To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

Meeting Information


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 

        held at City Hall   Room  406   Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place San Francisco, CA   94102

The Minutes of this meeting set forth all actions taken by the Commission on the matters stated, but not necessarily the chronological sequence in which the matters were taken up


(ACTION)  Roll Call
Comm Ricci called the meeting to order at 6:07 pm.  Comms. Queen, Bonilla, Stiglich, and Hale were present at the gavel.  Comm. Chuck was excused.   Comm Richard arrived at 6:23 pm.


(ACTION) Review and approval of April 28, and May 26, 2004 meeting minutes
Comm Ricci tabled the action until Comm Richard could be there to vote on the minutes. At the end of the meeting, Comm Ricci had been excused, and in her absence, Comm Richard suggested tabling the action until the next full Commission meeting so she could also be there.  Comm Hale corrected the spelling of Thomas Layne.

(public comments)
There were none.


(DISCUSSION) Chief Probation Officer’s Report
a.    Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative update
        G. Bieringer was on vacation, so there was no update

b.    Budget update
        M Lui gave an oral report. He said that Harvey Rose has already recommended an additional $121K of cuts from the Mayor’s submitted budget. The categories are:  equipment for the new JH (reduced $30K, MIS equipment by $38K, and a 9708 employment specialist position, another $52K.  They also asked for an elimination of empty positions: 2-8414 Supervising POs, 2-8444 DPOs, 8340 Asst Dir JH, 8323 Sr. Counselor at LCRS, 8142 public defender.

       He said the final decisions on our budget would be made July 2, in the Bd chambers.

       Comm Hale asked how the Bd/Rose, as non-experts in this field, could recommend cuts of professional positions.  Lui said that they (the Dept) would be going back and explaining to them the impact of these cuts.  He said that they would agree with most of those (Rose’s) decisions but some they will be addressing.

      Comm Hale said that these recommended cuts were a policy decision.  He opposed someone like H. Rose coming in from outside, and making the decisions without even discussing it with the Commission. He said this action flies in the face of the SF Charter.

      Comm Stiglich asked Lui; the Dept had designated 5 positions for salary savings? Lui didn’t catch the question.  She repeated, they had listed 5 positions that were going to be taken off the books.  Lui said, deleted, for lay offs.  Stiglich: so they existed, for lay offs.  So there were people who hold those positions who are going to be laid off?  Lui; yes.  Stiglich: with respect to the one that’s going to be counted against the budget, nobody is in that position? Lui; the positions …are all vacant positions, so there is no budgetary…or no dollar reduction in our budget.

      Stiglich: they were vacant positions because we were not allowed to fill them?

      Lui; correct. And we do not anticipate getting the authority from the Controller and the Mayor.

     Comm Stiglich asked how long the vacancies existed.  Lui gave one estimate for one position but didn’t have the exact fact for every one.  There were no specific answers given.

      Comm Hale repeated his displeasure about others (Bd of Supes, H Rose) making decisions without consulting the Commission.

       The Chief said, “one of the things we wanted you to take note of, is of the public protection agencies, Juvenile Probation Dept is taking a 15.4 cut, Fire Dept is taking a 5.9 cut, Police Dept is taking a 1.4 cut, and the Sheriff’s Dept is taking a 1.2 cut. So, we are taking a significantly heavy cut in terms of public safety agencies.”  “Additionally, we were notified less than a month ago, on June 2, that the Sheriff’s would no longer be covering the front door, which has a significant public safety issue.” (sic)

       The Chief said that the courts’ budgets were cut and they would no longer pay for the Sheriffs. The cost of 2 deputies would be $200K. She reported that the Sheriff agreed to keep covering the door for a while after July 1, until the Dept could resolve the problem.

      Comm Hale cited the refusal of the City to allow us to charge other depts. for use of our facilities, but now expect us to pay the costs necessitated by having other depts. in our facilities, as an unfair proposal.  He asked if the Dept ever brought that up to the Mayor’s office.  The Chief said no they had not said that to the courts or the Mayor. She has given the information to Murlene Randle of MOCJ.

      Comm Stiglich asked how much Adult Probation was cut.  The Chief said very little, but then said they had a slight increase. (“a slight increase of 1.”)

       M Lui said the Commission asked them to come up with a list of add-back items.  There are 8: $250K for additional community services to help address the increased violence on the streets. This would be put back into the baseline program funding

      The 2nd item would be 2-8444 POs. the layoffs of 2 Supervising POs would eventually affect staff    level POs in layoffs of 2.  3rd is  2-8320 counselors (similar situation as the POs).  

       4th is $200K for security at YGC.  5th is a 1022 IS position. 6th is a 1430 transcriber/typist  7th is $52K in MIS equipment.

       Comm Stiglich asked about the 6 positions that were recommended eliminated, by H. Rose, and that Comm Hale had a problem with, because they were important positions. Then why is $811K being asked for, for other positions and not these?

