HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10201992 - I.O.1 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1 .0. 1
,. Contra
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ,f
o Costa
CountY 4
DATE: October 12, 1992
SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON THE WORK OF THE JUVENILE HALL REPLACEMENT
ADVISORY GROUP
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)3 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Express to the members of the Juvenile Hall Replacement *
Advisory Group the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors
for the dedication and cooperative work which is evident in
the attached status report, both for the manner in which the-
report
hereport is organized and the thoughtful approach to the subject
matter which is evident in the content of the report.
2 . Refer the attached report to the County Administrator, request
the County Administrator to review the proposed budget for the
Advisory Group showing proposed expenditures of $166,500,
request the County Administrator to review the budget and
documentation for the budget for appropriateness, and return
to the Internal Operations Committee on October 26 1992 with
his recommendations.
3 . Request the County Administrator to review the availability of
current staff resources to continue to support the work of the
Advisory Group and report to the Internal Operations Committee
with his findings and recommendations on October 26, 1992 .
This report should include an identification of where the
costs of the consultants presently supporting the work of the
Advisory Group have been charged and the extent to which some.
costs can continue to be charged to the same location.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): ROBERT I - SrHRnL)ER SiTNNF WRIGHT McPEAK
ACTION OF BOARD ON 06teber 20, 199 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
i
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT �t ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. "
CC: See Page 3 ATTESTED
PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY DEPUTY
I.O. - 1
4 . Endorse the Work Plan of the Advisory Group as laid out in the
attached report, subject to further consideration of the Work
Plan following the Internal Operations Committee' s
consideration on October 26, 1992 of the reports from the
County Administrator as identified above.
5 . Clarify that the charge to the Advisory Group is to include
the identification and exploration of alternatives to
detaining a child at Juvenile Hall, including alternative
placement options and an emphasis on family reunification and
keeping a child at home whenever possible and appropriate.
6 . Indicate the intent of the Board of Supervisors to utilize
funds from the $400,000 set aside in the 1991-92 budget as a
juvenile hall construction fund for the support of the
Advisory Group, with the specific budget for this purpose to
be recommended to the Board of. Supervisors following our
Committee' s October 26, 1992 meeting.
BACKGROUND:
On June 16, 1992, the Board of Supervisors created a Juvenile Hall
Replacement Advisory Group, directed the County Administrator to
provide interim staff support to the Advisory Group and requested
the Advisory Group to provide a status report to our Committee by
October 6, 1992 .
Our Committee met with members of the Advisory Group, members of .
the Grand Jury, the County Probation Officer and other interested
individuals on October 12, 1992 . Clyde Parkhurst, Co-Chair of the
Advisory Group, presented the attached report to our Committee and
reviewed it with us and the others who were present.
Our Committee was extremely impressed with the organization, format
and content of the attached report. We agreed that the exploration
of alternatives to detaining a child at Juvenile Hall was intended
to be a part of the charge to the Advisory Group and should be
spelled out more explicitly. We also noted the importance of
emphasizing that family reunification and avoiding removing a child
from his or her home in the first place should be major goals of
the Advisory Group' s work, rather than simply deciding how to
replace the existing Juvenile Hall without regard to what other
changes in program might appropriately need to be explored while
discussing such replacement.
We noted the possibility that juvenile justice programs might be
transferred to the counties as a part of a Phase II Program
Realignment. This might provide counties with the opportunity to
determine on an individual basis what use the County and the Court
wish to make of CYA placements, as opposed to having alternative
placement options available in the community. This might also
provide the incentive for regional planning of placement
alternatives, much as is now happening with State Hospital
placements as a result of having mental health programs "realigned"
to the counties .
Since the County Administrator has not had the opportunity to
carefully review the proposed budget for the Advisory Group and the
justification which is provided for each item in the budget, we are
asking that this data be referred to the County Administrator, with
his comments and recommendations being forwarded to our Committee
on October 26, 1992 . We are also asking where the time which has
already been put into this project by Mark Morris and Carol Kizziah
has been charged and to what extent their time can continue to be
made available to the Advisory Group.
2
r �
I .O. - 1
Finally, we believe that it would appropriate to use a portion of
the $400,000 which the Board of Supervisors has set aside for a
juvenile hall construction fund for the support of the Advisory
Group, the exact amount to be determined at our October 26, 1992
meeting after we have had an opportunity to review the comments and
recommendations of the County Administrator.
cc: County Administrator
Judge John C. Minney, Juvenile Court Judge
Gerald S. Buck, County Probation Officer
Annemarie M. Goldstein, Foreman, 1992-93 Grand Jury
Clyde Parkhurst, Co-Chairman
Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group
George Roemer, Senior Deputy County Administrator
3
October 9, 1992
To: County Internal Operations Committee
From: Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group
Co Chairs Chris Adams and Clyde Parkhurst
Subject: Progress report and work plan
This group was established June 16, 1992 by action of the Board of Supervisors.
It provided for formation of the group and initial staff assistance by the County Administrator's
Office to provide a report on a work plan for replacing or rebuilding Juvenile Hall to the Internal
Operations Committee by October 6, 1992. The Internal Operations Committee calendared it for
October 12, 1992.
This is the report to the Internal Operations Committee.
We request that the VO Committee endorse our work plan and recommend to the Board of
Supervisors that we be empowered to proceed.
Our report is presented in two layers, with the second providing additional detail. We feel that
this approach will allow you to best understand what we have done and propose to do.
