshop 11/2
December 2018 CCP Agenda Packet Published 11/30
December 2018 CCP Meeting - Budget Deliberations 12/7
Public Protection Comm. Agenda Packet Published (tentative)1/31
Public Protection Comm. - CCP Budget Discussion (tentative)2/4
County Budget Materials Due from Departments (tentative)2/8
County Recommended Budget available (tentative)4/5
Board of Supervisors Budget Hearings (tentative)4/23
County Budget Adoption (tentative)5/7
FY 2019/20 CCP Budget Schedule
Attachment A
Page 15 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form *** EXAMPLE***
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
Director Field Services Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 27,711 0.10 - -
Probation Manager Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 51,041 0.20 - -
Probation Supervisor I Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 223,944 1.00 - -
Deputy Probation Officer III Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 2,148,521 12.00 - -
DPO III Overtime Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 25,750 N/A - -
Clerk Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 79,460 1.00 - -
IT Support Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 8,242 0.06 - -
17/18 4% Floor Allocation 26,759 N/A - -
Subtotal 2,591,428 14.36 - - - - -$ -
OPERATING COSTS -
Office Expense Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 3,090 -
Communication Costs Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 10,300 -
Minor Furniture/Equipment Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 1,545 -
Minor Computer Equipment Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 25,750 -
Food Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 10,300 -
Client Expenses/Incentives Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 17,688 -
Contracts Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 - -
Data Processing Services/Supplies Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 7,725 -
Travel/Training Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 10,300
Warrant Pick-up Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 - -
Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses (Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 82,400 -
Subtotal 169,098 - - -$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
e.g. Vehicle Purchases (2)-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 2,760,526$ 14.36 -$ - -$ - -$ -
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Attachment C
Department: Probation Department
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
Attachment A
Page 16 of 127
Attachment D
*** EXAMPLE***
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Probation Department
2019/20 Baseline Request
The Probation Department's proposed FY 2019/20 Baseline allocation of $???? will provide the following level of service:
Salary and Benefit costs of $????? are requested for (a X% increase over the FY 18/19 allocation):
· One (1) FTE Probation Supervisor
· Twelve (12) FTE Probation Officers
· The case load for each AB 109 Deputy Probation Officer (DPO) is 40 to 45 people
· This includes a dedicated DPO to process the reentry of those being released from prison and local jail. This will
include but is not limited to completion of the CAIS risk needs assessment tool, develop a case plan, and begin the
process to ensure the most seamless transition from being in custody and returning to our communities.
· Projected Overtime for AB 109 DPOs
· One (1) FTE clerk
· Partial FTEs for additional management supervision and IT support.
Operating costs of $???,??? are requested for:
· $???,??? for ongoing vehicle maintenance, equipment, communication costs, data processing services, incentives for probation clients
including bus/BART tickets and food for weekly "Thinking for a Change" meetings. This amount reflects a $???? increase (decrease) over
2018/19 due to increased rates for communication and data processing services.
2019/20 Program Modification Request
The Probation Department is seeking a $?????? increase in to augment programming for the Thinking for a Change program in FY2019/20:
Salary and Benefit costs of $??,??? are requested for:
· An addition 0.5 FTE to serve clients participating in the Thinking for a Change program.
Operating costs of $?,??? are requested for:
· Increased revenue to cover additional program costs for the Thinking for a Change program.
Attachment A
Page 17 of 127
2017/18
ONGOING CCP Recommended
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
Sheriff
Salaries & Benefits 6,649,947 7,013,256
Inmate Food/Clothing/Household Exp 456,250 456,250
Monitoring Costs 55,000 55,000
IT Support 40,000 40,000
Behavioral Health Court Operating Costs 80,500 80,500
"Jail to Community" Program 208,000 243,650
Inmate Welfare Fund re: FCC Ruling 755,000 755,000
Sheriff Total 8,244,697 8,643,656
Probation
Salaries & Benefits 2,591,428 2,695,085
Operating Costs 169,098 175,862
Salaries & Benefits-Pre-Trial Services Program 748,632 784,296
Operating Costs-Pre-Trial Services Program 77,762 80,872
Probation Total 3,586,920 3,736,116
Behavioral Health
Salaries & Benefits 996,180 1,036,027
Operating Costs 58,752 61,102
Contracts 1,292,088 1,343,772
Vehicle Purchase and Maintenance 22,448 23,346
Travel 10,200 10,608
Behavioral Health Total 2,379,668 2,474,855
Health Services--Detention Health Services
Sal & Ben-Fam Nurse, WCD/MCD 187,537 195,038
Salaries & Benefits-LVN, WCD 294,711 306,499
Salaries & Benefits-RN, MCD 494,004 513,764
Sal & Ben-MH Clinic. Spec., WCD/MCD 121,532 126,394
Detention Health Services Total 1,097,784 1,141,696
Public Defender
Sal & Ben-Clean Slate/Client Support 397,269 413,160
Sal & Ben-ACER Program 872,787 907,698
Sal & Ben-Reentry Coordination 267,971 340,827
Sal & Ben-Failure to Appear (FTA) Program 172,575 354,912
Sal & Ben-Pre-Trial Services Program 190,401 295,788
Stand Together CoCo 500,000 500,000
Public Defender Total 2,401,003 2,812,385
District Attorney
Salaries & Benefits-Victim Witness Prgrm 109,231 87,881
Salaries & Benefits-Arraignment Prgrm 649,491 682,494
Salaries & Benefits-Reentry/DV Prgrm 693,512 792,950
Salaries & Benefits-ACER Clerk 64,094 72,372
Salaries & Benefits-Gen'l Clerk 63,536 60,399
Operating Costs 86,109 92,638
District Attorney Total 1,665,973 1,788,734
EHSD-- Workforce Development Board
Salaries & Benefits 204,000 212,160
Travel 4,000 4,160
EHSD-WDB Total 208,000 216,320
County Administrator/Office of Reentry and Justice
Salaries & Benefits 517,079 528,580
Ceasefire Program Contract 110,000 114,000
Research and Eval. Manager - 155,608
Data Evaluation & Systems Planning 83,021 -
Operating Costs 7,500 7,500
CAO/ORJ Total1 717,600 805,688
CCC Police Chief's Association
Salaries and Benefits-AB109 Task Force 542,880 564,596
Salaries and Benefits-MHET Teams (3)- 423,447
CCC Police Chiefs' Total 542,880 988,043
Community Programs
Employment Support and Placement Srvcs 2,000,000 2,000,000
Network System of Services 820,000 940,000
Reentry Success Center 465,000 525,000
Short and Long-Term Housing Access 1,030,000 1,030,000
Legal Services 150,000 150,000
Mentoring and Family Reunification 200,000 200,000
Connections to Resources 15,000 15,000
17/18 4% Floor Allocation - TBD 187,201 -
CAB Support (via ORJ)- 7,021
18/19 4% COLA - Allocation TBD - 194,688
Community Programs Total 4,867,201 5,061,709
Superior Court
Salaries and Benefits - Pretrial 208,421 216,758
Superior Court Total 208,421 216,758
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 25,920,149 27,885,959
Notes:
1. ORJ budget as listed includes costs associated with the Community Corrections
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2018/19 CCP RECOMMENDED BUDGET SUMMARY
2018/19
(as approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 18, 2018)
(as approved by the Public Protection Committee on February 5, 2018)
ATTACHMENT E
Attachment A
Page 18 of 127
2014-2018 Base and Growth Allocations
County 2014-15 Base 2014-15 Growth 2015-16 Base 2015-16 Growth 2016-17 Base 2016-17 Growth 2017-18 Base 2017-18 Growth
Alameda $ 31,497,960 $ 4,100,990 $ 40,861,385 1,776,165$ 42,856,842$ 2,422,666$ 45,787,995$ 5,513,055$
Alpine $ 167,152 $ 13,366 $ 224,809 3,481$ 235,787$ 4,595$ 251,913$ 5,369$
Amador $ 1,368,104 $ 516,243 $ 1,378,795 382,541$ 1,446,128$ 75,669$ 1,545,035$ 34,647$
Butte $ 6,466,722 $ 1,697,507 $ 6,931,223 219,961$ 7,269,708$ 552,340$ 7,766,913$ 259,439$
Calaveras $ 992,402 $ 255,449 $ 1,114,713 90,663$ 1,169,150$ 54,214$ 1,249,113$ 788,456$
Colusa $ 589,667 $ 243,850 $ 693,231 20,003$ 727,085$ 49,694$ 776,813$ 61,480$
Contra Costa $ 20,669,679 $ 8,765,532 $ 20,831,204 727,382$ 21,848,491$ 1,195,045$ 23,342,798$ 2,375,791$
Del Norte $ 721,629 $ 436,564 $ 983,957 47,756$ 1,032,008$ 61,952$ 1,102,591$ 28,279$
El Dorado $ 3,586,615 $ 1,818,367 $ 3,614,643 234,813$ 3,791,163$ 222,252$ 4,050,456$ 172,912$
Fresno $ 24,164,305 $ 2,558,069 $ 32,711,894 941,281$ 34,309,372$ 2,975,703$ 36,655,930$ 1,920,436$
Glenn $ 846,022 $ 134,849 $ 1,153,582 321,454$ 1,209,917$ 100,668$ 1,292,668$ 176,369$
Humboldt $ 3,695,189 $ 806,028 $ 4,330,130 356,079$ 4,541,591$ 140,475$ 4,852,209$ 300,685$
Imperial $ 3,501,228 $ 409,231 $ 4,777,351 218,106$ 5,010,652$ 565,417$ 5,353,350$ 390,492$
Inyo $ 541,209 $ 61,046 $ 691,756 46,526$ 725,537$ 56,564$ 775,160$ 248,762$
Kern $ 31,628,367 $ 4,872,538 $ 36,104,558 3,753,017$ 37,867,716$ 1,399,164$ 40,457,643$ 3,346,246$
Kings $ 6,894,852 $ 2,618,439 $ 6,948,733 652,823$ 7,288,072$ 843,929$ 7,786,533$ 278,805$
Lake $ 1,934,887 $ 192,832 $ 2,497,419 105,656$ 2,619,380$ 112,486$ 2,798,530$ 569,592$
Lassen $ 1,080,925 $ 185,516 $ 1,358,884 152,545$ 1,425,245$ 54,397$ 1,522,723$ 220,498$
Los Angeles $ 290,538,549 $ 23,778,008 $ 344,481,162 17,755,186$ 361,303,819$ 22,298,545$ 386,014,858$ 12,317,966$
Madera $ 4,087,031 $ 640,018 $ 5,576,210 318,582$ 5,848,523$ 639,914$ 6,248,528$ 602,411$
Marin $ 4,900,330 $ 2,569,053 $ 4,938,624 182,798$ 5,179,800$ 408,743$ 5,534,068$ 260,189$
Mariposa $ 472,956 $ 92,075 $ 566,924 169,734$ 594,610$ 16,152$ 635,278$ 51,140$
Mendocino $ 2,205,821 $ 711,297 $ 2,322,880 156,857$ 2,436,317$ 79,842$ 2,602,947$ 886,932$
Merced $ 5,692,045 $ 1,444,201 $ 7,763,704 539,041$ 8,142,842$ 714,281$ 8,699,764$ 336,045$
Modoc $ 235,208 $ 45,018 $ 321,108 88,070$ 336,789$ 15,502$ 359,823$ 26,290$
Mono $ 428,294 $ 70,606 $ 584,103 44,113$ 612,628$ 64,198$ 654,528$ 37,940$
Monterey $ 8,633,838 $ 844,532 $ 11,159,775 647,463$ 11,704,760$ 756,797$ 12,505,297$ 385,741$
Napa $ 2,673,402 $ 551,811 $ 3,240,370 676,311$ 3,398,613$ 283,400$ 3,631,058$ 185,871$
Nevada $ 1,918,350 $ 783,916 $ 1,933,341 80,310$ 2,027,755$ 194,020$ 2,166,441$ 204,494$
Orange $ 63,045,168 $ 17,399,444 $ 70,813,993 2,931,181$ 74,272,178$ 6,055,331$ 79,351,954$ 4,783,418$
Placer $ 6,659,794 $ 1,930,434 $ 7,176,968 259,768$ 7,527,454$ 636,454$ 8,042,287$ 588,898$
Plumas $ 551,023 $ 197,629 $ 609,538 59,307$ 639,305$ 25,139$ 683,029$ 30,491$
Riverside $ 47,744,372 $ 5,381,263 $ 65,141,764 2,142,476$ 68,322,947$ 6,709,911$ 72,995,831$ 2,572,932$
Sacramento $ 30,485,341 $ 3,679,007 $ 41,572,174 1,337,531$ 43,602,342$ 2,532,450$ 46,584,483$ 8,597,884$
San Benito $ 1,203,382 $ 428,214 $ 1,593,050 203,766$ 1,670,846$ 143,765$ 1,785,122$ 163,847$
San Bernardino $ 68,145,357 $ 12,157,309 $ 83,729,133 4,712,958$ 87,818,026$ 5,398,263$ 93,824,259$ 2,276,500$
San Diego $ 63,164,783 $ 16,578,200 $ 68,458,956 1,518,743$ 71,802,133$ 5,740,690$ 76,712,973$ 2,411,562$
San Francisco 18,337,440$ 6,285,751$ 20,359,877$ 965,739$ 21,354,147$ 1,240,372$ 22,814,644$ 1,374,521$
San Joaquin $ 16,066,726 $ 1,771,257 $ 21,513,379 1,142,909$ 22,563,980$ 989,100$ 24,107,222$ 2,032,188$
San Luis Obispo $ 5,644,308 $ 545,788 $ 7,164,312 284,364$ 7,514,180$ 691,713$ 8,028,105$ 288,366$
San Mateo $ 14,450,429 $ 5,863,388 $ 14,563,353 885,694$ 15,274,551$ 956,884$ 16,319,240$ 987,971$
Santa Barbara $ 8,657,369 $ 1,118,182 $ 11,078,836 551,843$ 11,619,868$ 993,525$ 12,414,598$ 760,393$
Santa Clara $ 36,404,725 $ 8,409,131 $ 41,313,799 1,543,990$ 43,331,349$ 3,580,025$ 46,294,956$ 3,471,148$
Santa Cruz $ 5,637,055 $ 748,732 $ 6,832,189 612,916$ 7,165,838$ 764,181$ 7,655,938$ 643,431$
Shasta $ 6,741,871 $ 2,487,750 $ 6,794,556 342,732$ 7,126,367$ 256,950$ 7,613,768$ 1,093,649$
Sierra $ 178,831 $ 91,603 $ 231,033 5,697$ 242,315$ 16,329$ 258,888$ 35,271$
Siskiyou $ 1,110,942 $ 356,271 $ 1,296,058 52,299$ 1,359,351$ 86,398$ 1,452,322$ 427,770$
Solano $ 9,077,651 $ 3,143,755 $ 10,466,801 402,396$ 10,977,944$ 386,517$ 11,728,771$ 297,427$
Sonoma $ 9,657,516 $ 4,530,253 $ 9,732,986 371,092$ 10,208,294$ 604,266$ 10,906,481$ 496,743$
Stanislaus $ 13,899,952 $ 1,440,268 $ 17,764,873 1,180,382$ 18,632,416$ 1,530,289$ 19,906,763$ 1,126,729$
Sutter $ 2,692,639 $ 1,024,819 $ 2,713,681 287,448$ 2,846,203$ 161,826$ 3,040,867$ 225,183$
Tehama $ 2,824,325 $ 3,101,850 $ 2,846,396 46,705$ 2,985,399$ 266,558$ 3,189,582$ 1,219,295$
Trinity $ 427,173 $ 220,005 $ 580,154 26,124$ 608,486$ 27,350$ 650,103$ 62,243$
Tulare $ 12,723,594 $ 2,227,867 $ 15,875,860 587,520$ 16,651,153$ 1,502,507$ 17,789,994$ 1,030,339$
Tuolumne $ 1,389,149 $ 183,692 $ 1,776,122 133,987$ 1,862,858$ 145,887$ 1,990,266$ 123,527$
Ventura $ 16,115,645 $ 6,183,310 $ 16,300,317 439,395$ 17,096,339$ 931,118$ 18,265,628$ 468,066$
Yolo $ 6,506,453 $ 3,279,053 $ 6,689,128 221,316$ 7,015,790$ 644,623$ 7,495,628$ 347,977$
Yuba $ 2,424,248 $ 1,447,764 $ 2,443,192 126,925$ 2,562,505$ 70,526$ 2,737,765$ 206,351$
California $ 934,100,000 $ 173,428,945 $ 1,107,528,945 54,085,919$ 1,161,614,864$ 79,447,570$ 1,241,062,434$ 70,130,455$
* The 2014-15 growth numbers include an additional $64.8 million per Government Code
section 30027.9, subdivision (a), paragraph (3). Although the Governor’s May Revision
realignment estimates displays $998.9 million for base and $108.6 million for growth, this
chart reflects the restoration in the growth column as it was distributed using the growth
formula. While the display is different, the total statewide and individual county allocations
are the same.
ATTACHMENT B
Page 19 of 127
May 11, 2018
Detailed Description of Growth Allocation
For the growth formula to function as an incentive system, as it is designed to be, the incentives must be clear enough
that counties know which outcomes are rewarded.
The formula is broken down into three categories in which there are sub-categories. The three are:
1. 2
nd Striker Reduction= $29,632 per reduction
2. Probation= 80%
3.Incarceration= 20%
In each of these categories, the formula rewards both ongoing success and yea r-over-year success.
2nd Striker Reduction
The first step in calculating growth allocations is to determine which counties sent fewer felons to prison with second-
strike designations than in the previous year. Counties get a direct allocation of $28,726 for each one fewer second striker
than the previous year. This allocation is taken off the top, so it is not part of the portions allocated based on incarceration
or probation. Due to the low growth revenue, there will be a cap of 10% from the top for 2 nd striker reduction allocations.
Probation – 80%
Felony Probation Success – 60%: Sixty percent of growth funds are allocated by taking a county’s annual felony
probation population and subtracting the number of those revoked to prison or jail. The number of each county’s non-
revoked probationers is then calculated as a share of the number statewide and the county receives that share of these
funds.
Felony Probation Improvement – 20%: Twenty percent of growth funds are allocated to counties that improve their
felony probation failure rate from one year to the next. A county’s failure rate is determined by dividing its annual felony
probation population by the number of probationers revoked to prison or jail. If that rate decreases from one year to the
next, then the difference is multiplied by the county’s total felony probation population . This gives the number that would
have been revoked under the previous year’s higher revocation rate . That number is then calculated as a share of the
total number among all counties that qualify and the county receives that share of these funds.
Incarceration – 20%
Incarceration Reduction – 10%: Ten percent of the growth funds are allocated to counties that send fewer felons to
prison on new convictions from one year to the next. The difference is then calculated as a share of the total difference
among all counties that qualify and the county receives that share of these funds.
Low Incarceration Rate – 10%: Ten percent of the growth funds are allocated to counties that have a lower rate of
incarceration per capita than the statewide rate. The rate is calculated by taking a county’s number of felon admissions for
new convictions and dividing it by the county’s adult popu lation (those aged 18 to 64). That rate is then compared to the
statewide rate to determine how many more people would be imprisoned if the county’s rate were not lower than the
statewide rate. That number is then calculated as a share of the total number for all counties that qualify and the county
receives that share of these funds.
ATTACHMENT B
Page 20 of 127
2nd Strikers -
2016
2nd Strikers -
2015 Reduction
2nd striker
share 2nd striker $
Contra Costa 45 53 8 0 237,056$
California 9148 8,477 184 100%5,452,288$
2016 Probation
Popualtion
Revoked to Jail
or Prison Successes
Statewide
Share $
Contra Costa 3,100 82 3,018 1.18%457,574$
California 269,555 13,619 255,936 100%38,806,900$
2016 Failure
Rate
2015 Failure
Rate Improvement
# of Probationers
Improvement
Represents
Statewide
Share $
Contra Costa 2.65%2.42%0.00%- 0.00%-$
California 5.05%4.22%0.00%789 100%12,935,633$
Incarcerated
from County -
2016
Incarcerated
from County -
2015
Incarcerated
from County -
Difference
Incarceration
Reduction
Statewide
Share $
Contra Costa 376 455 -17.36%79 15.13%978,846$
California 35,712 34,450 3.66%522 100%6,467,817$
County
Population
Incarceration
Rate - 2016
Rate Below
Statewide
Prisoners Fewer
Because Lower
Statewide
Share $
Contra Costa 1,127,279 0.03%0.06%651.51 10.86%702,315$
California 39,179,627 0.09%5,999.92 100%6,467,817$
Statewide
Share Total Growth $
Contra Costa 3.3877%2,375,791$
California 100.00%70,130,455$ Monday, September 24, 2018
Total
Calculating Contra Costa County's 2017-18 Growth
2nd Striker Reduction ($29,632 per)
Felony Probation Success (60%)
Felony Probation Improvement (20%)
Incarceration Reduction (10%)
Low Incarceration Rate (10%)
ATTACHMENT B
Page 21 of 127
ATTACHMENT C
Major Activity Due Date CCP Date PPC Date BOS Date Completed?
