Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 02032020 - PPC Agenda PktPUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE February 3, 2020 10:30 A.M. 651 Pine Street, Room 107, Martinez Supervisor Candace Andersen, 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 December 2, 2019 meeting. (Page 4) 4.CONSIDER reviewing and approving the fiscal year 2020/21 AB 109 budget proposal, as recommended by the Community Corrections Partnership-Executive Committee. (Paul Reyes, Committee Staff) (Page 8) 5.CONSIDER recommending nominees for appointment to the CY2020 Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and CY2020 Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee. (Paul Reyes, Committee Staff) (Page 51) 6.CONSIDER approving the calendar year 2019 Public Protection Committee Annual Report for submission to the Board of Supervisors. (Paul Reyes, Committee Staff) (Page 59) 7.The next meeting is currently scheduled for February 24, 2020. 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 paul.reyes@cao.cccounty.us PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE - SPECIAL MEETING 3. Meeting Date:02/03/2020 Subject:RECORD OF ACTION - December 2, 2019 Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: RECORD OF ACTION - December 2, 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 the Committee's December 2, 2019 meeting. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): APPROVE Record of Action from the December 2, 2019 meeting. Fiscal Impact (if any): No fiscal impact. This item is informational only. Attachments Record of Action - Dec 2, 2019 Page 4 of 76 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE RECORD OF ACTION FOR December 2, 2019   Supervisor John Gioia, Chair Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair   Present: John Gioia, Chair      Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair    Staff Present: Paul Reyes, Committee Staff; David Twa, County Administrator                   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 November 4, 2019 meeting.      Approved as presented.    AYE: Chair John Gioia   Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  4.CONSIDER applications submitted to the Clerk of the Board for the vacant seat on the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP). 1. INTERVIEW applicants for the vacant victims' representative seat on the CCP. 2. CONSIDER making nominations to the Board of Supervisors at their December 17, 2019 meeting to fill the vacancy on the CCP. 3.       The Public Protection Committee nominated Shannon Mahoney to the Board of Supervisors to fill the the vacant victims' representative seat on the Community Corrections Partnership.    AYE: Chair John Gioia   Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  5.ACCEPT an update on the implementation of a moratorium on the1.   Page 5 of 76 5.ACCEPT an update on the implementation of a moratorium on the collection and assessment of certain criminal justice fees assessed by the County; and 1. CONSIDER directing staff to return to the Board of Supervisors to provide the Summary Report on criminal justice fees, authorize the County Administrator's Office to request the Superior Court to incur the necessary expenses to implement the moratorium, to request direction on backfill funding; and to consider approving a revised the moratorium resolution. 2. Approved as presented, with the following direction given to staff: 1. Return to the Board of Supervisors to continue the moratorium and request approval to notify the Court to proceed with the necessary programing to implement the moratorium. AYE: Chair John Gioia  Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  6.PROVIDE input and direction to staff on the draft Racial Equity Action Plan. Approved as presented, with the following direction given to staff: 1. Receive input from the Racial Justice Oversight Body on the plan; 2. The plan will be referrred to the County Administrator's Office for a financial analysis and to address any other potential issues prior to bring the plan to the Board of Supervisors. AYE: Chair John Gioia  Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  7.RECEIVE a presentation on Contra Costa County - A Place to Thrive and PROVIDE direction to staff. Approved as presented, with the following direction given to staff: 1. Employment and Human Services will lead on applying for the Gateways 4 Growth grant and will work with the County Administrator's Office to bring this item to the Board of Supervisors for approval. 2. The staff report to the Board of Supervisors will include an analysis of the staff time required by the grant. AYE: Chair John Gioia  Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  8.1. RECOMMEND the Board of Supervisors Award $300,000 from the Local Innovation Fund to Rubicon Programs for an Evening Connections Program, and 2. DIRECT staff to take appropriate action for the use of Local Innovation Fund revenue. Page 6 of 76  Approved as presented.    AYE: Chair John Gioia   Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  9.The next meeting is to be determined.   10.Adjourn    Adjourned - 12:27 PM        For Additional Information Contact:  Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1096, Fax (925) 646-1353 paul.reyes@cao.cccounty.us Page 7 of 76 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE - SPECIAL MEETING 4. Meeting Date:02/03/2020 Subject:FY 2020/21 CCP RECOMMENDED BUDGET Submitted For: PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE,  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 30, 2019, budget instructions for the FY 2020/21 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 18, 2019. This year’s budget submission process remains unchanged and continues to illustrate 1) the FY 2019/20 Budget, 2) the "baseline" budget (i.e. the cost of simply maintaining the current level of service in 2020/21 dollars), and 3) a "program modification" budget to reflect any proposed program additions or deletions for the upcoming year. All budget requests have been included in a detailed summary (Attachment C) and each individual request has been compiled and attached to this staff report (Attachment D). On November 1, 2019, the CCP held a workshop, giving departments and funded agencies an opportunity to present and discuss budget proposals. Subsequently, a final vote of the CCP-Executive Committee was held on December 6, 2019. The budget approved by the CCP has been submitted to the Public Protection Committee for review and approval at today's meeting.  Referral Update: On December 6, 2019, the CCP-Executive Committee approved a Recommended Budget for fiscal year 2020/21 for consideration by the Public Protection Committee. A summary of the final Recommended Budget and all budget submissions are included in today's packet for references (Attachments C and D, respectively). Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): REVIEW and APPROVE the fiscal year 2020/21 AB 109 budget proposal, as recommended by the Community Corrections Partnership - Executive Committee. Fiscal Impact (if any): The fiscal year 2019/20 ongoing AB 109 Budget is $29,858,546 which is composed of Page 8 of 76 The fiscal year 2019/20 ongoing AB 109 Budget is $29,858,546 which is composed of $29,358,546 approved by the CCP and an additional allocation of $500,000 to fund the Stand Together CoCo program in the Public Defender's Office from the AB 109 fund balance. Based on the fiscal year 2019/20 Governor’s Enacted Budget, Contra Costa County is expected to receive $26,587,000 in fiscal year 2019/20 in Base allocation funding. The County has received fiscal year 2018/19 Growth allocation (paid in fiscal year 2019/20) in the amount of $1,152,872, 10% of which will be transferred to the Local Innovation account (pursuant to Government Code section 30029.07(b), effectively reducing our Growth allocation by $115,287 to $1,037,585. Since the new Growth formula is permanent for the foreseeable future and many factors are based on year-over-year performance, future Growth allocation will continue to be difficult to estimate. A detailed calculation of the Contra Costa Growth formula allocation is included in Attachment A. As proposed, the FY 2019/20 CCP Recommended Budget would increase expenditure appropriations by $1.6 million, from $29,858,546 to $31,466,788. The Governor's Proposed Budget includes an estimated increase to the County's Base allocation of $720,213 from $26,587,000 to $27,435,000. This figure will likely change in the May Revision and Enacted Budgets.  Attachments Attachment A - CSAC Historical Base & Growth Allocations by County (FY 2014-19) Attachment B - FY 2020/21 AB 109 Budget Schedule Attachment C - FY 2020/21 Budget Request Summary Attachment D - FY 2020/21 Budget Requests Page 9 of 76 2014-2019 Community Corrections 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 2018-19 Base 2018-19 Growth 2019-20 Base* 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$ 48,375,402$ 1,979,224$ 50,396,055$ Alpine $ 167,152 $ 13,366 $ 224,809 3,481$ 235,787$ 4,595$ 251,913$ 5,369$ 266,149$ 11,982$ 277,266$ Amador $ 1,368,104 $ 516,243 $ 1,378,795 382,541$ 1,446,128$ 75,669$ 1,545,035$ 34,647$ 1,632,342$ 124,585$ 1,700,525$ Butte $ 6,466,722 $ 1,697,507 $ 6,931,223 219,961$ 7,269,708$ 552,340$ 7,766,913$ 259,439$ 8,205,809$ 280,488$ 8,548,568$ Calaveras $ 992,402 $ 255,449 $ 1,114,713 90,663$ 1,169,150$ 54,214$ 1,249,113$ 788,456$ 1,319,699$ 32,586$ 1,374,823$ Colusa $ 589,667 $ 243,850 $ 693,231 20,003$ 727,085$ 49,694$ 776,813$ 61,480$ 820,710$ 15,558$ 854,991$ 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$ 24,661,862$ 1,152,872$ 25,691,995$ Del Norte $ 721,629 $ 436,564 $ 983,957 47,756$ 1,032,008$ 61,952$ 1,102,591$ 28,279$ 1,164,897$ 20,396$ 1,213,555$ El Dorado $ 3,586,615 $ 1,818,367 $ 3,614,643 234,813$ 3,791,163$ 222,252$ 4,050,456$ 172,912$ 4,279,341$ 257,539$ 4,458,090$ Fresno $ 24,164,305 $ 2,558,069 $ 32,711,894 941,281$ 34,309,372$ 2,975,703$ 36,655,930$ 1,920,436$ 38,727,298$ 912,709$ 40,344,947$ Glenn $ 846,022 $ 134,849 $ 1,153,582 321,454$ 1,209,917$ 100,668$ 1,292,668$ 176,369$ 1,365,715$ 34,461$ 1,422,761$ Humboldt $ 3,695,189 $ 806,028 $ 4,330,130 356,079$ 4,541,591$ 140,475$ 4,852,209$ 300,685$ 5,126,400$ 103,323$ 5,340,531$ Imperial $ 3,501,228 $ 409,231 $ 4,777,351 218,106$ 5,010,652$ 565,417$ 5,353,350$ 390,492$ 5,655,860$ 424,651$ 5,892,107$ Inyo $ 541,209 $ 61,046 $ 691,756 46,526$ 725,537$ 56,564$ 775,160$ 248,762$ 818,963$ 33,376$ 853,171$ 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$ 42,743,840$ 1,333,016$ 44,529,261$ Kings $ 6,894,852 $ 2,618,439 $ 6,948,733 652,823$ 7,288,072$ 843,929$ 7,786,533$ 278,805$ 8,226,538$ 663,267$ 8,570,162$ Lake $ 1,934,887 $ 192,832 $ 2,497,419 105,656$ 2,619,380$ 112,486$ 2,798,530$ 569,592$ 2,956,670$ 56,977$ 3,080,171$ Lassen $ 1,080,925 $ 185,516 $ 1,358,884 152,545$ 1,425,245$ 54,397$ 1,522,723$ 220,498$ 1,608,770$ 249,388$ 1,675,969$ Los Angeles $ 290,538,549 $ 23,778,008 $ 344,481,162 17,755,186$ 361,303,819$ 22,298,545$ 386,014,858$ 12,317,969$ 407,827,941$ 9,641,642$ 424,863,024$ Madera $ 4,087,031 $ 640,018 $ 5,576,210 318,582$ 5,848,523$ 639,914$ 6,248,528$ 602,411$ 6,601,622$ 314,987$ 6,877,374$ Marin $ 4,900,330 $ 2,569,053 $ 4,938,624 182,798$ 5,179,800$ 408,743$ 5,534,068$ 260,189$ 5,846,790$ 457,849$ 6,091,011$ Mariposa $ 472,956 $ 92,075 $ 566,924 169,734$ 594,610$ 16,152$ 635,278$ 51,140$ 671,176$ 113,240$ 699,212$ Mendocino $ 2,205,821 $ 711,297 $ 2,322,880 156,857$ 2,436,317$ 79,842$ 2,602,947$ 886,932$ 2,750,035$ 137,047$ 2,864,905$ Merced $ 5,692,045 $ 1,444,201 $ 7,763,704 539,041$ 8,142,842$ 714,281$ 8,699,764$ 336,045$ 9,191,374$ 262,041$ 9,575,300$ Modoc $ 235,208 $ 45,018 $ 321,108 88,070$ 336,789$ 15,502$ 359,823$ 26,290$ 