These layers are:
1. An overview consisting of a description of progress to date, work plans for each of our
committees and an estimate of what we expect the effort to cost.
2. Supporting detail showing how our projected budget was prepared and the underlying
assumptions.
Examples of some of our early efforts and committee meeting minutes.
A listing of the members of the advisory group and the appointing entity.
LETS MAKE IT HAPPEN !
OVERVIEW
1. Progress to date.
2. Work plans.
3. Estimate of cost.
k
OVERVIEW Juvenile HaII..Replacement Advisory Group
The activities of this Group have progressed with three meetings of the full group as created by
the Board of Supervisors. There have been twelve meetings of subgroups formed from within the
full group to consider various aspects of the problem of dealing with juveniles that have been
taken from their home environment in order to protect either themselves or society.
Prior to adopting a work plan, consensus was reached on several points:
1. This is an advisory committee.Action can be taken only by the Board of Supervisors.
2. The projections of detainees made in the Juvenile Corrections Master Plan Update of
October 1990 will be considered, along with other and more recent data in determining
the number of detainees appropriate for Juvenile Hall.
3. A significant portion of the population of Juvenile Hall is composed of juveniles who
should be detained inside locked facilities either for their own protection or for the
protection of society.
4. A significant portion of the population of Juvenile Hall is composed of juveniles who
have been determined not to require incarceration in locked facilities, but require
placement in structured programs to attempt to correct a wide variety of problems.
6. Locked facilities should be reserved for those needing this type of treatment, and should
not be used for holding juveniles determined to require placement in programs of various
types rather than requiring jail type facilities.
6. Facilities for dealing with juveniles must be addressed from basics. We must define what
type of locked facilities are needed, where they are located and how they are to be
operated.
We must also consider alternatives other than locked facilities.
7. We must address the costs and benefits of rebuilding versus replacement and
recommend a course of action.
8. Our Committee must address the methods of financing whatever changes we
recommend. Our recommendations must not result in a significant drain of County
General Funds. Operating funds as well as facilities funding must me addressed and
sources identified.
9. There will be a need to educate the public as to the condition and deficiencies of present
facilities and to justify the need for funding either improvements or replaced facilities.
10. If a new facility is recommended, we must address the needs that must be met in the
several year period until these facilities are financed, built and on line.
Work Plan - Function
Goals:
• Determine the legally required and the actual function of Juvenile Hall. Who must be
there,who is there, legal constraints on holding juveniles,etc.
• Reconcile any differences between legal requirements and what we do.
• Review current mission statements.
0 Examine the mission statements of other jurisdictions and examine their degree of
success.
• Modify our mission statement if necessary.
• Obtain buy-in of any changes in mission statement from full group, Probation
Department, Board of Supervisors and the community.
• Have results become the basis for changes in facilities.
Work Plan:
• Review current legal requirements, mission statements of our facility. Consultant help
may be necessary.
• Survey and analyze mission statements from'other Counties and States. Consultant and
CYA help will be needed in this phase.
• Survey other comparable Counties to compare their kinds and numbers of juvenile
detainees.Analyze and understand differences from our profile.
• Develop the needs and roles of other agencies (schools, social services, health services,
courts, etc.)and define their needs and present programs and facilities.
• Visit other facilities which have different programs to determine their degree of success
or non success, and determine how or if their experiences can be applied here.
• Draft modifications of our mission statement, programs and procedures. Obtain buy in of
the full committee,the County Departments involved and the Board of Supervisors.
• Determine how these changes will influence facilities programs and costs. This must be
done in conjunction with the above step.
0 Determine how to implement changes and proceed with changes.
Work Plan - Alternatives
Goals:
• Define a philosophical framework for a statement of basic values that will guide juvenile
justice and services in the County.
• A detailed look at youth in the Hall will be done to determine what types and numbers of
wards would not need to be there if more appropriate placements were available as well
as what youths must be in locked facilities. All services for youths should be examined
including the network of public and private services identified in the support system for
youth and for those caring for them.
• Determine which alternatives are best suitable to those currently held in the Hall but who
do not require locked and secure facilities.
• Compare current availability of selected alternatives.
• Recommend course of action best suited to those not requiring secure and locked
facilities.
• Retain focus on those detainees which have historically ended up in Juvenile Hall. It is
not our intent to cover the entire spectrum of help for juveniles, only those which have
become incarcerated in the Hall.
Work Plan:
• Review alternatives in depth to understand the advantages, limitations and costs of each.
This will require the assistance of consultants.
• As part of the review process it may be necessary to visit jurisdictions utilizing
alternatives. This need will be determined by the degree of our familiarity with each
alternative.
• Thoroughly compare the alternatives to select those which best apply to our needs.
• Determine what changes would be necessary in physical facilities, operational
procedures and costs.
• Determine what steps would be necessary to utilize selected alternatives.
• Gain support of changes from the full Committee and the Board of Supervisors.
Work Plan - Physical Facilities
Goals:
• Develop projections of the number of detainees expected for both locked facilities and for
placement in other facilities.
• Determine type of secure facility. Should it be a lock down prison or should it be an open
facility such as adult detention facilities in the County?
• Scope the general layout of a facility to the point estimates of cost can be prepared,
obtain cost estimates for construction and staffing.
• Do the same things for those not requiring locked detainment.This may be either use of
existing programs and facilities or new facilities.