Distribute 2019/20 CCP Budget Packet 9/28
Departments Submit Preliminary Budget Proposals 10/19
November 2018 CCP Agenda Packet Published 10/26
November 2018 CCP Meeting - Budget Workshop 11/2
December 2018 CCP Agenda Packet Published 11/30
December 2018 CCP Meeting - Budget Deliberations 12/7
Public Protection Comm. Agenda Packet Published 1/23
Public Protection Comm. - CCP Budget Discussion 1/28
County Budget Materials Due from Departments 2/8
County Recommended Budget available 4/10
Board of Supervisors Budget Hearings 4/16
County Budget Adoption 5/7
as of January 23, 2019
FY 2019/20 CCP Budget Schedule
Page 22 of 127
ATTACHMENT D
2018/19
ONGOING BASELINE +PROG. MOD.=TOTAL REQUEST
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
Sheriff
Salaries & Benefits 7,013,256 7,321,484 - 7,321,484
Inmate Food/Clothing/Household Exp 456,250 456,250 - 456,250
Monitoring Costs 55,000 55,000 - 55,000
IT Support 40,000 40,000 - 40,000
Behavioral Health Court Operating Costs 80,500 80,500 - 80,500
"Jail to Community" Program 243,650 243,650 - 243,650
Inmate Welfare Fund re: FCC Ruling 755,000 800,000 - 800,000
Sheriff Total 8,643,656 8,996,884 - 8,996,884
Probation
Salaries & Benefits 2,695,085 2,794,803 - 2,794,803
Operating Costs 175,862 182,896 - 182,896
Salaries & Benefits-Pre-Trial Services Program 784,296 813,314 - 813,314
Operating Costs-Pre-Trial Services Program 80,872 81,083 - 81,083
Probation Total 3,736,116 3,872,096 - 3,872,096
Behavioral Health
Salaries & Benefits 1,036,027 1,055,891 (277,764) 778,127
Occupancy Costs 61,102 58,752 (20,000) 38,752
Contracts 1,343,772 1,367,801 58,832 1,426,633
Vehicle Purchase and Maintenance 23,346 22,448 2,500 24,948
Travel 10,608 10,200 (1,000) 9,200
Behavioral Health Total 2,474,855 2,515,092 (237,432) 2,277,660
Health Services--Health, Housing, & Homeless
Salaries & Benefits - - 137,432 137,432
Operating Costs - - 116,000 116,000
Health, Housing & Homeless Total - - 253,432 253,432
Health Services--Detention Health Services
Sal & Ben-Fam Nurse, WCD/MCD 195,038 235,168 - 235,168
Salaries & Benefits-LVN, WCD 306,499 316,673 30,641 347,314
Salaries & Benefits-RN, MCD 513,764 534,854 236,222 771,076
Sal & Ben-MH Clinic. Spec., WCD/MCD 126,394 134,565 - 134,565
Detention Health Services Total 1,141,696 1,221,260 266,863 1,488,123
Public Defender
Sal & Ben-Clean Slate/Client Support 413,160 472,641 191,996 664,637
Sal & Ben-ACER Program 907,698 932,866 - 932,866
Sal & Ben-Reentry Coordination 340,827 368,376 368,376
Sal & Ben-Failure to Appear (FTA) Program 354,912 365,752 175,434 541,186
Sal & Ben-Pre-Trial Services Program 295,788 317,084 317,084
Stand Together CoCo 500,000 500,000 500,000
Operating/Capital Costs - - 78,869 78,869
Public Defender Total 2,812,385 2,956,719 446,299 3,403,018
District Attorney
Salaries & Benefits-Victim Witness Prgrm 87,881 105,452 - 105,452
Salaries & Benefits-Arraignment Prgrm 682,494 703,125 - 703,125
Salaries & Benefits-Reentry/DV Prgrm 792,950 703,934 - 703,934
Salaries & Benefits-Conviction Integrity - - 553,472 553,472
Salaries & Benefits-Neighborhood Courts - - 90,000 90,000
Salaries & Benefits-ACER Clerk 72,372 69,719 - 69,719
Salaries & Benefits-Gen'l Clerk 60,399 61,883 - 61,883
Salaries & Benefits-Realignment Clerk - - 24,940 24,940
Operating Costs 92,638 67,006 - 67,006
Operating Costs - Neighborhood Courts 60,000 60,000
District Attorney Total 1,788,734 1,711,119 728,412 2,439,531
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2019/20 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY
as of November 30, 2018
2019/20 BUDGET REQUEST
Page 23 of 127
ATTACHMENT D
2018/19
ONGOING BASELINE +PROG. MOD.=TOTAL REQUEST
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2019/20 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY
as of November 30, 2018
2019/20 BUDGET REQUEST
EHSD - Re-Entry Systems
Salaries & Benefits - - 106,966 106,966
Operating Costs - - 37,438 37,438
EHSD Total - - 144,404 144,404
EHSD-- Workforce Development Board
Salaries & Benefits 212,160 204,000 - 204,000
Travel 4,160 4,000 - 4,000
EHSD-WDB Total 216,320 208,000 - 208,000
County Administrator/Office of Reentry and Justice
Salaries & Benefits - Prog. Admin 528,580 571,378 (89,546) 481,832
Salaries & Benefits - Research and Evaluation 155,608 189,563 - 189,563
Ceasefire Program Contract 114,000 119,000 - 119,000
Data Evaluation & Systems Planning - - - -
Operating Costs 7,500 7,500 40,020 47,520
CAO/ORJ Total1 805,688 887,441 (49,526) 837,915
CCC Police Chief's Association
Salaries and Benefits-AB109 Task Force 564,596 587,180 - 587,180
Salaries and Benefits-MHET Teams (3)423,447 440,385 - 440,385
CCC Police Chiefs' Total 988,043 1,027,565 - 1,027,565
Community Programs
Employment Support and Placement Srvcs 2,000,000 2,081,275 201,725 2,283,000
Network System of Services 940,000 978,200 800 979,000
Reentry Success Center 525,000 546,335 - 546,335
Short and Long-Term Housing Access 1,030,000 1,071,855 200,145 1,272,000
Legal Services 150,000 156,095 905 157,000
Mentoring and Family Reunification 200,000 208,130 870 209,000
Connections to Resources 15,000 15,000 - 15,000
CAB Support (via ORJ)7,021 5,000 (1,969) 3,031
Salesforce Licensing - - 17,000 17,000
18/19 4% COLA - Allocation TBD 194,688 - -
Community Programs Total 5,061,709 5,061,890 419,476 5,481,366
Superior Court
Salaries and Benefits - Pretrial 216,758 225,745 - 225,745
Superior Court Total 216,758 225,745 - 225,745
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 27,885,959 28,683,811 1,971,928 30,655,739
Notes:
1. ORJ budget as listed includes costs associated with the Community Corrections subaccount only.
Page 24 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
Sergeant Staff Supervision 3.1 313,471 1.00 327,366$ 1.00 327,366 1.00
Deputy Sheriff Inmate Management 3.1 5,524,337 20.00 5,763,920$ 20.00 5,763,920 20.00
Sheriff's Specialist Alternative Custody progrms 3.1 436,506 3.00 456,249$ 3.00 456,249 3.00
Senior Clerk Data and Admin Support 3.1 232,242 2.00 252,096$ 2.00 252,096 2.00
ASA III Administrative Support 5.1 177,455 1.00 182,727$ 1.00 182,727 1.00
DSW Additional Cleaning/Maintenance 3.1 208,214 2.00 214,472$ 2.00 214,472 2.00
Lead Cook Food Prep.3.1 121,031 1.00 124,654$ 1.00 124,654 1.00
- -
Subtotal 7,013,256 30.00 7,321,484 30.00 - - 7,321,484$ 30.00
OPERATING COSTS -
FOOD/CLOTHING/HOUSEHOLD Inmate Management/Welfare 3.1 456,250 456,250.00$ 456,250
MONITORING COSTS Inmate Monitoring 3.1 55,000 55,000.00$ 55,000
IT SUPPORT Tech. Support 3.1 40,000 40,000.00$ 40,000
Behavioral Health Crt. Ops.Overhead for Behavioral Health Court 3.3 80,500 80,500.00$ 80,500
Program Administration Jail-to-Communities Programs 5.3 243,650 243,650.00$ 243,650
Program Services Inmate Program Services 755,000 800,000.00$ 800,000
-
- -
- -
Subtotal 1,630,400 1,675,400 - 1,675,400$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 8,643,656$ 30.00 8,996,884$ 30.00 -$ - 8,996,884$ 30.00
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: Sheriff
Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1 2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3
2019/20 Total
Funding Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 25 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
The above funding requests reflect a maintenance of 18/19 staffing, operations and programs, with no request for capital costs.
DEPARTMENT: Sheriff
2018/19 Baseline Request
FY 2018-2019 SERGEANT (1)
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19; increased personnel costs reflect a 5% rise in projected salary and benefits costs
FY 2018-2019 DEPUTY SHERIFF (16)* Facilities, (2) Transportation, (1) Classification,(1) Behaviorial Health Court
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19; increased personnel costs reflect a 5% rise in projected salary and benefits costs
*(16) = (5) MDF + (2) MDF freetime; (5) WCDF + (2) WCDF freetime + (2) WCDF female freetime
FY 2018-2019 SPECIALIST (3)
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19;increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costs
FY 2018-2019 SENIOR CLERK (2)
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19;increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costs
FY 2018-2019 ASA III -Inmate Programs (1)
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19;increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costs
FY 2018-2019 DETENTION SERVICE WORKER -DSW (2)
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19;increased personnel costs reflect a 3%rise in projected slary and benefits costs
FY 2018-2019 LEAD COOK (1)
Maintains same staffing approved for 18-19;increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costs
FY 2018-2019 Food/Clothing/Household
Funding for food, clothing, and household expenses to meet inmates' needs and Title 15 requirements. These ongoing cost estimates
are calculated from a Food/Clothing Services budget of approximately $4.1 million.
FY 2018-2019 Monitoring Costs
These costs are primarily related to the Custody Alternative Facility and the ongoing costs associated with the monitoring through
contracts with SCRAM and 3M for alternative custody devices.This program enables defendants to remain out of physical/hard custody
while being monitored (e.g.: electronically) under provisions recommended by the Court.
FY 2018-2019 IT Support
The ongoing costs associated with the Sheriff’s Office and contracts for IT support, which includes installation and maintenance for the
alternative custody devices, Jail Management System maintenance,and other computer and elctronic requisites supported by the
Sheriff's Technical Services Division.
FY 2018-2019 Behavioral Health Court
This item is to support the ongoing costs of the Behavioral Health Court as it currently exists,to include vehicle, rent, IT support,
phones, PG&E, repairs, limited supplies, cell phones, computers, drug testing, and annual training classes for deputies
FY 2018-2019 Program Administration Costs
The Sheriff's Office was awarded $208,000 in FY 17-18 to administer "Jail to Community" programs in the detention facilities. In 18-19,
Men and Women of Purpose requested a 23% increase of $35,650 due to their expanded service to all three Sheriff's custody facilities.
This requested total reflects the new status quo of 243,650.
FY 2018-2019 Program Services
In Fiscal Years 2017-18 and 2018-19, $755,000 in AB109 funding was allocated to Inmate Services to defray costs of inmate jail
programs. Due to increased programs costs, The Office of the Sheriff is requesting an additional $45,000 in AB109 funding for FY 2019-
2020.
The Office of the Sheriff is in the final stages of contract review, with the inmate telephone service provider, Global Tel* Link (GTL). The
requested $800,000 in ab109 funds offsets the loss of revenue from commissions The Office of the Sheriff will no longer be receiving
when the new contract is in place.
CCCOE is asking for a $37,103 increase for the 2019-2020 operating budget.The following reasons justify the requested CCCOE
increase:
3% cost of living adjustment
8% health increase
Staff step and longevity increases
COPE Parenting Program hourly increase from $40 -$50 per hour
Additional $2,000 allocated for substitutes based on usage in the 2017-2018 school year.
The remaining $7,897 will be divided among the other AB109 supported programs to help defray the increased costs of materials and
supplies.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 26 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS
Director Field Services Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 29,159 0.10 30,238 0.10 30,238 0.10
Probation Manager Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 53,708 0.20 55,695 0.20 55,695 0.20
Probation Supervisor I Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 232,822 1.00 241,436 1.00 241,436 1.00
Deputy Probation Officer III Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 2,259,431 12.00 2,343,030 12.00 2,343,030 12.00
DPO III Overtime Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 26,435 N/A 27,413 N/A 27,413 N/A
Clerk Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 84,043 1.00 87,153 1.00 87,153 1.00
IT Support Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 9,487 0.06 9,838 0.06 9,838 0.06
-
Subtotal 2,695,085 14.36 2,794,803 14.36 - - 2,794,803$ 14.36
OPERATING COSTS
Office Expense Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 1,529 1,590 1,590
Communication Costs Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 10,811 11,243 11,243
Minor Furniture/Equipment Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 30,572 31,795 31,795
Minor Computer Equipment Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 2,523 2,624 2,624
Food Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 4,331 4,504 4,504
Client Expenses/Incentives Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 15,286 15,897 15,897
Contracts Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 - - -
Data Processing Services/Supplies Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 8,109 8,433 8,433
Travel/Training Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 16,213 16,862 16,862
Warrant Pick-up Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 - - -
Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses (Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 86,488 89,948 89,948
Subtotal 175,862 182,896 - 182,896$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 2,870,947$ 14.36 2,977,700$ 14.36 -$ - 2,977,700$ 14.36
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: Probation Department
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 27 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Probation Department
2019/20 Baseline Request
The Probation Department's proposed FY 2019/20 allocation of $2,977,700 will provide the following level of service:
Salary and Benefit costs of $2,794,803 are requested for:
· One (1) FTE Probation Supervisor
· Twelve (12) FTE Probation Officers
· The case load for each AB 109 Deputy Probation Officer (DPO) is 40 to 45 people
· This includes a dedicated DPO to process the reentry of those being released from prison and local jail. This will
include but is not limited to completion of the CAIS risk needs assessment tool, and begin the
process to ensure the most seamless transition from being in custody and returning to our communities.
· Projected Overtime for AB 109 DPOs
· One (1) FTE clerk
· Partial FTEs for additional management supervision and IT support.
Operating costs of $182,896 are requested for:
· Ongoing vehicle maintenance, equipment, travel, training, communication costs, data processing services, incentives for probation clients
including bus/BART tickets and food for weekly "Thinking for a Change" meetings.
2019/20 Program Modification Request
Probation is not requesting any modifications for FY 2019/20.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 28 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2018/19 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
Deputy Probation Officer III Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 705,689 4.00 731,799 4.00 731,799 4.00
Clerk Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 78,607 1.00 81,515 1.00 81,515 1.00
Legal Assistant (Public Defender)Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 293,313 3.00 317,084 3.00 317,084 3.00
- -
Subtotal 1,077,609 8.00 1,130,399 8.00 - - 1,130,399$ 8.00
OPERATING COSTS -
Office Expense Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 2,002 5,000 5,000
Travel/Training Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 10,000 25,000 25,000
Contract Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 55,000 40,000 40,000
Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses (ISF)Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 10,760 11,083 11,083
-
Subtotal 77,762 81,083 - 81,083$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
e.g. Vehicle Purchases (2)-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 1,155,371$ 8.00 1,211,482$ 8.00 -$ - 1,211,482$ 8.00
1. FY 2018/19 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2017/18 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2018/19 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2018/19 dollars.
3. FY 2018/19 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2018/19.
Department: Probation Pre-Trial
Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1 2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3
2019/20 Total
Funding Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 29 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Probation Pre-Trial
2018/19 Baseline Request
The Pre-Trial Program's proposed FY 2019/20 allocation of $1,211,482 will provide the following level of service:
Salary and Benefit costs of $1,130,399 are requested for:
· Four (4) FTE Probation Officers
· One (1) FTE Clerk (Probation)
· Two (3) FTE Legal Assistants (Public Defender)
Operating costs of $81,083 are requested for:
· $11,083 for Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses.
· $25,000 for Travel & Training.
· $40,000 for Contracts.
· $5,000 for Office Expenses.
2018/19 Program Modification Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 30 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 31 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 32 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 33 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 34 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 35 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 36 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Prepared on 10/24/2018
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS
Case Managers Homeless 104,807 2.00 107,951 2.00 107,951 2.00
Evaluator 14,820 0.10 15,265 0.10 15,265 0.10
Program Supervisor 13,802 0.10 14,216 0.10 14,216 0.10
Subtotal 133,429 2.20 137,432 2.20 - - 137,432$ 2.20
OPERATING COSTS
Homeless Shelter Beds 100,000 116,000 116,000
Subtotal 100,000 116,000 - 116,000$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)
e.g. Vehicle Purchases (2)
Subtotal - - - -
Total 233,429$ 2.20 253,432$ 2.20 -$ - 253,432$ 2.20
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing programs in the FY 2019/20 Status Quo column in 2018/19 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
With 2% adjustment
Department: Health, Housing, and Homeless Services Division
Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
2019/20 Program
Modification Request3
2019/20 Total
Funding Request
With 3% COLA
2019/20 Baseline Request2
ATTACHMENT E
Page 37 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
The Health, Housing, and Homeless Services Division requests $253,432 to provide emergency shelter and case management services to individuals referred
from County Probation that have been released from state prison on post release community supervision, as well as, individuals released from county
facilities on mandatory supervision. The shelters mission is to provide safe, interim housing with comprehensive services that assist homeless adults in
securing permanent housing that will end their homelessness.
DEPARTMENT: Health, Housing, and Homeless Division
2018/19 Baseline Request
Salary and Benefits - $137,431.82
Case Manager (2 FTE)
Case Managers will provide one-on-one intensive case management services to assist to re-entry residents to successfully integrate back into the community.
Services provided include assistance 3 in securing permanent housing, linkages to education and employment services, life skills education and development,
and linkages to primary health care. In addition, AB109 dedicated shelter case managers will work closely with the Forensic Team to coordinate case plans
around their housing and other supports. Funds will also be used to offset travel expenses such as mileagereimbursement and bridge tolls to meetings and
clinical appointments on behalf of AB109 clients.
Planner/Evaluator (.1 FTE)
The Planner/Evaluator will gather, tabulate and analyze data relative to services and provide data outcomes. The Planner/Evaluator may conduct needs
assessment, and will provide additional data tracking, including, but not limited to, SSI status, housing status, Mental Health-AOD referrals, as collaborating
with community based agencies to pull data regarding interagency service provider utilization.
Program Supervisors (.1 FTE)
The Program Supervisor attends administrators meetings, receives and processes shelter referrals from probation, reviews utilization reports, and provides
supervision to AB109 shelter case managers.
Operating Costs - $116,000
Shelter beds
Up to ten beds (for a total of 2330 bednights @ a rate of $49.78) are dedicated for homeless AB109 clients on a first come, first served basis. Shelter services
include meals, laundry, case management, healthcare, and other support services.
Capital Costs (One time) - $0
No one-time capital costs are requests for FY 19/20.
2018/19 Program Modification Request
No request for modification
ATTACHMENT E
Page 38 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
- -
Family Nurse Practitioner/MD MDF/WCDF/MCDF 3.3 195,038 1.00 235,168 1.00 235,168 1.00
Licensed Vocational Nurse West County Detention 3.3 306,499 2.90 316,673 2.90 30,641 0.30 347,314 3.20
Registered Nurse MDF/WCDF/MCDF 3.3 513,764 2.80 534,854 2.80 236,222 1.20 771,076 4.00
Mental Health Clinical Specialist WCDF 3.3 126,394 1.00 134,565 1.00 134,565 1.00
- -
- -
- -
Subtotal 1,141,695 7.70 1,221,260 7.70 266,863 1.50 1,488,123$ 9.20
OPERATING COSTS -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 1,141,695$ 7.70 1,221,260$ 7.70 266,863$ 1.50 1,488,123$ 9.20
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request reflect proposed increased level of service needed in FY2019/20.
Department: Health Services - DETENTION
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 39 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
Department: Health Services - DETENTION
2019/20 Baseline Request
The Health Services Department - Detention proposed FY 2019/20 Baseline allocation of $1,221,260 will provide the same level of service. These
amount includes applicable merit increases and 3% COLA and related benefit increases.
An additonal 1.5 FTE in Salary and Benefit costs (includes 3% COLA and benefits) of $228,863 is requested forFY 19/20 due to increasing patient
visits with higher accuity requiring mandated hours:
· 1.2 FTE Registered Nurse
· 0.3 FTE Licensed Vocational Nurse
Salary and Benefit costs of $1,488,123 for the following positions:
• Family Nurse Practitioner - 1 FTE - West County Detention/Marsh Creek Detention/Martinez Detention . This provider delivers assessment
and ongoing medical care to patients housed at MDF/WCDF/MCDF. Additionally, this provider assists and communicates with internal and
external agencies in coordinating discharge planning/re-entry health needs.
• Licensed Vocational Nurse - 3.2 FTE West County Detention - These FTEs provide direct and on-going medication delivery and medication
support to inmates at the West County Detention . They serve as medication nurses for both the morning and afternoon shifts, seven days a
week. Additional staffing is needed based on the direct increase of medication administration post AB 109 inmate's arrival to West County
Detention in October of 2011.
• Registered Nurse - 3.2 FTE West County Detention/Martinez Detention/Marsh Creek Detention . Detention Health Services provides
nursing coverage to patients housed at all of the County's Adult Detention Facilities. This request is based on the on-going additional
needs/services provided to the AB109 population which are housed in the County's Adult Detention Facilities - During the FY 17/18, RN staffing
at the Marsh Creek Detention was increased from 5 days a week to 7 days a week. In order to accommodate the increased services required by
the additional inmate/patients housed at the Martinez Detention, West County and the Marsh Creek Detention Facility, Detention Health
Services has had to increase its RN FTEs to be able to provide timely and appropriate medical care.
• Mental Health Clinical Specialist - 1 FTE West County Detention. This clinician assists in providing direct mental health services and care to
the inmate/patients housed at both the West County Detention Facilities. Additionally, this clinician will assist internal and external agencies in
coordinating discharge planning and medical/mental health/medication information for inmates prior to their release to the community.
Currently this Clinician is engaged with the Transitions Health
Care Team based at the West County Health Center in San Pablo assisting patients with medical/mental health care upon re-entering the
community.