380,156$ 38,251$ 396,036$ Mono $ 428,294 $ 70,606 $ 584,103 44,113$ 612,628$ 64,198$ 654,528$ 37,940$ 691,514$ 26,130$ 720,399$ Monterey $ 8,633,838 $ 844,532 $ 11,159,775 647,463$ 11,704,760$ 756,797$ 12,505,297$ 385,741$ 13,211,951$ 453,955$ 13,763,818$ Napa $ 2,673,402 $ 551,811 $ 3,240,370 676,311$ 3,398,613$ 283,400$ 3,631,058$ 185,871$ 3,836,243$ 494,904$ 3,996,484$ Nevada $ 1,918,350 $ 783,916 $ 1,933,341 80,310$ 2,027,755$ 194,020$ 2,166,441$ 204,494$ 2,288,864$ 256,550$ 2,384,470$ 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$ 83,836,006$ 4,943,222$ 87,337,859$ Placer $ 6,659,794 $ 1,930,434 $ 7,176,968 259,768$ 7,527,454$ 636,454$ 8,042,287$ 588,898$ 8,496,744$ 252,022$ 8,851,655$ Plumas $ 551,023 $ 197,629 $ 609,538 59,307$ 639,305$ 25,139$ 683,029$ 30,491$ 721,626$ 44,947$ 751,769$ 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$ 77,120,709$ 1,975,146$ 80,342,062$ 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$ 49,216,898$ 4,519,457$ 51,272,701$ San Benito $ 1,203,382 $ 428,214 $ 1,593,050 203,766$ 1,670,846$ 143,765$ 1,785,122$ 163,847$ 1,885,997$ 143,408$ 1,964,775$ 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$ 99,126,118$ 1,682,258$ 103,266,642$ 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$ 81,047,901$ 1,856,503$ 84,433,293$ 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$ 24,103,864$ 2,555,802$ 25,110,688$ 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$ 25,469,483$ 1,653,065$ 26,533,350$ San Luis Obispo $ 5,644,308 $ 545,788 $ 7,164,312 284,364$ 7,514,180$ 691,713$ 8,028,105$ 288,366$ 8,481,761$ 254,652$ 8,836,046$ San Mateo $ 14,450,429 $ 5,863,388 $ 14,563,353 885,694$ 15,274,551$ 956,884$ 16,319,240$ 987,971$ 17,241,414$ 1,654,467$ 17,961,592$ Santa Barbara $ 8,657,369 $ 1,118,182 $ 11,078,836 551,843$ 11,619,868$ 993,525$ 12,414,598$ 760,393$ 13,116,127$ 590,980$ 13,663,991$ 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$ 48,911,010$ 1,593,405$ 50,954,036$ Santa Cruz $ 5,637,055 $ 748,732 $ 6,832,189 612,916$ 7,165,838$ 764,181$ 7,655,938$ 643,431$ 8,088,563$ 775,738$ 8,426,425$ Shasta $ 6,741,871 $ 2,487,750 $ 6,794,556 342,732$ 7,126,367$ 256,950$ 7,613,768$ 1,093,649$ 8,044,010$ 193,179$ 8,380,010$ Sierra $ 178,831 $ 91,603 $ 231,033 5,697$ 242,315$ 16,329$ 258,888$ 35,271$ 273,517$ 3,225$ 284,942$ Siskiyou $ 1,110,942 $ 356,271 $ 1,296,058 52,299$ 1,359,351$ 86,398$ 1,452,322$ 427,770$ 1,534,390$ 57,783$ 1,598,482$ Solano $ 9,077,651 $ 3,143,755 $ 10,466,801 402,396$ 10,977,944$ 386,517$ 11,728,771$ 297,427$ 12,391,545$ 490,823$ 12,909,143$ Sonoma $ 9,657,516 $ 4,530,253 $ 9,732,986 371,092$ 10,208,294$ 604,266$ 10,906,481$ 496,743$ 11,522,789$ 3,457,472$ 12,004,099$ 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$ 21,031,663$ 512,256$ 21,910,161$ Sutter $ 2,692,639 $ 1,024,819 $ 2,713,681 287,448$ 2,846,203$ 161,826$ 3,040,867$ 225,183$ 3,212,701$ 737,851$ 3,346,897$ Tehama $ 2,824,325 $ 3,101,850 $ 2,846,396 46,705$ 2,985,399$ 266,558$ 3,189,582$ 1,219,295$ 3,369,821$ 352,296$ 3,510,579$ ATTACHMENT A Page 10 of 76 2014-2019 Community Corrections 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 2018-19 Base 2018-19 Growth 2019-20 Base* Trinity $ 427,173 $ 220,005 $ 580,154 26,124$ 608,486$ 27,350$ 650,103$ 62,243$ 686,839$ 12,094$ 715,529$ Tulare $ 12,723,594 $ 2,227,867 $ 15,875,860 587,520$ 16,651,153$ 1,502,507$ 17,789,994$ 1,030,339$ 18,795,278$ 1,060,021$ 19,580,361$ Tuolumne $ 1,389,149 $ 183,692 $ 1,776,122 133,987$ 1,862,858$ 145,887$ 1,990,266$ 123,527$ 2,102,733$ 676,050$ 2,190,565$ Ventura $ 16,115,645 $ 6,183,310 $ 16,300,317 439,395$ 17,096,339$ 931,118$ 18,265,628$ 468,066$ 19,297,789$ 2,647,900$ 20,103,863$ Yolo $ 6,506,453 $ 3,279,053 $ 6,689,128 221,316$ 7,015,790$ 644,623$ 7,495,628$ 347,977$ 7,919,194$ 132,618$ 8,249,981$ Yuba $ 2,424,248 $ 1,447,764 $ 2,443,192 126,925$ 2,562,505$ 70,526$ 2,737,765$ 206,351$ 2,892,472$ 57,246$ 3,013,291$ 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$ 1,311,192,889$ 54,768,879$ 1,365,961,768$ Note: 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 estimate 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. *2019-20 Base is an estimate ATTACHMENT A Page 11 of 76 May 17, 2019 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= $30,434 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 $30,434 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. There is a cap of 10% of the overall growth funding 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 overall population. 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 12 of 76 2nd Strikers - 2017 2nd Strikers - 2016 Reduction 2nd striker share 2nd striker $ Contra Costa 42 45 3 0 91,302$ California 9843 9,148 151 100%4,595,534$ 2017 Probation Popualtion Revoked to Jail or Prison Successes Statewide Share $ Contra Costa 3,168 79 3,089 1.23%368,977$ California 266,815 14,791 252,024 100%30,104,007$ 2017 Failure Rate 2016 Failure Rate Improvement # of Probationers Improvement Represents Statewide Share $ Contra Costa 2.49%2.65%0.15%4.81 1.80%180,557$ California 5.54%5.05%0.00%267 100%10,034,669$ Incarcerated from County - 2017 Incarcerated from County - 2016 Incarcerated from County - Difference Incarceration Reduction Statewide Share $ Contra Costa 462 376 22.87%- 0.00%-$ California 37,173 35,712 4.09%645 100%5,017,335$ County Population Incarceration Rate - 2017 Rate Below Statewide Prisoners Fewer Because Lower Statewide Share $ Contra Costa 1,139,746 0.04%0.05%610.48 10.21%512,035$ California 39,504,609 0.09%5,981.95 100%5,017,335$ Statewide Share Total Growth $ Contra Costa 2.1050%1,152,872$ California 100.00%54,768,879$ Tuesday, October 1, 2019 Total Contra Costa County's 2018-19 Community Corrections Growth 2nd Striker Reduction ($30,434 per) Felony Probation Success (60%) Felony Probation Improvement (20%) Incarceration Reduction (10%) Low Incarceration Rate (10%) ATTACHMENT A Page 13 of 76 ATTACHMENT B Major Activity Due Date CCP Date PPC Date BOS Date Completed? Distribute 2020/21 CCP Budget Packet 9/30  Departments Submit Preliminary Budget Proposals 10/18  November 2019 CCP Agenda Packet Published 10/25  November 2019 CCP Meeting - Budget Workshop 11/1 December 2019 CCP Agenda Packet Published 11/29 December 2019 CCP Meeting - Budget Deliberations 12/6 Public Protection Comm. Agenda Packet Published 1/29 Public Protection Comm. - CCP Budget Discussion 2/3 County Budget Materials Due from Departments 2/7 County Recommended Budget available 4/1 Board of Supervisors Budget Hearings 4/21 County Budget Adoption 5/12 as of January, 29 2019 FY 2020/21 CCP Budget Schedule     Page 14 of 76 Attachment C 2019/20 ONGOING BASELINE +PROG. MOD.=TOTAL REQUEST PROGRAM EXPENDITURES Sheriff Salaries & Benefits 7,321,484 7,451,844 291,805 7,743,649 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 30,538 274,188 Inmate Welfare Fund re: FCC Ruling 800,000 800,000 197,315 997,315 Sheriff Total 8,996,884 9,127,244 519,658 9,646,902 Probation Salaries & Benefits 2,794,803 2,932,605 - 2,932,605 Operating Costs 182,896 127,657 - 127,657 Salaries & Benefits-Pre-Trial Services Program 813,314 852,349 - 852,349 Operating Costs-Pre-Trial Services Program 81,083 69,000 - 69,000 Probation Total 3,872,096 3,981,611 - 3,981,611 Behavioral Health Salaries & Benefits1 1,090,798 1,123,522 227,234 1,350,756 Occupancy Costs 38,752 38,752 38,752 Contracts 1,113,962 1,113,962 (800) 1,113,162 Vehicle Purchase and Maintenance 24,948 24,948 24,948 Travel 9,200 9,200 800 10,000 Behavioral Health Total 2,277,660 2,310,384 227,234 2,537,618 Health Services--Health, Housing, & Homeless Salaries & Benefits 137,432 141,557 141,557 Operating Costs 116,000 130,130 130,130 Health, Housing & Homeless Total 253,432 271,687 - 271,687 Health Services--Detention Health Services Sal & Ben-Fam Nurse, WCD/MCD 235,168 282,437 - 282,437 Salaries & Benefits-LVN, WCD 316,673 327,440 327,440 Salaries & Benefits-RN, MCD 534,854 556,848 556,848 Sal & Ben-MH Clinic. Spec., WCD/MCD 134,565 143,177 143,177 Detention Health Services Total 1,221,260 1,309,902 - 1,309,902 Public Defender Sal & Ben-Clean Slate/Client Support 664,637 691,222 691,222 Sal & Ben-ACER Program 932,866 970,180 970,180 Sal & Ben-Reentry Coordination 368,376 331,236 331,236 Sal & Ben-Failure to Appear (FTA) Program 541,186 767,235 767,235 Sal & Ben-Pre-Trial Services Program 317,084 329,767 329,767 Stand Together CoCo 500,000 500,000 500,000 Operating/Capital Costs 35,011 36,907 28,000 64,907 Public Defender Total2 3,359,160 3,626,547 28,000 3,654,547 District Attorney Salaries & Benefits-Victim Witness Prgrm 105,452 109,303 - 109,303 Salaries & Benefits-Arraignment Prgrm 703,125 730,149 - 730,149 Salaries & Benefits-Reentry/DV Prgrm 703,934 730,622 - 730,622 Salaries & Benefits-Conviction Integrity - - - Salaries & Benefits-Neighborhood Courts 90,000 93,233 93,233 Salaries & Benefits-ACER Clerk 69,719 72,141 72,141 Salaries & Benefits-Gen'l Clerk 61,883 63,991 63,991 Salaries & Benefits-Realignment Clerk 24,940 25,808 25,808 Operating Costs 67,006 70,000 70,000 Operating Costs - Neighborhood Courts 60,000 60,000 60,000 District Attorney Total 1,886,059 1,955,246 - 1,955,246 AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM FY 2020/21 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY (Approved by the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) on December 6, 2019)1 2020/21 BUDGET REQUEST Page 15 of 76 Attachment C 2019/20 ONGOING BASELINE +PROG. MOD.=TOTAL REQUEST PROGRAM EXPENDITURES AB 109 PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM FY 2020/21 CCP TOTAL REQUEST SUMMARY (Approved by the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) on December 6, 2019)1 2020/21 BUDGET REQUEST EHSD - Re-Entry Systems Salaries & Benefits 106,966 110,175 110,175 Operating Costs 37,438 41,866 41,866 EHSD Total 144,404 152,041 - 152,041 EHSD-- Workforce Development Board Salaries & Benefits 204,000 212,000 - 212,000 Travel 4,000 4,160 - 4,160 EHSD-WDB Total 208,000 216,160 - 216,160 County Administrator/Office of Reentry and Justice Salaries & Benefits - Prog. Admin 481,832 522,785 7,017 529,802 Salaries & Benefits - Research and Evaluation 189,563 189,563 - 189,563 Ceasefire Program Contract 119,000 119,000 - 119,000 Data Evaluation & Systems Planning - - - - Operating Costs 47,520 51,020 49,000 100,020 CAO/ORJ Total3 837,915 882,368 56,017 938,385 CCC Police Chief's Association Salaries and Benefits-AB109 Task Force 587,180 610,667 - 610,667 Salaries and Benefits-MHET Teams (3)440,385 458,000 - 458,000 CCC Police Chiefs' Total 1,027,565 1,068,667 - 1,068,667 Community Programs Employment Support and Placement Srvcs 2,283,000 2,283,000 2,283,000 Network System of Services 979,000 979,000 979,000 Reentry Success Center 546,335 546,335 33,665 580,000 Short and Long-Term Housing Access 1,322,000 1,272,000 1,272,000 Legal Services 157,000 157,000 157,000 Mentoring and Family Reunification 209,000 209,000 209,000 Connections to Resources 15,000 15,000 5,000 20,000 CAB Support (via ORJ)3,031 3,031 (31) 3,000 Salesforce Licensing 34,000 34,000 (34,000) - Community Programs Total 5,548,366 5,498,366 4,634 5,503,000 Superior Court Salaries and Benefits - Pretrial 225,745 231,021 - 231,021 Superior Court Total 225,745 231,021 - 231,021 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 29,858,546 30,631,245 835,543 31,466,788 Notes: 2. Public Defender's original proposal did not include funding for Stand Together Contra Costa (STCC). STCC funding was previously approved by the BOS and FY 19/20 is the last year approved for funding. FY 20/21 funding request in the amount of $500,000 has been is included for STCC. 3. ORJ budget as listed includes costs associated with the Community Corrections subaccount only. 1. Subsequent to CCP approval, the County Administrator's Office added $146,000 to the