Full_Commission2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999
MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2000 REGULAR MEETING
Held in Rm. 400, City Hall, at 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett
Place, San Francisco
<![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]>
1. (ACTION) Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Comm.
Julian at 5:38 pm. Comms. Aramburo,
Shimko, Chuck were present at the gavel.
Comm. Hale and Jackson-Drake arrived at 5:44 pm. Comm. Dupre was absent.
Comm. Julian began the meeting
by wishing all present a happy, healthy and prosperous new millennium.
<![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>(ACTION)
Review of October 27, and November 17, 1999 meeting minutes
As there was no quorum of
Commissioners present who were in attendance at the Oct. 27 meeting, action on
the minutes was deferred. On motion,
seconded and carried, the minutes of Nov. 17, 1999 were approved as written.
3. (DISCUSSION) Chief Probation
<![if !supportLists]>b. <![endif]>Highlights of Nov/Dec 1999
Chief Williams reported that because
of the passage of Prop. G, topics to be covered in reports by the CPO need to
be much more specifically noted on the agenda, so it would not be advisable to
speak about things now that were not agendized for tonight's meeting. He stated that he would come up with a list
of items that he might touch on at each meeting and have the Commission review
it to note what they would like included.
For tonight, he only mentioned that there would be a status report on
the ProDes project.
Comm. Shimko noted with
approval that the numbers (admission, referrals to CYA, detentions, etc.) for
year 1999 were all generally lower than those for 1998, which indicates an
Deputy City Attorney John Kennedy commented
that the monthly report was part of the materials made available to the
public. He reviewed the specific
language from Prop. G, to clarify the parameters for presenting and discussing
topics at meetings.
Comm. Shimko asked if the
monthly report is a regular item, is it within the parameters for
discussion? Answer: yes. If specific
months are mentioned.
Comm. Arámburo asked about incident
reports for the hall and what the character of the contraband was. J. Medina did not have the specific
information asked, but said that most of those incidents occurred at admission.
Presentation of commendation to former Commissioner Terry Landini-Brennan.
stated that Ms. Landini-Brennan was unfortunately unable to be here for the
presentation, due to personal, and health reasons. Supervisor Leland Yee had also expressed a desire to attend if
she had been here. Comm. Shimko
read the language of the resolution into the record (attached to minutes). The original resolution was passed in August
of 1999. Comm. Julian directed
the Commission Secretary to make sure the certificate reached Ms.
(ACTION) Consideration of, and possible action on Program Committee's
recommendation to contract with the American Justice Institute in the amount
of $179,000 for the continued
implementation of ProDes.
Hale corrected the amount stated for the contract. The correct amount is $197,000. He yielded to Dr. T. Oberweis for a
report. Oberweis reviewed that the
project is moving along very well, with no serious problems. They are on
schedule. They hope to do a test of the evaluation instrument, using 8 to 10
programs, in April, and be able to do a total data collection process beginning
in July. Chief Williams stated that
this coming Monday, the Executive Steering Committee will be meeting to review
the progress and make sure the course is set appropriately. He noted that Comm.Dupre is a member of that
committee. He further reported that
they are looking to hire a research associate, to be a liaison between the
Juvenile Probation Department and Dr. Oberweis, in preparing for the incorporation
of ProDes into the intrinsic department operations. Dr. Oberweis again offered to include the concerns of the
Commission in the development of the process.
Comm. Chuck reiterated
that he wanted the Commissioners to be surveyed about this issue.
It was stated that TANF
contractors are included in the population of participating CBOs for the
On motion by Comm. Hale, seconded by Comm. Chuck and
carried, the Commission approved the $ 197,000 contract with the American
Justice Institute, 6-0.
c. (DISCUSSION) Discusssion on the "Criminalization of Youth." For example, Prop 21
Wilson juvenile crime initiative).
Julian stated that upon advice of counsel, any discussion must be done in a
balanced manner, without a position being taken by the Commission. He noted that the Bd of Supervisors passed a
resolution in opposition to Prop. 21.
asked the Commissioners to comment on what he felt was a trend in society
toward the harsher treatment of youth offenders.Deputy City Attorney John
Kennedy said that if the Commission wanted to refer to a case of a 10 year
old in Michigan, brought up previously in past discussions, it would be okay,
but to steer away from using the topic to advance a position on an election or
Williams read the statement of the Secretary of State that appears in the
Arámburo asked if the
initiative would do away with 707 hearings.