The FY 19/20 CCP budget request assures Detention Health Services funding to continue the provision of medical and mental health services
to AB109 inmate/patients housed in the County's adult detention facilities. These services are provided in accordance with the Board of
State Community Corrections - Title 15, Division 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter 4, Article 11 - Minimum Standards for Local Detention Facilities -
Medical/Mental Health Services. Detention Health Services provides medical/mental health/dental services to inmate/patients housed at
the Martinez Detention Facility, West County Detention Facility and the Marsh Creek Detention Facility. The Detention Health Services
division budget is funded solely by County General Funds.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 40 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS ‐ ‐
Deputy Public Defender IV ACER 1.2, 2.1 535,942 2.00 568,697 2.00 568,697 2.00
Deputy Public Defender III ACER 1.2, 2.2 241,516 1.00 251,177 1.00 251,177 1.00
Legal Assistant ACER 1.2 95,329 1.00 112,992 1.00 112,992 1.00
Deputy Public Defender III Clean Slate 5.2 67,656 0.50 127,427 0.50 127,427 0.50
Legal Assistant Clean Slate 5.2 190,658 2.00 189,972 2.00 189,972 2.00
Social Worker Client Support 5.3 138,995 1.00 155,242 1.00 155,242 1.00
Clerk Experienced Level Reentry Program Support 1.2, 2.1, 5.2, 5.3, 62,137 1.00 64,622 1.00 64,622 1.00
Deputy Public Defender V Reentry Program Support 2.1‐2.3, 3.3, 4.1, 5.1 267,971 1.00 303,754 1.00 303,754 1.00
Deputy Public Defender ‐ Special Assignment FTA Reduction Program 1.2, 5.3 154,492 2.00 160,672 2.00 160,672 2.00
Legal Assistant FTA Reduction Program 1.2, 5.3 196,376 2.00 205,080 2.00 205,080 2.00
Deputy Public Defender ‐ Special Assignment FTA Reduction Program 1.2, 5.3 77,246 1.00 77,246 1.00
Legal Assistant FTA Reduction Program 1.2, 5.3 98,188 1.00 98,188 1.00
Social Worker II Client Support 5.3 95,998 1.00 95,998 1.00
Social Worker II Client Support 5.3 95,998 1.00 95,998 1.00
Subtotal 1,951,072 13.50 2,139,635 13.50 367,430 4.00 2,507,065$ 17.50
OPERATING COSTS ‐
Office Expense FTA Reduction Program 1.2,5.3 6,952 6,952
Training/Travel Reentry Programs 1.2, 2.1, 5.2, 5.3 10,000 10,000
Clean Slate event supplies Clean Slate 5.2 950 950
Mileage Reentry Programs 1.2, 2.1, 5.2, 5.3 9,379 9,379
Postage for FTA Reduction Program FTA Reduction Program 1.2, 5.3 1,205 1,205
Promotional Materials Clean Slate Clean Slate 5.2 925 925
Promotional Materials for EarlyRep FTA Reduction Program 1.2, 5.3 800 800
FTA Reduction Program Salaries Bridge
Funding (April‐June 2019)1.2, 5.3 43,858 43,858
‐
‐
Subtotal - - 74,069 74,069$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)‐
Laptop purchase 4,800 4,800
‐
Subtotal - - 4,800 4,800
Total 1,951,072$ 13.50 2,139,635$ 13.50 446,299$ 4.00 2,585,934$ 17.50
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: Public Defender
Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1 2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3
2019/20 Total
Funding Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 41 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Public Defender
2019/20 Baseline Request
1. ACER. Salary and benefits costs of $932,866 are requested for (2) FTE Deputy PD IVs, (1) FTE Deputy PD III, and (1) FTE Legal Assistant. This program
provides for early representation of in‐custody clients at arraignment. The program furthers the goals of reducing recidivism, reducing pretrial detention
rates, reducing unnecessary court appearances, and facilitating early resolution.
2. Social Worker. Salary and benefits costs of $155,242 are requested for (1) FTE Social Worker. The Public Defender Social Worker provides social histories
and needs assessments for adult clients to support appropriate case dispositions and to refer clients to services that will result in successful case outcomes
and reduce recidivism. The program furthers the goals of providing and enhancing integrated programs and services for successful reentry.
3. Clean Slate. Salary and benefits costs of $317,399 are requested for (2) FTE Clean Slate Legal Assistants and (1) .5 FTE Deputy Public Defender II. The .5 FTE
Clean Slate attorney represents clients in obtaining post‐conviction relief. One of the Clean Slate Legal Assistants is dedicated to handling Expungements and
the other Clean Slate Legal Assistant is dedicated to handling Prop 47/Prop 64 cases. The Clean Slate Program provides extensive community outreach and
record clearance services county‐wide. The program furthers the goals of reducing recidivism, providing and enhancing integrated programs and services for
successful reentry.
4. FTA Reduction Program/Early Representation Program. Salary and benefits costs of $365,752 are requested for (2) Deputy PDs – Special Assignment and
(2) FTE Legal Assistants. This program furthers the goal of reducing recidivism, reducing pretrial detention rates, reducing unnecessary court appearances,
and facilitating early disposition of cases.
5. Reentry Program Support. Salary and benefits costs of $368,376 are requested for (1) FTE Reentry Coordinator & AB109 Program Supervisor and (1) FTE
Reentry Clerk. The AB109 Program Supervisor oversees the Reentry Programs Unit and coordinates the Public Defender’s work with various reentry programs
countywide in order to continue and expand our outreach to CBOs, other county agencies, and the greater community to support reentry services for our
client population. The Reentry Clerk supports this work as well as working closely with the Reentry Programs. This program furthers the goal of reducing
recidivism, reducing pretrial detention rates, reducing unnecessary court appearances, and facilitating early disposition of cases.
2019/20 Program Modification Request
1. FTA Reduction Program/Early Representation Program. Salary and benefits costs of $175,434 are requested for (1) FTE Deputy PD – Special Assignment
and (1) FTE Legal Assistant. This Program is currently operating in East, Central, and West County and has dramatically reduced failures to appear in court and
the associated costs of arrest and incarceration systemwide. The West County Program is a partnership with Richmond Police Dept. and launched in February
of 2017 with US DOJ funding. This program furthers the goals of reducing recidivism, reducing pretrial detention rates, reducing unnecessary court
appearances, and facilitating early disposition of cases. (See attached proposal).
2. Social Worker. Salary and benefits costs of $191,996 are requested for (2) FTE Social Workers II. Our social workers will encourage releases from custody
and reduce recidivism by aiding successful pretrial release, reentry, and reintegration. The program furthers the goals of reducing recidivism, reducing pretrial
detention rates, and providing and enhancing integrated programs and services for successful reentry. (See attached proposal).
3. Operating costs. Ongoing operating costs of $30,211 are requested for: training and travel for Reentry Unit attorneys and Legal Assistants, Clean Slate
event supplies, mileage for Reentry Unit staff, postage for the Early Representation Program, and promotional materials for the Clean Slate and Early
Representation Programs, etc. One time costs for $43,858 bridge funding for salary for the FTA Reduction Program and $4800 for 4 laptops (2 for Clean Slate
and 2 for the EarlyRep Program staff) are requested.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 42 of 127
Early Representation Program West County Proposal
Submitted to the Community Corrections Partnership by the Office of the Public Defender
October 19, 2018
1. Request
The Office of the Public Defender (CCPD) is requesting funding for 1 FT Special Assignment
Attorney and 1 FT Legal Assistant to continue our existing innovative and cost-saving Early
Representation program (EarlyRep) in West County. This program began as a partnership with the
Richmond Police Department in February 2017 and has been funded by a U.S. Department of Justice
grant, which will lapse in March 2019.
2. Background and Context
EarlyRep is a pilot program, which due its success has now been expanded to all three regions of the
county. Each site partners with law enforcement agencies in the region and employs one attorney and
one Legal Assistant. EarlyRep’s purpose is to alleviate the burdens felt by all criminal justice partners
caused by high failure to appear (FTA) rates in misdemeanor cases, which are often the result of a
simple lack of understanding of the court process and timing delays between the incident and
arraignment. The program gives individuals access to an attorney from the time of police contact to
help them navigate the criminal justice process and ensure that they make their court dates.
Prior to EarlyRep, more than 50% of those with a misdemeanor case in Contra Costa FTA’ed at their
court dates. FTAs are costly and burdensome for all criminal justice partners. When an individual
misses court, an arrest warrant is issued. As a result, courts expend resources processing warrants, and
police agencies expend resources in finding and arresting individuals and booking them into jail, where
they may remain for several days before seeing a judge. Many of these cases involve low-level
misdemeanor charges that would not normally involve jail time, absent an FTA. The costs of arrest
and incarceration also carry a host of collateral consequences that can be devastating to arrestees and
their families. Reducing FTAs also helps police agencies by shortening the duration of a criminal case
so that officers are less likely to have to testify many years after an incident occurred.
EarlyRep has proven that the FTA problem can be improved substantially by giving individuals who
are accused of misdemeanor offenses information about their court dates and access to due process
resources. As shown below, the effectiveness of the EarlyRep program is dramatic:
County
Region
Law Enforcement Agency Launch Date No. of
Participants
FTA Rate
Reduction
East Antioch Police & Calif. Hwy. Patrol July 2016 2,424 57% to 17%
West Richmond Police & Calif. Hwy. Patrol Feb. 2017 1,272 52% to 20%
Central Calif. Hwy. Patrol & others pending Sept. 2018 TBD TBD
This program has garnered statewide and national attention, including the award of a Smart Defense
grant from the US DOJ. The EarlyRep team has presented about the program at various conferences
around the country, including the Right to Counsel Conference at the US DOJ, the American Society
of Criminology, and the Judicial Council of California. The program has attracted media attention
from the East Bay Times, the American Bar Association Journal, KQED Radio, and others.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 43 of 127
3. Program Design and Outcomes
The West County EarlyRep Program is a partnership between CCPD and the Richmond Police
Department. After police contact for a misdemeanor incident, EarlyRep staff immediately attempt to
reach individuals to offer assistance using request for prosecution forms provided by RPD. Officers
also distribute an information card with the EarlyRep phone number to each individual following the
incident. The court clerks’ office and partnerships with community-based organizations provide
additional outreach. Utilizing innovative technology by Uptrust, individuals can text message the
program for help, and multilingual automated reminder texts are sent in advance of their court dates.
The EarlyRep team provides various levels of assistance to participants, including:
• Explaining the criminal justice process and case filing timelines;
• Practicing early intervention by connecting clients with social services and community resources;
• Consulting on the specific offense, potential case resolutions, and probation or diversion terms;
• Negotiating with the District Attorney’s Office prior to charges being filed;
• Preparing individuals for their first court appearance; and
• Appearing at arraignment court dates with participants.
In Richmond, the EarlyRep program has been especially successful at resolving cases pre-filing. The
EarlyRep attorney meets regularly with the District Attorney’s office to discuss individual cases.
These “pre-filing” conferences have proven very successful at reducing unnecessary filings in some
cases and achieving early resolutions at arraignment in others.
The East and West County EarlyRep programs have dramatically reduced FTA rates since inception.
Identifying the trends and causes of FTAs encourages all justice partners to collaborate in identifying
more efficient practices that avoid costly FTAs, streamline filing practices, and reduce unnecessary
arrests and the resulting costs. The EarlyRep model engages all criminal justice system partners in
establishing better practices and benefits all involved stakeholders.
4. Budget for FY 19/20
Employee Classification Salary & Benefits
1 FT Deputy PD, Special Assignment Attorney $77,246
1 FT Legal Assistant $98,188
Total annual salary cost $175,434
*Salaries for April-June 2019 $43,858
*This request is for one additional quarter of bridge funding as the US DOJ funding lapses in March of
2019, before the beginning of FY 19-20.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 44 of 127
Public Defender AB109 Funded Social Worker Proposal
Submitted to the Community Corrections Partnership by the Office of the Public Defender
October 19, 2018
1. Request
The Office of the Public Defender (CCPD) is requesting funding for 2 FT Public Defender Social Workers to assist
individuals with pretrial release and reentry support needs.
2. Background and Context
The use of social workers as part of a “holistic” defense team is widely recognized as a best practice and is
essential for connecting justice-involved individuals with the reentry resources available throughout the county.
Public Defender social workers help address the root causes of incarceration and system involvement, which are
complex and often include mental health, substance use disorders, poverty, homelessness, trauma and abuse. To
be effective, defense attorneys must collaborate with social workers, who have subject matter expertise in mental
health, and integrate them into the defense team. Studies show that the use of social workers for alternative
sentencing and reentry needs yields a high return on the dollar 1 and is an extremely effective tool at providing
alternatives to incarceration, improving outcomes for those going through the system, and reducing recidivism.2
In 2013, CCPD hired an AB109-funded Social Work Supervisor (SWS). During her time at CCPD, the SWS has
worked with nearly 500 individuals and has supervised 15 Social Work MSW interns. She has excelled at
working to help clients meet a range of needs and to achieve better outcomes. The SWS has directly contributed
to release from jail by providing alternatives to incarceration and practicing crisis intervention techniques for
many individuals. In 2018, CCPD still has just 1 FT Public Defender Social Worker to work with 86 attorneys in
3 branches of the department (Martinez, Richmond, and the Alternate Defender’s Office). Despite the diligence of
the CCPD Social Worker, the need for additional social work services for CCPD clients is great.
This gap in services was highlighted by the Contra Costa Racial Justice Task Force, which recommended in its
recent report to the BOS that “[t]he Public Defender’s Office shall hire social workers who can assess clients’
psychosocial needs and link them to services.”3 Additionally, Contra Costa’s commitment to the Stepping Up
Initiative - to reducing the number of mentally ill individuals in our jails - cannot be realized without trained
mental health professionals, such as Social Workers, working closely with mentally ill individuals who are
incarcerated, or at risk of incarceration, to find and secure alternatives to jail.
Contra Costa County currently lags far behind other larger county Bay Area Public Defender’s Offices and conflict
panels in the number of Social Workers on staff:
County Population Number of Social Workers
San Francisco 874,228 10
Alameda (PD and Conflict Panel) 1,645,359 7.5
Santa Clara (PD and Alternate Defender) 1,938,180 4
Solano 436,023 2
San Mateo Defender Program 770,203 1
Contra Costa 1,139,513 1
1 Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy Alternative Sentencing Work Program (Sept. 2017), citing a return on investment of $3.76 for
every $1 of program cost and an 80% reduction in days incarcerated through use of “alternative sentencing worker” program. (See
https://dpa.ky.gov/who_we_are/ASW/Documents/DPA%20ASW%20Outcome%20Study%20FY%202015.pdf).
2 A study to assess the impact of the SF Public Defender’s Office reentry social work program found that alternatives to incarceration,
reduced sentencing, and avoided jail days saved over $5,000,000 in CDCR costs and over $1,000,000 to SF County. (See
http://sfpublicdefender.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2009/05/reentry-unit-program-evaluation.pdf).
3 Contra Costa Racial Justice Task Force Final Report and Recommendations, June 2018, Attachment A, xiv. (See
http://64.166.146.245/docs/2018/BOS/20180724_1121/34430_FINAL%20CCC-RJTF_BoS-memo_20180710_STC.pdf).
ATTACHMENT E
Page 45 of 127
3. Program Design & Outcomes
The current need for additional Public Defender social workers is especially acute given the number of recent
legal reforms in California that require additional services be offered by CCPD. These include dramatic changes
in the pretrial release law stemming from the In Re Humphrey decision, the imminent implementation of SB 10,
and the new Mental Health Diversion law. To support the need due to these recent reforms, as well as the existing
need to provide additional alternatives to incarceration for a large number of individuals, CCPD will have one
social worker designated to the Bail/Pretrial Release Team and the other assigned to Reentry Support.
Bail/Pretrial Release Social Worker:
Our Bail/Pretrial Release social worker will work closely with the Bail/Pretrial Release team at CCPD to address
the new legal obligation to handle in depth bail hearings and to draft intensive court appearance plans for those
who are in custody pretrial. This social worker will identify housing options, mental health and substance use
disorder placements, secure those placements, and formulate intensive reentry plans to meet each individual’s
needs.
In January of 2018, the Court of Appeal issued a groundbreaking legal decision In Re Humphrey which holds that
when courts set bail, courts must set bail according to one’s ability to pay and must consider “nonmonetary
alternatives.” In response, CCPD formed a Bail Unit and added 2 attorneys to address the expanded legal obligation
to litigate in depth pretrial release hearings. Although many individuals have been granted release through the
efforts of the Bail/Pretrial Release team, we are still lacking additional support in many cases where individuals
have complex placement needs and are not released due to lack of placement options. The need for additional
support will increase shortly with the implementation of SB 10 next year. SB 10 changes the pretrial release
system from a money-based system to risk-based release system and assumes that individuals will be released with
the least restrictive nonmonetary condition(s) that ensure public safety and return to court.
Fortunately, Contra Costa has invested in a pilot Pretrial Services (PTS) program and has been using an evidence-
based risk assessment tool to author release recommendations to our local court since 2014. However, without a
court appearance plan and the appropriate resources for those who are arrested, individuals who would otherwise be
released stay in jail. To be successful, pretrial release plans must include details about housing, mental health
treatment options, drug/alcohol treatment plans, and much more. A social worker is needed to leverage existing
community-based resources to increase the number of people released pending trial in Contra Costa’s jails.
Reentry Support Social Worker
CCPD handles approximately 19,000 cases a year, the majority of the people we represent have mental health or
substance use disorder needs. However, even for those without mental health and SUD issues, the majority, if not
all of our clients, suffer from problems of poverty, homelessness, trauma and other related complications that
require reentry service connections in order to reduce recidivism. A reentry social worker would work with CCPD
clients to develop individualized service plans, provide ongoing case management and to connect clients to
appropriate services, such as housing, treatment and benefits.
Various legal reforms and pilot programs have necessitated additional social worker resources at CCPD.
The Reentry Support social worker will work closely with CCPD clients on mental health and reentry needs,
including those that arise under the new Mental Health Diversion law AB 1810. This new law was
designed to divert cases from the criminal justice system and reduce the number of mentally ill individuals
in our jails and hospitals. This will only happen if defense attorneys are able to successfully develop a
detailed and comprehensive mental health treatment plan. In order to develop such plans, CCPD needs
additional social work resources.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 46 of 127
4. Budget for FY 19/20
Employee Classification Salary & Benefits
1 FT Social Worker II $95,998
1 FT Social Worker II $95,998
Total annual salary cost $191,996
ATTACHMENT E
Page 47 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS
DDA-Advanced Level Realignment Coordinator Attorney 317,842 1.00 310,315 1.00 310,315 1.00
DDA-Advanced Level Arraignment Court/Realignment Attorney 596,289 2.00 625,557 2.00 625,557 2.00
Senior Level Clerk Clerical/file support-Arraign. Court 86,205 1.00 77,568 1.00 77,568 1.00
Experienced Level Clerk Clerical/file support-Arraign. Court 72,372 1.00 69,719 1.00 69,719 1.00
Experienced Level Clerk Clerical/file support 60,399 1.00 61,883 1.00 61,883 1.00
V/W Assist. Prog Specialist Reentry Notification Specialists 87,881 1.00 105,452 1.00 105,452 1.00
V/W Assist. Prog Specialist Reentry Notification Specialists 180,658 2.00 178,867 2.00 178,867 2.00
DDA-Basic Level Violence Reduction/Recidivism Attorney 294,450 1.00 214,752 1.00 214,752 1.00
Senior Level Clerk - Part Time 960 Realignment - - 24,940 1.00 24,940 1.00
Subtotal 1,696,096 10.00 1,644,113 10.00 24,940 1.00 1,669,053$ 11.00
OPERATING COSTS -
Office Expense 3,516 6,219 6,219
Postage 1,561 1,982 1,982
Communication Costs 3,557 3,121 3,121
Minor Furniture/Equipment 1,383 1,521 1,521
Minor Computer Equipment 678 5,668 5,668
Clothing & Supply 14 61 61
Memberships 592 165 165
Computer Software Cost - 361 361
Auto Mileage 5,052 4,493 4,493
Other Travel Employees 3,789 553 553
Occupancy Costs 56,048 28,147 28,147
Data Processing Services/Supplies 14,836 14,450 14,450
Other Interdepartmental Charges 105 105 105
Other Special Dept. Charges - 160 160
Books-Periodicals-Subscription 1,132 - -
Non Cnty Prog Speclzd Svcs 375 - -
-
Subtotal 92,638 67,006 - 67,006$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 1,788,734$ 10.00 1,711,119$ 10.00 24,940$ 1.00 1,736,059$ 11.00
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: District Attorney's Office
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 48 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: District Attorney's Office
2019/20 Baseline Request
The District Attorney's Office proposed FY 2019/20 Baseline allocation of $ 1,711,119. The realignment team will continue to address the new
responsibilities presented by the realignment of our criminal justice system pursuant to Cal. Penal Code § 1170(h).
Salary and Benefit costs of $ 1,644,113 are requested for Four (4) FTE Deputy District Attorneys, One (1) Senior Level Clerk, Two (2) Experienced
Level Clerk, and Three (3) Victim/Witness Assistance Program Specialists. Benefits includes FICA, Medical Insurance, Workers Compensation,
SUI, Deferred Compensation, Other Post Employee Benefits (OPEB), Paulson Cost, Retiree Health Cost, Benefits Administrative Fee, etc.
Operating costs of $ 67,006 includes: Office Expense $ 6,219, Postage $ 1,982, Communication Costs $ 3,121, Minor Furniture Equipment $
1,521, Minor Computer Equipment $ 5,668, Clothing and Supply $ 61, Membership $165, Computer Software Cost$361, Auto Mileage $
4,493, Other Travel Employees $ 553, Occupancy Costs $ 28,147, Data Processing Services/Supplies $ 14,450, Other Interdepartmental Charges
$ 105, Other Special Dept. Charges $ 160
2019/20 Program Modification Request
The District Attorney's Office is seeking a $24,940.21 increase in provide for one part time 960 senior level clerk in FY2019/20:
Salary and Benefit costs of $24,940.21 are requested for:
· One part time 960 Senior Level Clerk to solely assist our Realignment Program Specialist.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 49 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
DDA-Advanced Perm - Top (level 4)295,713 295,713 -
Sr. Inspector Perm - Top 257,759 257,759 -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
Subtotal - - - - 553,472 - 553,472$ -
OPERATING COSTS -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total -$ - -$ - 553,472$ - 553,472$ -
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: District Attorney's Office
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 50 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Creation of the first Conviction Integrity Unit in the District Attorney's Office. See attached memo for further information.
DEPARTMENT: District Attorney's Office
2019/20 Baseline Request
2019/20 Program Modification Request
The Distritct Attorney;s Office is seeking a $553,472 increase in to augment programming for the creation of a Conviction Integrity Unit in
FY2019/20:
Salary and Benefit costs of $553,472 are requested for:
· An additional 1 full time level 4 attroney and 1 senior inspector for the Conviction Integrity Unit.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 51 of 127
Conviction Integrity Unit Proposal
The purpose of this proposal is to seek funding to establish the first ever Conviction
Integrity Unit (“CIU”) in the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office. The unit, which at
its inception will be comprised of one full time experienced attorney and one full time inspector,
will investigate wrongful conviction claims of actual innocence based on new evidence. While
claims of actual innocence will be the main priority for the unit, it will also review cases where
there is evidence of a significant integrity issue. The CIU will also assist in reviewing and
developing practices and policies related to training, case assessment, investigations and
disclosure obligations with the goal of preventing wrongful convictions in the first place. After a
thorough review of each case, where appropriate, the CIU will make recommendations to the
Contra Costa County District Attorney outlining the appropriate remedy.