Behavioral Health budget in order to fund a Mental Health Clinical Specialist to work with the Sheriff's Office MHET deputy. Page 16 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - - Sergeant Staff Supervision 3.1 327,366 1.00 $331,430 1.00 331,430 1.00 Deputy Sheriff Inmate Management & MHET 3.1 5,763,920 20.00 $5,896,097 20.00 291,805 1.00 6,187,902 21.00 Sheriff's Specialist Alternative Custody progrms 3.1 456,249 3.00 $467,202 3.00 467,202 3.00 Senior Clerk Data and Admin Support 3.1 252,096 2.00 $239,091 2.00 239,091 2.00 ASA III Administrative Support 5.1 182,727 1.00 $179,026 1.00 179,026 1.00 DSW Additional Cleaning/Maintenance 3.1 214,472 2.00 $213,645 2.00 213,645 2.00 Lead Cook Food Prep.3.1 124,654 1.00 $125,352 1.00 125,352 1.00 - - Subtotal 7,321,484 30.00 7,451,844 30.00 291,805 1.00 7,743,649$ 31.00 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$ 30,538 274,188 Program Services Inmate Program Services 800,000 800,000.00$ 197,315 997,315 - - - - - Subtotal 1,675,400 1,675,400 227,853 1,903,253$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 8,996,884$ 30.00 9,127,244$ 30.00 519,658$ 1.00 9,646,902$ 31.00 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Sheriff Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3 2020/21 Total Funding Request ATTACHMENT D Page 17 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE:The above funding requests reflect a maintenance of 18/19 staffing, operations and programs, with no request for capital costsDEPARTMENT: Sheriff2019/20 Baseline RequestFY 2019‐2020 SERGEANT (1)Maintains same staffing approved for 18‐19; increased personnel costs reflect a 5% rise in projected salary and benefits costsFY 2019‐2020 DEPUTY SHERIFF (17)* Facilities, (2) Transportation, (1) Classification, (1) Behaviorial Health Court (1) MHETIncreases deputy staffing by one for the MHET team; increased personnel costs reflect a 5% rise in projected salary and benefits costs*(17) = (5) MDF + (2) MDF freetime; (5) WCDF + (2) WCDF freetime + (2) WCDF female freetime + (1) MHETMHET‐ A mobile response deputy for services to emphasize a coordinated approach with the mental health system of care in order to provide local communities with a range of psychiatric and case management serviceFY 2019‐2020 SPECIALIST (3)Maintains same staffing approved for 18‐19; increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costsFY 2019‐2020 SENIOR CLERK (2)Maintains same staffing approved for 18‐19; increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costsFY 2019‐2020 ASA III ‐ Inmate Programs (1)Maintains same staffing approved for 18‐19; increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costsFY 2019‐2020 DETENTION SERVICE WORKER ‐ DSW (2)Maintains same staffing approved for 18‐19; increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costsFY 2019‐2020 LEAD COOK (1)Maintains same staffing approved for 18‐19; increased personnel costs reflect a 3% rise in projected salary and benefits costsFY 2019‐2020 Food/Clothing/HouseholdFunding 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 2019‐2020 Monitoring CostsThese 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 2019‐2020 IT SupportThe 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 DivisionFY 2019‐2020 Behavioral Health CourtThis 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 2019‐2020 Program Administration CostsMen and Women of Purpose has an increase of $30,538 to expand their services with an additional weekly work group meeting at WCDF and to cover a 4% COLA. FY 2019‐2020 Program ServicesIn Fiscal Year 2019‐2020 $800,000 in AB109 funding was allocated to Inmate Services to defray costs of inmate jail programs. Due to the increased programs costs, as well as the addition of one fulltime Re‐entry Employment Specialist, the Office of the Sheriff is requesting an additional $197,315 in AB109 funding for FY 2020‐2021.The Office of the Sheriff has signed a nonrevenue generating contract with Global Tel*Link (GTL.) The requested $997,315 in AB109 funds offsets the loss of revenue from commissions The Office of the Sheriff is no longer receiving with the current GTL contract.CCCOE is asking for a $197,315 increase for the 2020‐2021 operating budget.  The following reasons justify the requested CCCOE increase:3% cost of living adjustment8% health increaseStaff step and longevity increasesA second COPE Parenting Program FacilitatorAdditional $2,000 allocated for substitutes based on usage in the 2018‐2019 school yearA Re‐Entry Employment Specialist will bridge the gap from jail, pre and post release, to employers, pre‐apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs, and other work based training or employment. ATTACHMENT DPage 18 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS Director Field Services Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 30,238 0.10 31,750 0.10 31,750 0.10 Probation Manager Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 55,695 0.20 58,480 0.20 58,480 0.20 Probation Supervisor I Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 241,437 1.00 253,509 1.00 253,509 1.00 Deputy Probation Officer III Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 2,343,030 12.00 2,460,182 12.00 2,460,182 12.00 DPO III Overtime Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 27,413 N/A 28,784 N/A 28,784 N/A Clerk Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 87,152 1.00 89,767 1.00 89,767 1.00 IT Support Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 9,838 0.06 10,133 0.06 10,133 0.06 Subtotal 2,794,803 14.36 2,932,605 14.36 - - 2,932,605$ 14.36 OPERATING COSTS Office Expense Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 1,590 500 500 Communication Costs Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 11,244 4,500 4,500 Minor Furniture/Equipment Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 31,794 8,000 8,000 Minor Computer Equipment Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 2,624 2,500 2,500 Food Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 4,500 6,000 6,000 Client Expenses/Incentives Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 16,000 3,500 3,500 Contracts Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 - - - Data Processing Services/Supplies Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 8,400 10,716 10,716 Travel/Training Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 16,796 8,000 8,000 Warrant Pick-up Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 - - - Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses (Post-release Community Supervision 5.1 89,948 83,941 83,941 Subtotal 182,896 127,657 - 127,657$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME) - - Subtotal - - - - Total 2,977,699$ 14.36 3,060,262$ 14.36 -$ - 3,060,262$ 14.36 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Probation 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 19 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. DEPARTMENT: Probation 2020/21 Baseline Request The Probation Department's proposed FY 2020/21 allocation of $3,060,262 will provide the following level of service: Salary and Benefit costs of $2,932,605 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 to 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 $127,657 are requested for: · Ongoing vehicle maintenance, equipment, travel, training, communication costs, data processing services, incentives for probation clients including bus/BART tickets and food for weekly "Thinking for a Change" meetings. 2020/21 Program Modification Request Probation is not requesting any modifications for FY 2020/21 ATTACHMENT D Page 20 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - Deputy Probation Officer III Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 731,799 4.00 768,389 4.00 768,389 4.00 Clerk Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 81,515 1.00 83,960 1.00 83,960 1.00 Legal Assistant (Moved to Public Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 317,084 3.00 - - - - Defender Budget in FY 2020-21) Subtotal 1,130,398 8.00 852,349 5.00 - - 852,349$ 5.00 OPERATING COSTS Office Expense Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 2,100 - - Travel/Training Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 11,000 6,000 6,000 Contract Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 57,000 45,000 45,000 Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses (ISF)Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 10,983 18,000 18,000 Subtotal 81,083 69,000 - 69,000$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME) - - Subtotal - - - - Total 1,211,481$ 8.00 921,349$ 5.00 -$ - 921,349$ 5.00 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Probation/Pre-Trial 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 21 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. 2020/21 Baseline Request The Pre-Trial Program's proposed FY 2020/21 allocation of $921,349 will provide the following level of service: Salary and Benefit costs of $852,349 are requested for: · Four (4) FTE Probation Officers · One (1) FTE Clerk Operating costs of $69,000 are requested for: · One-year contract in the amount of $45,000 for Pre-Trial program evaluation. · $18,000 for Annual Vehicle Operating Expenses. · $6,000 for Travel & Training. 2020/21 Program Modification Request Probation/Pre-Trial is not requesting any modifications for FY 2020/21. DEPARTMENT: Probation/Pre-Trial ATTACHMENT D Page 22 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 23 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 24 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 25 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 26 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 27 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 28 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - - Case Managers Homeless 107,951 2.00 111,190 2.00 111,190 2.00 Evaluator 15,265 0.10 15,725 0.10 15,725 0.10 Program Supervisor 14,216 0.10 14,642 0.10 14,642 0.10 - - - - - - - - - - Subtotal 137,432 2.20 141,557 2.20 - - 141,557$ 2.20 OPERATING COSTS - Homeless Shelter Beds 116,000 130,130 130,130 - - - - - - - - - Subtotal 116,000 130,130 - 130,130$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 253,432$ 2.20 271,687$ 2.20 -$ - 271,687$ 2.20 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Health, Housing, and Homeless Services Division 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 29 of 76 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 2019/20 Baseline Request Salary and Benefits - $141,557 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 - $130,130 Shelter beds Up to ten beds (for a total of 2330 bednights @ a rate of $55.85) 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) - $0 No one-time capital costs are requests for FY 19/20. 2019/20 Program Modification Request (INCLUDE NARATIVE DESCRIBING ANY PROPOSED PROGRAM ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS) ATTACHMENT D Page 30 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - - - - Family Nurse Practitioner/MD MDF/WCDF/MCDF 3.3 235,168 1.00 282,437 1.00 282,437 1.00 Licensed Vocational Nurse West County Detention 3.3 316,673 2.90 327,440 2.90 327,440 2.90 Registered Nurse MDF/WCDF/MCDF 3.3 534,854 2.80 556,848 2.80 556,848 2.80 Mental Health Clinical Specialist WCDF 3.3 134,565 1.00 143,177 1.00 143,177 1.00 - - - - - - Subtotal 1,221,260 7.70 1,309,902 7.70 - - 1,309,902$ 7.70 OPERATING COSTS - - - - - - - - - - - Subtotal - - - -$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 1,221,260$ 7.70 1,309,902$ 7.70 -$ - 1,309,902$ 7.70 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Health Services - DETENTION 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 31 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. 