The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 11031992 - IO.2 . TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS -2. Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa 9; County DATE: October 26, 1992 Or`�y SUBJECT: PLANNING PROCESS FOR REPLACEMENT AND/OR REMODEL OF JUVENILE HALL SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Authorize the County Auditor-Controller to transfer $95,000 from the Designated Reserve for Juvenile Hall Replacement to Budget Unit 0128 - Juvenile Hall Replacement to pay for expenses, staff, and consultants for the Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group to continue planning work regarding Juvenile Hall capital needs . 2 . Direct that all expenditures for this project be approved by the County Administrator or his designee. 3 . Approve the scope of work as presented to the Internal Operations Committee, with the minor changes suggested by the County Administrator' s Office in the attached report. 4 . Request the Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group to report to the 1993 Internal Operations Committee at the conclusion of Phase I (approximately April 1, 1993) and thereafter as directed by the Board of Supervisors and for this purpose refer this issue to the 1993 Internal Operations Committee. 5 . Remove this item as a referral to our Committee. BACKGROUND: On October 20, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved a report from our Committee, which included referring the report of the Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group to the County Administrator for the purpose of reviewing the requested budget and available staff resources . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTYADMI RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHE SIGNATURE(S): DER SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK ACTION OF BOARD ON Quem er 3, 199Z APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) 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. 2 ATTESTED Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF CC: SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR See Page 2 . BY- �� 'DEPUTY I .O.-2 On October 26, 1992, the County Administrator' s Office filed the attached report with our Committee. We met with Clyde Parkhurst and Chris Adams, co-chairs of the Advisory Group; Linda Baker, Vice-Chair of the Juvenile Justice Commission; Jerry Buck, County Probation Officer; Mark Morris, consultant to the Advisory Group; and George Roemer from the County Administrator' s Office. Mr. Roemer briefly reviewed the attached report with our Committee. Both Mr. Parkhurst and Ms . Adams indicated their concurrence with the report since it left open the option to return to the County Administrator and Board of Supervisors for additional money if the Advisory Group deemed it necessary to do so. We are concurring with the recommendation of the County Administrator that only $95,000 be allocated for the work of the Advisory Group at this time, rather than the $166,500 which the Advisory Group had requested. We are also suggesting that the Advisory Group report back to the 1993 Internal Operations Committee at the end of Phase I of their work, as is outlined in the attached report. cc: County Administrator John C. Minney, Juvenile Court Judge Gerald S. Buck, County Probation Officer Kenneth J. Corcoran, Auditor-Controller Barton J. Gilbert, Director of General Services Annemarie M. Goldstein, Foreman, 1992-93 Grand Jury Juvenile Justice Commission (Via Probation Department) Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group (Via CAO) De Royce Bell, Deputy County Administrator George Roemer, Senior Deputy County Administrator -2- 4'.� ,,f _•_._•°� Contra Costa TO: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE x•t County SUPERVISOR SUNNE W. MC PEAK �' SUPERVISOR ROBERT SCHRODER FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR County Administrator DATE: October 21, 1992 SUBJECT: PLANNING PROCESS FOR REPLACEMENT AND/OR REMODEL OF JUVENILE HALL Specific Request( s) or Recommendation( s) & Background & Justification RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Authorize County Auditor-Controller to transfer $95, 000 from the Designated Reserve for Juvenile Hall Replacement to Budget Unit 0128 - Juvenile Hall Replacement to pay for expenses, staff, and consultants for the Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group to continue planning work regarding Juvenile Hall capital needs. 2. Direct that all expenditures for this project be approved by the County Administrator or his designee. 3. Direct that the scope of the work be as described in the discussion below, and that the Advisory Group report to the Internal Operations Committee at intervals described below. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No additional general fund impact. Funds have previously been reserved to proceed with this planning activity. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: The Board created the Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Group on June 16 , 1992, directed the County Administrator to provide interim staff support to the Advisory Group, and requested the Advisory Group to e a status report to the Internal Operations Committee by Oct9}ae 6 , 99 Continued on Attachment: X YES Signature: Recommendation of County Administrator Recommendation of Board Committee Approve Other Signature(s) : Action of Board on: Approved as Recommended-----other Vote of Supervisors: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN Unanimous (Absent ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE Ayes: Noes: ) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN. Contact: George Roemer (646-4855) Attested: cc: CAO-Justice System Programs Phil Batchelor, Clerk of Advisory Group Members the Board of Supervisors County Auditor-Controller and County Administrator CAO-Capital Projects By: , DEPUTY 1 The County Administrator contacted recommended group members to meet membership representation specified in the June 16 Board Order. Persons agreeing to serve (and the appointing entity) are listed in Attachment 1. Clyde Parkhurst and Chris Adams were elected co-.chairs by the Advisory Group. The Advisory Group met three times to define the scope and workplan for the Juvenile Hall Replacement effort. Four subcommittees (on Alternatives to Detention, Hall Function, Financing, and Physical Facilities) also met at lease three times each. The workplan recommended by the Advisory Group is Attachment 2 . The Internal Operations 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 to discuss the proposed workplan. In a status report to the Board about that meeting, the IO Committee expressed appreciation for the work done, endorsed in concept the workplan of the Advisory Group, and referred the workplan and proposed budget to the County Administrator for review. Following are County Administrator ' s Office .recommendations: I . SCOPE The scope of work in the workplan is appropriate for this study, with the following minor stipulations. In order to expedite the process, it is recommended that the Advisory Group consider only the current Juvenile Hall site and the West County Detention Facility properties in its analysis of sites. As directed by the IO Committee, the Advisory Group charge will include the identification and exploration of alternatives to detaining a juvenile at Juvenile Hall, including alternative placement options. The project should focus on juvenile justice matters. A full exploration of all youth and family services in the County is beyond the scope of this project. The Advisory Group should also consider the potential impact of a Phase II Program Realignment, specifically whether. the County should retain CYA placements in alternative local or regional placements. In addition, planning should include provision of juvenile court space within the juvenile hall complex that is adequate to permit, if necessary, centralization of all juvenile court activity. II . BUDGET The following budget is recommended. Staff support and ad hoc consultants: $30,000 Architectural services (through pre- architectural programming) : 50,000 Misc. expenses, mileage, and travel: 15,000 Total: $95,000 This budget is intended to carry the project through the approximately 12 months needed to complete the project through pre- architectural programming ( if needed) . The budget is provisional; if at the conclusion of Phase I ( see schedule below) , budget modifications seem warranted, the County Administrator will present additional recommendations to the Board through the Internal Operations Committee. All requests for travel, consultants, and other expenses shall be approved in advance by the County Administrator or his designee to ensure that they correspond with County regulations and with the scope of the project. Automobile mileage reimbursement to and from . meetings shallbe consistent with. County policy and be limited to citizen members of the Advisory Group (County employees and official representatives of formal organizations are excluded) . 