The unit will also seek advice from and engage with external experts to assist in the
design and overall operation of the unit. We have already met with representatives from the
Northern California Innocence Project at Santa Clara University to begin fostering a working
relationship. The unit will also have an external advisory board to offer an outside lens on each
reviewed case, which will also provide an additional layer of credibility and transparency during
the review process.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 52 of 127
Advisory Board
Hon. John Burton
Hon. Nancy Pelosi
Hon. Cruz Reynoso
Board of Directors
Cynthia Alvarez
Richard Boswell
W. Hardy Callcott
Eva Grove
Bill Ong Hing
Lisa P. Lindelef
Anita I. Martinez
Michelle Mercer
Toni Rembe
Rudy Ruano
Guadalupe Siordia-Ortiz
Lisa Spiegel
Reginald D. Steer
Alan Tafapolsky
Mawuena Tendar
Hon. James L. Warren
(Ret.)
Allen S. Weiner
Roger Wu
General Counsel
Bill Ong Hing
Of Counsel
Don Ungar
Executive Director
Eric Cohen
San Francisco
1663 Mission Street
Suite 602
San Francisco, CA 94103
t: 415.255.9499
f: 415.255.9792
Washington D.C.
1016 16th Street, NW
Suite 100
Washington, DC 20036
t: 202.777.8999
f: 202.293.2849
ilrc@ilrc.org
www.ilrc.org
October 31, 2018
Community Corrections Partnership
c/o Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office
900 Ward Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Community Corrections Partnership:
The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) writes to express our enthusiastic
support for the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office (CCCDA)
application for funding to establish a Conviction Integrity United.
For nearly forty years, the ILRC has stood on the forefront of protecting and
advancing immigrant rights to continue to build a democratic society that values
diversity and the rights of all people.
The ILRC has unique expertise about the immigration consequences of crimes. As
the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, “deportation is an integral part—indeed,
sometimes the most important part—of the penalty that may be imposed on
noncitizen defendants who plead guilty to specified crimes. Padilla v. Kentucky,
559 U.S. 356, 364 (2010).1
Deportation is indiscriminate: it can separate longtime lawful permanent residents
from their innocent U.S. citizen family members as well as deprive undocumented
parents of the opportunity to raise their U.S. citizen children. For refugees deported
to their homelands, deportations can be, quite literally, the equivalent to a death
sentence.
Because of the outsized immigration consequences that can attach to even low-level
convictions, it is critically important that those convictions comply with the
constitutional and legal standards that underpin our criminal justice system. For
this reason, in 2017, the California Legislature enacted Cal. Pen. C. § 1473.7, a
post-custodial legal vehicle that allows U.S. citizens and noncitizens to file a
motion to vacate a conviction if there is newly discovered evidence of actual
innocence; or for noncitizens who failed to meaningfully understand, knowingly
accept, or defend against, the immigration consequences of a criminal conviction.
Since its inception, many noncitizens have availed themselves of the Cal. Pen. C. §
1473.7 motion to challenge old convictions. District Attorneys’ offices have felt
1 In 2017, 83% of all “interior removals”—i.e., removals of people not at the border—occurred as a
result of contact with the criminal justice system. See ICE Removal Statistics, available at:
https://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics/2017.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 53 of 127
2
the brunt of this impact as they have had to revisit old cases to assess whether to stipulate or
oppose a defendant’s motion to vacate.
Funding to help the CCCDA establish a CIU will help the CCCDA comply with their legal
mandate to “consider the immigration consequences of convictions,” Cal. Pen. C. § 1016.3(a).
The CIU will help ensure that no person with a Contra Costa County conviction is deported on
the basis of an unconstitutional conviction and that immigrant families are not needlessly and
unlawfully separated.
We applaud the CCCDA’s leadership and its commitment to ensuring that innocent people do
not face continued punishment, from inside or outside the criminal justice system. We have
reviewed their proposal and are confident that the CCCDA has the expertise and thoughtfulness
to become a leader for CIUs in California and throughout the country.
Sincerely,
Rose Cahn
Director, Immigrant Post-Conviction Relief Project
Criminal and Immigrant Justice Attorney
Immigrant Legal Resource Center
Rose Cahn
ATTACHMENT E
Page 54 of 127
500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053-0001 tel: 408.554.4790 fax: 408.554.5440 www.ncip.org
October 29, 2018
Community Corrections Partnership
c/o Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office
900 Ward St
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Community Corrections Partnership:
The Northern California Innocence Project (NCIP) supports the Contra Costa County District
Attorney’s Office (CCCDA) application for grant funding to create a Conviction Integrity Unit
(CIU) in Contra Costa County.
NCIP’s mission is to promote a fair, effective and compassionate criminal justice system and
protect the rights of the innocent. Since our founding in 2001, NCIP has helped win the freedom
of 24 wrongly convicted people, sponsored and supported legislative change that has improved
our criminal justice system, and become an important voice in the criminal justice community,
both in this state and in the nation. In the painstaking work that we do to exonerate the innocent
throughout the state, we have seen how a District Attorney’s Office can be our ally as an
advocate for justice. We support and commend CIUs dedicated to a fair investigation and
resolution of a claim of wrongful conviction rather than those that exist simply to defend a
conviction.
Best practices are vital to the success and credibility of CIUs, and at a minimum should provide a
neutral, inclusive, and collaborative process in order to effectively investigate possible wrongful
convictions, exonerate innocent people, learn from mistakes, and highlight the need for state-
wide reforms. The CCCDA’s application incorporates these best practices into its proposed CIU.
Neutral review is necessary to give the case an untainted view, free of any confirmation and
hindsight bias in order to view the new evidence independently of the previous outcome. A
CIU’s goal should be to objectively evaluate the evidence to determine if the conviction was
proper, not simply to defend a conviction. It can be impossible for a prosecutor to be objective in
reviewing cases they previously worked on when so much work, time, resources, and support to
victims and their families went into the original prosecution. Having a detached, neutral unit
will allow for a more objective and just review of cases. The CCCDA’s proposal allows for
neutral review, calling for one full-time experienced attorney and one-full time inspector who
were not involved with the original conviction.
Conviction review programs also need to be expansive in the types of cases they consider.
Programs with limited case criteria exclude convictions that might warrant review. CIUs that
only review cases where there is a claim of new evidence of innocence, overlook innocence
claims based on faulty science, incentivized informants, false confession, ineffective assistance
of counsel, or government misconduct—the factors that have contributed to the majority of
ATTACHMENT E
Page 55 of 127
500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053-0001 tel: 408.554.4790 fax: 408.554.5440 www.ncip.org
California’s wrongful convictions. The CCCDA’s proposal describes a commitment to forming a
CIU that will conduct an expansive review, looking not only at cases of new evidence of
innocence, but also cases where there is evidence of another significant integrity issue.
Finally, successful CIUs collaborate with prosecutors, defense attorneys, innocence
organizations and other stakeholders who can offer expert insight into the causes of wrongful
convictions. Open exchange of case information and easy access to files increases collaboration,
facilitates timely review, and improves the objectivity of the case review process. Before drafting
their proposal, the CCCDA met with NCIP to learn about CIU best practices and to establish a
working relationship to assist one another in the review of wrongful conviction cases.
The CCCDA’s proposed program includes all of the best practices — neutral, expansive, and
collaborative review — which will lead to just results. I believe the CCCDA has the leadership
and expertise to carry out the work needed to make their CIU a success and I strongly endorse
their application.
Sincerely,
Linda Starr
Executive Director
Northern California Innocence Project
Cc: Diana Becton, District Attorney
Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office
900 Ward St
Martinez, CA 94553
ATTACHMENT E
Page 56 of 127
ATTACHMENT E
Page 57 of 127
ATTACHMENT E
Page 58 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS $90,000 1.00 90,000 1.00
Neighborhood Courts Director Non-violent misdemeanor diversion - -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
Subtotal - - - - 90,000 1.00 90,000$ 1.00
OPERATING COSTS -
Training & TA for Adjudicators Non-violent misdemeanor diversion $60,000 60,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Subtotal - - 60,000 60,000$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total -$ - -$ - 150,000$ 1.00 150,000$ 1.00
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: District Attorney's Office
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 59 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Contra Costa County Dsitrict Attorney Neighborhood Courts Pilot Program. Please see atatched memo for further information.
DEPARTMENT: District Attorney's Office
2019/20 Baseline Request
2019/20 Program Modification Request
The District Attorney's Office is seeking a $150,000 increase in to augment programming for the Neighborhood Courts program in FY2019/20:
Salary and Benefit costs of $90,000 are requested for:
· An additional 1.0 FTE for a director for the Neighborhood Courts program.
Operating costs of $60,000 is requested for:
· Increased revenue to cover additional program costs and training for the Neighborhood Courts program. Please see attached memo for
additional details.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 60 of 127
Neighborhood Community Courts Proposal
In an effort to offer smart and safe alternatives for low level non-violent misdemeanors,
the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office proposes the creation of the District
Attorney’s Neighborhood Courts Program. In lieu of filing criminal charges, this community
based pre-charging diversion program will use a restorative justice lens to resolve low-level
misdemeanors and quality of life crimes. Modeled after a similar District Attorney lead program,
adjudicators – comprised primarily of residents who live and work in the community where the
incident occurred – hear the case and create plans that enable the participant to address harms
caused to the community and parties affected by the incident.
The Neighborhood Court will seek to accomplish five main goals. The first goal is
efficient case resolution. The goal will be for each participant to have their case heard within
weeks of arrest and have their diversion program fully complete within six months of arrest.
Second, the focus of the program will be community driven solutions. The goal is to launch the
pilot in three locations throughout the county (fill in). The community that was affected by the
crime will have the chance engage with the offender and direct the plan for repairing the harm
caused to the victim, the community and the offender. The third goal is to reduce the burden on
the criminal courts. This program has the potential to reduce the number of cases making their
way through the criminal justice system, saving both time and money for the courts and impacted
county agencies. Lastly, this program aims to reduce recidivism. By keeping low-level non-
violent offenders out of the criminal justice system, and keeping convictions off their record, this
program will aid in preventing obstacles to obtaining employment, education, housing, and
meaningful participation in the community. Additionally, we will be tracking recidivism rates
through the collection of data to ensure the program is fulfilling its goals.
Program Overview
Neighborhood Courts is a pre-filing diversion program for low level non-violent
misdemeanors that emphasizes community participation and restorative justice. Contra Costa
County District Attorney (CCCDA) prosecutors will review all misdemeanor cases to identify
those that are suitable for Neighborhood Courts. Suitable cases are those that (1) are legally
eligible, per Neighborhood Courts guidelines (provided below) and (2) would otherwise be
charged for prosecution.
Participation in Neighborhood Courts is voluntary. Potential participants are contacted
by the CCCDA program coordinator and will be provided information about the program,
including their legal rights and program requirements.
A panel of volunteer “adjudicators” (or panelists) trained in restorative justice and
problem solving, hear misdemeanor cases at a Neighborhood Court located in (FILL IN). There
are no prosecutors or defense counsel in the hearings, as this is not a criminal proceeding. This
process is completely confidential. If an individual agrees to participate, nothing said in the
hearing will be used against them for criminal prosecution. Supported by staff from the
CCCDA’s nonprofit partners, panels of 3-4 adjudicators hear each case separately to dialogue
with the participant, assess the harm caused by the incident, and issue “directives” to address the
ATTACHMENT E
Page 61 of 127
harm caused to the victim, the community, and the participant him/herself. Once the participant
completes his/her directives, the CCCDA discharges the case (e.g. does not file it in criminal
court).
While participation in Neighborhood Courts is voluntary, the individual must take
responsibility for their role in the incident. If candidates fail to respond to the invitation to
participate, opt out, or fail to appear at Neighborhood Courts or complete their directive, their
case will be referred back to the CCCDA for traditional criminal case processing.
Initial Implementation
The CCCDA’s Office will consult with office team members, community stakeholders, and
consultants about how best to roll out the model in a thoughtful and methodical way.
Additionally, the office will reach out to merchants, community based organizations, schools,
faith based leaders, as well as other civic and social groups. Simultaneously, we will be speaking
with local law enforcement agencies and county agencies to inform the implementation and look
for creative ways to partner and provide services to the participants where appropriate.
Proposed Eligible Cases
All misdemeanor offenses are eligible for Neighborhood Courts, with the following exceptions:
o Moving violations
o Gun cases
o Domestic violence
o Child assault
o Stalking
o Sex assault / 290 registration
o Hate crimes
o Elder abuse, whether physical, mental or financial
o Assault on an officer
o Witness / victim intimidation
The following individuals are also excluded:
o 290 registrant
o Juvenile
o Anyone under any form of community supervision in any jurisdiction, except that the
following probationers are Neighborhood Courts eligible:
o Individuals on court probation for NC-eligible offenses.
o Individuals who are on probation in cases where their charged offense is NC-
eligible.
o Anyone with pending open case(s), including pending co-defendant case(s).
o Individuals with prior convictions are assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into
consideration the severity of the offenses, number of prior convictions and length of time
from the last conviction to the present case.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 62 of 127
o Individuals who have previously participated in Neighborhood Courts.
o Individuals who are unwilling to pay documented restitution.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 63 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 64 of 127
ATTACHMENT EPage 65 of 127
ATTACHMENT E
Page 66 of 127
ATTACHMENT E
Page 67 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
One Stop Administrator
Coordination with One-Stop/America Job Center of
California system 46,000 46,000 46,000 -
Workforce Services Specialist Engagement with public & private partners 55,000 55,000 55,000 -
Business Service Representative Recruitment & engagement of businesses 70,000 70,000 70,000 -
SBDC Director Small business & entrepreneurship linkages 5,000 5,000 5,000 -
SBDC Advisors Small business & entrepreneurship linkages 10,000 10,000 10,000 -
Workforce Board Executive Director Oversight & coordination with workforce system 10,000 10,000 10,000 -
17/18 4% Floor Allocation 8,000 8,000 8,000
18/19 4% Floor Allocation 8,160
- -
Subtotal 212,160 - 204,000 - - - 204,000$ -
OPERATING COSTS -
Training/Travel 4,000 4,000 4,000
18/19 4% Floor Allocation 160 -
-
-
Subtotal 4,160 4,000 - 4,000$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 216,320$ - 208,000$ - -$ - 208,000$ -
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing programs in the FY 2019/20 Status Quo column in 2018/19 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20
Department: Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County
Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1 2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3
2019/20 Total
Funding Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 68 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming that will be provided on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County
2019/20 Baseline Request
The Contra Costa Workforce Development Board (WDB) is seeking status quo level funding of $208,000 for the fiscal year 2019-2020. The
budget reflects the amount of time key staff will devote to AB109 in order to continue to provide linkages to the One-Stop/AJCC system,
business engagement and small buisiness and entrepreneurship connections. In accordnace with the WDB's orginal submittal the WDB will us
AB109 funds to leverage other funds to provide services to previously incarcerated individuals.
2019/20 Program Modification Request
The Workforce Development Board is not seeking new funding at this time. While labor agreements resulting in wage increases will increase
staffing costs by about 4%, through working with CCP partner agencies and other organizations, the WDB is committed to pursuing and securing
additional resources that can further support, link, align and leverage related work to serve AB109 participants and concurrerntly expand efforts
to serve other populations that are returning to communitites in Contra Costa County and help them with employment and training needs.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 69 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB 109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
- -
Senior Deputy County Administrator Program Administration 6.2 152,075 0.75 168,531 0.75 168,531 0.75
ORJ Deputy Director Program Administration 6.2 185,136 1.00 190,690 1.00 190,690 1.00
Research & Evaluation Manager Research & Evaluation 6.3 155,608 1.00 189,563 1.00 189,563 1.00
Senior Management Analyst Program Administration 6.2 148,632 1.00 165,765 1.00 (165,765) (1.00) - -
Advanced Secretary Program Administration 6.2 42,737 0.50 46,392 0.50 (46,392) (0.50) - -
Management Analyst Program Administration 6.2 122,611 1.00 122,611 1.00
Subtotal 684,188 4.25 760,941 4.25 (89,546) (0.50) 671,395$ 3.75
OPERATING COSTS -
-
Ceasefire Program Coordinator 5.1 114,000 119,000 119,000
Communications, office supplies, travel/transp.6.2 7,500 7,500 5,500 13,000
SAFE, Skuid Database Licenses; SPSS subscription 6.3 8,520 8,520
Intern 6.3 8,000 8,000
Occupancy Costs 6.2 12,000 12,000
County Counsel charges 6.2 6,000 6,000
-
-
-
Subtotal 121,500 126,500 40,020 166,520$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 805,688$ 4.25 887,441$ 4.25 (49,526)$ (0.50) 837,915$ 3.75
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: County Administrator--Office of Reentry & Justice
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 70 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
DEPARTMENT: County Administration--Office of Reentry & Justice
2019/20 Baseline Request
The ORJ's proposed FY 2019/20 Baseline allocation of $837,915, a 4% increase from FY 18-19, will provide the following level of service:
Salary and Benefit costs of $671,395 are requested (a 2% decrease over the FY 18/19 allocation) to implement the Work Plan of the ORJ. The
cost projections include salary step increases and a 4% COLA for the following positions:
· 0.75 FTE Senior Deputy County Administrator, acting as Director of the ORJ
· One (1.0) FTE Deputy Director
· One (1.0) FTE Research & Evaluation Manager
· One (1) FTE Management Analyst
The reduction in Salary and Benefit costs comes from the elimination of the (0.5) FTE Advanced Secretary position and the retirement of the 1.0
FTE Senior Management Analyst . A 1.0 FTE Management Analyst position is added.
Operating costs of $166,520 are requested for:
· $119,000 for ongoing Ceasefire Program Coordination services, which represents a 4% increase over FY 18-19;
· $13,000 for Office expenses including: Communications, Office Supplies, Travel/transportation;
· $8,520 for Salesforce (reentry database), Skuid (interface for SAFE), and SPSS (statistical software) administrative licenses;
· $8,000 for an Intern to support evaluation and research, (as proposed in the original ORJ development proposal);
· $12,000 for Occupancy Costs at the Morrow House (not previously budgeted );
· $6,000 for County Counsel charges for services (not previously budgeted ).
2019/20 Program Modification Request
The modification of a reduction of -$49,526 from Baseline stems from the elimination of the Advanced Secretary position ($46,392) and the
Senior Management Analyst position ($165,765), which results in a net reduction despite Operating Cost increases, as noted above.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 71 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
Antioch Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Concord Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Pittsburg Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Richmond Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Richmond Police Officer (West)MHET Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Walnut Creek Police Officer (Central)MHET Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Pittsburg Police Officer (East)MHET Officer 5.1 141,149 1.00 146,795 1.00 - - 146,795 1.00
Subtotal 988,043 7.00 1,027,565 7.00 - - 1,027,565$ 7.00
OPERATING COSTS -
e.g. Training/Travel -
Small Equipment Purchase -
computer, printer, etc.-
IT Support -
Vehicle Operating -
Office Supplies -
Communication Costs -
Outfitting Costs
-
Subtotal - - - -$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
e.g. Vehicle Purchases (2)-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 988,043$ 7.00 1,027,565$ 7.00 -$ - 1,027,565$ 7.00
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: CCC Police Chief's Association
Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1 2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3
2019/20 Total
Funding Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 72 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: CCC Police Chief's Association
2019/20 Baseline Request
The Contra Costa County Police Chief's Association has requested $587,180 to fund four (4) postions. These officers participate in coordinated
monitering, compliance checks, and drug testing within the County. This collaborative approach is consistent with the Contra Costa County
AB109 Operation Plan. Each Police Officer maintains a current knowledge of County AB109 programs to ensure County AB109 probationers are
referred to services, if deemed appropriate.
Baseline Request also includeds $440,385 to fund three (3) MHET postions. These officers participate in coordinated efforts of handling referrals
of potentially "high risk" dangerous persons with mental health issues and combative behaviors towards police and others including AB109 and
Prop 47 clients within the County. This collaborative approach is consistent with the Contra Costa County MHET Operation Plan. Each Police
Officer maintains a current knowledge of MHET programs to ensure countywide potentially "high risk" dangerous persons with mental health
issues and combative behaviors are referred to services, if deemed appropriate. The goal is to reduce potential conflicts or confrontations
between police and citizens.
2019/20 Program Modification Request
ATTACHMENT E
Page 73 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
REGIONAL SERVICES
Employment 5.3b 2,081,275 201,725 2,283,000
West/East County Rubicon Programs 1,144,700 8.74
Central/East County Goodwill Industries 936,575 8.30
Housing 5.3c 1,071,855 200,145 1,272,000
Countywide Housing Shelter Inc.1,019,825 6.85
Gender Responsive Housing (unallocated)52,030
Peer Mentoring 5.4a 114,470 530 115,000
West County Service Men and Women of Purpose 114,470
Family Reunification 5.4b 93,660 340 94,000
Countywide Service Center for Human Development 93,660
Legal Services 5.4c 156,095 905 157,000
Countywide Service Bay Area Legal Aid 156,095
One Stops 5.2b
East/Central County Network System of Services see below 6.00
West County Reentry Success Center see below 3.22
CAB Support (countywide)Via Office of Reentry & Justice 5,000 5,000 (1,969) 3,031
subtotal 3,522,355 33.11 3,522,355 - 401,676 - 3,924,031$
NETWORK SYSTEM OF SERVICES
Network Management 3.3, 4.1, 5.1 978,200 800 979,000
Network Staff & Operations HealthRIGHT360 629,585
Contracted Services
Sober Living Homes Mz. Shirliz 156,095
Auto Repair Training Fast Eddie's Auto Services 67,640
In-Custody Engagement (men)Men and Women of Purpose 62,440
Transition Planning (women)Centerforce 62,440
subtotal 978,200 978,200 800 979,000
REENTRY SUCCESS CENTER
Operation and Management Rubicon Programs 3.3, 4.1, 5.1 546,335 546,335 546,335
subtotal 546,335 546,335 - 546,335
OTHER EXPENSES
4% COLA Increase 5 202,476 (202,476) -
Salesforce Licensing 17,000 17,000
Connections to Resources Rubicon Programs 15,000 15,000 15,000
TOTAL 5,061,890$ 33.11 5,264,366$ - 217,000$ - 5,481,366$
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
4. CAB Support line used to create round numbers to be used in RFP process.
5. $202,100 from the COLA is to be dedicated to Employment Services in FY 2019-20, and the rest to CAB Support.
