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, rm 400 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, 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

1. (ACTION) Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Comm. Hale at 5:43pm. Comms. Aramburo, Chuck, Grossman, Ricci were present at the gavel. Comm. Dupre arrived at 5:50 pm, and Comm. Richard, at 5:55 pm.
2. (ACTION) Review and approval of September 25, 2001 meeting minutes
The minutes were approved as written. Comm. Hale noted that the August meeting minutes hadn’t been agendized for action at this meeting, and asked that they be placed on the Nov. agenda. He commented that having listened to tapes of a previous meeting, he is aware of the difficulty faced by the Commission secretary in ascertaining what people are saying, and appreciates the attention to reflecting what is said by speakers, given the state of the audio equipment being used. Comm. Arámburo expressed the importance of having thorough minutes so the public is fully able to understand what occurred at meetings. They both commended the Secretary for his diligence in extracting the content from the tapes.
(public comments)
3. (DISCUSSION) Chief Probation Officer’s Report:
The Chief acknowledged, and on behalf of his family, thanked everyone for their expressions of sympathy and support during their recent bereavement.
a. Status Report on Juvenile Hall Replacement Project.
Chris Bigelow reported that he showed a revised design plan which reflects a reduction of construction, due to a shortfall of funds. Site preparation for relocation is being carried out until Jan. 2002. Hazardous materials abatement will go from Feb. to May. The replacement project will be advertised in Jan. with construction slated for July 2002 and completion in Fall of 2004. Budget estimated to be $45.9 million, including $35.7 million in construction for the entire new facility. The budget for the reduced plan will be worked out by next week. The City has $29.7 million in identified funds, leaving $15.3 million to be secured.There are no significant impacts on environment so state funds can be released to the City. The City’s regulatory agencies have responded favorably to the reduced plans and the proposed arts projects, in the main, can be kept in tact.. There are a few delays in getting the contractors set up to work on site (new security measures and background checks are being instituted), but things are progressing.
He mentioned that the costs of moving the courts, another $100K, will need to be absorbed by the replacement project (courts not paying for it).
b. Trends/Emerging Issues/Upcoming Events
The Chief announced the re scheduled Employee Recognition event, which will be held Nov. 1, in the Girls Gym at YGC.
The FY 02-03 planning has already begun. The Mayor’s State of the City address last Monday was upbeat but recognized a shortfall in city revenues and so each department is being requested to make reductions in their current fiscal year spending.
Count in Juvenile Hall was 89 today, with one unit closed for about 3 weeks. This is unusual as historically this is the time of year when the count rises. They hope that through the JDAI they might be able to keep those numbers at this level or reduce them even more.
This upcoming Friday, there will be a dance troupe that will perform for the youth in Juvenile Hall.
Comm. Arámburo said that there was a significant drop in juvenile referrals from Sept through Oct. What is this due to? The Chief said that a similar trend seems to be happening statewide, but did not say why. What impact will this have on the replacement project? The Chief said that they might have to look to alternate uses of the extra bed space then. Library?
Comm. Arámburo asked about the DDAP? This is a program under AB 1913 funding. Comm. Arámburo asked to include stats for the Home Detention and Placement Diversion programs in the monthly report.
She further asked about the utilization levels of the Intensive Home Based Supervision programs, and why they are low. The Chief said that each of these programs are new under AB 1913, and are just getting underway.
Bob Wertz, Dir of Probation Services, said it was a shock to him when he saw the low levels of service. He said that they have slowly gone back up a little.
Comm. Arámburo was not only concerned that services were not being used, she wondered if the programs were still getting paid, whether they provided services or not. Answer: they are paid, regardless.
Wertz said they are looking at ’enhancing’ the DDAP contract so they provide help in domestic violence area. And when the JDAI begins, they will figure out ways to utilize the under utilized services.
c. Report requested at September Commission meeting, regarding the status of the NCCD
Strategic Planning report, and status of hiring new Director of Juvenile Hall.