      The Chief said, “the positions we are asking to be put back in are the positions that have already been notified that they are being laid off. The positions that Harvey Rose is proposing to be cut to reduce our budget are vacant positions. They represent a potential to fill the positions at a later time when the budget is better. The 14 people we are laying off, that is like a forgone conclusion, the way this budget has gone through.  The 15.5% cut includes those 14 people that are to be laid off. What we are saying is, I guess, let me explain the process. When the Mayor turned in the budget, the proposal was 14 people being laid off. When we turned that over to the Bd of Supervisors, they accept that or they evaluate it. They have evaluated and accepted those 14, and then they’re going…. Harvey Rose, who is from the Bd of Supervisors,…is recommending additional cuts, cuts that are.. not people but… vacant positions. So those are vacant positions they are talking about cutting. So they are talking about cutting our budget in addition to the 15.2.  this is a hundred and some, addition.  So what we are saying is, we are suggesting to the Commission that these would be the things which we would asked to be added back, because it is our understanding that we cannot ask for these things to be added back. It has to be something that is done by the Commission.” “We cannot go before the Bd and ask for add backs. This is the document that we prepared and we have the Commission, with Commissioner,..Commissioner Ricci wanted to know what the Commission could do in help with the budget, given that we were getting cut so deeply. So we looked, given the fact that we were cut 14 positions, a total of 15.4, that these were the things that we would want, if there is lobbying, you know, if there is possibility of add backs. These are the priorities that we thought, but it would be your decision, and our priorities were framed in the policies and procedures that you have defined.”

       Comm Hale said that it was always contemplated that those positions would be filled.

       There was a discussion regarding the guarding of the front door.  If it is for the safety of the courts, then it should not be paid out of Juvenile Probation Dept budget. M. Baumgartner, Dep. City Attorney said the charter only requires the Sheriffs provide bailiffs for the courts.  Comm Stiglich questioned why the cost should be borne by this dept.  The Chief said Judge Hitchens said clearly the courts weren’t going to pay a dime for that.  Comm Stiglich commented that before we go ask for $200K for security, rather than for say restoring some of those positions, it would be important to see where we could draw the line on the cost of security.  We should check out how other depts. (eg. Police) do it..  who pays for them? 

      Comm Bonilla said perhaps this Dept should say we will not pay for it.  The Chief said that would be chaos. 

       Comm Queen asked Comm Stiglich to propose a course of action. Comm Stiglich said that she recommends we go back to the table with whomever to negotiate this.

       Comm Hale said he’d like us to start charging the other depts., if we are to pay this cost.

       Comm Queen said that we should present our position to the Mayor, giving them the options we see before us. 

       Comm Hale proposed evicting the courts from the building.  The Chief said there would be costs for getting the youth to and from court.  There are other problems associated with this idea.

       Comm Ricci asked Comm Stiglich to follow up on this issue of security.  She accepted.

  c.  Status of TANF funding, and the Dept’s RFP process
        The Chief reported that the State restored the $134 mil in TANF, but placed it in general funds.  That means that the total $201 mil is available to the state.  She said they do not know the “access vehicle” for which they will receive that (sic). It may be the BOC.  She said that “the big five have committed to it. And now it’s just a matter of how we will access it. It is supposed to be with the same regulation, the same distribution, the same allocation.  There can be complications in terms of how we access it, because right now there are laws and the JJCC determines how that TANF money is distributed. So we have yet to find that information. The other thing we’ve been advised, our lobbyist, is that there are no guarantees from year to year now. It is general funds and it will be a fight every year. So we can celebrate in terms of this battle is over but the war is not won yet.  But it’s positive and we’re excited that all the lobbying we have done, all the chief probation officers, the lobbyist we have paid, in fact, produced the results that we wanted.”

      Liz Jackson-Simpson gave a brief summary of the RFP process.  They are now in the selection process. She requested the Commission call a special meeting in order to review the staff recommendations and to approve contracting with those selected proposals, within the next 2 wks.            

(public comments) 
There was none.                      


Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission
There was none.


(DISCUSSION) Youth Presentation on YGC Cornerstore Business Plan

Dorian Johnson and Jane Siegal did a PowerPoint presentation put together by a couple of the youth they are working with (from the Y-TEC program).  This is a joint effort between Turning Heads, a non-profit working with LCRS, and the Volunteer Auxiliary.  A copy of the presentation is available from the JPC office.

The Commission commended them on their good work. Comm Hale asked if there was a possibility to have youth in JH be given privileges of buying items from the cornerstore.  L Jackson-Simpson said that it might be problematic.

(public comments)
There was none.


(DISCUSSION) Status report from LCR Director on Log Cabin Ranch operations
This was tabled until the next full Commission meeting.

