Reentry Council City & County of San Francisco
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Reentry Council City & County of San Francisco MINUTES Tuesday, August 18, 2015 10:00 a.m. Milton Marks Auditorium California State Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA Members Present: Paul Henderson, alternate for Mayor Ed Lee, co-chair; Cristine Soto DeBerry, alternate for George Gascón, co-chair; Karen Fletcher, co-chair; Ross Mirkarimi, co-chair; Simin Shamji, alternate for Jeff Adachi, co-chair; Joe Calderon; Michael Carr; Joyce Crum, alternate for Trent Rhorer; Armel Farnsworth alternate for Steve Lin; Leslie Levitas; Commander Bob Moser, alternate for Chief Gregory Suhr; Laura Moyé, alternate for Maria Su; Craig Murdock, alternate for Jo Robinson; Allen Nance; and Karen Roye Members Absent: Kimberli Courtney, Omorede Rico Hamilton, Yador Harrell, Ernest Kirkwood, Keenia Williams 1. Call to Order and Introductions. Mayor’s Chief of Staff Paul Henderson called the meeting to order at 10:05am, acknowledged the co- chairs, and asked that members introduce themselves. 2. Public Comment on Any Item Listed Below as for “Discussion Only.” Daniel Landry stated that this was his first time coming to a Reentry Council meeting. He said that he follows SFGOV TV, and during one program, heard from Sheriff Mirkarimi about the need for bodies like the Reentry Council to have teeth. Mr. Landry agrees that this body should have more teeth. He said that justice needs to take on a different look and that the San Francisco Police Department needs to be investigated by the Department of Justice. Mr. Landry identified himself as an ex felon, and encouraged the Reentry Council and other similar bodies to include participation by people with criminal history experience. 3. Review and Adoption of Meeting Minutes of June 23, 2015 (discussion & possible action). Cristine Soto DeBerry moved that the minutes be approved. Seconded by Sheriff Mirkarimi. The motion passed. 4. Staff Report on Activities of the Reentry Council and its Subcommittees (discussion & possible action). a. Staff updates Karen Shain reported on the following: Getting Out and Staying Out is online (http://sfgov2.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2856) and at the printer. Printed copies should be available mid-September. Page 1 Reentry Council City & County of San Francisco Tomorrow night, August 19th, the film Unlikely Friends, will be shown at the Main Branch of the San Francisco Public Library. The showing is at 5:30 pm. This is part of the Visions of Justice film series presented by the Reentry Council. b. Subcommittee updates Laura Thomas, Chair of the Policy and Operational Practices Subcommittee reported that the Subcommittee discussed the Burns Institute report on racial disparities, and expressed concerns about community voices being heard. She stated that the Subcommittee is ready to help get input from communities. The subcommittee is also interested in looking more deeply at the 290 lifetime registration for sex offenders, barriers, and how to best address the issue. The next meeting is on September 9, 2015 at City Hall, Room 305. Karen Shain reported that the last meeting of the Assessment and Connections Subcommittee included a presentation by the Coalition on Homelessness regarding its new report, “Punishing the Poorest: How the Criminalization of Homelessness Perpetuates Poverty in San Francisco.” The Subcommittee requests that the Coalition be invited to do a presentation to the full Reentry Council. The next meeting of the Assessment & Connections subcommittee is on September 9th, 9am, in room 305 of City Hall. Karen also reported that the Support & Opportunities Subcommittee meeting included a presentation by Chief Adult Probation Officer Karen Fletcher. The conversation included discussion of her vision for the Adult Probation Department over the next several years. The next meeting will include a discussion about the mental health needs of people coming out of jail and prison. That meeting will be held on September 17th, 1:00 pm, City Hall, Room 305. 5. Regular Update on Legislation and Funding Related to Reentry (discussion only). In an effort to create more time for discussion of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), Karen Shain provided brief overviews of legislation and grants, and directed members’ attention to associated parts of the agenda packet. Ms. Shain directed members to page 11 of the meeting materials, suggested that members review the list of legislative policies, and shared that many are returning to appropriations the week of August 17, 2015. Ms. Shain also shared that AB1036, a bill that permits the use of jail identification for notarizations in jail was supported by the Reentry Council and the City and County of San Francisco, and has made its way thru the California legislature and was signed by Governor Brown. Ms. Shain also shared that the state of California reversed a previous decision, and now grants people under PRCS and mandatory supervision the right to vote in the state of California. Ms. Shain also asked members to review grant information on pages 19-23 of the meeting materials and to alert her with any changes or updates. 