As the Commission was aware, NCCD produced a final draft report of their strategic planning activities, in Jan. 2001. This happened at a time when other things were occurring in the Dept (budget matters), causing it to be put on a back burner. The Chief highlighted a few things that the Dept has done in reaction to the report in the meantime. A clerical retreat was held in May to deal with some of their issues. It was decided to continue doing this on at least an annual basis. Lack of recognition of staff’s service. The celebration the Chief mentioned earlier, on Nov. 1, is an attempt to respond to this issue. While it is not the final solution to the problem, it is a point of departure for additional recognition that the Dept doesn’t currently give. Some major issues dealt with communications within the Dept. so a Director of Communications was hired. Some positive articles have been published about the Dept as a result. An in-house newsletter was produced. Another will come out next month.
Another issue was how staff interacted with each other and the public. A Barbara Collins is putting together a "customer service" training process, scheduled to occur sometime next month.
The absence of a Dept. policy and procedures manual was pointed out. There is one for the hall, and Log Cabin, but we have not had in one place an assembly of administrative policies and procedures that was completed in draft form in July. Barbara Johnson is in charge of putting together a Probation Services policy and procedures manual. The full Departmental manual is expected to be completed early next year.
The Dept will submit to the Commission a report and further implementation timelines, on or before Nov. 16. That will be the final statement on where the Dept stands on the other items in the strategic plan and recommendations.
Comm. Arámburo said the draft was excellent, and wanted to know the full cost of the report. She said it is her understanding that Finance Committee was going to review that. She asked, in light of the criticism of the Log Cabin Ranch strategic plan, when the public and Commission be able to discuss that document at a Commission meeting. The Chief said it would be available on or before the 16th for public review. Comm. Arámburo said she didn’t see where they incorporated some of the issues around detention reform. Is that not part of the strategic plan or was this a contract initiated before the Casey Initiative was confirmed. The Chief said it preceded the Casey Initiative. Question: any chance NCCD can look at that issue and make some determination whether it needs to be addressed in the plan? The Chief stated that NCCD has a representative on the Stakeholders Group (for the Initiative) so they can at least ask them whether they’d be willing to do it. Comm. Arámburo asked to have this item on the Nov. Commission meeting agenda. Comm. Hale queried whether NCCD’s contract for work would be extended to do this extra piece. He said that this is an ongoing process, so the plan is not the end product, not to be changed, massaged. He cautioned that if Comm. Arámburo wanted to discuss the document in the Nov meeting, asking them to do further work on it may prolong the process and not allow for that discussion. The Chief said that NCCD’s contract ended Sept. 30, using a ’no cost’ extension to finish other work (the training). Comm. Arámburo asked that maybe it could be produced as a supplement to the strategic plan, addressing whether the initiative would affect the plan as submitted.
As to the hiring of the Juvenile Hall Director, the Chief said that DHR just released the announcement for the position. Final application deadline is now set for Dec. 14, but extensions can be made. Hopefully, interviews can be done in Jan. and a hire made by Feb. 2002. The Dept will be able to provide the Commission within the next couple of weeks a listing of all the outreach efforts.
Comm. Arámburo asked what the cost of doing a national search would be, and what the chance of getting someone from it, this late into an administration. The Chief said that there are still a couple of years left in the present Mayor’s term, and with the job market being depressed, he feels the Dept is in a good position to attract some candidates. The issue is the cost of living here. The salary is competitive, in fact better than others. Question: any chance to find someone with experience in a construction/replacement setting? Answer: the hope is to find someone. Question: will the Dept name an interim Director? Answer: probably next week.
(public comments)
Mary Lavolay (representing Coleman Advocates), asked about the PrIDE contract. She was directed to wait for the next item.
The Chief lauded Janet Medina for her long years of fine service in the Dept. Janet Medina thanked the Chief, and Commission, and reflected on the changing landscape of juvenile justice. Comm. Hale, on behalf of the Commission, echoed the appreciation of those already having spoken.