• Determine costs of design of all facilities and present to Finance subcommittee.
Work Plan:
• Examine existing data to project number and type of detainees between now and 2010.
Test these projections to determine their validity.This may require help from consultants.
• Examine successful facilities of both lock down and open types.Work with Probation
organization to determine philosophy to be followed.This will require also working with
CYA to be sure they will be supportive of the type of facility selected.
• Determine the site and scope of a facility.This should include all necessary infrastructure
such as Court and School facilities.
• Determine what is to be done with those not requiring locked facilities.This could range
from increased use of existing programs to design and construction of facilities.
• Determine what improvements are necessary for the existing Hall as an interim to new
facilities.This should include costs for operation.
• Consider renovation of present facilities instead of construction of new facilities.This
should be carried to the point of identifying work and obtaining estimates. The decision
to rebuild or provide new facilities must be made on the basis of factual information
rather than just saying "we need new facilities".
• Make recommendations of work to be done to the full Committee,and then to Board of
Supervisors.
• After approval by Board of Supervisors, select architect and proceed with full design.
Work Plan - Finance
Goals:
• Analyze various forms of financing,determine which two or three are most promising and
recommend to full committee preferred methods.
• Gain approval of Board of Supervisors for recommended financing method.
• Create a 'sales pitch'to support the need to spend money. Disseminate this information.
Work plan:
• Work with Physical Facilities Committee to determine cost of facilities to be financed.
Until enough information can be developed to accurately do this, assume there is a need
for twenty million dollars.
• Analyze each possible method of financing in enough depth to understand the costs,
advantages, disadvantages, probability of success, etc. for each alternative. Alternatives
include general obligation bonds; private philanthropic contributions; redevelopment
agency project; formation of a special district; obtain State or Federal funding; have built
by Public Facilities Corporation; have privately built with leaseback; benefit assessment
charges to taxpayers; special sales tax and other methods of financing. This effort will
require some use of specialists to help in the analysis.
• Work with other subcommittees to determine changes in ongoing costs. Identify sources
of any ongoing costs greater than present level of funding.
• Work with Physical Facilities Committee to identify work necessary in the interim until
any new facilities come on line. Determine costs and identify sources of funding.
• Present to full Committee and then to Board of Supervisors.
J
0 0 0 0 0 O
Fa- 0 0 0 0 N U)
0 0 W 4& W V r
a
D
O
W
0
U o 0 010
>. Q o o O
04 49
N
D
Q
H
W W o 0 0 0 0 0
0 CL o c W U
WW) W) W o cm
V J 60 61). L
Q a
JU-
CL
W
J
J Z
= N p 0 C 0
W 0
� _
J !- Z fA V- 60
F-
W LL
>
� O
� U
N
0 > o o L 0
W acm
N Z
Z w
W F
a.
x a
W
c J o 0 o O
ui � o o 0 0
Q U-
H
U
W
W
LL
W J LL CO)> y > cn 0
01
z0. m Z 0
W � D � � g
mcnm = v
Z p U N O
LU 0 a a ~
DETAILS
1. Budget supporting detail.
2. Assignments to subcommittees.
3. Minutes of several subcommittee meetings.
4. Appointments to group.
SUPPORTING DETAIL-BUDGET
Some assumptions:
1. Non County employees volunteering for the Group will be reimbursed for their expenses on
behalf of the County, as ordered in the Board Order. This is interpreted to reimburse for
travel and meals when involved in meetings or trips necessary to investigate other facilities.
Mileage at the going County reimbursement rate.
2. It will not be possible for the County to provide Staff assistance for secretary and minutes
keepers of the various committees.This will be considered a consultant expense.
3. There will'be a need for significant amounts of Probation Counselors time. When it would
require overtime or use of temporary employees to cover a position, Probation has advised
that their budget will not cover this. It is included as a separate expense. Most of this will
come from involvement of Counselors in details of changed or new facilities.
4. It is not intended to use members of the Group as a free labor source.
5. There are many items of work which will require specialized knowledge not available through
the County. An example would be to evaluate layouts of facilities for security. Another
example would be the need to make sure projections of the number of detainees are still
valid. Consultants will be utilized to provide these types of know-how.
6. It is desirable for a number of the Group personnel and Probation Staff to visit facilities built
and operated in different ways to help in deciding how we should configure our effort. These
will not be pleasure jaunts, but to answer specific questions.
Specifics:
Full Group
1. Travel expense to attend full committee meetings - 15 meetings during year x 15 people
reimbursed for mileage x average of 30 miles x$.28 per mile=$2000.
2. Travel expense to attend sub-committee meetings - 4 sub-committees x 2 meetings per
month x 12 months x 10 people reimbursed x 30 miles x$.28 per mile=$8000.
3. Trips to examine other facilities (trips not covered by sub-committees) - 4 trips x 4 people x
$300 expenses per person =$5000.
4. Consultant time to cover meetings and prepare minutes-2 hours per meeting x 110 meetings
(total of full and sub-committee meetings)x$50 per hour=$11000.
5. Other consultants for full group. An example could be to have Farbstein to explain his State
analysis or to do further Contra Costa specific study-200 hours x$50 per hour=$10000.
6. Add 10% to total for group to take care of incidentals and supplies, and to give some room
for unforeseen expenses.
ALTERNATIVES SUBCOMMITTEE
1. Estimate of consultant time to help evaluate alternatives and their applicability to our system
-400 hours x$50 per hour=$20000.