2 Other unbudgeted County support will be available to the Advisory Group if needed, for example, minimal clerical support, advice regarding capital financing strategies, etc. The budgeted staff support shown above is to provide staff assistance to the Advisory Group and its subcommittees in preparing information for, and conducting, meetings. The staff support and outside consultant budget is relatively modest for a project of this scope, in recognition of the Advisory Group' s intention and willingness to do much of the work (such as site visits, program observations, etc. ) itself. III . SCHEDULE The Advisory Group did not provide a schedule with its workplan. Following is a recommended schedule. Reports from the Advisory Group should follow each Phase, with IO Committee approval before proceeding with the next phase. Phase I : Define Hall and Placement Beds In this phase, the Advisory Group should study and make recommendations regarding the size, scope and complementary alternative placements for the Hall. It should also make recommendations regarding whether the Hall should be renovated and/or replaced, and at what location( s) . At the conclusion of Phase I , in April 1993 , the Advisory Group should report its recommendations to the IO Committee regarding these issues. Preliminary estimates of capital and operating costs for the recommendations should be included. Phase II : Define Facility and Financing Options If the IO Committee accepts the Advisory Group recommendations, Phase II will focus on facility and program planning. Specifically, the Advisory Group will work with the Probation Department and an architect to develop general site plans and facility pre-architectural programs. If the facility proposal is tied to creation or continuation of particular placement alternatives, the Advisory Group should develop an implementation plan. In addition, the Advisory Group should meet again with the IO Committee to report recommended facility and program details. This should include more precise capital and operations cost estimates. Phase III : Capital Projects and/or Program Implementation The scope and emphasis of Phase III work cannot be predicted at this time since implementation activities will depend on Advisory Group findings and on County fiscal considerations. 3 Attachment 1 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 (.�51 Pine Street, 7t.h F.1. Mart.incr, CA 94553 ( 510) 646-22.16 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 ' . � fAUl0fORST, Clyde Grand Jury Association 1951 Calaveras Circle Antioch, C& 94509 (510) 757-4069 LEPAK, Dennis, Executive Director Cbi)dreo`a Coalition Crisis & Suicide Intervention ' P 0 Box 4852 Walnut Creek, CA 94553 (SlO) 939-I9I6 ` Children's Home Society HASAN, Taalia West County Youth Service West Contra Costa Youth Bureau Service Bureau I300 Amador Street' Dm. 18 San Pablo, CA 94806 (510) 237-9503 SIMP50N, Wayne Drake House Executive Director Drake Hoose 808 Grayson Road Pleasant. |ljll, C& 94523 (510) 935-2590 D&BST' l.iu Junior League Contra Coota Law League 38 yillob Real Pleasant. Uill' C& 94623 (5I0) 935-9057 MASON, Charles La Cbeim School Lo Cbebn School P. O' Box 5000 Richmond, C& 94805 (510) 525-6882 SALVADOR, Jacque (Mo) Henry Clarke, Local I Probation Dept' , Juvenile Hall 202 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 (5I0) 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, Roger (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 1003 Vi.a '-strel.la Martinez, CA 94553 (51.0) 37�-681.1. STRISOWER, Suzanne Delinquency Prevention 31.59 Lippizaner Lane Commission Walnut Creek, CA 94598 (510) 930-8"178 (H) (510) 682-9924 (W) ADAMS, Chris CADSAC 3146 Maryol.a 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, 6iild 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. Faliden 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 (51-0) 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) 646-2.031 BASTIAN, Lorna Health Services Director Health Services 20 Allen Street MA WJ'I N E'7., ( 516) 310-5055 ARMSTIZONG, Kathy ,'outh 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 Attachment 2 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 UO 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. OVERVIEW Juvenile Hall Replacement Advisory Gro ua 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. 5. 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. S. 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 ISe 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 haw 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 wands 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 Pian - 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. i 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 Nall 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. 0 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. 