4. (DISCUSSION) Public Comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission.
Mary Lavolay asked about the PrIDE contract and if someone could explain to her what that was. Comm. Hale advised her that a dialog on that could not occur, given the Brown Act. Comm. Arámburo explained that reference to that contract would be made in the committee report later in the meeting.
5. (ACTION) Possible action to form an Oversight Committee for Log Cabin Ranch, to assure improvements to the ranch programs and operations.
Comm. Hale referred to a letter from a Public Defender, requesting participation in such a committee. Comm. Arámburo elaborated; at the last Commission meeting, Judge Feinstein suggested creating such a committee that would increase the dialog between the courts and key stake holders to improve the services at LCR, and to have the chance to give input to the strategic plan for LCR, produced by the Dept. The Program Committee discussed their commitment to facilitate this dialog, and improve the services at LCR, (which clearly could be improved). The big value to this commitee is that there could be no claim that stakeholders were not given a say in that process. She said that she was approached by Marynella Woods, who has much experience in this field. Dewitt Hoard could aid immensely in the mental health issues. Jim Fithian would be helped a lot in his efforts to improve the school program there, Gary Harding, PO, used to be assigned to LCR. These are all people interested in this committee. Comm. Arámburo recommended that the Commission adopt a committee to facilitate the Program Committee in its dialog with and improvement of LCR services.
Comm. Grossman commended the Chief and Johnny Miller for the improving situation at LCR. She is particularly excited with Jim Fithian as the principal. She supports having a small committee like this to affect input to the Commission, Program Committee, and Dept.
Comm. Dupré said that "oversight" is a little too strong a word for the committee. He mentioned that at the Program Committee, it was stated that LCR was a top priority.
Comm. Arámburo recognized the concerns expressed by Comm. Dupré, vis a vis authority, protocol of that committee. This can be taken up by the Program Committee. She further proffered that perhaps protocols can be drafted up to have both the Program Committee and the Advisory Committee meet jointly at LCR so that they can get a first hand look at the changes taking place, and what needs to be done.
Comm. Chuck asked for an interpretation of the phrase "memorialize a plan of action for the committee and commission to monitor....etc." what kind of commitment does this involve? Comm. Arámburo said that possibly that means the protocols. To put to words and timelines what needs to be done. Comm. Chuck asked if this would be an adhoc committee? Comm. Arámburo said that possibly not. Comm Richard asked what authority would be given to the committee. Comm. Arámburo said none. It would be advisory to the Program Committee, who retains the authority. This is about a public dialog. Comm Richard: why is the enrollment at LCR so low. The Chief said due to the moritorium and more kids being moved out.
Comm. Ricci said that it would be important to set this up properly, with guidelines and timelines.
Chief Williams said that they welcome every opportunity for support and understanding of all areas of operations. An advisory body could be a reasonable vehicle for that, to generate additional dialog, consensus, and support to continue things heading the way they are heading now.
It could also be useful in dispelling misperceptions of what goes on in LCR. He further added, quite honestly, some of the names mentioned (by Comm. Aramburo) as potential contributors to this process, haven’t been to LCR in years. The begininng should be to get them there to find out the truth about what is going on today. Even as familiar as Judge Feinstein is with Dept and LCR programs, some of her comments reflected some lack of true understanding of what is going on at LCR.
The Chief requested that the strategic plan passed out at the last Commission meeting (drawn up by Johnny Miller) be considered as a point of departure for discussion for what should happen at LCR. He also requested that there be a clear mandate written for the committee, what the structure and participation is to be, with projected timelines, and instructions for what is to be done with the results of the committee’s work.
He said he hopes that the participants in the committee will work with the Dept in getting the work done and not just create work for somebody else to do.
Comm. Grossman said that by doing this (the advisory committee) the Commission is being responsive to the community. She believes that it is a positive thing and should not be looked upon as adversarial.