2. Travel other than attending meetings. Example would be to travel to a location using
alternatives other than we currently use to evaluate their success and problems - 4 trips x 4
people x$300 per person =$4800. Rounded to$5000.
3. Add 10%for contingencies and incidentals-$2500.
FUNCTION SUBCOMMITTEE
1. Estimate of consultant time required to update County projections, assist in defining resident
profiles, finding facilities having other types of philosophies, etc. -300 hours at $50 per hour
_$15000.
2. Member travel to other locations to study facilities and organizations which differ from ours
and to determine if their methods would be beneficial to us. $ trips x 4 people x $300 per
person =$5000.
3. Add 100/6 for contingencies and incidentals-$2000.
FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE
1. Consultants to evaluate financing alternatives where expertise not available from County
personnel - 120 hours at$50 per hour=$6000. This includes consultant time to develop best
methods to convince community of the need to do things about the Hall.
2. Add 10%for contingencies and incidentals-$1000.
PHYSICAL FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE
1. Travel to other facilities having different configurations to understand their success or lack
of success-4 trips x 4 people x$300 per trip=$5000.
2. Consultants to help evaluate design assumptions, find locations with other layouts, etc. - 100
hours x$50 per hour=$5000.
3. Probation staff time to develop and evaluate configurations, etc. - 42 days x $120 per day
$5000.
4. Architect services to take design constraints and desires developed and turn these into
concept and sketch stage. This is not facilities design, but the last step prior to that stage -
$50000.
5. Add 10%for contingencies and incidentals-$6500.
JX xx
xx xx x x x X
Q m
LL
E W
o x �xq
x xx
x xx x xx x x x xx x
CL
U
= x K �xxx
x x X X X X x x x
LL
> > > > > > > > > > >
W vvv 'ovv 'o 'ovv 'C
W LL LL LL LL L L LL LL LL LL LL LL LL L L LL LL LL LL LL L L L L L L LL LL LL L L L L L L L L L t L L L t L
N N N N N N N N 0 41 N N
N F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- H
O m
E
> E
Q
0
O c
Q
Q N >
> O 0 00 oLv
V Q
Eoym Oy
= p OZ E v w dm a) 0 Q N /) y
O_U U p_v W aQp0
QN
y `1
m
0 U) (D >V:3 � oc co 3` m� = aO n . x
Y ` vOU) vaoQUvU -p � cv > � > �
QQQQQQQaQQQm �> o> tm o o D UQQ�UUUUUUUUUU UUmo - UUmon - U > ommoUUJmJLLUfAUmfo 1, 0111,101
Q
N Q Q N C c
N _V C m N 0 d
O N O L « r
d C 7 'C
'C N � O � m m '- y O O d y N0 = C C
� H c (mid 0 rnaciU) 13 c0 tr n 4) pp v o , umi
3
'7 E Z N - y .L. ,N� N W U) O D Q j�U y t l0 C > > 7 d N N
O 0> L p -J •+ 7 N 7 N U C ..; m U) V V O o y U) U C)
U U) c 0 +' .' E O to fl N U) p () () a —
() a 3 — } � A c c E 'Cp O m m @ >X 0 m a) 0 0
rn U (D U a p F- w N c 3 += c x U)
oL m oL U U 0 � LO) •c > o n c � _ � E > � OQ 00
UU) = a0 U � � a0w0 -jnUa w 0 U � C70000 ', = UU UU
c v
X v
rPLO — OMr- V M — V• N 000 N N O to W OO COOO MOGOM — a . OWCO ^
WfMM CO V• CIDO) LON000M1- - OO .•- (ONWOO MO - 0000NOCOMOOCON
1- V• OO — .- - 000 (0 V• N0M 00000 � 0L00) ONCOONMM .- 0000 V• (D
�p `nI� OCOONOD � � '99 'T TYYNN — 9C911, M9NNN191' 10
CO (ONOODM V' CO V' 1� (OCDI� O) MCOO � (OO � N M — O (OMN00000 (OMO
aCDCOOcM� MNMCDOMiC� NC(OIrOMiOUOCNO (CO � (CONOMiN MNN (�OMCD,(MO (co (cO (O ((ooM � �
tT
C
E
O
Ql
NgNE CU v aC py Ey v C C y 0CC
d N
y C EO wE
Ym ` ° ° � om= � mCcm - U C `o'D mmoUmmm0 . mo
aammmmoo = YJ -j � Uc (nAS [Omm00aC70 � U) N Lam
amm �
N �. m m �.: O N m m N p) N N N C N N N N N N .1C N _ T A m c C N 01 v L N C0 Y
'C v C N L v 7 C C d C U '- L O 0 m 0) .- .- .- �'' CT T O` U
O t`0 N J C m v C7) C N v O T CT C T U C m E C +.. m C �' Y v A > 7 �. (p m m
0 ' m 0 m m U o y m m -� — 0 CO Co c m '� m 'o m m A m 0 Y
J Q ~ V U U J LL 0 M Y m Q U U
LL O U) O
N
m
a
Minutes
Functions Subcommittee
Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group
September 14 , 1992
Present: Stan Boren
Dave Grossi
Jack Waddell
Kaye Sasnett
Topics:
1. Jack Waddell handed out two lists showing suggested
categories of youth who should or should not be in the Hall . Those
present agreed that these . lists were . a good starting point, and
that the Alternatives to Detention Subcommittee and perhaps the
full committee would need to discuss them.