(public comments)


(DISCUSSION/ACTION) Resolution for LaFrance Associates, pending availability of funds.
L Jackson-Simpson said this is for a max of $175K. and is the last year of a 3 yr
effort to finalize the evaluation program and integrate it into the Dept. Comm Richard,
taking the Chair in Comm Ricci’s absence, commented that the report from LaFrance at
the last Commission meeting was beautiful. Comm Queen asked whether it would be
possible to re direct some of that money to other direct services in view of the
violence in the communities. Comm Hale expressed his support of the evaluation
program. He said the CBOs would now have something powerful to use in their
proposals. Comm Bonilla admitted he didn’t have the understanding of how that
document could be used, how it would work. He said he could support this, the last
year of the project, but would have a problem if it came up again for support.
Comm Queen mentioned that “Citi-Stat” might be a program we can use to gather
relevant demographic information, in lieu of creating another one. L. Jackson-Simpson
offered maybe that the PriDE program could help Citi-Stat fill in information.
Comm Bonilla moved to approve the contract.  Comm Stiglich 2nd.  The question was
called and upon roll call vote, the motion passed 5-0
. Comms Ricci and Chuck’s
absence excused.
(public comments)
Rev Toni Dunbar spoke in favor of the contract.

Katie Miller, MOCJ also spoke in support of the contract.



(DISCUSSION/ACTION) First reading of possible recommendation from Program Committee
the support of district based violence intervention strategies in those
districts most impacted.
Comm Queen explained the background to this, which began with the African American Po
lice Community Relations Board, and their efforts to establish an understanding and
protocols for dealing with violence in impacted neighborhoods. He stated that the Mayor
has already adopted it and is working with the group to reach the goals delineated in
the plan. (copy available from the JPC office) He asked that the Commission take a
stand to support both this concept and the program described.
Comm Hale wanted to know some examples of how this would work.  Comm Bonilla moved
to approve this resolution to support district based violence intervention strategies
in those districts most impacted. Comm Stiglich 2nd.
The question was called and upon voice vote, passed 5-0.
(public comments)
Katie Miller, MOCJ, asked how this initiative would interface with other
citywide initiatives (eg. JDAI, girls’ initiatives, CARC, etc). Comm Queen commented
that when there are citywide initiatives, in many cases they target specific
neighborhoods (eg. gang initiatives), and that this just assures that local resources
in those communities are at the lead of how those initiatives play out in their
neighborhoods. This is not in conflict.

L. Holmes spoke in support of this resolution.



(DISCUSSION/ACTION) First reading of possible recommendation from Program Committee
regarding the use of district based juvenile justice plans, as the foundation of
the Commission’s juvenile justice planning strategy.
Comm summarized this, reading the resolution, and commented that he would like the
Commission to be involved in a proactive way with setting policy orientation on
juvenile justice in the city.
Comm Bonilla suggested including some form of actualization activities to give the
spirit of the resolution some concrete body. Comm Stiglich asked to consider this
further, and have a larger discussion before an action is taken on it. Comm Queen
offered to take this back to the Program Comm to have a larger discussion, and invite
all interested to speak at that level. Comm Hale also thought it would be fruitful
to have a larger discussion. Comm Bonilla suggested having it discussed in Committee
level, and then have a public hearing in the community, focused on this one issue.
The Chief said, “I think one of the issues is that I really …(inaudible) to what
Comm Bonilla said, we have a function under certain requirements, like JJCC, JDAI,
and how this would be implemented, how it would change our whole direction, would
or would it not. I think there are a lot of questions we need to explore. I don’t
know the answers. I know there are certain guidelines that we use now. We have the
Mission Statement, we have the legal requirement for JJCC, and that means that we
would implement this by expanding the JJCC not only community based organizations
but someone from each district. You know, I’m just espousing (sic). I think, we
need to think through the scenario and see how it would be implemented, and then we
would be clearer on its meaning.”
While the Commission supported the concept as described, it felt it needed more
opportunity to discuss details and thoughts that were expressed at tonight’s meeting
before taking action. Comm Bonilla moved to send it back the Program Committee for
further discussion. Comm Hale 2nd. The question was called and upon voice vote,
passed 5-0. 
(public comments)
There was none.   


(DISCUSSION) Committee reports 

This was tabled until the next full Commission meeting.
                        Finance Committee
                        Program Committee
                        Ad Hoc Committee
                            Retreat Report

(public comments)


Public comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission
There was none.


(DISCUSSION) Announcements, requests for future agenda items

Comm. Hale spoke about a young lady who recently lost her life.  Annie Powell.  She was a very active young person, involved in the activities of one of the CBOs supported by the Dept. He asked that the meeting be adjourned in her memory.

Comm Richard asked that some future meetings of the Commission be held in the community.

(public comments)
There were none.


(ACTION)  Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm

                                     In the memory of
Annie Powell