Department: Community Advisory Board
2019/20 Total
Funding Request42019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item 2018-19 CONTRACTED PROVIDER Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 74 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Probation Department
2019/20 Baseline Request
CAB continues to recommend that CCP invest significant funds in community programs to continue development of the local non-profit
services sector. The CCP should therefore continue to support community based programs. Funding these programs is consistent with the
nationwide effort of justice reinvestment. Staying this course will ensure our communities gain the capacity to provide reentry services with
high levels of quality and fidelity, and is the best way to achieve lasting reductions in recidivism and long term enhanced public safety outcomes.
As CAB submits this 2019/2020 AB109 Budget Request, we present status quo request with a modest increase as described below. As part of
this status quo budget request, CAB recommends that the CCP Executive Committee fund each of the funded reentry service areas at an amount
that is no less than what was allocated for each program during the current fiscal year. CAB further recognizes that the County will put all
services out for bid through an RFP process this year and recommends that CCP endorse a plan to award five year contracts through that
process. CAB would also recommend that include CAB in both the RFP development and selection processes. Furthermore, CAB recommends
that the RFP for the Network Management contract be for a single entity to manage both the operations, and any additional services provide
through the Network by way of subcontract.
The recommended amounts of ongoing funding for FY 2019-20 are as follows:
Reentry Success Center: $543,384
Center/Network Joint Communications Strategy $15,000
CAB support through ORJ $2,384
The following amounts should be offered for these services through the impending RFP process:
Employment Support and Placement Services: $2,280,000
Housing: $1,269,000
Peer Mentoring: $114,000
Family Reunification: $94,000
Civil Legal Services: $156,000
Network System of Services: $973 000
2019/20 Program Modification Request
Additional Funding Increase of Community-Based Housing Services - $1,269,000
The relationship between housing and employment is increasingly evident. A living wage is required to qualify for and maintain permanent housing through
rental assistance or other programs. Stable housing is critical to individuals seeking to secure and maintain employment. CAB therefore strongly recommends
that the County increase funding for community-based housing services, and design the next RFP process in a way that encourages bidders to propose
integrated approaches to housing and employment. This could be done by giving preferential scoring to bidders that propose innovative approaches to linking
employment and housing support and/or that have partnered with other organizations to offer an integrated and holistic approach.
Additional Funding for Salesforce Licensing: The County has mandated that all funded service providers use the Salesforce datasystem known as the Safe.
During fiscal year 2017/2018, CCP approved a $75,000 allocation for the transfer of this database from the direct control of the Reentry Success Center to the
ORJ. Through this process costs for the system went from the reduced non-profit rate for licensing to the increased rates charged to enterprises such as
county government. This increase license costs from about $350 to nearly $1,200 each. In the transition has taken on much of this cost increase. However,
going forward their plan is to reduce contract amounts based on these costs. Because approximately $17, 000 was deducted from contractors in fiscal year
2018/2019, CAB is recommending this amount be provided to the ORJ to cover these costs to avoid the complication and confusion involved in reducing and
tracking contract allocation decreases acrossed the many AB109 funded providers.
Additional Funding Increase of 4%: COLAThe Community Advisory Board (CAB) continues to recommend that CCP invest significant funds in community
programs to continue development of the local non-profit services sector. CAB therefore requests a 4% COLA increase in funding for community programs that
amounts to $202,476. A total of $202,100 from this amount was added to employment services, and the remaining $376 added to the CAB Support item.
Funding these programs is consistent with the nationwide effort of justice reinvestment. Staying this course will ensure our communities gain the capacity to
provide reentry services with high levels of quality and fidelity, and is the best way to achieve lasting reductions in recidivism and long term enhanced public
safety outcomes. In setting the amounts to be released to RFP, CAB then reduced its own support line by an amount that would ensure each service's
recommended RFP award amount could be rounded up to the nearest thousand from its most recent allocation.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 75 of 127
Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2019/20 AB109 Budget Proposal Form
Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding
Request FTEs
SALARY AND BENEFITS - -
Courtroom Clerk II Step 6 208,421 2.00 225,745 2.00 225,745 2.00
18/19 4% Floor Allocation 8,337 N/A - -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
Subtotal 216,758 2.00 225,745 2.00 - - 225,745$ 2.00
OPERATING COSTS -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -$
CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)-
-
-
Subtotal - - - -
Total 216,758$ 2.00 225,745$ 2.00 -$ - 225,745$ 2.00
1. FY 2019/20 Status Quo Request reflects the FY 2018/19 Funding Allocation.
2. FY 2019/20 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continung programs in the FY 2018/19 Status Quo column in 2019/20 dollars.
3. FY 2019/20 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2019/20.
Department: Superior Court
2019/20 Total
Funding Request2019/20 Baseline Request2 2019/20 Program
Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan
Item #
2019/20 Status Quo
Allocation1
ATTACHMENT E
Page 76 of 127
PROGRAM NARRATIVE:
Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form.
DEPARTMENT: Superior Court
2019/20 Baseline Request
The Contra Costa Superior Court respectfully requests one-time funding from the County’s FY 2019-20 AB 109 allocation in the amount of
$225,745. The funding continues to address the extra workload associated with PRCS cases, parole violation petitions, and the Pretrial Release
Program by funding two dedicated courtroom clerks whose sole focus is on capturing court proceedings, and entering the appropriate case
information timely.
The Court calendars many cases involving the supervision of “non-non-non” offenders. This workload continues to exceed that which could
reasonably be handled by a single courtroom clerk. In response, the court allocated a second clerk to each of the high volume calendars at all
times.
The additional clerk serves as a primary resource for the Judge, Justice Partners and the Attorneys in answering questions and receiving
paperwork. The second clerk also preps calendars, answers incoming phone calls, responds to faxes and enters data in case management while
the primary clerk records matters on the record. The two clerk team works together in departments creating a more efficient process for each
case.
ATTACHMENT E
Page 77 of 127
2017/18
ONGOING BOS APPROVED
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
Sheriff
Salaries & Benefits 6,649,947 7,013,256
Inmate Food/Clothing/Household Exp 456,250 456,250
Monitoring Costs 55,000 55,000
IT Support 40,000 40,000
Behavioral Health Court Operating Costs 80,500 80,500
"Jail to Community" Program 208,000 243,650
Inmate Welfare Fund re: FCC Ruling 755,000 755,000
Sheriff Total 8,244,697 8,643,656
Probation
Salaries & Benefits 2,591,428 2,695,085
Operating Costs 169,098 175,862
Salaries & Benefits-Pre-Trial Services Program 748,632 784,296
Operating Costs-Pre-Trial Services Program 77,762 80,872
Probation Total 3,586,920 3,736,116
Behavioral Health
Salaries & Benefits 996,180 1,036,027
Operating Costs 58,752 61,102
Contracts 1,292,088 1,343,772
Vehicle Purchase and Maintenance 22,448 23,346
Travel 10,200 10,608
Behavioral Health Total 2,379,668 2,474,855
Health Services--Detention Health Services
Sal & Ben-Fam Nurse, WCD/MCD 187,537 195,038
Salaries & Benefits-LVN, WCD 294,711 306,499
Salaries & Benefits-RN, MCD 494,004 513,764
Sal & Ben-MH Clinic. Spec., WCD/MCD 121,532 126,394
Detention Health Services Total 1,097,784 1,141,696
Public Defender
Sal & Ben-Clean Slate/Client Support 397,269 413,160
Sal & Ben-ACER Program 872,787 907,698
Sal & Ben-Reentry Coordination 267,971 340,827
Sal & Ben-Failure to Appear (FTA) Program 172,575 354,912
Sal & Ben-Pre-Trial Services Program 190,401 295,788
Stand Together CoCo 500,000 500,000
Public Defender Total 2,401,003 2,812,385
District Attorney
Salaries & Benefits-Victim Witness Prgrm 109,231 87,881
Salaries & Benefits-Arraignment Prgrm 649,491 682,494
Salaries & Benefits-Reentry/DV Prgrm 693,512 792,950
Salaries & Benefits-ACER Clerk 64,094 72,372
Salaries & Benefits-Gen'l Clerk 63,536 60,399
Operating Costs 86,109 92,638
District Attorney Total 1,665,973 1,788,734
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2018/19 CCP RECOMMENDED BUDGET SUMMARY
2018/19
(as approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 18, 2018)
(as approved by the Public Protection Committee on February 5, 2018)
ATTACHMENT F
Page 78 of 127
2017/18
ONGOING BOS APPROVED
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2018/19 CCP RECOMMENDED BUDGET SUMMARY
2018/19
(as approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 18, 2018)
(as approved by the Public Protection Committee on February 5, 2018)
EHSD-- Workforce Development Board
Salaries & Benefits 204,000 212,160
Travel 4,000 4,160
EHSD-WDB Total 208,000 216,320
County Administrator/Office of Reentry and Justice
Salaries & Benefits 517,079 528,580
Ceasefire Program Contract 110,000 114,000
Research and Eval. Manager - 155,608
Data Evaluation & Systems Planning 83,021 -
Operating Costs 7,500 7,500
CAO/ORJ Total1 717,600 805,688
CCC Police Chief's Association
Salaries and Benefits-AB109 Task Force 542,880 564,596
Salaries and Benefits-MHET Teams (3)- 423,447
CCC Police Chiefs' Total 542,880 988,043
Community Programs
Employment Support and Placement Srvcs 2,000,000 2,000,000
Network System of Services 820,000 940,000
Reentry Success Center 465,000 525,000
Short and Long-Term Housing Access 1,030,000 1,030,000
Legal Services 150,000 150,000
Mentoring and Family Reunification 200,000 200,000
Connections to Resources 15,000 15,000
17/18 4% Floor Allocation - TBD 187,201 -
CAB Support (via ORJ)- 7,021
18/19 4% COLA - Allocation TBD - 194,688
Community Programs Total 4,867,201 5,061,709
Superior Court
Salaries and Benefits - Pretrial 208,421 216,758
Superior Court Total 208,421 216,758
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 25,920,149 27,885,959
Notes:
1. ORJ budget as listed includes costs associated with the Community Corrections
ATTACHMENT F
Page 79 of 127
ATTACHMENT G
Base Revenue Allocation vs. Ongoing Expenditure Allocation Impacts
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-161 FY 2016-173 FY 2017-184 FY 2018-195 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22
Adopted Budget Adopted Budget Adopted Budget Adopted Budget Adopted Budget Adopted Budget (Estimate)(Estimate)(Estimate)
Base Allocation2 22,854,832 20,669,679 20,831,204 21,848,491 23,342,798 24,980,233 27,118,445 28,193,985 29,269,526
CCP Ongoing Allocation (+4%)21,316,788 21,307,133 21,458,315 23,684,570 25,920,149 27,885,959 29,001,397 30,161,453 31,367,911
Under/(Over) Base Allocation 1,538,044 (637,454)(627,111)(1,836,079)(2,577,351)(2,905,726)(1,882,952)(1,967,468)(2,098,385)(5,948,806)
Base Allocation2 22,854,832 20,669,679 20,831,204 21,848,491 23,342,798 24,980,233 27,118,445 28,193,985 29,269,526
CCP Ongoing Allocation (+3%)21,316,788 21,307,133 21,458,315 23,684,570 25,920,149 27,885,959 28,722,538 29,584,214 30,471,740
Under/(Over) Base Allocation 1,538,044 (637,454)(627,111)(1,836,079)(2,577,351)(2,905,726)(1,604,093)(1,390,229)(1,202,214)(4,196,536)
Base Allocation2 22,854,832 20,669,679 20,831,204 21,848,491 23,342,798 24,980,233 27,118,445 28,193,985 29,269,526
CCP Ongoing Allocation (+2%)21,316,788 21,307,133 21,458,315 23,684,570 25,920,149 27,885,959 28,443,678 29,012,552 29,592,803
Under/(Over) Base Allocation 1,538,044 (637,454)(627,111)(1,836,079)(2,577,351)(2,905,726)(1,325,233)(818,566)(323,277)(2,467,077)
Notes:
2. Contra Costa share of Base Allocation remains fixed at 1.8809% of the statewide Base Allocation beginning in FY 2015/16
as of 11/30/18
5. The FY 2018/19 Base Allocation calculated at 1.8809% of the 2018/19 State Enacted Budget.
3-Year Cumulative Deficit
Continue Funding FY 2018/19 Ongoing Programs, with 4%, 3%, or 2% Annual
Increases beg. in 2019/20
1. FY 2015/16 Adopted Base Allocation was $19,938,497. County notified of error in state calculation of the formula on November 19, 2015 and provided with revised allocation.
4. The FY 2017/18 Adopted Budget includes $500,000 in funding for the Stand Together CoCo program in the Public Defender's office, which was approved subsequent to the CCP budgeting process.
3. FY 2016/17 Base Allocation reduced from $22,651,678 based on the 2016/17 Governor's Proposed Budget (January 2016) to $21,848,491 in the 2016/17 State Enacted Budget.
Page 80 of 127
FY 2019/20
AB 109 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT
1
Attachment H
Page 81 of 127
2
Attachment H
Page 82 of 127
3
Growth Formula Factors:
FY 2018/19:
•Year 2 of final Growth formula approved by RAC/DOF
•Volatile and difficult to estimate –However, increase from prior year
•$2,375,791 received; $237,579 to Innovation Fund leaving $2,138,212
in “net Growth”
Attachment H
Page 83 of 127
4
Attachment H
Page 84 of 127
5
Attachment H
Page 85 of 127
6
Attachment H
Page 86 of 127
7
Attachment H
Page 87 of 127
8
Attachment H
Page 88 of 127
9
Attachment H
Page 89 of 127
10
Attachment H
Page 90 of 127
‣New funding formula has brought stability to
Base allocation revenues.
‣18/19 2nd year Base revenue exceeds FY 13/14
levels (pre-formula change)
‣18/19 Base revenue will not keep up with
Ongoing Program costs and 19/20 will not either
‣18/19 Growth allocation received resulted in
moderate financial benefit to the County
‣Little opportunity for increased Growth funding in
future years based on formula categories
11
Attachment H
Page 91 of 127
12
Attachment H
Page 92 of 127
2018/19 2019/20
ONGOING BASELINE PROG. MOD.TOTAL REQUEST CCP RECOMMENDED
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
Sheriff
Salaries & Benefits 7,013,256 7,321,484 - 7,321,484 7,321,484
Inmate Food/Clothing/Household Exp 456,250 456,250 - 456,250 456,250
Monitoring Costs 55,000 55,000 - 55,000 55,000
IT Support 40,000 40,000 - 40,000 40,000
Behavioral Health Court Operating Costs 80,500 80,500 - 80,500 80,500
"Jail to Community" Program 243,650 243,650 - 243,650 243,650
Inmate Welfare Fund re: FCC Ruling 755,000 800,000 - 800,000 800,000
Sheriff Total 8,643,656 8,996,884 - 8,996,884 8,996,884
Probation
Salaries & Benefits 2,695,085 2,794,803 - 2,794,803 2,794,803
Operating Costs 175,862 182,896 - 182,896 182,896
Salaries & Benefits-Pre-Trial Services Program 784,296 813,314 - 813,314 813,314
Operating Costs-Pre-Trial Services Program 80,872 81,083 - 81,083 81,083
Probation Total 3,736,116 3,872,096 - 3,872,096 3,872,096
Behavioral Health
Salaries & Benefits 1,036,027 1,055,891 (277,764) 778,127 778,127
Occupancy Costs 61,102 58,752 (20,000) 38,752 38,752
Contracts 1,343,772 1,367,801 58,832 1,426,633 1,426,633
Vehicle Purchase and Maintenance 23,346 22,448 2,500 24,948 24,948
Travel 10,608 10,200 (1,000) 9,200 9,200
Behavioral Health Total1 2,474,855 2,515,092 (237,432) 2,277,660 2,277,660
Health Services--Health, Housing, & Homeless
Salaries & Benefits - - 137,432 137,432 137,432
Operating Costs - - 116,000 116,000 116,000
Health, Housing & Homeless Total1 - - 253,432 253,432 253,432
Health Services--Detention Health Services
Sal & Ben-Fam Nurse, WCD/MCD 195,038 235,168 - 235,168 235,168
Salaries & Benefits-LVN, WCD 306,499 316,673 30,641 347,314 316,673
Salaries & Benefits-RN, MCD 513,764 534,854 236,222 771,076 534,854
Sal & Ben-MH Clinic. Spec., WCD/MCD 126,394 134,565 - 134,565 134,565
Detention Health Services Total 1,141,696 1,221,260 266,863 1,488,123 1,221,260
2019/20 BUDGET REQUEST
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2019/20 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY
(Approved by the Community Corrections Partnership on December 7, 2018)
ATTACHMENT I
Page 93 of 127
2018/19 2019/20
ONGOING BASELINE PROG. MOD.TOTAL REQUEST CCP RECOMMENDED
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
2019/20 BUDGET REQUEST
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2019/20 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY
(Approved by the Community Corrections Partnership on December 7, 2018)
Public Defender
Sal & Ben-Clean Slate/Client Support 413,160 472,641 191,996 664,637 472,641
Sal & Ben-ACER Program 907,698 932,866 - 932,866 932,866
Sal & Ben-Reentry Coordination 340,827 368,376 368,376 368,376
Sal & Ben-Failure to Appear (FTA) Program 354,912 365,752 175,434 541,186 541,186
Sal & Ben-Pre-Trial Services Program 295,788 317,084 317,084 317,084
Stand Together CoCo 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000
Operating/Capital Costs - - 78,869 78,869 35,011
Public Defender Total2 2,812,385 2,956,719 446,299 3,403,018 3,167,164
District Attorney
Salaries & Benefits-Victim Witness Prgrm 87,881 105,452 - 105,452 105,452
Salaries & Benefits-Arraignment Prgrm 682,494 703,125 - 703,125 703,125
Salaries & Benefits-Reentry/DV Prgrm 792,950 703,934 - 703,934 703,934
Salaries & Benefits-Conviction Integrity - - 553,472 553,472 -
Salaries & Benefits-Neighborhood Courts - - 90,000 90,000 90,000
Salaries & Benefits-ACER Clerk 72,372 69,719 - 69,719 69,719
Salaries & Benefits-Gen'l Clerk 60,399 61,883 - 61,883 61,883
Salaries & Benefits-Realignment Clerk - - 24,940 24,940 24,940
Operating Costs 92,638 67,006 - 67,006 67,006
Operating Costs - Neighborhood Courts 60,000 60,000 60,000
District Attorney Total 1,788,734 1,711,119 728,412 2,439,531 1,886,059
EHSD - Re-Entry Systems
Salaries & Benefits - - 106,966 106,966 106,966
Operating Costs - - 37,438 37,438 37,438
EHSD Total - - 144,404 144,404 144,404
EHSD-- Workforce Development Board
Salaries & Benefits 212,160 204,000 - 204,000 204,000
Travel 4,160 4,000 - 4,000 4,000
EHSD-WDB Total 216,320 208,000 - 208,000 208,000
County Administrator/Office of Reentry and Justice
Salaries & Benefits - Prog. Admin 528,580 571,378 (89,546) 481,832 481,832
Salaries & Benefits - Research and Evaluation 155,608 189,563 - 189,563 189,563
Ceasefire Program Contract 114,000 119,000 - 119,000 119,000
Data Evaluation & Systems Planning - - - - -
Operating Costs 7,500 7,500 40,020 47,520 47,520
CAO/ORJ Total3 805,688 887,441 (49,526) 837,915 837,915
ATTACHMENT I
Page 94 of 127
2018/19 2019/20
ONGOING BASELINE PROG. MOD.TOTAL REQUEST CCP RECOMMENDED
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
2019/20 BUDGET REQUEST
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
FY 2019/20 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY
(Approved by the Community Corrections Partnership on December 7, 2018)
CCC Police Chief's Association
Salaries and Benefits-AB109 Task Force 564,596 587,180 - 587,180 587,180
Salaries and Benefits-MHET Teams (3)423,447 440,385 - 440,385 440,385
CCC Police Chiefs' Total 988,043 1,027,565 - 1,027,565 1,027,565
Community Programs
Employment Support and Placement Srvcs 2,000,000 2,081,275 201,725 2,283,000 2,283,000
Network System of Services 940,000 978,200 800 979,000 979,000
Reentry Success Center 525,000 546,335 - 546,335 546,335
Short and Long-Term Housing Access 1,030,000 1,071,855 200,145 1,272,000 1,272,000
Legal Services 150,000 156,095 905 157,000 157,000
Mentoring and Family Reunification 200,000 208,130 870 209,000 209,000
Connections to Resources 15,000 15,000 - 15,000 15,000
CAB Support (via ORJ)7,021 5,000 (1,969) 3,031 3,031
Salesforce Licensing - - 17,000 17,000 17,000
18/19 4% COLA - Allocation TBD 194,688 - - -
Community Programs Total 5,061,709 5,061,890 419,476 5,481,366 5,481,366
Superior Court
Salaries and Benefits - Pretrial 216,758 225,745 - 225,745 225,745
Superior Court Total 216,758 225,745 - 225,745 225,745
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 27,885,959 28,683,811 1,971,928 30,655,739 29,599,550
Notes:
3. ORJ budget as listed includes costs associated with the Community Corrections subaccount only.
1. Health, Housing, and Homeless funding was included in Behavior Health's allocation in FY 18/19.
2. Public Defender's original proposal included $43,858 in bridge funding (April - June 2019) for the FTA Reduction Program Salaries which is not included in the CCP approved budget, CCP recommended
that approval for this funding will be considered at the March 2019 CCP meeting. The PD's budget request also did not include funding for Stand Together Contra Costa (STCC) and pre-trial services. STCC
funding was previously approved by the BOS. Pre-trial services was requested as part of a pre-trial service budget request provided by the Probation Department.
ATTACHMENT I
Page 95 of 127
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP
RESERVE POLICY
1. In recognition of the need to ensure continuity of operations and programming, it is the policy of
the Community Corrections Partnership to maintain a reserve balance equal to or above 50% of the
estimated annual state revenue allocated to the County pursuant to Government Code section 30029.05
(c)(2) from year-to-year.