2 . In general discussion about what topics should be included
in the workplan for the Juvenile Hall Replacement study, committee
members mentioned the following:
* Program elements--what kinds of programs/interventions
with youth housed there?
* Look at alternative housing types: many youth need
secure detention (as at Boys Ranch) but do not need expensive
facility like Juvenile Hall.
* Need up to date profile of youth in, the Hall . Is this
changing? Need to update Master Plan.
* What kinds of youth, and how many, are comparable sized
California counties placing in Juvenile Halls?
* Need to develop information on other agencies roles,
not . just focus on Hall: e.g. , what resources will Board of
Supervisors make available for other placements (such as mental
health residential programs or adding to Boys Ranch) ?
DETAINEES IN JUVENILE HALL
1 ) Minors whose manifest capacity for violence .pose-�;. a
serious threat to the safety of others regardless of the nature of
the charge for which they are being detained.
2 ) Minors who are retained for serious property
offenses when it appears that multiple offenses have been
committed or there is other evidence to fear recidivism if minor
is released.
\ 3 ) Minors who are out of control and have emotional
roblems which put their own safety at risk.
4 ) Minors awaiting commitment to the California Youth
Authority.
5 ) Boys ranch escapees. -
NOT WANTED AT JUVENILE HALL
1 ) Placement program failings. *
2 ) Minors awaiting placement. *
3 ) Probation failures not involving new offenses
described above. *
4 ) Abandoned 602 minors (parents won' t pick them up) . *
*Should be detained in a "secure" Boys Ranch setting.
.Jxw:M
a:Detainee.mem
Motion II
Minutes
Alternatives to Detention Subcommittee
Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group
September 3, 1992
Present: Chris Adams
Stan Boren
Charles Mason
Paul zaro
Belle Lipsett
Dennis Lepak
Katherine Armstrong
Leanne Schlegel
Ruth Ormsby
Mark Morris
Topics:
I . Belle Lipsett will be chairperson.
2 . The group chose the name "Alternatives to Detention
Subcommittee. ',
3 . The group agreed to the following outline for a workplan.
Phase 1: Fact-finding. This includes reviewing the
alternatives currently available and updating the ,juvenile
Corrections Master Plan, if necessary.
Phase 2: Review of models. Programs and systems in
other California counties and in other states will be studied. E1
Dorado County, in California, and Massachusetts and New York were
mentioned as systems which approach juvenile issues in ways
different than Contra Costa. The committee agreed to contact
various outside resources, for example, Mark Soler of the Youth Law
Center and Carol Hatch of the Congressman Miller's office.
Phase 3 : Analysis of program models for Contra Costa
County. Information from Phases 1 and 2 will be compared, to
determine what programs or approaches best "fit" Contra Costa
County's needs. Key criteria will be: public protection,
protection of youth, and costs.
4 . Kathy Armstrong will Contact Mark Soler about possible
assistance from the Youth Law Center. Belle Lipsett will contact
Carol Hatch regarding information developed in Congressional
hearings. In addition, it was noted that Gerry Buck and George
Roemer have libraries of information and program evaluations:
Alternatives to Detention Subcommittee minutes--page two
5. The group also discussed they need for a "philosophical
framework"--for a statement of the basic values that will guide
juvenile justice and services in the county.
6. The next meeting wili be September 15 at 4 : 00.
h
Minutes
Alternatives to Detention Subcommittee
Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group
September 15, 1992
Present: Belle Lipsett
Taalia Hasan
Dennis Lepak
Gerry Buck
Charles Mason
Wayne Simpson
Leanne Schlegel
Topics:
1. The committee agreed to the following statement about the
role of detention:
Detention is not a bad thing when taken with a
matrix of pre-detention and post-detention services.
Detention itself can and will have a positive
effect. Locked and secure detention is a vital
intervention resource, and when made available and
utilized is a vital component of this system, as are
pre- and post detention services.
2 . Several additions were made to the approach outlined in
the minutes for the subcommittee 's first meeting. This include:
* The determination of a philosophic framework, of basic
values, should be the first step in the planning effort.
* All services for juveniles should be examined. The
description of current county services for youth (Phase I
factfinding) should examine the entire network of services and
identify gaps in the support system for youth. Likewise, Phases
II and III (review and analysis of models) should include
consideration of integration of all services for youth.
* Phase I factfinding should also be expanded to
describe former programs that have been discontinued (for budget
or other reasons) .
* Phase I factfinding should include a very detailed
look at youth in the Hall, to determine what types (and numbers)
of wards would not need tobe there if more. appropriate placements
were available, and conversely, what youths must be in the Hall
regardless of other placement options.
* Both pre-adjudication and post-adjudication
alternatives should be included. ' Pre-adjudication alternatives
include Home Supervision/Electronic Monitoring. We should see
about developing a "cadre" of crisis foster homes.
* The definition of "detention" needs to be considered
carefully. Some placements can be considered "detention" but
should not characterized as such, if that make them ineligible for
social services funding.
* Barry Krisberg, of NCCD, should be added to the outside
resources/experts to be consulted.
3 . The subcommittee also considered a timeline for conducting
the work outlined, but decided that the schedule would depend on
the overall project schedule.
Minutes
Functions Subcommittee
Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group
September 3 , 1992
Present: Chris -Adams
Stan Boren
Jack Waddell
Kaye Sasnett
Dave Grossi
Charles Mason
Mark Morris
Topics:
1. Chris Adams will send note to Linda Baker, asking if she
will chair the subcommittee.