2019/20 Baseline Request The Health Services Department - Detention proposed FY 2020/21 Baseline allocation of $1,309,902 will provide the same level of service. These amounts include applicable merit increases and 3% COLA and related benefit increases. Salary and Benefit costs of $1,309,902 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 - 2.90 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. • Registered Nurse - 2.80 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. • 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 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 20/21 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 D Page 32 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 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, 2.1 568,697 2.00 591,445 2.00 591,445 2.00 Deputy Public Defender III ACER 1.2, 2.2 251,177 1.00 261,224 1.00 261,224 1.00 Legal Assistant ACER 1.2 112,992 1.00 117,511 1.00 117,511 1.00 Deputy Public Defender IV Clean Slate 5.2 127,427 0.50 132,524 0.50 132,524 0.50 Legal Assistant Clean Slate 5.2 189,972 2.00 197,571 2.00 197,571 2.00 Social Work Supervisor II Client Support 5.3 155,242 1.00 161,451 1.00 161,451 1.00 Social Worker II Client Support 5.3 191,996 2.00 199,676 2.00 199,676 2.00 Clerk Experienced Level Reentry Program Support 1.2, 2.1, 5.2, 5.3, 64,622 1.00 67,207 1.00 67,207 1.00 Asst. Public Defender Reentry Program Support 2.1-2.3, 3.3, 4.1, 5.1 303,754 1.00 264,029 0.75 264,029 0.75 Deputy Public Defender II Early Representation Program 1.2, 5.3 237,918 3.00 451,836 3.00 451,836 3.00 Legal Assistant Early Representation Program 1.2, 5.3 303,268 3.00 315,399 3.00 315,399 3.00 Legal Assistant (Previously Probation Pre-Trial Services Program 1.2 317,084 3.00 329,767 3.00 329,767 3.00 Budget) Subtotal 2,824,149 20.50 3,089,640 20.25 - - 3,089,640 20.25 OPERATING COSTS - Office Expense Early Representation 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 15,880 Postage for FTA Reduction Program Early Representation Program 1.2, 5.3 1,205 1,400 Promotional Materials Clean Slate Clean Slate 5.2 925 925 Promotional Materials for EarlyRep Early Representation Program 1.2, 5.3 800 800 Vehicle Client Support 5.3 28,000 - - Subtotal 30,211 36,907 28,000 64,907$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- Electronic Equipment/Devices 4,800 4,000 4,000 - Subtotal 4,800 4,000 - 4,000 Total 2,859,160$ 20.50 3,130,547$ 20.25 28,000$ - 3,158,547$ 20.25 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Public Defender Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3 2020/21 Total Funding Request ATTACHMENT D Page 33 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. DEPARTMENT: Public Defender 2020/21 Baseline Request 1. ACER. Salary and benefits costs of $970,180 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. Client Support. Salary and benefits costs of $361,172 are requested for (1) FTE Social Work Supervisor II and (2) FTE Social Worker II. Public Defender Social Workers provide 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. Our social workers encourage releases from custody and reduce recidivism by aiding successful pretrial release, reentry, and reintegration.The program furthers the goal of providing and enhancing integrated programs and services for successful reentry. 3. Clean Slate. Salary and benefits costs of $330,095 are requested for (2) FTE Clean Slate Legal Assistants and (1) .5 FTE Deputy Public Defender IV. 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. Early Representation Program. Salary and benefits costs of $767,235 are requested for (3) Deputy PD II Attorneys and (3) 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. We are requesting an adjust of the classification of the (3) FTE attorneys assigned to the Early Representation Program (EarlyRep) from Deputy Public Defender Fixed Term to Deputy Public Defender II. This classification more accurately reflects the experience level needed for the attorneys that are working in the EarlyRep program. EarlyRep is now functioning countywide and has successfully reduced FTAs in arraignment court in all 3 regions. EarlyRep was recently awarded a BSCC JAG grant to expand our holistic array of EarlyRep services to include housing, treatment, reentry community navigation, and civil legal aid in collaboration with a broad array of government and community-based partners. To be clear, we are not asking to add new positions, just the ability to fill the positions at the next higher level of attorney classification. 5. Reentry Program Support. Salary and benefits costs of $331,236 are requested for (.75) FTE 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. 6. Public Defender Legal Assistants. Salary and benefits costs of $329,767 are requested for (3) FTE Public Defender Legal Assistants. Due to the imminent changes on the horizon with bail reform, the Probation Department is transitioning to the use of the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) Arnold risk assessment tool in the Pretrial Services Program (PTS) by the end of this FY. Because of this, the 3 FTE Public Defender PTS Legal Assistants will no longer be providing interview information directly to Probation to be used in calculating the risk assessment scores of PTS candidates. The Legal Assistants will continue their work in conducting intake interviews for Public Defender clients, and gathering information critical to support release, placement in residential treatment, and connection to community-based services for those who come through our arraignment courts. Accordingly, we are requesting that these positions continue to be funded at the same level, with the line item moved from the Pretrial Services budget to the Public Defender’s Office budget. 7. Operating costs. Ongoing operating costs of $36,907 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 $4000 for electronic equipment for Clean Slate and the EarlyRep Program staff. 2020/21 Program Modification Request 1. Reentry Program Support vehicle. We are requesting $28,892 for a vehicle for our Social Workers to use in the field. This will allow our Social Work team to effectively meet with clients, clients’ families and support systems, and resource agencies in order to link our clients with necessary community-based services and resources. This will further the goal of providing and enhancing integrated programs and services for successful reentry. ATTACHMENT D Page 34 of 76 Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - - DDA-Advanced Level Realignment Coordinator Attorney 310,315 1.00 322,360 1.00 322,360 1.00 DDA-Basic Level Violence Reduction/Recidivism Attorney 214,752 1.00 222,974 1.00 222,974 1.00 V/W Assist. Prog Specialist Reentry Notification Specialists 178,867 2.00 185,287 2.00 185,287 2.00 DDA-Advanced Level Arraignment Court/Realignment Attorney 625,557 2.00 649,845 2.00 649,845 2.00 Senior Level Clerk Clerical/file support-Arraign. Court 77,568 1.00 80,303 1.00 80,303 1.00 V/W Assist. Prog Specialist Reentry Notification Specialists 105,452 1.00 109,303 1.00 109,303 1.00 Neighborhood Courts Director Non-violent misdemeanor diversion 90,000 1.00 93,233 1.00 93,233 1.00 Experienced Level Clerk Clerical/file support-Arraign. Court 69,719 1.00 72,141 1.00 72,141 1.00 Experienced Level Clerk Clerical/file support 61,883 1.00 63,991 1.00 63,991 1.00 Senior Level Clerk - Part Time 960 Realignment 24,940 1.00 25,808 1.00 25,808 1.00 - - Subtotal 1,759,053 12.00 1,825,246 12.00 - - 1,825,246$ 12.00 OPERATING COSTS - Office Expense 6,219 7,000 7,000 Postage 1,982 2,000 2,000 Communication Costs 3,121 3,000 3,000 Minor Furniture/Equipment 1,521 2,000 2,000 Minor Computer Equipment 5,668 6,000 6,000 Clothing & Supply 61 - - Memberships 165 - - Computer Software Cost 361 - - Auto Mileage 4,493 5,000 5,000 Other Travel Employees 553 - - Occupancy Costs 28,147 30,000 30,000 Data Processing Services/Supplies 14,450 15,000 15,000 Other Interdepartmental Charges 105 - - Other Special Dept. Charges 160 - - Training 60,000 60,000 60,000 - Subtotal 127,006 130,000 - 130,000$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 1,886,059$ 12.00 1,955,246$ 12.00 -$ - 1,955,246$ 12.00 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Department: District Attorney 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 35 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: The District Attorney’s Office is requesting $1,955,246 for FY 2020/21. This baseline request will continue the programs approved in the FY 2019/20 budget. The realignment team will address the responsibilities presented by the realignment of our criminal justice system pursuant to Penal Code section 1170(h). DEPARTMENT: District Attorney's Office 2019/20 Baseline Request The realignment team includes (4) FTE Deputy District Attorneys, (1) Neighborhood Courts Director, (1) Senior Level Clerk, (2) Experienced Level Clerk, (3) Victim/Witness Assistance Program Specialists, and 1 PT Senior Level Clerk. • $1,825,246 Salary and Benefits. Benefits Costs include FICA, medical, workers' compensation, SUI, deferred compensation, Paulson costs, benefits administration, retiree health, and OPEB pre-pay. • $130,000 Operating costs are requested. Neighborhood Community Courts In an effort to offer smart and safe alternatives for low level non-violent misdemeanors, the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office is implementing the 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. 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. 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. 2019/20 Program Modification Request None. ATTACHMENT D Page 36 of 76 ATTACHMENT DPage 37 of 76 ATTACHMENT D Page 38 of 76 Page 39 of 76 Page 40 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 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 48,000 48,000 - Workforce Services Specialist Engagement with public & private partners 55,000 57,000 57,000 - 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 22,000 22,000 - PY 4% Floor Allocation 8,000 - - - - Subtotal 204,000 - 212,000 - - - 212,000$ - OPERATING COSTS - Training/Travel 4,000 4,160 4,160 - - - - - - - - - Subtotal 4,000 4,160 - 4,160$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 208,000$ - 216,160$ - -$ - 216,160$ - 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Workforce Develoment Board of Contra Costa County 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 41 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. DEPARTMENT: Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County 2020/21 Baseline Request The Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County (WDBCCC) is seeking baseline level funding of $216,160 for the fiscal year 2020- 2021. 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 use AB109 funds to leverage other funds to provide services to previously incarcerated individuals. As part of the East Bay Regional Planning Unit (EBRPU), the WDBCC, is anticipating the receipt of a percentage of the $2.3 million Prison to Employment funding that was awarded to the EBRPU over the next 2 years. These funds will be leveraged to augment/increase the current level of support the WDBCCC is dedicating toward our AB109 and greater reentry engagement, as well as provide direct services to individuals on supervision. 