2. Reserves may be drawn below the minimum level in order to address one or more of the
following issues upon notification to the Board of Supervisors and its Public Protection Committee as to
the specific circumstances that justify the recommendation:
a. an unforeseen emergency;
b. to fund a non-recurring expense; or,
c. to fund a one-time capital cost.
d. any other expense if approved by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Community
Corrections Partnership – Executive Committee
ATTACHMENT J
Page 96 of 127
ONGOING ONE-TIME TOTAL
FUNDING AVAILABLE
FY 2018/19 Beginning Fund Balance 0 25,244,644 25,244,644
Est. State Funding Allocation
Base Allocation 24,980,233 0 24,980,233
Growth Allocation 2,375,791 0 2,375,791
10% Growth X'fer to Local Innovation Account (237,579)0 (237,579)
Subtotal 27,118,445 25,244,644 52,363,089
Less: Reserved Unspent Funds
WCDF Visiting Center (14/15)- (192) (192)
Pre-Trial Services Program (12/13)- (900,000) (900,000)
Pre-Trial Services Program (13/14)- (675,000) (675,000)
TOTAL SOURCES 27,118,445 23,669,452 50,787,897
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES - BOS APPROVED
Sheriff 8,643,656 1,500,000 10,143,656
Probation 3,736,116 - 3,736,116
Behavioral Health 2,474,855 - 2,474,855
Health Services--Detention Health Services 1,141,696 - 1,141,696
Public Defender 2,812,385 - 2,812,385
District Attorney 1,788,734 - 1,788,734
EHSD-- Workforce Development Board 216,320 - 216,320
County Administrator 805,688 - 805,688
CCC Police Chief's Association 988,043 - 988,043
Community Programs 5,061,709 - 5,061,709
Superior Court 216,758 - 216,758
TOTAL USES 27,885,959 1,500,000 29,385,959
EST. FY 2018/19 ENDING FUND BALANCE (767,514) 22,169,452 21,401,938
FY 2018/19
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT FUNDING
FY 2018/19 ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
ATTACHMENT K
Page 97 of 127
ONGOING ONE-TIME TOTAL
FUNDING AVAILABLE
FY 2019/20 Beginning Fund Balance 0 21,401,938 21,401,938
Est. State Funding Allocation
Base Allocation 26,586,522 - 26,586,522
Growth Allocation 2,037,714 - 2,037,714
10% Growth X'fer to Local Innovation Account (203,771)- (203,771)
TOTAL SOURCES 28,420,465 21,401,938 49,822,403
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES - PPC APPROVED
Sheriff 8,196,884 - 8,196,884
Probation 3,872,096 - 3,872,096
Behavioral Health 2,277,660 - 2,277,660
Health, Housing, & Homeless 253,432
Health Services--Detention Health Services 1,221,260 - 1,221,260
Public Defender 3,359,160 - 3,359,160
District Attorney 1,886,059 - 1,886,059
EHSD - Re-Entry Systems 144,404 144,404
EHSD-- Workforce Development Board 208,000 - 208,000
County Administrator 837,915 - 837,915
CCC Police Chief's Association 1,027,565 - 1,027,565
Community Programs 5,481,366 - 5,481,366
Superior Court 225,745 - 225,745
SUBTOTAL 28,991,546 - 28,738,114
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES - PENDING APPROVAL
Sheriff 800,000 - 800,000.00
TOTAL USES 29,791,546 - 29,791,546
(1,371,081) 21,401,938 20,030,857
(3,205,024) 21,401,938 18,196,914
EST. FY 2019/20 ENDING FUND BALANCE
EST FUND BALANCE EXCLUDING GROWTH
MINIMUM FUND BALANCE RESERVE (50% OF ONGOING)14,895,773
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT FUNDING
FY 2019/20 ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
FY 2019/20
ATTACHMENT K
Page 98 of 127
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24
Contra Costa County
CCP Projected Fund Balance vs. 50% Fund Balance Goal, FY 2018-24
Ending Fund Balance (2% Ann. Exp. Inc.)50% Fund Balance Goal
Attachment L
Page 99 of 127
PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 5.
Meeting Date:02/04/2019
Subject:AB 109 Community Programs: Proposed 2019 Contractor Solicitation Process
Submitted For: PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE,
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: 2019-02
Referral Name: AB 109 Community Programs: Contractor Solicitation Process
Presenter: L. DeLaney and D. Blue Contact: L. DeLaney, 925-335-1097
Referral History:
The Public Protection Committee has provided input on the solicitation process for AB 109
Community Program reentry service providers, undertaken by the County Administrator's Office
(and, now, the Office of Reentry & Justice) since 2013. The funding for the AB 109 Community
Programs is developed through recommendations by the Community Advisory Board (CAB) to
the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and the Public Protection Committee, and
ultimately approved by the Board of Supervisors and included in the County's adopted Budget.
On November 2, 2018, the CCP received an update on the CAB's proposed policy & budget
recommendations for FY 19/20. CAB's proposal to CCP is inlcuded as Attachment B.
On December 7, 2018, the CCP Executive Committee voted on FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Public
Safety Realignment funding recommendations that included allocations of the following to the
AB 109 Community Programs:
Employment Support and Placement Services: $2,283,000
Reentry Network System of Services: $979,000
Reentry Success Center: $546,335
Short and Long-term Housing Access: $1,272,000
Legal Services: $157,000
Mentoring and Family Reunification Services: $209,000
Connections to Resources: $15,000
CAB Support $3,031
Salesforce Licensing: $17,000
Total: $5,481,366
At their January 28, 2019 meeting, the PPC discussed the possibility of increasing the AB 109
Community Programs support. They requested staff provide information about the unmet service
needs of the returning residents. ORJ staff notes that housing access is the greatest unmet need
that is most frequently identified, followed by additional civil legal services. In addition,Page 100 of 127
that is most frequently identified, followed by additional civil legal services. In addition,
post-placement employment services to ensure clients are finding and keeping the "better job"
after initial successful placement are also in need of enhancement. Staff requests direction on the
utilization of FY 2018-19 funds in the amount of $50,000 that were allocated to Reach
Fellowship International for housing services for women and children; Reach declined to enter
into contract for these services. In addition, staff notes that the amount requested by the CAB for
support of the Salesforce licenses required for data reporting was not sufficient to cover the
full-year cost of licenses; an additional $17,000 is required.
At their December 7, 2018 meeting, the CCP also voted to recommend, upon a recommendation
from the CAB and the Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) of the CCP, that contracts for these
services be issued as 5-year contracts rather than 3-year contracts, as has been the practice to this
point. Following Administrative Bulletin 613 (attached), the AB 109 Community Programs
contracts have been offered/noticed in the RFP process as one-year contracts with two (2)
one-year renewals upon determination of successful performance.
Administrative Bulletin 613 provides:
Contract Term - A contract with a one-year term may not be renewed more than two times, for a
total of three years, without a competitive bidding process. Contracts with a term exceeding one
year may not exceed three years in length and may not be renewed or extended without a
competitive bidding process.
However, the Bulletin also provides a waiver to the policy:
IV.Waivers. Prior to entering into any contractual agreement under this bulletin, a department
may apply to the County Administrator for waiver of the competitive bidding process. Waiver
requests must clearly explain the extenuating circumstances that justify the waiver. The County
Administrator or authorized designee will evaluate waiver requests, including the applicability of
State and Federal statutes. The Administrator will either deny the request or, if appropriate,
recommend approval by the Board of Supervisors.
(Note that the current 3-year contract period for the Reentry Success Center will not expire until
June 30, 2020.)
Referral Update:
At their January 28, 2019 meeting, the Public Protection Committee requested that staff provide
information about the proposed 2019 contractor solicitation process for the implementation of the
AB 109 Community Programs. Based on input received from the Community Advisory Board
(CAB), the Quality Assurance Committee (QAC), and the Community Corrections Partnership
(CCP), and following the protocol and requirements of prior solicitations for reentry service
providers, the Office of Reentry & Justice (ORJ) proposes the following process and terms for the
2019 solicitation and requests input from the Public Protection Committee at its Feb. 4, 2019
meeting.
Contract Opportunity
The ORJ proposes to utilize both an RFI (Request For Interest) and an RFP (Request For
Proposals) process to solicit proposals from qualified contractors to provide the AB 109
Community Programs reentry services for a period of up to 5 years.
Page 101 of 127
Community Programs reentry services for a period of up to 5 years.
The RFI/RFP would specify that the term of agreement resultant of the solicitation would be a
three (3) year contract (July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2022) with an expectation of two (2) annual
renewals (contract amendments) upon successful contract performance and based on the
availability of funding. Therefore, a solicitation process would not be conducted again for these
services for another five years unless contractor performance required the termination of the
contract and the solicitation of a new contractor.
(With regard to contractor performance, the ORJ is now staffed with a Research and Evaluation
Manager, who is administering the Salesforce data system ("SAFE") and monitoring the
contractor data reports to ensure better data quality, moving forward.)
Extending the contract period to five years offers the contractors more financial certainty and
stability, an opportunity to provide follow-up services to clients over a longer period of time and
the opportunity to track outcomes for longer periods; it reduces administrative costs and provides
opportunity for better program evaluation as well.
The RFI process is a written solicitation process prepared and issued for the purpose of seeking
information about interested contractors and potential proposers. The RFI would precede the
issuance of an RFP.
For 2019, the ORJ proposes the following solicitations:
1. 1 (one) RFI/RFP for Employment($2,283,000/ year) and Housingservices ($1,272,000/year) :
Proposers should indicate whether they would intend to propose services for one or both service
areas (employment, housing services), and if only for one, indicate how they would collaborate
with other type of service providers. Proposers should also indicate the regions of the County
(East, Central, West) in which they propose to operate.
In previous solicitations, the PPC provided input on the proportion of funding allocated to each
region for Employment services, with West County receiving 30% of the total available funding,
Central County receiving 30% of the funding, and East County receiving 40%.
Note that for FY 2018-19, the contractor providing housing support for women and children,
Reach Fellowship International, declined a contract in the amount of $50,000; this contract was
issued as a result of the 2016 RFP process and represented the third year of the contract period.
The PPC may wish to provide direction on the utilization of this funding.
2. 1 (one) RFI/RFP for the Reentry Network Management and Services ($979,000/year);
Proposers should indicate their interest in providing the Central and East County Reentry
Network management functions and Reentry Network Services, consistent with the adopted plan
for the "East & Central Networked System of Services" and the "Network System Manual &
Operations Plan." Proposals that diverge from these plans would be expected to describe the
reason for such differences.
The FY 18-19 contract ($972,290) provides $623,890 for Network Management services, and
$348,400 for Network Services. These "Network" services include:
$156,000 for Transitional Housing (Mz. Shirliz, subcontractor)
$67,600 for Specialized Vocational Training (Fast Eddie's, subcontractor)
Page 102 of 127
$62,400 for Employment and Education Liaison Services (Men and Women of Purpose,
subcontractor)
$62,400 for Pre/Post-Release Women's Case Management services (Centerforce,
subcontractor)
3. 1 RFI/RFP for Family Reunification ($94,000/year) and MentoringServices ($115,000):
Proposers can indicate whether they would intend to propose services for one or both service
areas, but each service would need to be provided on a countywide basis;
4. 1 RFI/RFP for Legal Services ($157,000/year) to be provided countywide to clients for civil
legal matters.
Process
The ORJ has initiated the AB 109 Community Programs solicitation process with the convening
of a stakeholders meeting on January 28, 2019 which included representatives of the CAB;
Probation; Health, Housing and Homeless Services; Public Defender's Office; the Sheriff's Office,
and the ORJ. The purpose of the meeting was to consider the development of a solicitation
timeline, discuss the CAB input on the integration of housing and employment services, and
provide input on the solicitation process. The next meeting was scheduled for February 11, 2019.
The RFP/Qs that have been developed for prior solicitations will be reviewed and revised, as
needed. Staff will research RFPs utilized in other jurisdictions for reentry services. Final draft
RFPs can be provided to the PPC at its March 4, 2019 meeting. Staff will seek to broaden its
notification and outreach process to ensure that as many potential providers are notified about the
opportunities. For the establishment of Review Panels, the PPC may wish to provide input on
Panel composition. For prior solicitations, Review Panels have generally been comprised of:
Probation representation
County Administrator's Office representation
A member of the CAB
Someone who has been justice-involved (or family member)
A subject-matter expert in the service area
Staff of a neighboring county working in reentry
The Review Panels are facilitated by staff of the ORJ, who do not participate in scoring. A
Consensus Scoring process has been utilized for all prior solicitations.
Timeline
In light of the 2019 PPC and CCP meeting schedules, staff proposes the following schedule for
the AB 109 Community Programs solicitation.
AB 109 Community Programs Solicitation 2019
Event Date
RFI Development Feb. 4-12
RFIs issued Feb. 13, 2019
RFIs Due Feb. 22, 109
Page 103 of 127
Final Draft RFPs to PPC March 4, 2019
RFPs Issued March 5, 2019
Bidders Conference #1: East County Week of March 18
Bidders Conference #2: Central County Week of March 18
Bidders Conference #3: West County Week of March 18
Addendum Issued Week of March 18
Responses Due April 3, 2019
Evaluation Period April 4-19
Vendor Interviews April 15-17
Results Letter Issued April 19, 2019
Appeal Period April 22-25
Public Protection Review May 6, 2019
CCP Review June 7, 2019
Board Award Date June 11, 2019
Contract Start Date July 1, 2019
Note that this process only addresses the solicitation of the AB 109 Community Programs
contractors and does not address the AB 109 Innovation funding. Staff anticipates undertaking the
solicitation process for the AB 109 Innovation funding at a later date.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
1. PROVIDE input and direction to staff on the proposed contractor solicitation process for the
AB 109 Community Programs for 2019, including but not limited to:
a. the contract period,
b. the method of solicitation,
c. the timeline of the process
d. the composition of Review Panels, and
e. the allocation of funding.
Note that the AB 109 Innovation funding solicitation for 2019 will also require a similar
solicitation process to be undertaken by the ORJ for FY 2019-2020 contracts.
2. CONSIDER increasing the AB 109 Community Programs allocation to:
support housing needs of special populations such as women, families, families with
dependents, and 290 sex offender registrant;
expand civil legal services;
provide full funding for the Salesforce licenses that contractors are required to maintain for
reentry service data. ($17,000)
3. CONSIDER the re-allocation of the FY 2018-19 funding in the amount of $50,000 for housing
for women and children that was not utilized by Reach Fellowship International.
Attachments
Attachment A: Administrative Bulletin 613
Attachment B: CAB's Policy & Budget Recommendations
Page 104 of 127
Page 105 of 127
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Office of the County Administrator
ADMINISTRATIVE BULLETIN
Number: 613.0
Effective Date: February 5, 2008
Section:Purchasing
SUBJECT: CONTRACTS WITH COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS (CBO’s)
This bulletin sets forth policy and procedure on contracting with community-
based organizations for health or human services, in order to ensure that
recipients of county services receive the best services available in the market.
I. APPLICABILITY. This bulletin pertains exclusively to contracts with CBOs
for health and human services funded by new, dedicated funding streams
that are available, eligible and appropriate for CBO contracts. This bulletin
does not amend or replace Administrative Bulletins 605 or 609.
II.POLICY. The policy of the County is to solicit CBO services through a
competitive bid process anytime a new, dedicated funding stream for health
or social services is available, eligible, and appropriate for contracts for new
services or expansion of existing services.
III. PROCEDURES.
A. Requests for Interest. Prior to proceeding to a formal or informal
competitive bid process for contracts above $50,000, a department must
issue a Request for Interest to determine if there is interest from multiple
CBOs, whether or not they are currently County contractors. If interest is
limited to only one CBO, the competitive bidding process may be waived
pursuant to Section IV.
B. Competitive Bidding and Awards.
Bidding - Competitive bidding is required for contracts in excess of
$50,000.
Award Criteria - All contract awards should consider the most
responsive and responsible proposal in addition to cost.
Additional Criteria Award - For contracts exceeding $250,000, award
criteria should include the fiscal, managerial and professional
capabilities and capacities of the CBO. New or renewal contracts will
not be approved unless and until any and all audit exceptions and
deficiencies have been remedied.
Contract Term - A contract with a one-year term may not be renewed
more than two times, for a total of three years, without a competitive
bidding process. Contracts with a term exceeding one year may not
Page 106 of 127
exceed three years in length and may not be renewed or extended
without a competitive bidding process.
C. Outreach. Contracts with CBO’s are exempt from the County Outreach
program.
D. Performance Based Contracts.
Performance based contracting promotes the sharing of best practices
and gives providers a basis for benchmarking.
1. All contracts shall identify specific performance outputs and/or
outcomes. Contracting departments shall review contracts at least
once per contract term to ensure compliance with output/outcome
requirements. The review should identify reason(s) for any non-
compliance, including whether or not the outputs/outcomes are
achievable.
2. Failure to achieve contracted performance output or outcome
requirements may be grounds for contract termination. Such
contracts may not be automatically renewed.
3.Any contract renewals or extensions must include a supportable
statement that any problems or deficiencies identified in the
contractor’s most recent performance review have been remedied to
the department’s satisfaction
IV.Waivers. Prior to entering into any contractual agreement under this
bulletin, a department may apply to the County Administrator for waiver
of the competitive bidding process. Waiver requests must clearly explain
the extenuating circumstances that justify the waiver. The County
Administrator or authorized designee will evaluate waiver requests,
including the applicability of State and Federal statutes. The
Administrator will either deny the request or, if appropriate, recommend
approval by the Board of Supervisors.
References: California Government Code section 26227
Board Order dated August 17, 1982 from the Internal Operations
Committee
Board Orders dated February 23 and March 13, 2007 - County Policy
on Contracting with CBO’s
Administrative Bulletins 605 and 609 and Contracts and Grants
Manual
Orig. Dept: County Administrator
Contact(s): Dorothy Sansoe 335-1009
/s/_____________________________
JOHN CULLEN,
County Administrator
Page 107 of 127
MEMORANDUM:
FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations
Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
1
TO: Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership – Executive Committee
FROM: Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
DATE: November 2, 2018
SUBJECT: Proposed AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations for FY 19-20
Summary
The Community Advisory Board (CAB) to the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) submits the
following policy and budget recommendations to the Executive Committee of the CCP for consideration
and adoption while the Partnership deliberates its final allocations for the FY 2019-2020 AB 109 budget
cycle. Each year, the CAB makes recommendations with a commitment to strengthen the
implementation of AB 109 public safety realignment and enhance local efforts to improve the County’s
criminal justice system.
In previous years, both the full CCP and individual members have supported CAB recommendations to
include:
The creation of the County’s first Office of Reentry and Justice
Increased funding for community-based reentry programming
Increased capacity for expanding pre-release planning activities
The creation of capacity-building and reentry innovations funds
While the CAB recognizes the positive direction taken by the CCP to enhance the County’s reentry
system, we also acknowledge that its future success relies on ongoing investment in innovative solutions
with a proven track record of reducing recidivism, increase access to needed services, and support
successful reintegration.
Over the last year, CAB members have participated in a number of planning processes administered by
the County to identify strategic activities and opportunities to strengthen and build upon the foundation
laid by AB 109 funded initiatives and programs. The recommendations outlined in this memorandum are
guided by the strategies identified in the BOS adopted Reentry Strategic Plan (2018-2023), the BOS
adopted Racial Justice Taskforce Recommendations, feedback from community-based service providers
and County agency representatives, and previously submitted CAB recommendations to the CCP.
To that end, the CAB proposes the following budget recommendations to CCP’s Executive Committee.
Proposed Budget Recommendations for FY 19-20
1. Institutionalize the Office of Reentry and Justice
With the Office of Reentry and Justice’s (ORJ) pilot phase coming to a close with less than a year
remaining, CAB is recommending the CCP support making the Office a permanent entity beginning in FY
2019-2020. CAB also supports ORJ’s funding request of $829,859, and recommends an additional
$135,035 to support expanding the capacity of the Office by hiring a full-time Administrative Assistant (1
Page 108 of 127
MEMORANDUM:
FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations
Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
2
FTE; Classification Code – JWXD) to provide administrative services to ensure efficient operation of the
Office, and an Administrative Services Assistant III (1 FTE; Classification Code – APTA) to manage fiscal
responsibilities for contracted services (including service provider contracts) as was originally proposed
by CAB in May 2016. This would bring their total requested amount FY 19-20 to $964,894.
It goes without saying that ORJ has played a significant role in steering the County to make great strides
to improve our local justice system and enhance our reentry work overall. Given the various roles and
responsibilities this Office hold, it is imperative that decision-makers consider the future growth of the
field of reentry and justice reform our County will be engaged in, the subject matter expertise needed to
carry this work forward, and whether ORJ is sufficiently resourced to tackle current and future
obligations.
In addition to the Office’s current FY18-19 workplan – which includes approximately 20 or more projects
(as reported to this body during the September 7 meeting), the implementation of the County’s newly
adopted Reentry Strategic Plan and Stepping Up Initiative, development and support of the newly
formed Racial Justice Taskforce and soon-to-be formed Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, and the
launching of its planned evaluation activities, indicates a great need for increased staffing support to
ensure successful execution of the Office’s various oversight, planning, research and administrative
duties and responsibilities. CAB urges CCP to fully fund, and thus fully staff ORJ.
2. Establish a Housing Innovations Fund
Housing continues to be a deciding factor in whether a justice-involved person successfully reintegrates
back into society or will be gripped by a cycle of recidivism and homelessness. Considering the state’s
housing crisis, in addition to limited resources to address the County’s lack of affordable housing, we
have a collective obligation and commitment as local custodians of AB 109 implementation to ensure we
are investing in what works and break the cycle of recidivism. CAB believes that by investing in a housing
first approach and expanding the number of housing resources for individuals who are returning to
Contra Costa County communities after incarceration, we are fulfilling our commitment to justice
reinvestment.
CAB recommends the CCP establish a Housing Innovations Fund with an initial allocation of $800,000.
This would be in addition to the $1.1 million currently allocated for community-based housing services.
The Housing Innovations Fund would support housing programs and services that would meet the
various housing needs of the reentry population currently being served through AB 109 funded
programs in the County.
Presently, AB 109 funding supports emergency shelter, 90-day transitional living in clean and sober
environments, and rental assistance. However, our reentry system is under resourced in providing safe
housing for formerly incarcerated women, and women with children, housing for reentry clients with
families, permanent supportive housing for reentry clients with a disabling condition, more than 90-day
transitional living options, or temporary housing for reentry clients who can secure permanent housing
but are awaiting access.