2. The group agreed to call the subcommittee the "Functions"
subcommittee.
3 . The group discussed topics to be addressed. The
definition of Juvenile Hall, in state law and CYA regulations, was
discussed. Kaye Sasnett said Halls are intended for short term
detention; Jack Waddell asked if Halls are intended primarily for
pre-adjudicated youth. Data provided by Dave Grossi showed that
well over half the residents of the Hall now are adjudicated,
awaiting placement (ranch, CYA, or private) .
The group agreed that a main issue is to determine what types
of youth should be detained in the Hall. The Master Plan gives
information about the profile (types of offenses, for example) of
youth in the system in 1989. Are those profiles changing? What
does that imply for future Hall needs?
4 . The next meeting will be on September 14 at 3 : 00, to talk
further about what categories of youth belong in Juvenile Hall and
to prepare for the full Coup meeting later in the week.
MINUTES
PHYSICAL FACILITIES COMMITTEE
September 23 , 1992
Present: Clyde Parkhurst
Liz Darst
Bianca Bloom
Dave Grossi
Wayne Simpson
Lorna Bastian
Topics:
1. Resources include Master Plan and CYA materials from Kaye
Sasnett regarding CYA standards.
2 . The workplan should address the decision regarding whether'
to rehab or replace the Hall. Mark Morris/Carol Kizziah will
contact Jay Farbstein & Associates to see if work materials from
their review of the Hall are available. (Farbstein recommended
replacement of the 'Hall.
3 . The workplan should discuss sites. In committee
discussion, options mentioned included going to West County; this
might entail two facilities, a scaled down Hall (at current site?)
and a second facility in West County. Concerns about this dual
site approach included: will it result in ethnic division, with
on-going equal service issues? Would it be more expensive, loss
of economies of scale? On positive side, it could create greater
accessibility for all areas of the County.
Other issues related to site were mentioned. It might be
easier to create Redevelopment District financing outside of
Martinez. An architect would be needed to determine what is
feasible at the current site. The Work.Furlough facility was also
mentioned as a potential site, but this may impossible because
Work Furlough is already used for various family services programs.
4 . The workplan should address secure facility needs and any
needed non-secure facility. While only half of the youth now at
the Hall must be there, they are there because non-secure
placements are not available.
The workplan should also address special housing. Should
special needs youth. be in the Hall or elsewhere? The need for
separate housing for girls was discussed.
5. Liz Darst agreed to be chair of the committee.
6. The next meeting will be at the Probation Department on
September 30 at 3:30. . The committee will discuss the draft
workplan prepared by Clyde Parkhurst.
Work Plan - Physical Facilities
Goals:
• Develop projections of the number of detainees expected for both locked, secure facilities
and for placement in other facilities.
• Determine type of secure facility. Should it be a lock down prison or should it be an open
facility such as adult detention facilities in the County?
• Scope the general layout of a facility to the point estimates of cost can be prepared,
obtain cost estimates for construction and staffing.
• Do the same things for those not requiring locked secure incarceration. This may be
either use of existing programs and facilities or new facilities.
• Determine costs of design of all facilities and present to Finance subcommittee.
Work Plan:
• Examine existing data to project number and type of detainees between now ant 2010.
Test these projections to determine their validity.This may require help from consultants.
• Examine successful facilities of both lock down and open types. Work with Probation
organization to determine philosophy to be followed.This will require also working with
CYA to be sure they will be supportive of the type of facility selected.
• Determine the scope of a facility.This should include all necessary infrastructure such as
Court and School facilities.
• Determine what is to be done with those not requiring secure locked facilities.This could
range from increased use of existing programs to design and construction of facilities.
• Determine what improvements are necessary for the existing Hall as an interim to new
facilities. This should include costs for operation.
• Consider renovation of present facilities instead of construction of new facilities. This
should be carried to the point of identifying work and obtaining estimates. The decision
to rebuild or provide new facilities must be made on the basis of factual information
rather than just saying "we need new facilities".
• Make recommendations of work to be done to the full Committee, and then to Board of
Supervisors.
• After approval by Board of Supervisors, select architect and proceed with full design.
9/23/92 CRP File PHYPLAN
MINUTES
FINANCE COMMITTEE
September 23, 1992
Present: Clyde Parkhurst
John Wolfe
Linda Baker
Wayne Simpson
Topics:
1. Clyde Parkhurst will continue as chair.
2. In the previous- meeting, several financing options were
identified. Clyde Parkhurst reported on his findings regarding
three of the options (see attached summaries) .
Redevelopment Agency financing would be viable (outside
Martinez) , although it might be cumbersome to accomplish and the
a revenue stream (in addition to tax increments) for payback would
have to be identified.
Financing through a Public Facilities Corporation would also
be viable. This would be somewhat less cumbersome than the
Redevelopment option. This, too would require identification of
a payback revenue source.
Financing through a Special District appears less viable.
There is doubt whether a Special District for a Juvenile Hall would
be able to levy benefit assessments, and a 2/3 voter approval would
be required.
3 . Possible funding sources to add to the list from the last
meeting include: sale of the current site and use of the proceeds
to relocate the Hall; and acquisition and conversion of a vacant
building (such as office building, motel, hotel, or school) for at
least the youth who do not require secure housing.