2020/21 Program Modification Request The Workforce Development Board is not seeking increaed funding at this time. The WDB is committed to partnering with the CCP and other agencies/organizations working in this space, with a goal of pursuing and securing additional resources that can further support, align, and leverage related work to serve AB109 participants and concurrerntly expand efforts to serve other justice involved populations that are returning to communitites in Contra Costa County and help them with employment and training needs. ATTACHMENT D Page 42 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS Senior Deputy County Administrator Program Administration 6.2 168,531 0.75 183,566 0.75 183,566 0.75 ORJ Deputy Director Program Administration 6.2 190,690 1.00 204,368 1.00 204,368 1.00 Research & Evaluation Mgr.Research & Evaluation 6.3 189,563 1.00 189,563 1.00 - - 189,563 1.00 Senior Management Analyst Program Administration 6.2 - - - 141,868 1.00 141,868 1.00 Management Analyst Program Administration 6.2 122,611 1.00 134,851 1.00 (134,851) (1.00) (0) - Subtotal 671,395 3.75 712,348 3.75 7,017 - 719,365$ 3.75 OPERATING COSTS - - Ceasefire Program Coordinator 5.1 119,000 119,000 119,000 Communications, office supplies, travel/transp.6.2 13,000 13,000 13,000 SAFE, Skuid Database Licenses and Maintenance; SPSS subscription 6.3 8,520 12,020 49,000 61,020 Intern 6.3 8,000 8,000 8,000 Occupancy Costs 6.2 12,000 14,000 14,000 County Counsel charges 6.2 6,000 4,000 4,000 - - - Subtotal 166,520 170,020 49,000 219,020$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 837,915$ 3.75 882,368$ 3.75 56,017$ - 938,385$ 3.75 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: Officer of Reentry and Justice 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3 Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 43 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: DEPARTMENT: Office of Reentry & Justice 2019/20 Baseline Request The ORJ's FY 2020/21 Baseline allocation of $882,368 (Total Funding Request of $938,385) will provide resources for the continued operation of the office: Salary and Benefit costs of $719,365 are requested to implement the Work Plan of the ORJ. The cost projections include salary step increases, a 3% COLA, and benefit cost increases 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 Senior Management Analyst The modification in Salary and Benefit costs results from the proposed reclassification of the 1.0 FTE Management Analyst to Senior Management Analyst . Operating costs of $219,020 are requested for: · $119,000 for ongoing Ceasefire Program Coordination services; · $13,000 for Office expenses including: Communications, Office Supplies, Travel/transportation; · $61,020 for Data: Salesforce (reentry database), Skuid (interface for SAFE), database development costs, and statistical software licenses; · $8,000 for an Intern to support evaluation and research; · $14,000 for Occupancy Costs at the Morrow House; · $4,000 for County Counsel charges for services. 2019/20 Program Modification Request The $49,000 proposed modification to Data needs is comprised of the $34,000 allocation to the 1215 Community Programs budget unit for Salesforce licenses for SAFE and an additional $15,000 for database development services. The $7,017 proposed modification to Salaries and Benefits stems from the proposed reclassification of the Management Analyst position. ATTACHMENT D Page 44 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - - Antioch Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 Concord Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 Pittsburg Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 Richmond Police Officer AB 109 Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 Richmond Police Officer (West)MHET Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 Walnut Creek Police Officer (Central)MHET Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 Pittsburg Police Officer (East)MHET Officer 5.1 146,795 1.00 152,667 1.00 152,667 1.00 - - Subtotal 1,027,565 7.00 1,068,667 7.00 - - 1,068,667$ 7.00 OPERATING COSTS - - - - - - - - - - - Subtotal - - - -$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 1,027,565$ 7.00 1,068,667$ 7.00 -$ - 1,068,667$ 7.00 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: CCC Police Chief's Association 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 45 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. 2019/20 Baseline Request The Contra Costa County Police Chief's Association has requested $610,667 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 $458,000 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 N/A Department: CCC Police Chief's Association ATTACHMENT D Page 46 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEsTotal Funding RequestFTEsREGIONAL SERVICESEmployment 5.3b2,283,000             21.41    2,283,000             21.41          CountywideRubicon Programs2,283,000             21.41    Housing5.3c1,272,000             7.23      1,272,000             7.23             CountywideShelter Inc.4892,000                  4.88      Countywide  LAO Family Community Development 430,000                  2.35      Peer Mentoring5.4a115,000                 1.36      115,000                 1.36             West County ServiceMen and Women of Purpose115,000                 1.36      Family Reunification5.4b94,000  0.80      94,000 0.80             Countywide ServiceCenterforce94,000  0.80      Legal Services5.4c157,000                 1.37      157,000                 1.37             Countywide ServiceBay Area Legal Aid157,000                 1.37      One Stops5.2bEast/Central County Network System of Servicessee below5.70      5.70      5.70             West CountyReentry Success Centersee below‐             ‐ CAB Support (countywide)Via Office of Reentry & Justice3,031 3,031 (31) 3,000 subtotal 3,974,031             37.87    3,924,031             37.87    (31)  ‐             3,924,000$           37.87          NETWORK SYSTEM OF SERVICESNetwork Management3.3, 4.1, 5.1979,000                 979,000                 Network Staff & Operations HealthRIGHT360654,400                 Contracted ServicesTransitional HousingMz. Shirliz175,000                 Specialized Vocational Training Fast Eddie's Auto Services67,600 Transition Planning (women) Centerforce82,000 subtotal979,000                979,000                ‐ 979,000                REENTRY SUCCESS CENTEROperation and ManagementRubicon Programs3.3, 4.1, 5.1 546,335                 546,335                 33,665 580,000                 subtotal546,335                546,335                33,665                   580,000                OTHER EXPENSESSales Force Licensing534,000 34,000 (34,000)                 VOICE Quarterly Newsletter615,000 15,000 5,000 20,000 TOTAL 5,548,366$          37.87  5,498,366$          37.87  4,634$                  ‐           5,503,000$          37.87        1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget.2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars.3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21.4. FY2019‐20 funding allocation includes $50,000 one time rollover allocation5. This expense has been moved to the ORJ budget beginning in FY 2020‐21.6. Previously described as "Connection to Resources," and now changed to reflect the dedication of this funding allocation to the development and circulation of four newsletter editions annually.Department: Community Advisory Board2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request22020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item 2019‐20 CONTRACTED PROVIDEROps. Plan Item  #2019/20 Funding Allocation1ATTACHMENT DPage 47 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: The Community Advisory Board budget represents a vital component of the County's effort to reduce recidivism.  Investments in the  community programs included in CAB's budget have not only emerged as essential elements of the County's reentry system, but the  programs that they fund have become beacons of hope and opportunity for the County residents that participate in these programs.   Furthermore, the County's support of the programs and initiatives included in the CAB Budget have paved the way for the development of  innovative approaches to improving public safety (Reentry Success Center and Reentry Network), communication to stakeholders  regarding the County's reentry efforts (seasonal VOICE newsletter), and information sharing and tracking among partners (Salesforce  based data system).   For FY 2020/21, CAB submits a largely status quo budget to the County for approval with modifications that amount to a modest net  increase of $4,634, and actually amounts to a total net decrease of $45,366 from the FY 2019/20 allocation due to a one‐time $50,000  housing allocation in the previous fiscal year.  Given this fiscal prudence, CAB recommends the CCP approve its budget as presented,  including any COLA the County Administrator's Office deems appropriate for the entire array of community corrections programs.  DEPARTMENT: Community Advisory Board 2020/21 Baseline Request In FY 2018/19, the ORJ put all of the contracts for the community programs in CAB's budget out for public bidding, except the Reentry  Success Center (Center) contract.  This bidding process resulted in the loss of one contractor from FY 2018/19 and the addition of two new  entities.  In FY 2019/20 the ORJ executed three year contracts with each of agencies selected through the County's competitive bidding  process, and these contracts are expected to expire at the end of FY 2021/22.  Because the performance of these contracts (and  implementation of their related programs) has only recently began, the CAB is recommending each of these programs be funded at the  same level they were funded at in FY 2019/20.  Because the FY 2019/20 allocation for housing included $50,000 that rolled over from FY  2018/19, the FY 2020/21 requested housing allocation has been reduced by this amount. The contract for the Center is expected to be put out for competitive bidding in the second half of FY 2019/20.  In expectation of the three  year contract that will result from this process, the CAB is recommending a slight increase to the allocation for this program that is  explained in detail below.  2020/21 Program Modification Request CAB believes that a $3,000 allocation will be adequate in the upcoming fiscal year to support its work and any important initiatives it may  choose to partner on. The contract for the Center is expected to be released for competitive bidding in the current fiscal year.  In preparation for this, CAB  recommends that the County allocate $1,740,000 over the next three years to support this program.  This total funding level was  calculated by providing a roughly 3% COLA increase in each of the next three years from the program's current funding level of $546,335.   This three year contract amount of $1,740,000 was then divided equally among each of the next three years to get an annual funding level  of $580,000 that is included in CAB's FY 2020/21 budget for the operation and management of the Reentry Success Center.  This  modification amounts to an increase of $33,665 in FY 2020/21 for the Center. CAB has removed the $34,000 allocation for Salesforce Iicensing from its budget as these costs are now in the ORJ budget as part of the  total costs for the administration of the SAFE Database.   Three years ago $15,000 was allocated to the Center and Reentry Network to execute a joint strategy that would inform local stakeholders  of the reentry programs available in the County the impact of these programs.  As CAB looked into these efforts during the current fiscal  year, it learned that the entirety of this allocation has been devoted to the development of the VOICE newsletter and that to produce the  four editions of the periodical newsletter each year the Center must contribute about $3,000 to this allocation.  Because of this, CAB is  recommending an increase in this allocation by $5,000 so that $20,000 is available for the development and circulation of the VOICE in FY  2020/21.  Currently, there are only 1,000 copies of each edition able to be printed, of which 600 are distributed in the local jails.  