0 C; tz U� C; tic� cl 40 W), U) to 4* w 404% w V- (L 0 OG wQ IL) a 0 0 z Q .0 < g . V-- z 6% 40 U. Gl Wo a a 0 C) 0w a a a (D C�Iq 0 Ct q C� Ct 4q LLI -1 %0 UW) o co N- w 619, 6% If) 460 P. LL. a. LU zo C) a 0 C� 0 w p: cW� LU w z C.) 6& w IN M 2 LL LU > 0 M 0o C:) o C)C) 40 w C5 CD LL > C:) o Un U) W LO p CN tC4z 40 C14 to Q) z Z a: W LU M -i x uj a -i a C) C) 0 LU C) C) 40 40 bac) C� CD LL - to CO) uj LL LU LL U) > W W V) D Ol z ca > V) (1) w 0 w z Z z Q I-- L< o b X w w W W t M cf) w co 2: z 0 v0 0 uj 0 w <w 0 0. 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 answerspecific 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'/6 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 me.:t:ngs. 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 101%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 10%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. S. Add 10%for contingencies and incidentals-$6500. D � J x x Ix xx xx x x x ir K � Q ll I I E } I o x x x xx .91O = x xx xx Ix IXI x 1XIX IXI a ? x x xx x x x x xxx x x x LL L - v ` L L - 4 v W > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ _ _ a � 'avt) aav -csvzs m 3 3 Q Q d Q d < < < < < Q W LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL L L L t r t L L L 00000000000 a 4) a 4) 4) 4) a 4) 4) 4) a F- F- H F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- 0 v C M � C�^- -D C O Q C c U > N E Q o a a` o c a m v c C7 w a m a m a _ mU Q E ,m a G p CLcIm U 0 U)CLU a .o = Cl) o o �m d r o 0 U o 0 U o N Zq o a o o65 •-a-� o o C � o 5 U = aa o (L k U a M � > F'ap 00C: m 0U o 00U0 00000 Q 0> 0MadaQo o O d mm Ot9 o m 0Ud= U UK4) Un mmUJmJLL0c> 0mNO0UUUUUlol 'I d UU _ ¢ < c c ` 4) a _ n c tF c = } WJ a a � o ,cn 0 ` m U v w e 75 75 Oja am > o 4) = cc CC / N O = C F' a) m 231P w w a LU•� a t Ww; CO Vo A p '� d m a m tUh JamU CL N U 4) L .IIa 4) C0 'o — opoC p a4) u : 0 UO p>a _4 xEin C=A CO cm 0aU p a OQ 04U) 0 4) M 2 VzaUU w ` > � UaoU -1 '- UnW p0 - (9 � ZU0aU UU co M d' .- h+ •- U) — OMI V' co vN (Oo N N 0 0o00 0aCDma CD M .-- OHOM W )�,,, . UJ M 0) i- LO V co (7} tt? N O GSD 0) h- r co CO — (D N co CF) 0) M O r 0) O CD N co (o M O C.1 (t) N 1- C�pDC? �- � r0 (OIn � N (0C) (OCDOOt-•- CoUl0) OCN (OONMMr0000 'T00 0L? l )[S19L? CDNCD -- -- K'iT ` IT `TNN a- OlO17 � MaC NC eC � IT t i r t s t t (n (OCJOCDM V tf7AYh (0tl- V) CAMLo 0C*4Ict VNCON 1e; Cd (0MNt0 (0 (0 (0 (0M (0 � = M 'ct' h. t� NstMNM � t� 4� M V` Ntt (L) �hNMN e- MN � � StM � � ttst .- st• O CLCD (0MMNCf) (bCDLO,NC I- I- m cotot0fl- (0NO3N MNC140M0) (0Co (0 (0 (oM (0 N N O CA C E O a cn C O 4) � Eaa (ra �ca` (mn � •mmmNmc � > LE '= 0R . oE � p2 � � aEWE �j t!? m � u) > UE g4dmmmmia001 1 cY � � � 3caini� c�nco < m0 4) mm000t9owco N 2' m m ma Ua c a m Ca 0C> NN Ca -YU C' +-' c C - 4) ,>7 L_ 4YTam Y gm m (CU�C ud L "n = C qL .O U m a pC J _ 4) ommUo m m mmC OaO < U - m � _ Q m U � u. 0 LL (n U o N m Q Minutes Functions Subcommittee Juvenile Hali 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 Manors whose manifest capacity for violence `�poses 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, Autilority. 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. JHW:mg 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: 1 . 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. El Dorado County, in California, and Massachusetts and Now 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. Bello 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 the steed for a "philosophical framework"--for a statement of the baric values that will guide juvenile justice and services in the county. 6. The next meeting will be September 15 at 4.00. 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 to be 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'. .I* 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 SaBnett 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 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 Goup 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 be 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. Determinecosts and identify sources of funding. • Present to full Committee and then to Board of Supervisors. Upon approval, execute financing. 9/23/92 CRP File FINPIAN 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. 9122192 GRP File FlNRED Preliminary analysis of financing through Public Facilities Corporation Summary .This is a viable alternative.The Public Facilities Corporation exists or ly 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 50°/a of design must be complete for going this route. Could be about$750,000. 9/72/92 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, GAO office 646-4855 Advantages: • Special Districts are governed by their own Board. • There are over,100 already. Disadvantages: • Voter approval of levying taxes required. 9122/92 CRP File FINSPD