CAB recognizes the need to enlist local housing experts to design and support procurement of evidence-
based housing services that will address the needs of the population, and will ensure that our housing
Page 109 of 127
MEMORANDUM:
FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations
Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
3
resources are distributed cost-effectively. Because of the Health, Housing, and Homeless Services
Division (H3) of Contra Costa Health Services’ expertise in building a quality service delivery system for
the County’s homeless population, as well as the Office of Reentry and Justice’s authority and oversight
of reentry-focused programming and initiatives throughout the County, CAB proposes both agencies
serve as potential administrators of the Fund. CAB is confident in their ability to develop policies and
protocols for quality assurance and steward the Housing Innovation Fund ethically and responsibly.
3. Fund Transportation Services for Jail Releases
A recent analysis – conducted by County Health Services and the Sherriff’s Office Custody Bureau during
their weeklong Rapid Improvement Event in March – of daily rate of releases and release times showed
that of the average daily releases (from 65-70 releases per day) from our local county jails, a significant
number of those individuals are released during hours outside of normal business hours (8am – 5pm),
and their ability to access services available outside the normal business hours are severely limited due
to lack of readily accessible transportation.
It was also found through the Pre-Release Planning Pilot that a significant number of participants who
were released with transition plans failed to connect to outside resources coordinated for them prior to
release. One of the many contributing factors to the lack of connection is immediate access to
transportation. Based on the County’s Office of Education’s observations – which is the agency
implementing the Pre-Release Planning Pilot -- the bridge to services secured through pre-release
planning is transportation. Often, services are coordinated prior to release, but participants are
challenged with finding a way to get to them, and therefore access is severely limited.
As a result of these findings, CAB recommends establishing a transportation service specifically targeting
jail releases at peak hours throughout the day to transport individuals from the three detention facilities
to safe, County supported community settings with on-site services such as H3’s Care Centers, Warming
Centers, or the Reentry Success Center, as examples. CAB envisions the service to operate in tandem
with the Pre-Release Planning Pilot and leverage the County’s existing homeless outreach service, multi-
service locations and other community-based reentry services. Specifically, CAB recommends setting
aside up to $150,000 to be used for implementing and operating a transportation service for jail releases
to facilitate care coordination.
CAB acknowledges there are various approaches that are currently being explored by different agencies
and discussions are underway. Therefore, CAB does not wish to explicitly endorse a particular method,
however, we’d like to recognize the Sheriff’s Office Custody Bureau, County Office of Education, H3, ORJ,
and Detention Health Services as possible administrators for this new service.
With this added support, the potential for enhanced service coordination and increased, effective
communication and connection between participants, out of custody service providers, and in-custody
programs and services is great, and ultimately improves the jail-to-community continuum.
4a. Institutionalize the Early Representation Program County-wide
CAB recognizes CCP’s forward-thinking by investing in the highly successful Early Representation
program now established in partnership with the Antioch and Richmond Police Departments, and
California Highway Patrol. Prior to the Early Representation (EarlyRep) program, the failure to appear
(FTA) rate was 57% in misdemeanor cases coming from the Antioch Police Department. Based on recent
Page 110 of 127
MEMORANDUM:
FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations
Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
4
statistics, that number has been reduced to 17% -- a 40% decline. In West County, for misdemeanor
cases from the Richmond Police Department, this number has been reduced from 52% prior to the
program to 20% after the EarlyRep Program launched.
According to the Public Defender, a major factor contributing to as many as 99% of FTAs result from the
fact that upon citation, a hearing date 6 weeks out is provided; however, currently the prosecutor’s
office is not filing charges until well past that date. In the interim, a person’s address to receive hearing
notices may have changed or otherwise may not be aware of the new hearing date. By missing the
hearing date, however, an arrest warrant will be issued causing significant negative consequences for
involved individuals. The Early Representation program mitigates this problem by making the
defendants aware of the hearing date.
CAB views the Early Representation program as a necessary fix to reducing the enormous amount of
resources expended by justice system actors – from law enforcement agencies to the courts – and
prevent the collateral damage to individuals who would otherwise be incarcerated as a result of a failure
to appear. CAB recommends the CCP further its investment in the EarlyRep program by fully funding the
existing EarlyRep program with Richmond Police Department – which its current funding source is set to
expire in February of 2019. This ensures that the program is not disrupted in the current fiscal year, and
is sustained overtime. CAB recommends the total requested amount of $219,292 for mid-year allocation
and full FY 2019-2020 allocation be approved.
4b. Expand Holistic Defense
Additionally, CAB also recognizes that in light of the state’s Supreme Court ruling in the Humphrey case,
the new Mental Health Diversion Law (AB 1810), and the soon to be enacted California Bail Reform law,
now more than ever, local defense attorneys will carry the weight of release planning to advise the
courts on appropriate and safe pre-trial releases. Though CAB is in favor of reducing our local pre-trial
population within our County’s jails, we also understand the need for clinical expertise and assessment
to ensure that populations experiencing mental health and behavioral health issues are connected to
the services they need in anticipation of release.
According to the Public Defenders Office, its total number of cases are estimated at 19,000 a year, to
include a majority of clients who experience some level of mental health or substance use disorder
needs. Many others are also challenged with facing problems relating to poverty, homelessness, trauma
and other complications that require sufficient service coordination and connections in order to reduce
recidivism. Housing Social Workers within the Public Defenders Office will fill a significant service gap
particularly as diversion efforts continue to expand to reduce the number of individuals with mental
health needs out of the criminal justice system.
Therefore, CAB joins the Racial Justice Taskforce in supporting this recommendation and the Public
Defenders Office proposal for 2 FTE clinically licensed Social Workers, and recommends the CCP approve
funding in the amount of $191,996.
5. Match Drug Medi-Cal Waiver Resources to Expand the County’s Detoxification and Recovery/Aftercare
Services
The County has a unique opportunity to utilize state resources offered through the Drug Medi-Cal
Waiver to expand locally the much needed behavioral health services to support individuals struggling
Page 111 of 127
MEMORANDUM:
FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations
Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
5
with co-occurring disorders or substance abuse. The AODS Division of the County’s Health Services
Department is currently administering a procurement process for expanding detoxification services and
residential treatment for specialized populations. However, CAB believes more can be done to support
the expansion of and access to more behavioral health services, with a particular emphasis on recovery
and after care services for both AB 109 probationers and the expanded population.
CAB recommends the CCP provide match funding to expand detoxification services, and invest in
expanding recovery and after care services to include quality recovery-focused housing, relapse
prevention, recovery coaches, and other ancillary services as defined in the County’s Drug Medi-Cal
Organized Delivery System (DMC-ODS) Implementation Plan. These resources would be administered by
the Behavioral Health – AODS Division.
Proposed Policy Recommendations
1.Improve AB 109 budget development, reporting, and meaningful analysis of “budget to actuals”
In December 2016, CAB presented to the CCP its key findings on uses of AB 109 funding with a set of
recommendations to improve budget planning and reporting and encourage analysis and public
discussion of AB 109 fund uses. The intention of our analysis and recommendations was to foster public
trust by ensuring AB 109 funding is applied with the same objectives in mind as articulated in the AB 109
Public Realignment legislation. Key findings included:
Over and Under Spending. There were many examples of agencies under spending approved
line items and yet receiving the same or higher approved budgets in the subsequent year as
result of the status quo approach to budgeting
Supplantation. The status quo directive has resulted in substantial spending other than as
approved e.g., use of AB109 funds to offset costs of existing staff and positions
Inconsistent financial recording and tracking practices for reporting and inconsistent uses of
approved funds.
No linking to outcomes and impacts. The status quo directive has prevented linking of funding
to outcomes/impacts.
To that end, CAB recommends addressing the above concerns by adopting and implementing the
following actions:
Adopt CAB recommended Budget Request Template Form (Attachment A) – CAB is requesting
again that the CCP take action by directing staff to replace the current “status quo” budget
request form with CAB’s proposed budget request template (see Attachment A) as a
standardized form for all agencies funded by or applying for AB 109 funding.
This form instructs agencies to produce due‐diligence renewal requests based on prior‐year
budget‐to‐actual reporting (including any unspent balances) and offer justification for requests
of changes in funding allocation. Additionally, the form includes an updated budget narrative
section for gathering supplemental information to assist in tracking use of approved funds.
Additional information may include a more detailed explanation of costs calculations,
Page 112 of 127
MEMORANDUM:
FY 2019-2020 AB 109 Policy & Budget Recommendations
Community Advisory Board to the Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership
6
justifications for staffing levels, quantification of funded services, existing service utilization
rates, etc.
The information gathered by adopting our template will not only increase fiscal transparency,
but will also fully inform CCP Executive Committee members as they take part in budget
planning and decision‐making for future fiscal years, provide direction for course‐correction if
necessary, and ultimately, fulfill their fiduciary duty to ensure AB 109 funds are managed
responsibly and effectively.
Establish a bi-annual budgetary review process of AB 109 spending – There are several reasons
for establishing a public budget review process outside the CCP’s annual budget cycle. For
starters, it provides an opportunity for CCP members to meaningful engage in public discussions
about analyses of AB 109 spending trends and outcomes.
The current budget cycle only offers an opportunity for the CCP Executive Committee to
consider and approve budget requests for the upcoming fiscal year, thus leaving little to no
room for a study of and discussion about past and current funding allocations, impact of
currently assumed spending patterns on the service population and the system as a whole, as
well as considering the local fiscal impact of state and federal policy changes on various parts of
the reentry and criminal justice system.
CAB supports any effort by the CCP to create a process that allows for more informed discussion
and decision-making as it relates to budgetary actions.
Adopt CAB recommended Budget Summary Template (Attachment B) – To support analysis of
AB 109 spending and the implementation of the aforementioned bi-annual budgetary review
process, CAB also recommends adopting the proposed budget summary form. The purpose of
this document is to provide up to date information on budget-to-actuals for all AB 109 funded
entities. In gathering this information, it lays the foundation for analysis of use of funds on a
more frequent basis and will support budgetary planning for future years.
Page 113 of 127
PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 6.
Meeting Date:02/04/2019
Subject:CY2018 Annual Report
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: CY2018 Annual Report
Presenter: Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Contact: Paul Reyes, 335-1096
Referral History:
Each year, the Committee reviews its prior year activities and submits an annual report to the
Board of Supervisors. As part of that process, existing referrals are assessed as to whether they
should be continued to the next year, referred to a different Standing Committee or discontinued.
Referral Update:
Attached is a draft of the CY 2018 Public Protection Committee Draft Annual Report put together
by staff for review by the Committee.
Staff requests that the Committee review the attached documents and provide comments,
amendments and additional direction as necessary.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
1. APPROVE calendar year 2018 Public Protection Committee Annual Report for submission to
the Board of Supervisors;
2. PROVIDE direction to staff as appropriate.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
No fiscal impact.
Attachments
DRAFT CY 2018 Annual Report
Page 114 of 127
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Board of Supervisors referred ten (10) issues to the Public Protection
Committee (PPC) for its review and consideration during 2018.
2. FIND that the 2018 PPC convened nine (9) meetings, worked through and provided an opportunity for
public input on a number of significant Countywide issues.
3. RECOGNIZE the excellent work of the County department staff who provided the requisite information
to the PPC in a timely and professional manner, and members of the Contra Costa community and other
public agencies who, through their interest in improving the quality of life in Contra Costa County,
provided valuable insight into our discussions, and feedback that helped us to formulate our policy
recommendations.
4. ACCEPT year-end productivity report and APPROVE recommended disposition of PPC referrals
described at the end of this report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact. This is an informational report only.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 02/12/2019 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
Contact: Paul Reyes,
335-1096
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 12, 2019
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc:
To:Board of Supervisors
From:PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Date:February 12, 2019
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:2018 YEAR-END REPORT ON ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND DISPOSITION OF
REMAINING REFERRALS TO THE PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Attachment A
Page 115 of 127
BACKGROUND:
The Public Protection Committee (PPC) was established on January 8, 2008 to study criminal justice and
public protection issues and formulate recommendations for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. At
the February 4, 2019 meeting, the Committee discussed all issues currently on referral and has made the
following recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for the 2019 PPC work-plan:
1. Opportunities to Improve Coordination of Response to Disasters and Other Public
Emergencies
Approximately three weeks following the November 2007 Cosco Busan oil spill, the Sheriff’s Office of
Emergency Services (OES) presented to the Board of Supervisors its assessment of the emergency response
efforts, including what worked well and didn’t work well, and what lessons were learned through those
experiences. At the conclusion of the Board discussion, Supervisor Gioia introduced five recommendations
that were approved by the Board.
On February 5, 2008 the Board of Supervisors referred this matter to the PPC for continuing development
and oversight. PPC received a status report from the Office of the Sheriff and Health Services Department
in February 2009 and requested the Hazardous Materials Program Manager to report back to the PPC on the
development of mutual aid agreements from local oil refineries. Following a second briefing to the PPC by
the Office of the Sheriff, the PPC reported out to the Board of Supervisors on May 6, 2009 with
recommendations for follow-up by the Sheriff and Human Resources departments. The Health Services
Department made a report to the PPC on April 19, 2010 regarding the resources and connections available
to respond to hazardous materials emergencies and, again, on October 18, 2010 regarding who determines
which local official participates in incident command if an event is in Contra Costa County. On December
5, 2011, Health Services reported to our Committee regarding training and deployment of community
volunteers.
In January 2008, the Board of Supervisors referred to the PPC the matter of improving public response to
emergency instructions and protocols through broader and better education, which had previously been on
referral to the IOC. The Board suggested that the PPC work with the Office of the Sheriff, the Health
Services Department, and the CAER (Community Awareness & Emergency Response) Program to
determine what educational efforts are being made and what additional efforts may be undertaken to
improve public response and safety during an emergency. In April 2011, the PPC met with CAER
(Community Awareness Emergency Response) Executive Director Tony Semenza and staff from the Office
of the Sheriff and Health Services to discuss what has been done to better inform the public and what more
can be done to improve public response to emergency warnings. CAER provided a thorough report on its
countywide community fairs, and programs targeted at the education system and non-English speaking
populations. The PPC asked CAER to provide a written outreach strategy that describes how new
homeowners are educated about emergency awareness. The Sheriff's Office of Emergency Services
provided an update to the Committee at the April 13, 2015 meeting. In addition, the draft update of the
Countywide Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was reviewed and forwarded to the BOS for review and
approval in 2015. Since there will be opportunities for the review of future updates to the EOP, we
recommend that this issue remain on referral to the Committee.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
2. Welfare Fraud Investigation and Prosecution
In September 2006, the Employment and Human Services (EHS) Department updated the Internal
Operations Committee (IOC) on its efforts to improve internal security and loss prevention activities. The
Attachment A
Page 116 of 127
Operations Committee (IOC) on its efforts to improve internal security and loss prevention activities. The
IOC had requested the department to report back in nine months on any tools and procedures that have been
developed and implemented to detect changes in income eligibility for welfare benefits.
The EHS Director made follow-up reports to IOC in May and October 2007, describing what policies,
procedures, and practices are employed by the Department to ensure that public benefits are provided only
to those who continue to meet income eligibility requirements, explaining the complaint and follow-through
process, and providing statistical data for 2005/06, 2006/07, and for the first quarter of 2007/08.
Upon creation of the PPC in January 2008, this matter was reassigned from the IOC to the PPC. PPC has
received status reports on this referral in October 2008, June and October 2010, November 2011, November
2012 and, most recently, in December 2013. The Committee has reviewed the transition of welfare fraud
collections from the former Office of Revenue Collection to the Employment and Human Services
Department; the fraud caseload and percentage of fraud findings; fraud prosecutions and the number of
convictions; and the amounts recovered.
The Committee received an annual report on this subject from the District Attorney and Employment and
Human Services Director on September 26, 2016. The Committee wishes to continue monitoring the
performance of the welfare fraud program annually. It is recommended that this matter be retained on
referral. The Committee did not receive an update on this topic in 2018, but would like the issue to remain
on referral to the Committee for future oversight.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
3. Multi-Language Capability of the Telephone Emergency Notification System
(TENS)/Community Warning System (CWS) Contracts.
This matter had been on referral to the IOC since 2000 and was reassigned to the PPC in January 2008. The
PPC met with Sheriff and Health Services Department staff in March 2008 to receive an update on the
County’s efforts to implement multilingual emergency telephone messaging. The Committee learned that
the Federal Communications Commission had before it two rulemaking proceedings that may directly
affect practices and technology for multilingual alerting and public notification. Additionally, the
federally-funded Bay Area “Super Urban Area Safety Initiative” (SUASI) has selected a contractor
undertake an assessment and develop a five-year strategic plan on notification of public emergencies, with
an emphasis on special needs populations. The Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services reported to the PPC
in April 2009 that little has changed since the March 2008 report.
On October 18, 2010, the PPC received a report from the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services on the
Community Warning and Telephone Emergency Notification systems, and on developments at the federal
level that impact those systems and related technology. Sheriff staff concluded that multi-lingual public
emergency messaging is too complex to be implemented at the local level and should be initiated at the
state and federal levels. New federal protocols are now being established to provide the framework within
which the technological industries and local agencies can work to develop these capabilities.
In 2011, the Office of the Sheriff has advised staff that a recent conference on emergency notification
systems unveiled nothing extraordinary in terms of language translation. The SUASI project had just
commenced and Sheriff staff have been on the contact list for a workgroup that will be developing a gap
analysis, needs assessment, and five-year strategic plan. At this point, this matter had been on committee
referral for more than ten years and technology had yet to provide a feasible solution for multilingual public
emergency messaging.
On September 18, 2012, following the Richmond Chevron refinery fire, the Board of Supervisors
established an ad hoc committee to discuss the Community Warning System and Industrial Safety
Attachment A
Page 117 of 127
established an ad hoc committee to discuss the Community Warning System and Industrial Safety
Ordinance. Since that committee is ad hoc in nature, the PPC recommended that this issue remain on
referral to the PPC.
The PPC received two updates on this issue in CY 2015; one on April 13, 2015 and one on November 9,
2015. Following the November 2015 discussion, the Committee requested the Sheriff's Office to return in
six months for an update.
On May 23, 2016, the Committee received an update from the Sheriff's Office on the status of the TEN
system and directed staff to provide a summary of the CWS/Emergency services protocols for future
review of the Committee and prepare a handout in both English and Spanish that summarizes emergency
services protocols.
On October 18, 2016, the Board of Supervisors referred a review of the AtHoc, Inc. contract to the
Committee for additional review and discussion and on October 24, 2016, the Committee met to discuss
this item. AtHoc Inc., is a full-service alert and warning company specializing in fixed siren systems and
emergency notification systems. Alerting Solutions, Inc., provides support for the Contra Costa County
Community Warning System. The Contra Costa County Community Warning System consists of 25
separate and linked control centers, monitoring systems, and communication systems between emergency
responders, sirens (40), and other alerting devices (700+), and automated links to radio and television
stations serving the community. Representatives from the Sheriff's Office were present to discuss the item
and it's importance to the County's Community Warning System (CWS) operations. Following that
discussion, the Committee recommended that the contract be rescheduled on the Board of Supervisors'
agenda for approval, but directed staff to continue reporting on CWS operating contracts on a periodic basis.
Since the Committee has an existing referral on the CWS telephone electronic notification system (TENS),
this referral was combined with the TENS referral with the expectation that the Committee would receive
coordinated updates on both issues in the beginning in 2017.
The Committee did not receive an update on this topic in 2018. However, the Committee continues to have
interest in monitoring the implementation of a multi-lingual telephone ring down system and CWS issues.
For this reason, this issue should remain on referral to the Committee in 2019.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
4. County support and coordination of non-profit organization resources to provide
prisoner re-entry services, implementation of AB 109 Public Safety Realignment, and
appointment recommendations to the Community Corrections Partnership
On August 25, 2009, the Board of Supervisors referred to the PPC a presentation by the Urban Strategies
Council on how the County might support and coordinate County and local non-profit organization
resources to create a network of re-entry services for individuals who are leaving jail or prison and are
re-integrating in local communities. On September 14, 2009, the PPC invited the Sheriff-Coroner, County
Probation Officer, District Attorney, Public Defender, Health Services Director, and Employment and
Human Services Director to hear a presentation by the Urban Strategies Council. The PPC encouraged
County departments to participate convene a task force to work develop a network for prisoner re-entry
services, which has been meeting independently from the PPC.
The PPC received a status report from County departments in April 2010. The Employment and Human
Services department reported on its efforts to weave together a network of services, utilizing ARRA funding
for the New Start Program and on the role of One-Stop Centers in finding jobs for state parolees. Probation
reported on the impacts of the anticipated flood of state parolees into the county. The Sheriff reported on
the costs for expanding local jail capacity and possible expanded use of GPS (global positioning systems)
Attachment A
Page 118 of 127
the costs for expanding local jail capacity and possible expanded use of GPS (global positioning systems)
use in monitoring state parolees released back to our county. The Health Services Department reported on
its Healthcare for the Homeless Program as a means to get parolees into the healthcare system and on its
development of cross-divisional teams on anti-violence.
Supervisors Glover and Gioia indicated that their staff would continue to coordinate this local initiative
when the Urban Strategies Council exhausts its grant funding from the California Endowment. The PPC
continued to monitor progress on the initiative and, on February 7, 2011, received a presentation of the
completed strategic plan and recommendations. In response to public testimony at the PPC meeting
regarding concerns over the "Ban the Box" element of the plan, the plan recommendations were modified
to exclude from the "Ban the Box" requirement certain identified sensitive positions in public safety and
children’s services or as determined by the agency.
On March 22, 2011, representatives from the Urban Strategies Council presented the completed Contra
Costa County Re-entry Strategic Plan (100 pages), an Executive Summary (6 pages) of the plan, and a slide
show to the Board of Supervisors, which approved the strategic plan and implementation recommendations
with one modification: rather than adopt a 'Ban the Box' policy as recommended, which would have
removed the question about criminal records from county employment applications during the initial
application, the Board agreed to consider adopting such a policy at a future date. The Board directed the
County Administrator to work with the offices of Supervisors Glover and Gioia to identify the resources
needed to implement the strategic plan and to report back to the Board with his findings and
recommendations.