4 . For next meeting, Clyde Parkhurst will develop information
on leasebacks from private developers, and Linda Baker will check
on the market value of the current site.
5. The next meeting will be at 4:30 on September 30, at the
Probation Department. The committee will discuss a draft workplan
prepared by Clyde Parkhurst (attached) .
Work Plan - Finance
Goals:
• Analyze various forms of financing,determine which two or three are most promising and
recommend to full committee preferred methods.
Gain approval of Board of Supervisors for recommended financing method.
• Proceed to obtain financing.
• Create a 'sales pitch'to support the need to spend money. Disseminate this information.
Work plan:
• Work with Physical Facilities Committee to determine cost of facilities to be financed.
Until enough information can be developed to accurately do this, assume there is a need
for twenty million dollars.
• Analyze each possible method of financing in enough depth to understand the costs,
advantages, disadvantages, probability of success, etc. for each alternative. Alternatives
include general obligation bonds; private philanthropic contributions; redevelopment
agency project; formation of a special district; obtain State or Federal funding; have built
by Public Facilities Corporation; have privately built with leaseback; benefit assessment
charges to taxpayers; special sales tax and other methods of financing. This effort will
require some use of specialists to help in the analysis.
• Work with other subcommittees to determine changes in ongoing costs. Identify sources
of any ongoing costs greater than present level of funding.
• Work with Physical Facilities Committee to identify work necessary in the interim until
any new facilities come on line. Determine costs and identify sources of funding.
• Present to full Committee and then to Board of Supervisors. Upon approval, execute
financing.
9/23/92 CRP File FINPLAN
Preliminary analysis of financing through Redevelopment Agency
Summary:
A viable alternative, but not as easy to use as the Public Facilities'Corporation.
First, must have a redevelopment area within which the facility would be built. Present location
no go, as it is in City of Martinez,and Martinez does not have or want redevelopment. It is
possible that other locations within County would be in a current redevelopment area, either the
County or one of the Cities.
First, the governing body must establish that a blight exists,and that a redevelopment project is
the only way this blight can be removed.Then a project is formed and financed by tax free bonds
based on the stream of property tax increment and any other income committed to the project.
One example given of this type of use was Riverside County,which built a new County Hospital
using a redevelopment agency. The City of Antioch has built a new$17 million police facility
through their redevelopment agency.
This method of financing shows promise, but would need to be carefully guided to make sure it
met the requirements of redevelopment.
One benefit is that the tax increment increase from normal growth in the project area could be
used to reduce the amount of payback from other County sources.
County Contact: Jim Kennedy, Deputy Director of Redevelopment 646-4076
Advantages:
• Would require less financing from County funds due to incremental property taxes.
• Does not require voter approval.
Disadvantages:
• Somewhat cumbersome.
• Difficult to build in present site.
• Could require formation of new redevelopment area.
9/22/92 CRP File FINRED
Preliminary analysis of financing through Public Faciiities Corporation
Summary
This is a viable alternative.The Public Facilities Corporation exists only as a tool for financing
buildings and property for the County. It builds using tax free revenue bonds and leases back to
the County. At the end of the payback period,the facilities become County property.
Each project must have a payback stream identified and committed before bonds are salable.
This vehicle has been used for many buildings used by the County..It was used for the Antioch
Social Services building.
They key is to commit a long term stream of money for payback.This currently would require
approximately$75,000 per year per million of money spent.As an example,to build a fifteen
million dollar facility would require a payback stream of 15x75,000 or$1,125,000 per year.
This mechanism can also be used for rehabilitation money.As an example,five million could be
used to rehabilitate the present Hall or to convert the Richmond Work Furlough Center.The same
needs for payback would prevail.
There is currently no waiting line for these funds. It would take about three months to issue and
sell bonds once project costs and payback streams have been provided for.
County Contact: DeRoyce Bell, CAO office.646-4093
Advantages:
• Money is reasonably readily available.
• County is used to using this method.
• Does not require voter approval.
Disadvantages:
• Payback stream must be cemented in before bonds can be sold.
• At least 500/6 of design must be complete for going this route. Could be about$750,000.
9/22/92 CRP File FINPFC
Preliminary analysis of financing through a Special District
Summary
Probably not a viable alternative.
There are currently no Special Districts within the County that seem to fit in with modifying or
replacing Juvenile Hall.
A new Special District requires LAFCO approval(probably obtainable)and the voter approval for
any taxes levied. This would be 2/3 voter approval.
Not clear whether a Special District can levy benefit assessments.Terry McGraw, County Special
District Deputy CAO thinks reserved for fire districts.There have been several cities which have
levied for lighting districts. Would require further checking.
County contact: Terry McGraw, CAO office 646-4855
Advantages:
• Special Districts are governed by their own Board.
• There are over 100 already.
Disadvantages:
• Voter approval of levying taxes required.