Counsel advised not to pursue general questioning along these lines. Comm. Arámburo said
her concern was that the impact of the initiative would be to increase the need
for high level, longer term, secure lock up for youth awaiting adult court, and
what the Department has to do to prepare for this. The increased use of gang affiliation charges would possibly
impact both the hall and LCR. Counsel
further advised that much more discussion might lead to imbalance in
presentation. Comm. Julian asked
if Kennedy could find people to come before the Commission to present both
sides. He responded that he might be
able to. Comm. Hale commented
that he believed the Commission directly responsible for knowing what the
implications and impact the proposition would have on the running of this
Department. He wondered if the Attorney
General could be enlisted to give an analysis to the Commission. Comm. Julian agreed that what Comm.
Hale brought up -the consequences of the bill—are of critical importance to
the Commission and Department. J.
Kennedy said that such a discussion might be bettered held after the Nov.
Shimko referred to a portion of Kennedy's memo to the Commission, which she
interpreted to allow the Commission a discussion to investigate and evaluate
the potential impact of the ballot measure on city operations.
Arámburo said that
the bill would surely impact the ultimate design and plan for the new juvenile
facility. Comm. Shimko repeated
that possibly under the portion of the memo she read from, the Commission could
direct the Department to investigate and present a case for the impact of the
bill on the Department. J. Kennedy
emphasized presenting both sides (pro and con) of it. Comm. Hale said that this was not his intent. His was to understand the administrative
impact on the Department eg. financial
costs, staffing, resources, programming, facilities. etc.
Julian recalled the case of the 10 yr old who was tried as an adult. He asked J. Kennedy if he could pose the
question for discussion of whether society should treat a 10 yr old as an
adult. Kennedy repeated that such a
question should not make reference to the ballot measure. Comm. Julian asked rhetorically
whether trial by peers on juries would allow the involvement of 10 yr olds,
adjudged to be adults? Or maybe a 10 yr
Julian asked this topic to be put on a future agenda.
<![if !supportLists]>d. <![endif]>(DISCUSSION) Proposal for revised
Williams reviewed that in past contracting activities, it became clear that
there needed to be a consistent and commonly understood process for contracting
(the number of contracts entered into by the Department has jumped five
fold). *** The document discussed is
available from the JPC office. But basically: Sandy Brown-Richardson referred
to pg 1, explaining that contract
thresholds have been raised to $75K. On pg.2, for sole source contracts the
threshold has been raised to $75K.
condition for contracts is that if the amount is over $50K, then a public
hearing is required. Personal services contracts (consultants) over $75K would
go before the Commission for approval.
Shimko referred to #4 which states that after a panel selects a contractor,
it is awarded. This is not so. The
Commission must approve it before an award is made. On another point, she asked why pg 1, #5 says contracts first
come to the Commission for approval, and then contracts are drafted and come to
the Commission for approval to enter the contract. This seems to be the same for sole source contracts (steps 1 and
6). What is the potential of a consent
calendar for such actions? Can we work
with the City Attorney's office to streamline this process? Comm. Shimko said that it seems
unecessary for the Commission to approve contracting with someone, and then
having to come back and approve the final contract.
do we need a resolution for such actions?
Or is it adequate to just reflect the action in the Commission
minutes. For sole source contracts,
the process should follow established rules.
Having a resolution allowing the Chief to enter into contract with (x and y) would be adequate, so the
Commission wouldn't have to re visit the contract for action at the end of the
Discussion of election of officers.
was just noted as a reminder that the Commission will hold elections at their
February meeting. There was no further discussion.
<![if !supportLists]>4. <![endif]>(DISCUSSION) Public Comment on any matter
within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission.
There was no public
<![if !supportLists]>5. <![endif]>(DISCUSSION) Unfinished business
Comm. Julian pondered the
appropriateness of this unspecific item.
J. Kennedy said that if there were items of unfinished business, they
would have to be listed out.
<![if !supportLists]>6. <![endif]>(DISCUSSION) New business
Comm. Shimko raised the same
question regarding this item, and whether it could be listed as Requests for
future agenda items, and announcements.
Kennedy said that without discussion, it would be okay. And about announcements? Answer: if they do not entail Commission
business, it would be okay.
The meeting was adjourned at 650 pm.