Later in 2011, the California Legislature passed the Public Safety Realignment Act (Assembly Bills 109),
which transfers responsibility for supervising specific low-level inmates and parolees from the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to counties. Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109) takes
effect October 1, 2011 and realigns three major areas of the criminal justice system. On a prospective basis,
the legislation:
• Transfers the location of incarceration for lower-level offenders (specified non-violent, non-serious,
non-sex offenders) from state prison to local county jail and provides for an expanded role for post-release
supervision for these offenders;
• Transfers responsibility for post-release supervision of lower-level offenders (those released from prison
after having served a sentence for a non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offense) from the state to the
county level by creating a new category of supervision called Post-Release Community Supervision
(PRCS);
• Transfers the housing responsibility for parole and PRCS revocations to local jail custody
AB 109 also tasked the local Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) with recommending to the County
Board of Supervisors a plan for implementing the criminal justice realignment, which shall be deemed
accepted by the Board unless rejected by a 4/5th vote. The Executive Committee of the CCP is composed
of the County Probation Officer (Chair), Sheriff-Coroner, a Chief of Police (represented by the Concord
Police Chief in 2014), District Attorney, Public Defender, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court or
designee, and the Behavioral Health Director.
On October 4, 2011, the Board of Supervisors approved the CCP Realignment Implementation Plan,
including budget recommendations for fiscal year 2011/12. Throughout 2012, the PPC received regular
status updated from county staff on the implementation of public safety realignment, including
recommendations from the CCP-Executive Committee for 2012/13 budget planning. On January 15, 2013
the Board of Supervisors approved a 2012/13 budget for continuing implementation of public safety
realignment programming.
Attachment A
Page 119 of 127
The Committee received several reentry/AB 109 related presentations and updates throughout 2014,
including program updates, review of the proposed fiscal year 2014/15 AB 109 Public Safety Realignment
budget and made appointment recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for the CY 2015 Community
Corrections Partnership. In addition, the Committee evaluated the feasibility of submitting a grant proposal
for the 2014 Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) released by the California Board of State and
Community Corrections.
In 2016, the Committee reviewed the FY 2016/17 AB 109 budget proposed by the CCP, made appointment
recommendations for the CY2017 CCP and CCP-Executive Committee to the Board of Supervisors and
advised on grant programs that tie into AB 109 programming infrastructure. In addition, the Committee
reviewed the process for allocating the Community Programs portion of the AB109 budget, which was
composed of four separate RFPs for: (1) Employment and Placement services, (2) Short and Long-Term
Housing services, (3) Monitoring and Family Reunification services and (4) Legal services. In addition, the
Committee reviewed the first AB109 Annual Report assembled by Resource Development Associates on
behalf of the Community Corrections Partnership and a recommendation to establish an Office of Reentry
and Justice in the County Administrator's Office.
In 2017, the Committee reviewed the proposed FY 2017/18 AB109 budget assembled by the CCP, the FY
2015/16 AB 109 Annual Report and received staff reports regarding plans to update the Countywide
Reentry Strategic Plan and AB109 Operational Plan. The FY 2015/16 AB109 Annual Report was
forwarded to the Board on March 14, 2017. At the October and November 2017 meetings, the Committee
had discussion regarding appointments to the CCP and the CCP-Executive Committees for CY2018. At the
November meeting, the Committee recommended the reappointment of all members with the exception of
the CBO-representative seat. The Committee requested the CCP-Community Advisory Board to make a
recommendation regarding appointment to that seat, which will be proposed to the Committee in early
2018. Ultimately, the Board approved the CY2018 appointments as recommended by the Committee on
November 14, 2017.
In 2018, the Committe continued its oversight responsibilities related to the implementation of AB109. On
February 5, 2018 the PPC reviewed and approved the proposed FY 2018/19 AB 109 budget approved by
the CCP - Executive Committee. On May 23, 2018, the PPC reviewed and approved the FY 2018/19 AB
109 Community Program funding allocations, approved the CY 2018 appointment of the
CBO-representative seat, and received the AB 109 Annual Report for FY 2016/17. On June 25, 2016, the
PPC accepted the Contra Costa County Reentry System Strategic Plan for 2018-2023. At the November 5th
meeting, the Committee recommended the reappointment of all members with the exception Chief of
Police seat which the PPC recommmended the Antioch Police Chief.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
5. Inmate Welfare Fund/Telecommunications/Visitation Issues.
On July 16, 2013, the Board of Supervisors referred a review of the Inmate Welfare Fund (IWF) and
inmate visitation policies to the Public Protection Committee for review. The Inmate Welfare Fund is
authorized by Penal Code § 4025 for the “…benefit, education, and welfare of the inmates confined within
the jail.” The statute also mandates that an itemized accounting of IWF expenditures must be submitted
annually to the County Board of Supervisors.
The Sheriff's Office has made several reports to the Committee throughout 2013 and 2014 regarding
funding of IWF programs, visitation/communication policies and an upcoming RFP for inmate
telecommunications services. The referral was placed on hold pending further discussion and outcomes of
Attachment A
Page 120 of 127
state and federal level changes to statute or rulemaking that could curtail the collection of telephone
commissions individuals contacting inmates and wards housed in county adult and juvenile detention
facilities normally pay. Such changes could potentially impact programming provided within the County's
detention facilities.
In late 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued new regulations significantly
curtailing the costs charged to inmates or the families of inmates for use of a jail or prison
telecommunications system. During 2016, a final rulemaking process was anticipated by the FCC.
Ultimately, the FCC passed updated regulations related to telecommunications in detention facilities.
The Committee did not receive an update on this topic in 2018. The Sheriff's Office is in the final stages of
contract review with the inmate telephone service provider which will have an impact on this issue. For this
reason, this topic should remain on referral to the Committee in 2019.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC (to be scheduled at the request of the
Sheriff-Coroner)
6. Racial Justice Task Force Project
On April 7, 2015, the Board of Supervisors received a letter from the Contra Costa County Racial Justice
Coalition requesting review of topics within the local criminal justice system. The Public Protection
Committee (the "Committee") generally hears all matters related to public safety within the County.
On July 6, 2015, the Committee initiated discussion regarding this referral and directed staff to research
certain items identified in the Coalition's letter to the Board of Supervisors and return to the Committee in
September 2015.
On September 14, 2015, the Committee received a comprehensive report from staff on current data related
to race in the Contra Costa County criminal justice system, information regarding the County's Workplace
Diversity Training and information regarding diversity and implicit bias trainings and presentations from
across the country.
On December 14, 2015, the Committee received an update from the Public Defender, District Attorney and
Probation Department on how best to proceed with an update to the Disproportionate Minority Contact
(DMC) report completed in 2008. At that time, the concept of establishing a new task force was discussed.
The Committee directed the three departments above to provide a written project scope and task force
composition to the Committee for final review.
At the November 9, 2015 meeting, the Committee received a brief presentation reintroducing the referral
and providing an update on how the DMC report compares with the statistical data presented at the
September meeting. Following discussion, the Committee directed staff to return in December 2015
following discussions between the County Probation Officer, District Attorney and Public Defender with
thoughts about how to approach a new DMC initiative in the County.
On April 12, 2016, the Board of Supervisors accepted a report and related recommendations from the
Committee resulting in the formation of a 17-member Disproportionate Minority Contact Task Force
composed of the following:
•County Probation Officer
•Public Defender
•District Attorney
Attachment A
Page 121 of 127
•District Attorney
•Sheriff-Coroner
•Health Services Director
•Superior Court representative
•County Police Chief’s Association representative
•Mount Diablo Unified School District representative
•Antioch Unified School District representative
•West Contra Costa Unified School District representative
•(5) Community-based organization (CBO) representatives (at least 1 representative from each region of
the County and at least one representative from the faith and family community)
•Mental Health representative (not a County employee)
•Public Member – At Large
Subsequently, a seven-week recruitment process was initiated to fill the (5) five CBO representative seats,
the (1) one Mental Health representative seat and the (1) one Public Member - At Large seat. The deadline
for submissions was June 15, 2016 and the County received a total of 28 applications.
On June 27, 2016, the PPC met to consider making appointments to the (5) five CBO representative seats,
the (1) one Mental Health representative seat and the (1) one Public Member - At Large seat. The PPC
nominated to following individuals to be considered by the full Board of Supervisors:
1.CBO seat 1: Stephanie Medley (RYSE, AB109 CAB) (District I)
2.CBO seat 2: Donnell Jones (CCISCO) (District I)
3.CBO seat 3: Edith Fajardo (ACCE Institute) (District IV)
4.CBO seat 4: My Christian (CCISCO) (District V, but works in District III)
5.CBO seat 5: Dennisha Marsh (First Five CCC; City of Pittsburg Community Advisory Council) (District
V)
6.Mental Health: Christine Gerchow, PhD. (Psychologist, Juvenile Hall-Martinez) (District IV)
7.Public (At-Large): Harlan Grossman (Past Chair AB 109 CAB, GARE participant) (District II)
During the meeting, it was noted that Ms. Christine Gerchow had an exceptional background in mental
health that would be very beneficial to the Task Force discussions. Ms. Gerchow is a County employee in
the Health Services department working in the juvenile hall. In light of Ms. Gerchow's qualifications, the
Committee voted to recommend her for appointment to the Mental Health representative seat and request
that the full Board remove the requirement that the Mental Health representative not be a County employee.
At the conclusion of the of the meeting, the Committee directed staff to set a special meeting for early
August to consider the final composition of the entire (17) seventeen member Task Force once all names
were received from county departments, school districts, etc. In addition, the Committee recommended
changing the title of the Task Force to the "Racial Justice Task Force", which was determined to be more
reflective of the current efforts to evaluate racial disparities in the local criminal justice system.
On August 15, 2016, the Committee approved nominations for appointment to the Task Force for
consideration by the Board of Supervisors, including a recommendation that the Superior Court designee
seat be a non-voting member of the Task Force at the request of the Superior Court.
On September 13, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved the Task Force. The Task Force will make
reports to the Public Protection Committee, as needed, over the course of its work. For this reason, the
referral should be continued to the 2019 PPC.
On February 5, 2018, the PPC received an update from the Office of Reentry and Justice on the Racial
Justice Task Force.
Attachment A
Page 122 of 127
On June 25, 2018, the PPC received the report "Racial Justice Task Force - Final Report and
Recommendations" and recommended it to be adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
On July 24, 2018, the Board of Supevisors adopted the "Racial Justice Task Force--Final Report and
Recommendations," with the exclusion of recommendations 18 and 19: (18) Establish an independent
grievance process for individuals in custody in County adult detention facilities to report concerns related to
conditions of confinement based on gender, race, religion, and national origin. This process shall not
operate via the Sheriff’s Office or require any review by Sheriff’s Office staff, (19) Establish an
independent monitoring body to oversee conditions of confinement in County adult detention facilities
based on gender, race, religion, and national origin and report back to the Board of Supervisors. The Board
also referred to the Public Protection Committee the matter of an Implementation Plan for FY 2018-19 and
the structure of an Implementation Oversight body and to take input from the Racial Justice Task Force and
the Sheriff’s Department on the recommendations regarding the establishment of an independent grievance
process and independent monitoring body, to report back to the full Board.
On August 6, 2018, the PPC considered the implementation of recommendations from the Task Force and
directed staff to develop a process to identify nominees for appontment to the Racial Justice Oversight
Body. During this meeting the PPC also accepted input from the Office of the Sheriff and members of the
Task Force regarding the 2 recommendations of the Racial Justice Task Force's Final Report. The
Committee directed the Racial Justice Task Force to reconvene to discuss solutions to the conflicts raised
by the Sheriff's Office in regards to these two recommendations.
On September 10, 2018, the PPC received an update on the Racial Justice Task Force which summarized
the Task Force meeting on September 5, 2018 to consider the 2 recommendations noted above.
The Task Force had discussed information regarding other oversight bodies at the County level that were in
existence across the state and had compiled a handout that was shared with the Task Force. The Task Force
Members felt that there were more information to be considered by the Task Force, and that there would be
value in including the Sheriff, or detention facility staff, in future discussions and information sharing prior
to this being reconsidered by the Board of Supervisors. The Committee directed the Task Force to continue
to review these recommendations, including meeting with the Sheriff's Office.
On November 5, 2018, the PPC received an update on the on the Racial Justice Task Force's review of the
2 recommendations opposed by the Sheriff's Office. During its October 2018 meeting, the Racial Justice
Task Force was given a presentation that provided members of the Task Force with key
oversight/monitoring terms, a list of the different forms of monitoring/oversight that occur in detention
facilities, descriptions of various law enforcement monitoring/oversight models, and a selection of reasons
jurisdictions consider having independent oversight/monitoring.
The Task Force then discussed the creation of the small working group with Sheriff staff, and through this
discussion determined they wanted to invite Assistant Sheriff Matthew Schuler to speak with the entire
Task Force prior to forming the smaller working group. Because Assistant Sheriff Schuler is the executive
administrator assigned to the County’s jail, the Task Force believed that this initial discussion with him
would help inform the smaller working group’s conversation, and how it might approach further
consideration of Task Force Recommendations #18 and #19.
On November 13, 2018, PPC interviewed appliacants for seven seats for community based representatives
on the Racial Justice Oversight Body and recommended appointment to the Board of Supervisors
On December 4, 2018, BOS appointed members to the Racial Justice Oversight Body and accepted an
update from the Task Force on recommendations #18 and #19 which stated that the Racial Justice Task
Attachment A
Page 123 of 127
Force voted 10-1 at its meeting on November 14, 2018 to withdraw recommendations #18 and #19 from the
Final Report, recognizing that there is no legal means by which to establish an independent grievance
process for adults in custody in Contra Costa County or to establish an independent monitoring body to
oversee conditions of confinement in County adult detention facilities without the cooperation of the
Sheriff's Office.
An Implementation Plan for the Racial Justice Oversight body has yet to be developed. For this reason, this
topic should remain on referral to the Committee in 2019.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
7. Review of Juvenile Fees assessed by the Probation Department
On July 19, 2016, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Public Protection Committee a review of fees
assessed for services provided while a minor is in the custody of the Probation Department. Welfare and
Institutions Code 903 et seq. provides that the County may assess a fee for the provision of services to a
minor in the custody of its Probation Department. This referral follows a statewide discussion as to whether
or not these fees should be imposed by counties on the parents or legal guardians of minors in the custody
of the County.
On September 26, 2016, the Public Protection Committee accepted an introductory report on the issue and
voted unanimously to refer the issue to the full Board of Supervisors with two separate options: 1) to adopt
a temporary moratorium on the fees and/or 2) refer the issue to the newly formed Racial Justice Task Force
for review.
On, October 25, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved a moratorium on certain juvenile fees and
directed staff to further review the assessment of juvenile fees and report back to the Public Protection
Committee. Ultimately, the Board directed staff and the Committee to return back to the full Board no later
than May 2017 with a recommendation as to whether or not juvenile fees should be permanently repealed.
In 2017, the Committee received several updates related to the repeal of certain juvenile fees assessed by
the County via the Probation Department. Ultimately, the Committee recommended and the Board
approved the full repeal of juvenile cost of care fees at the Juvenile Hall and the Orin Allen Youth
Rehabilitation Facility. The Juvenile Electronic Monitoring (JEM) fee was also repealed. The Committee
also discussed a process by which to refund overpayments made by the guardians of juveniles previously in
the custody of the Probation Department and forwarded the issue to the Board on December 12, 2017. On
December 12, 2017, the Board of Supervisors authorized a refund process to be commenced by the
Probation Department, including the notification of impacted individuals and those that may have been
impacted.
On April 12, 2018, the Committee received an update on Juvenile Electronic Monitoring fees and the
refunding of Juvenile Cost of Care Fees.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
8. County Law Enforcement Participation and Interaction with Federal Immigration
Authorities
On February 7, 2017, the Board of Supervisors referred this issue to the Committee for review. Specifically,
there has been growing public concern around the county, especially among immigrant communities, about
the nature of local law enforcement interaction with federal immigration authorities. This concern has been
Attachment A
Page 124 of 127
increasing due to the current political environment and has impacted the willingness of residents of
immigrant communities to access certain health and social services provided by community-based
organizations. For example, the Executive Director of Early Childhood Mental Health has reported that a
number of Latino families have canceled mental health appointments for their children due to concerns over
being deported.
The Committee introduced this item at the March 6, 2017 meeting and provided direction to staff, including
to continue monitoring Senate Bill 54 (De Leon), which was ultimately passed by the Legislature and
signed into law by Governor Brown, tracking relevant court cases involving the current federal immigration
policies and practices and to return with information regarding the Sheriff's contract to house federal
detainees in County detention facilities, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees.
At the November 2017 meeting, the Committee received an update on this issue, including the status of
current litigation across the country regarding immigration policy and a briefing on the final version of SB
54 (De Leon). County Counsel provided an analysis of policies of the Sheriff's Office and Probation
Department showing against the future requirements of SB 54 to become effective January 1, 2018. The
Committee directed staff to schedule a special meeting for December 2017 to continue this discussion in
advance of the effective date of SB 54 to ensure that the County is in compliance by that time.
On February 5, 2018, staff updated the Committee on various litigation related to immigration across the
nation and reported on the County's compliance with SB 54 following the January 1, 2018 effective date. In
addition, staff reported that the U.S. Department of Justice appears to be satisfied with the County's revised
immigration policy in the Sheriff's Office, which strikes a balance with complying with both federal and
state law. Also, the Public Defender's Office provided an update on efforts to launch the County's Stand
Together Contra Costa program, which provide various services to undocumented residents in the County
seeking assistance. Following discussion, the Committee directed staff to return to return to the next
meeting with information related to the public forum required under the TRUTH Act and a litigation
update.
On April 12, 2018, staff provided an update regarding the TRUTH Act community forum determination
process. In addition, the Committee directed County Counsel to review a letter submitted by the Asian Law
Caucus to Sheriff David Livingston on the evening prior to the meeting regarding the Sheriff's Immigration
Status Policy.
On May 23, 2018, staff provided an update regarding the due diligence process undertaken to determine
whether or not the County was required to hold a TRUTH Act community forum. Staff informed the
Committee that, based on responses from County department heads, it is necessary to hold a community
forum and the forum had been scheduled for Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 2:00PM.
On June 25, 2018, staff provided an update on the TRUTH Act community forum, specifically with regard
to the format. In addition, County Counsel updated the Committee on the various litigation items still
outstanding throughout the country related to immigration.
On August 6, 2018, staff provided a follow up on the TRUTH Act community forum, including the request
of the Sheriff's Office to provide further details on the 63 individuals that the U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) was provided information about. Staff also provided additional detail about
the types of exempt offenses that would allow local law enforcement to provide information about an
individual to ICE. County Counsel updated the Committee on the various litigation items still outstanding
throughout the country related to immigration.
At the September and November meetings, County Counsel provided updates on various litigation items
still outstanding throughout the county related to immigration.
Attachment A
Page 125 of 127
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
9. Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council
On February 13, 2018, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Committee a review of the production of
the County's Multi-Agency Juvenile Justice Plan. The plan is due to the state on May 1 of each year, as a
condition of Contra Costa’s annual funding through the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) and
Youthful Offender Block Grant (YOBG). For Contra Costa County, this amounts to over $8 million in
annual funding specifically for juvenile justice activities.
In 2018, the Committee accepted an introductory report on the County's Multi-Agency Juvenile Justice Plan
and the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council and a summary of the Juvenile Justice Commission (JJC),
the Delinquency Prevention Commission (DPC) and the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council (JJCC).
During the October 2018 meeting, the Committee noted that the County has two advisory bodies that are
charged with similar duties, specifically, the Delinquency Prevention Commission and the Juvenile Justice
Coordinating Council, and directed staff to return to the Board of Supervisors to combine the functions of
the DPC and JJCC. Also during the October 2018 meeting, the committee reviewed the composition of the
JJCC and recommended that the JJCC consist of the following:
Chief Probation Officer,
District Attorney's Office representative,
Public Defender's Office representative,
Sheriff's Office representative,
Board of Supervisors representative,
Employment and Human Services Department representative,
Behavior Health representative,
County Alcohol and Drugs representative,
City Police Department Representative,
County Office of Education or a school district representative,
County Public Health representative, and
Eight community-based seats, including a minimum of two representing youth-serving
community-based organizations and two youth-aged community representatives (14-21
years old).
On December 4, 2018, the Board of Supervisors introduced Ordinance 2018-30 to dissolve the Delinquency
Prevention Commission, adopted Resolution 2018/597 to add seats and duties to Juvenile Justice
Coordinating Council, and terminated the referral to the Committee on this topic. On December 18, 2018,
Ordinance 2018-30 was adopted.
Recommendation: No action required.
10. Review of Banning Gun Shows at the County Fairgrounds
On October 9, 2018, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Public Protection Committee the topic of
banning gun shows at the Contra Costa County Fairgrounds and a review of regulations governing the
purchase and sale of guns at gun shows.
On November 5, 2018, the Committee received an introduction to the referral and directed staff to forward
Attachment A
Page 126 of 127
to the full Board of Supervisors a letter to the Board of the Contra Costa County Fairgrounds outlining the
County's concerns of hosting gun shows at the fairgrounds, including a request to ban gun shows at the
fairgrounds.
On December 4, 2018, the Board of Supervisors authorized Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign a
letter to the 23rd Agricultural Association to convey the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors'
support of a policy prohibiting the possession and sale of firearms on the Contra Costa County Fairgrounds.
The Board of the Fairgrounds has not responded. For this reason, this topic should remain on referral to the
Committee in 2019.
Recommendation: REFER to the 2019 PPC
LIST OF ITEMS TO BE REFERRED TO THE
2019 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Welfare fraud investigation and prosecution
Multilingual capabilities of the telephone emergency notification system/Community
Warning System Contracts
County support and coordination of non-profit organization resources to provide
prisoner re-entry services and implementation of AB109 public safety realignment
Inmate Welfare Fund/Telecommunications/Visitation Issues
Opportunities to improve coordination of response to disasters and other public
emergencies
Racial Justice Oversight Body Implementation
Review of juvenile fees assessed by the Probation Department
County Law Enforcement Participation and Interaction with Federal Immigration
Authorities
Review of Banning Gun Shows at the County Fairgrounds
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Board of Supervisors will not receive the annual report from the 2018 Public Protection Committee.
Attachment A
Page 127 of 127