6. Regular Update on Activities of the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Sentencing Commission, Collaborative Courts, and Community Corrections Partnership (discussion only). Ms. Shain asked members to review report backs from each council which start on page 24 of the meeting materials. 7. Follow-Up on Justice Reinvestment Initiative (discussion & possible action). Page 2 Reentry Council City & County of San Francisco Item 7 of the agenda is a discussion of Phase II of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI). While funding ends in September, 2015, the Council will continue to hear report backs on the strategy at future meetings. a. Lore Joplin, Consultant to Crime and Justice Institute: San Francisco’s Justice Reinvestment Initiative Phase II close out process and next steps Lore Joplin, technical advisor of JRI thru Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) provided a JRI recap, and identified next steps. Ms. Joplin shared that the JRI process recommends allocating resources to highest risk people in the system (those who are at highest risk of reoffending) and treating lower risk people outside of the criminal justice system. Evidence shows this will reduce recidivism and increase public safety. Ms. Joplin shared that JRI Phase II focused on three areas: pretrial services, racial disparities, and risk based probation sentences. Next steps include looking into expanding pretrial services. Going forward Pretrial Diversion Project (PDP) will use an assessment tool created by the Arnold Foundation. The Foundation will continue to support the work past the end of the JRI grant. In tandem with the Arnold Foundation work, PDP and the Sheriff’s Department have completed a data sharing project which bridges software between the two entities so that agreed upon information can be more easily shared. The bridged software allows for real time data sharing, and will achieve greater data integrity and program efficiencies. Lastly, Ms. Joplin shared that the BJA has a grant application from the Reentry Council for JRI Phase III work. The Council should hear about this grant by the end of September. b. Martin Krizay, Chief Deputy Adult Probation Officer: Risk-Based Probation Sentencing Chief Deputy Adult Probation Officer Marty Krizay shared an update on Risk-Based Probation Sentences, and directed members to an update overview on page 51 of the meeting materials. Risk-Based Sentencing recommends that a client’s COMPAS score be part of the deliberation regarding the length of a defendant’s sentence. Having a low COMPAS score may result in 18 month probation, medium and medium-high COMPAS scores may result in 24 months, and high COMPAS score may result in 36 months with stipulations for review of termination at 24 months. A ramp-up phase for Risk-Based Sentencing started in May 2015, and limited data shows an increase in the use of Risk-Based Sentencing. Of 68 sentences since May 2015, 32 people were sentenced to less than three years of probation. More data on Risk-Based Sentencing needs to be collected to understand its impact. DC Krizay suggested that looking at a snapshot of sentences from a year ago for the same crimes would reveal more three-year sentences during that time. If Risk-Based Sentencing works well, a benefit could be shorter the sentences, fewer resources used, and more opportunity for reinvestment. Laura Moyé asked what makes someone not eligible. Are there specific crimes that make a defendant ineligible? DC Krizay responded that there are specific crimes that have statutorily set probation terms, e.g., DUIs and sex offenses. c. Lt. Dave Hardy, Unit Commander, and Ali Riker, Director of Programs, San Francisco Sheriff’s Department; and Will Leong, Executive Director, Pretrial Diversion Project: Microstrategies Data Bridge San Francisco Sheriff’s Department representatives, Lt. Dave Hardy and Ali Riker, gave a presentation on the purchase of business intelligence software that will bridge Pretrial Diversion Project (PDP) and the Sheriff’s Department data. They explained that in the past, the systems operated independently and were Page 3 Reentry Council City & County of San Francisco set up differently. Each system gathered different information, and they were isolated from each other even though the two entities worked hand in hand. The new software allows the entities to compare demographics, population statistics, identify where data is broken, and helps to detail inefficiencies. Following their powerpoint presentation (available in the meeting materials), Simin Shamji inquired why the Sheriff’s Department was using booking charges and not the charges filed by the DA as a first step towards assessing pretrial eligibility. Lt. Hardy affirmed it was a good question, and offered that charging data is always changing so it is harder to use it as a qualifier. The booking charges are static and accurate at booking. However, the system allows them to look regularly at the status of a person’s case to see how things change from booking to charging/resolution.