9/22/92 CRP File FINSPD
JUVENILE HALL REPLACEMENT/REMODEL ADVISORY GROUP
County Government Officials
BUCK, Gerald
County Probation Officer
50 Douglas Drive
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 313-4180
MINNEY, John
Juvenile Court Judge
1020 Ward Street
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-4012
YANCEY, Gary (represented by Jack Waddell, Sr. Deputy District Attorney)
District Attorney
725 Court Street
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-4518
JAMES, Charles
Public Defender
610 Court Street
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-2481
RAINEY, Richard (represented by Chief Deputy Larry Ard)
Sheriff-Coroner
651 Pine Street, 7th Fl.
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-2216
Community Groups Appointing Entity
BOYD, Jerry (Chief) CCC Police Chiefs' Association
Martinez Police Department
525 Henrietta Street
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 228-4141 •
WOLFE, John I. , Jr. CC Taxpayers Association
Executive Vice President
Contra Costa Taxpayers Association
P 0 Box 27
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 228-5610
10/9/92
1
PARKHURST, Clyde , Grand Jury Association
1951 Calaveras Circle
Antioch, CA 94509
(510) 757-4069
LEPAK, Dennis, Executive Director Children's Coalition
Crisis & Suicide Intervention
P O Box 4852
Walnut Creek, CA 94553
(510) 939-1916
Children's Home Society
HASAN, Taalia West County Youth Service
West Contra Costa Youth Bureau
Service Bureau
1300 Amador Street, Rm. 18
San Pablo, CA 94806
(510) 237-9503
SIMPSON, Wayne Drake House
Executive Director
Drake House
808 Grayson Road
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
(510) 935-2590
DARST, Liz Junior League
Contra Costa Law League
38 Pilloh Real
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
(510) 935-9057
MASON, Charles La Cheim School
La Cheim School
P. 0. Box 5000
Richmond, CA 94805
(510) 525-6882
SALVADOR, Jacque (Ms) Henry Clarke, Local 1
Probation Dept. , Juvenile Hall
202 Glacier Drive
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-4725
2
DUENSING, Donna Representative from a West
1515 Santa Clara Street County Interdenominational
Richmond, CA 94804 Ministerial Alliance
(510) 524-5264, x 36 (W)
KUEHN, 12oger (Pastor) Representative from an East
United Lutheran Church County Interdenominational
1360 East Tregallas Road Ministerial Alliance
Antioch, CA 94509
(510) 757-1672 (W)
(510) 757-5182 (H)
BOREN, Stan Representative from general
Millwrights Union, Local 102 labor: Steve Roberti
8400 Enterprise Way, Room 201 Central Labor Council of
Oakland, CA 94621 Contra Costa County
(510) 635-0323 525 Green Street, Martinez
(510) 228-0161
Representative from the
business community: Diane
Longshore, Executive Director
Contra Costa Council
1 Annabelle Lane, #214
San Ramon, CA 94583
(510) 866-6666
County Boards and Commissions
BAKER, Linda L. Juvenile Justice Commission
4003 Via Estrella
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 372-6811
STRISOWER, Suzanne Delinquency Prevention
3159 Lippizaner Lane Commission
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
(510) 930-8778 (H)
(510) 682-9924 (W)
ADAMS, Chris CADSAC
3146 Maryola Court
Lafayette, CA 94549
(510) 935-5731
MILLER, Cynthia Mental Health Advisory Board
105 Jose Lane
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 372-7678
3
SCHLEGEL. Leanne Family and Children's Services
109 Karen Lane Advisory Committee
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 228-4886 (H)
(510) 283-1563 (W)
LIPSETT, Belle Maternal, Child and Adolescent
Maternal, Child & Adolescent Health Advisory Board
Health Advisory Board
282 Los Altos
Kensington, CA 94708
(510) 843-5686
KLEINMAN, Craig Substance Abuse Advisory Board
2821 Carob Street
Antioch, CA 94509
(510) 778-8294
Public Members
SMITH, Frances Supervisor Tom Powers
2574 Sheldon Drive
Richmond, CA 94803
(510) 222-2999
WILLIAMS, Mamie
320 Market Avenue, Apt. 629
Richmond, CA 94801
(510) 231-0200 (W)
Supervisor Nancy C. Fanden
CAMPOS-DOMINGUEZ, Angelo Supervisor Robert Schroder
1600 Sunnyvale Avenue, #4
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
(510) 944-7193
Supervisor Sunne McPeak
Supervisor Tom Torlakson
4
Ex-officio Technical Advisory Board
ROEMER, George County Administrator
County Administrator's Office
651 Pine Street, 10th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-4855
DAWES, Vickie County Counsel
County Counsel's Office
651 Pine Street, 9th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-2060
BABA, Bob General Services Dept.
General Services (Architectural Div. )
Architectural Division
1220 Morello Ave. , #100 .
Martinez, CA 94553
(510)313-7200
DEENNAN, Debbie Community Development
Community Development
651 Pine Street, North Wing
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-2031
BASTIAN, Lorna Health Services Director
Health Services
20 Allen Street
MARTINEZ
(510) 370-5055
ARMSTRONG, Kathy Youth Services Coordinator
Youth Services Coordinator
5 Admiral Drive, F-219
Emeryville, CA 94608
(510) 646-4099
BLOOM, Bianca County Schools
Director, Alternative Education
77 Santa Barbara Road
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
(510) 942-3388
CORCORAN, Ken Auditor-Controller
Auditor-Controller `
625 Court Street
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-2181
5
ORMSBY, Ruth Health Services: Mental
Children Services Program Chief Health
595 Center Avenue, #200
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 313-6408
GROSSI, David Superintendent of Juvenile
Superintendent, Juvenile Hall Hall
202 Glacier Drive
Martinez, CA 94553
(510) 646-4800
SASNETT, Kaye (Ms) California Youth Authority
California Youth Authority
Parole Serv. & Community Correct.
4241 Williamsbourgh Drive, #223
Sacramento, CA 95823
(916) 427-4748
6