The low  level of copies available for community distribution limit the ability to distribute the VOICE to partners and community stakeholders.  This  increased funding level will also allow for analyses to be done to improve the distribution methods and content of the newsletter.  Finally,  this increase will also support the creation of an electronic version of the newsletter that will allow for even broader distribution. ATTACHMENT D Page 48 of 76 Contra Costa County Community Corrections Partnership 2020/21 AB109 Budget Proposal Form Current Allocation FTEs Funding Request FTEs Funding Request FTEs Total Funding Request FTEs SALARY AND BENEFITS - - Courtroom clerk II Pretrial Release Calendar support 225,745 2.00 231,021 2.00 231,021 2.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Subtotal 225,745 2.00 231,021 2.00 - - 231,021$ 2.00 OPERATING COSTS - - - - - - - - - - - Subtotal - - - -$ CAPITAL COSTS (ONE-TIME)- - - Subtotal - - - - Total 225,745$ 2.00 231,021$ 2.00 -$ - 231,021$ 2.00 1. FY 2019/20 Funding Allocation reflects the FY 2019/20 Board of Supervisor's approved AB 109 budget. 2. FY 2020/21 Baseline Request should reflect the cost of continuing FY 2019/20 programs in FY 2020/21 dollars. 3. FY 2020/21 Program Modification Request should reflect proposals for the cancellation of existing programs and/or funding of new programs for FY2020/21. Department: CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT 2020/21 Total Funding Request2020/21 Baseline Request2 2020/21 Program Modification Request3Description of Item Program/Function Ops. Plan Item # 2019/20 Funding Allocation1 ATTACHMENT D Page 49 of 76 PROGRAM NARRATIVE: Please provide a narrative describing the programming is being proposed on the AB 109 Budget Proposal Form. DEPARTMENT: CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT 2019/20 Baseline Request The Contra Costa Superior Court respectfully requests one-time funding from the County’s FY 2020-21 AB 109 allocation in the amount of $231,021. 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. 2019/20 Program Modification Request N/A ATTACHMENT D Page 50 of 76 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE - SPECIAL MEETING 5. Meeting Date:02/03/2020 Subject:APPOINTMENTS TO THE CY2020 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP & EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator  Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: APPOINTMENTS TO THE CY2020 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP & EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE  Presenter: Paul Reyes, 925-335-1096 Contact: Referral History: The California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 109 (Chapter 15, Statutes of 2011), which transferred responsibility for supervising certain lower-level inmates and parolees from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to counties. Assembly Bill 109 (AB109) took effect on October 1, 2011 and realigned three major areas of the criminal justice system. On a prospective basis, the legislation:  • Transferred the location of incarceration for lower-level offenders (specified nonviolent, 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;  • Transferred 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);  • Transferred the custody responsibility for parole and PRCS revocations to local jail, administered by county sheriffs  AB109 also created an Executive Committee of the local Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and tasked it with recommending a Realignment Plan (Plan) to the county Board of Supervisors for implementation of the criminal justice realignment. The Community Corrections Partnership is identified in statute as the following:  Community Corrections Partnership Chief Probation Officer (Chair) Presiding Judge (or designee) County supervisor, CAO, or a designee of the BOS District Attorney Public Defender Page 51 of 76 Sheriff Chief of Police Head of the County department of social services Head of the County department of mental health Head of the County department of employment Head of the County alcohol and substance abuse programs Head of the County Office of Education BO representative with experience in rehabilitative services for criminal offenders Victims’ representative  Later in 2011, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 117 (Chapter 39, Statutes of 2011), which served as “clean up” legislation to AB109. Assembly Bill 117 (AB117) changed, among other things, the composition of the local CCP-Executive Committee. The CCP-Executive Committee is currently identified in statute as the following:  Community Corrections Partnership-Executive Committee Chief Probation Officer (Chair) Presiding Judge (or designee) District Attorney Public Defender Sheriff A Chief of Police The head of either the County department of social services, mental health, or alcohol and drug services (as designated by the board of supervisors)  Although AB109 and AB117 collectively place the majority of initial planning activities for Realignment on the local CCP, it is important to note that neither piece of legislation cedes powers vested in a county Board of Supervisors’ oversight of and purview over how AB109 funding is spent. Once the Plan is adopted, the Board of Supervisors may choose to implement that Plan in any manner it may wish.  Referral Update: Each year, the Public Protection Committe reviews the membership of the Community Corrections Partnership and makes recommendations for appointment to non ex-officio seats to the Board of Supervisors. The Board has made these appointments on a calendar year basis. Today's action is seeking direction from the Public Protection Committee to either:  1. Forward nominees to the Board of Supervisors following a determination and vote of the Committee today, or 2. Direct staff to conduct a recruitment process for all or a portion of the Board appointment members of the CCP and CCP Executive Committee.  Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): 1. RECOMMEND nominees for appointment to seats on the CY2020 Community Corrections Partnership & Executive Committee (see attachments); 2. PROVIDE direction to staff on an alternative recruitment process for membership on the CCP and the CCP Executive Committee. Fiscal Impact (if any): Page 52 of 76 No fiscal impact. Attachments CY2020 CCP Membership CY2020 CCP Executive Committee Membership CSAC Informational Letter Page 53 of 76 EXHIBIT A - 2020 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP Seat Appointee Term Expiration Chief Probation Officer (Chair) Todd Billeci ex-officio Presiding Judge (or designee)Jim Paulsen (designee of Presiding Judge)ex-officio County supervisor, CAO, or a designee of the BOS David J. Twa, County Administrator December 31, 2020 District Attorney Diana Becton ex-officio Public Defender Robin Lipetzky ex-officio Sheriff David O. Livingston ex-officio Chief of Police Tamany Brooks, City of Antioch April 30, 2020 Chief of Police*Brian Addington, City of Pittsburgh December 31, 2020 Head of the County department of social services Kathy Gallagher, Employment and Human Services Director ex-officio Head of the County department of mental health Suzanne Tavano, Director of Behavioral Health Services ex-officio Head of the County department of employment Donna Van Wert, Executive Director-Workforce Development Board ex-officio Head of the County alcohol and substance abuse programs Fatima Matal Sol, Director of Alcohol and Other Drugs ex-officio Head of the County Office of Education Lynn Mackey, County Superintendent of Schools ex-officio CBO representative with experience in rehabilitative services for criminal offenders Patrice Guillory December 31, 2020 Victim's Representative Shannon Mahoney, DA Victim/Witness Services Program December 31, 2020 *Starting in May following Chief Brooks' term expiration Page 54 of 76 EXHIBIT B - 2020 COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Seat Appointee Term Expiration Chief Probation Officer (Chair) Todd Billeci ex-officio Presiding Judge (or designee)Jim Paulsen (designee of Presiding Judge)ex-officio District Attorney Diana Becton ex-officio Public Defender Robin Lipetzky ex-officio Sheriff David O. Livingston ex-officio Chief of Police Tamany Brooks, City of Antioch April 30, 2020 Chief of Police**Brian Addington, City of Pittsburgh December 31, 2020 Representative approved by BOS from the following CCP members:Kathy Gallagher, Employment and Human Services Director December 31, 2020 *Head of the County department of social services *Head of the County department of mental health *Head of the County alcohol and substance abuse programs **Starting in May following Chief Brooks' term expiration Page 55 of 76 MEMORANDUM July 12, 2011 To: Members, Board of Supervisors County Administrative Officers From: Paul McIntosh Executive Director Re: AB 117 and the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) There continues to be a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding regarding the changes in the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) encompassed in Assembly Bill 117 (Chapter 39, Statutes of 2011), passed as part of the 2011-12 budget. AB 117 did not change the make-up of the CCP, first formed in SB 678 in 2009, but does provide for revisions to the makeup of the CCP’s Executive Committee, which originally was established in AB 109 (Chapter 15, Statutes of 2011). The fourteen-member CCP in each county remains essentially unchanged and is comprised of the following (Penal Code Section 1230.1): Chief Probation Officer (Chair) Presiding Judge (or designee) County supervisor, CAO, or a designee of the BOS District Attorney Public Defender Sheriff Chief of Police Head of the County department of social services Head of the County department of mental health Head of the County department of employment Head of the County alcohol and substance abuse programs Head of the County Office of Education CBO representative with experience in rehabilitative services for criminal offenders Victims’ representative AB 117 requires the CCP to prepare an implementation plan that will enable the county to meet the goals of the public safety realignment. AB 117 is silent as to what those goals may be and provides counties with flexibility in how to address realignment. AB 117 does not abdicate the board of supervisor’s authority over appropriations and does not enable the CCP to direct how realignment funds will be spent. Page 56 of 76 The seven-member CCP Executive Committee, as provided in AB 117, is comprised of the following: Chief Probation Officer (Chair) Presiding Judge (or designee) District Attorney Public Defender Sheriff A Chief of Police The head of either the County department of social services, mental health, or alcohol and drug services (as designated by the board of supervisors) Under AB 117, the CCP would develop an implementation plan and the Executive Committee would vote to approve the plan and submit it to the board of supervisors. The plan would be deemed accepted unless the board of supervisors voted via a 4/5 vote to reject the plan and send it back to the CCP. Concerns have been raised regarding why the CAO or board member is not part of the Executive Committee and why a 4/5 vote is required to reject the plan. CSAC’s role in the drafting of this component of AB 117 was as one of several stakeholders involved in the public safety realignment. While most of the county stakeholders maintained general agreement on realignment issues during each phase of negotiations in general, there were disparate opinions in how the planning process should unfold. CSAC felt strongly that the only way realignment will be successful is if the planning effort results in a significant shift away from a predominantly incarceration model and movement to alternatives to incarceration. Therefore, it was critical that the planning process be structured to encourage compromise in the CCP to reach the goals of the community in a manner acceptable to the board of supervisors. The CAO, as you know, must be in a position to remain objective and provide the board of supervisors with unvarnished recommendations on matters that come before them. Having the CAO or a board member as part of the Executive Committee, and therefore casting a vote on the plan to be presented to the board of supervisors, would represent a conflict of interest to the CAO or board member and place them in a position that could compromise their independence. Rather, this approach seemed to capture the best of both worlds – the CAO is part of the planning process and can bring that global vision to that process but is also free to make contrary recommendations to the board of supervisors should they disagree with the ultimate plan adopted. Likewise with a member of the board of supervisors being part of the executive committee. Some have commented that the 4/5 vote requirement to reject the plan submitted by the CCP limits local flexibility and discretion of the board of supervisors. While the dynamics of the planning process will differ from county to county, the goal was to force consensus within the CCP and the planning process and not Page 57 of 76 provide an avenue for a participant to try to push their opinion outside of the CCP with the board of supervisors. A super majority makes an “end run” difficult, but still enables the board to reject the plan if the board disagrees with it. A 4/5 vote requirement is not unusual, but does place a higher level of focus on the planning process. It should be noted, as well, that counsel has opined that meetings of the CCP and the Executive Committee will be subject to the Brown Act and all discussions will be required to be conducted in a public meeting. AB 117 is not a perfect solution but it represents a negotiated agreement that will enable California’s counties to move forward with the dramatic changes necessary to make realignment successful. Clearly the successful implementation of realignment will require a significant paradigm shift in our public safety communities. The successful model will not be an incarceration model, but one that seeks to divert and rehabilitate citizens, returning them to be productive members of our community. Hopefully, the construct of the CCP – that is intended to drive the local public safety community to a consensus about a “different way of doing business” - will ultimately lead to that approach. Page 58 of 76 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE - SPECIAL MEETING 6. Meeting Date:02/03/2020 Subject:CY2019 Annual Report  Submitted For: PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE,  Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: CY2019 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 2019 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 2019 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 2019 PPC Annual Report Page 59 of 76 RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Board of Supervisors referred twelve (12) issues to the Public Protection Committee (PPC) for its review and consideration during 2019. 2. FIND that the 2019 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. 5. APPROVE recommended disposition of PPC referrals described at the end of this report. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 02/11/2020 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS Contact: Paul Reyes, (925) 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 11, 2020 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: C. 78 To:Board of Supervisors From:PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE Date:February 11, 2020 Contra Costa County Subject:2019 YEAR-END REPORT ON ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND DISPOSITION OF REMAINING REFERRALS TO THE PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE Page 60 of 76 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. This is an informational report only. 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 3, 2020 meeting, the Committee discussed all issues currently on referral and has made the following recommendations to the Board of Supervisors for the 2020 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 2020 PPC 2. Welfare Fraud Investigation and Prosecution Page 61 of 76 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 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 2019, but would like the issue to remain on referral to the Committee for future oversight. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 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.Page 62 of 76 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 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 2019. 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 2020. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 PPC 4. County support and coordination of non-profit organization resources to provide 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 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 Page 63 of 76 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) 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 Page 64 of 76 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. 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 Committee 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, 2018, 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 recommended the Antioch Police Chief. In 2019, Committee reviewed and approved the proposed FY 2019/20 AB109 budget assembled by the CCP - Executive Committee and the FY 17/18 AB 109 Annual Report. The Committee also provided input and direction on the 2019 AB 109 Community Programs solicitation process for reentry services and grant writing services. On March 11, 2019, the Committee accepted the recommendation from the Quality Assurance Committee of the Community Corrections Partnership to increase the award to Fast Eddies to provide Automotive Technician Training. The Committee also directed staff to issue an Request for Proposals to utilize the remaining Local Innovation Fund revenue. On December 2, 2019, the PPC recommended the Board of Supervisors award $300,000 form the Local Innovation Fund to Rubicon Programs for an evening connections program. Page 65 of 76 During 2019, the PPC provided direction on filling the vacant victims' representative seat. At the September 30, 2019 PPC meeting, the PPC was provided with a report on the victims' representative vacancy on the Community Corrections Partnership board. The PPC then determined to proceed with an 6-week recruitment and selection process for the vacant seat. On December 2, 2019, the PPC conducted interviews and considered applications for the vacant seat and forwarded a nomination to the Board of Supervisors for consideration at the December 17, 2019 meeting of Board of Supervisors. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 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 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 2019. However, changes in the Sheriff's Office contract for the inmate telephone services will have an impact on this issue. For this reason, this topic should remain on referral to the Committee in 2020. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 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 Page 66 of 76 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 •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) Page 67 of 76 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-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. 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 Supervisors 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 appointment 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 was 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 Page 68 of 76 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 applicants 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 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. The PPC did not received an update on this issue in 2019. However, the Racial Justice Oversight Body has been working on developing an implementation plan for the Racial Justice Oversight body and would like this issue to remain on referral for future oversight. For this reason, this topic should remain on referral to the Committee in 2020. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 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 Page 69 of 76 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. The PPC did not receive an update on this topic in 2019, but would like the issue to remain on referral to the PPC for future oversight. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 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 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 Page 70 of 76 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. The PPC did not receive an update on this topic in 2019, but would like the issue to remain on referral to the PPC for future oversight. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 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, Page 71 of 76 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. On March 11, 2019, the Committee accepted a report on the County's Multi-Agency Juvenile Justice Plan and provided direction on the recruitment process for the community-based-orgranization and public member seats on the JJCC. These vacant seats include three (3) At-Large Community Representatives and two (2) At-Large Youth Representatives. On June 3, 2019 the PPC considered the applications and interviewed the 21 applicants for the vacant seats on the JJCC. After the interviews, the PPC members recommended 6 individuals be appointed to the JJCC by the Board of Supervisors. Given the exceptionally high level of interest and quality of applicants, at the conclusion of the interview process, the PPC indicated a recruitment process would be conducted in the near future to fill two (2) seats for representatives from nonprofit community-based organizations (CBO). At the July 1, 2019 PPC meeting, the Committee approved the recruitment schedule to fill two vacancies of the CBO seats on the JJCC. On September 30, 2019, the PPC considered 9 applicants and recommended 2 individuals to be appointed to the JJCC by the Board of Supervisors. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 PPC 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 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. On March 11, 2019, the Committee accepted an update on the Board of Supervisor's letter requesting thePage 72 of 76 On March 11, 2019, the Committee accepted an update on the Board of Supervisor's letter requesting the Contra Costa County Fairgrounds to ban gun shows. The update included a discussion on the January 9, 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors of the 23rd District Agricultural Association (DAA) where the Board of Directors reviewed and discussed the letter from the County Board of Supervisors. The 23rd DAA Board approved a motion to continue gun shows at the Fairgrounds. Recommendation: TERMINATE referral 11. Review of Adult Criminal Justice Fees On February 26, 2019, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Public Protection Committee the topic of criminal justice system fees charged to individuals and a review the current programs, policies and practices related to criminal justice fees. On April 1, 2019, the Committee received an introductory report on the issue of certain fees assessed by the County related to the criminal justice system. On April 1, 2019, the Public Protection Committee considered an introductory report on the issue of criminal justice fees assessed in the County. During that meeting, it was noted that momentum to end criminal fees is growing in the state and individual counties have begun to view criminal justice fees as ineffective and have taken steps to eliminate them. In 2017, the County of Los Angeles eliminated its public defender registration fee. In May 2018, San Francisco eliminated all criminal administrative fees under its control. In December 2018, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to eliminate a host of county-imposed criminal fees. The board voted to eliminate $26,000,000 in fees for tens of thousands of Alameda County residents. With the passage of Senate Bill 190 in 2017, the State of California eliminated juvenile justice fees in all counties. In January 2019, Senate Bill (SB) 144 was introduced by Sen. Holly Mitchell and would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to eliminate the range of administrative fees that agencies and courts are authorized to impose to fund elements of the criminal legal system, and to eliminate all outstanding debt incurred as a result of the imposition of administrative fees. At the time of the April PPC meeting there had been discussion at the state level about the proposed elimination of specific fees – the probation fee, the public defender fee, and work furlough fee. Also during the April PPC, general arguments in favor or against continuing criminal justice fees were discussed. It was also noted that analysis of adult criminal justice fees had proven to be complicated. State law dictates a very complex process for the distribution of fine and fee revenue. Per a recent Legislative Analyst’s Office report, state law currently contains at least 215 distinct code sections specifying how individual fines and fees are to be distributed to state and local funds, including additional requirements for when payments are not made in full. The report provided at the April PPC meeting focused on those fees that had been positively identified as being local and discretionary fees (i.e. not mandated by California law), specifically Probation Fees, Public Defender Fees, and Sheriff Custody Alternative Facility Fees. Further research and analysis will be needed on other fines and fees collected by the Contra Costa Superior Court of California (Court) and remitted to the County. The April staff report also included infomation on Probation, Public Defender, and work furlough fees, discussion on the ability to pay process and collections. On July 1, 2019, the Public Protection Committee accepted an a follow-up report on this issue which included a review of a wider range of criminal justice fees, including those that are mandated by state legislation. This update included the following information on criminal justice fees and SB 144. During the July meeting, the PPC considered a number of concerns revolving around adult criminal justice fees, including significant concern brought up regarding the ability-to-pay process. The majority of criminal fees Page 73 of 76 include provisions that allow for either a waiver or reduction of the fee based on one’s ability to pay. The PPC voted unanimously to refer to the full Board of Supervisors a temporary moratorium on the assessment and collection of criminal justice fees currently authorized by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. On September 17, 2019, the Board of Supervisors considered adopting Resolution No. 2019/522 to place a moratorium on the assessment and collection of certain criminal justice fees. The Board of Supervisors approved the moratorium and directed the PPC to gather additiional data about criminal justice fees in Contra Costa County and to return to the Board of Supervisors before the end of the calendar year. Following the adoption of the moratorium by the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator's Office had notified the Sheriff's Office, the Probation Department, and the Superior Court of this moratorium on the assessment and collection of the applicable criminal justice fees. On September 30, 2019, the Public Protection Committee accepted an update on the implementation of the moratorium on the collection of adult criminal justice fee. The Committee directed staff to assemble a small work group to identify and provide to the Committee any additional available and relevant data. On November 4, 2019, the Committee was updated on the progress the workgroup had made. This update included information on the San Francisco Financial Justice Project, the abiltity-to-pay process of Probation and the Sheriff's Office, local data on race/income, pending data collection efforts, and an update on the Superior Court implementation of the moratorium. The Committee also discussed Additionally, Reentry Solutions Group provided a Report on Criminal Justice Fees in Contra Costa which provides additional information on the San Francisco Financial Justice Project, the local research process, and local/national research. On December 2, 2019, PPC accepted an update on the implementation of the moratorium on the collection and assessment of certain criminal justice fees assessed by the County and directed staff to return to the Board of Supervisors to provide the Summary Report on criminal justice fees and authorize the County Administrator's Office to request the Superior Court to incur the necessary expenses to implement the moratorium. Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 PPC 12. Racial Equity Action Plan At its November 19, 2019 meeting, the Board of Supervisors referred the matter of a Draft Racial Equity Action Plan (REAP) to the Public Protection Committee for their consideration and action. On December 2, 2019, the PPC received an introductory report on the REAP. Contra Costa County staff in a variety of departments have participated in the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) since 2016, working to develop and achieve racial equity outcomes in Contra Costa County. Racial equity means we eliminate racial disproportionalities so that race can no longer be used to predict success, and we increase the success of all communities. Advancing racial equity is to our collective benefit. GARE is a national network of governments working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all. GARE is supported by the Center for Social Inclusion, Race Forward, and funded by the California Endowment/Building Healthy Communities, with technical assistance and academic research from the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society and members of GARE's Technical Assistance Advisory Group. GARE was launched by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at the University of California Berkeley in early 2014. Page 74 of 76 Government agencies participating in GARE were required to establish a "cohort" of six to 15 individuals, which was ideally comprised of staff and leadership committed to advancing racial equity. The cohorts participated in a year-long training of monthly sessions that included skill building and strategy development, an "Advancing Racial Equity" speaker series, and peer-to-peer networking and problem solving opportunities. As a result of participation in the GARE cohort, each jurisdiction received tools and resources including: a racial equity training curriculum; a Racial Equity Tool to be used in policy, practice, program and budget decisions; example policies and practices that help advance racial equity; and a Racial Equity Action Plan template/framework, and development support. Implementation of these tools and resources varied, depending on the opportunities and resources within individual organizations. Technical assistance was generously provided to Contra Costa County by Philip Arnold, community advocate and leader; Dwayne Marsh, Vice President of Institutional and Sectoral Change, Race Forward; and Leslie Zeitler, California GARE Project Manager, Race Forward. Contra Costa County's participation in GARE has resulted in the following initiatives: 1. A Draft "Office of Human Rights & Equity" proposal, from the 2016 GARE Cohort; 2. A Resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors affirming the County's "Commitment to Racial Equity, Diversity, and the GARE Initiative." (Nov. 14, 2017, C. 15); 3. Development and implementation of Implicit Bias and Procedural Justice training programs in the County; 4. Participation by Contra Costa County in "United Against Hate Week" in 2018 and 2019; 5. Development of a Contra Costa County Position Statement on Racism, offered to the Board of Supervisors from the 2017 GARE Cohort; 6. Development of a Draft Racial Equity Action Plan. The REAP was developed by GARE Cohort participants, other County staff, and assembled by the staff of the Office of Reentry & Justice (ORJ). GARE Cohort participants from 2016, 2017, and 2018 were invited by the ORJ to form a "Racial Equity Action Leadership (REAL)" Team, to assist in the drafting of the REAP, utilizing the template provided by GARE. The Draft REAP was offered as a framework to continue to advance the development and maintenance of the necessary County infrastructure, policy and resources to ensure racial equity and immigrant inclusion. The Draft REAP recognized the community engagement process required to inform the infrastructure, policy, and resources, which must be conducted in order for the Board of Supervisors to adopt a Racial Equity Action Plan by 2021. ORJ staff is in the process of identifying resources to translate the Draft REAP into multiple languages for greater language accessibility. The PPC directed staff to continue to work on the REAP by seeking input from the Racial Justice Oversight Body a working with the County Administrator's Office on the financial impact and other potential issues. During the December meeting, PPC also received a presentation on Contra Costa County - A Place to Thrive. Part of the discussion on the Racial Equity Action Plan, involves looking at local efforts, such as Contra Costa County - A Place to Thrive, to promote immigration inclusion. The Zellerbach Family Foundation commissioned a research brief to inform their investments in support of a stronger Contra Costa County. This research featured demographics and the economic contributions of New Americans in Contra Costa County and was launched at a cross-sector event on June 19, 2019 cosponsored by: theY&H Soda Foundation, the Contra Costa Community Colleges District, New American Workforce (a nonprofit that partners with businesses to support immigrant inclusion), The Family Justice Center, First Five of Contra Costa County and Stand Together Contra Costa County. Following up on recommendations made during the launch, County and community leaders came together for a community strategy session on October 2,2019 to learn about: local government and community collaborations supporting immigrant inclusion and equity; and existing efforts in Contra Costa County. The PPC recommended staff to work with the County Administrator's Office to request approval to apply for the grant. Page 75 of 76 Recommendation: REFER to the 2020 PPC LIST OF ITEMS TO BE REFERRED TO THE 2020 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 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 Update on the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council Review on Adult Criminal Justice Fees Racial Equity Action Plan CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The Board of Supervisors will not receive the annual report from the 2019 Public Protection Committee. Page 76 of 76