Comm. Hale says that there appears two ways to go on this; one to vote on it as agendize, or two, to refer it back to committee for clarification, and establishing guidelines. He asked that the Commissioners to consider another matter, duplication. If the Program Committee is going to take the lead on LCR matters, would this not already include those individuals interested in the effort. Is there another reason to create the advisory committee? He stated that the facilities in La Honda will be focused upon by the Commission. He said that to date, those facilities had been pretty much put on the back burner by other issues as priorities. His own feeling is that the potential for those facilities is untapped. He said that as a Commission, they have directed the Dept to focus on priorities and issues. The sites in La Honda were not at the top of the list. He said he didn’t want to overburden the staff. He would like to give the staff and the Commissioners interested in this advisory committee, the opportunity to review how this will not be duplicative.
Comm. Arámburo was surprised to hear Comm. Hale say that LCR was not a Commission priority. She has always felt it was. She said that the Commission needs to bring back the confidence of the courts in LCR. Having the committee will be a good public relations tool. It can also help dispell what people think of LCR. Such a committee would show Judge Feinstein that the Commission welcomes her comments and wants the participation of stakeholders. She offered to draft up whatever protocols and get them approved by the Chief and Johnny Miller. This committee is not meant to burden the Dept. It is to assist the Dept in re building the confidence of the courts.
Comm. Grossman said that the Commission needn’t worry about duplicative efforts, that it will sort itself out. She repeated that this is a positive thing.
Comm. Chuck suggested that Comm. Arámburo and the Chief sit down to draft guidelines of tasks and functions, and then take it to the next step, whether it is to Committee or the full Commission. Can this wait til the next meeting for approval.
Comm. Arámburo asked John Kennedy, deputy city attorney, if they could assist in doing this. Kennedy said that they would be happy to work with the Commission in drafting protocols and procedures for the committee. The Mission Statement for the committee would be the responsibility of the Commission (a policy matter). There are other restrictions (eg. Sunshine Ordinance).
Comm. Dupré asked for a definition of community for the membership on the committee (enumerate specific individuals, bodies). Comm Richard said it seems to be "recreating the wheel." He felt there are adequate points of reference from which they can take opinions and input.
Comm. Arámburo said that having a large committee is problematic when trying to hold meetings, and thought that possibly having targeted aspects of the LCR operations be discussed individually, where those parties interested in just that particular aspect would participate (eg. parents concerns, CBOs providing services, CBOs wanting to provide services, working with unions to get entry level jobs to youth).
Chief Williams asked the Commission to consider having 70% of all the committee meetings be held at LCR. Comm. Hale asked what the Commission wanted to do on this item; a vote or refer back to committee. Comm. Grossman said that the concept could be voted on and the details referred back to committee for fleshing out.
Comm. Hale wanted to clear up his previous statement, that LCR has not been a priority. It has been, but others were addressed first. Comm. Arámburo said that it has been long known that the courts were unhappy with LCR, but for whatever reasons, the Commission hasn’t been as responsive as it should be. This proposal for an advisory committee, with a friendly amendment that guidelines be drafted by the Chief, City Attorney’s office and the Commissioner herself was fine.
But this type of discussion did not occur over detention reform. A Task Force is established. She doesn’t recall ever seeing a protocol for how that task force will work. So, why is there a different standard there. She reviewed that many judges before Feinstein were unhappy with LCR, and expressed irritation that this proposal is being tossed back and forth. She commented that they could just say that an advisory committee is a important, friendly overture to the courts about what the Commission can do about LCR. She said that the suggestion of having 70% of all meetings at LCR is not a friendly proposal, and indicates an adversarial attitude toward stakeholders.
She further said, even though this is not the process followed for other committees, task forces, if this is what is wanted, then she would take it back to committee, but the Commission could well take action to say this is an appropriate advisory committee, with protocols and membership to be worked out, and that the Commission supports Judge Feinstein’s recommendation for an advisory committee to the Program Committee, for LCR.
Comm. Ricci suggested voting to create the committee, and define/clarify its function afterward.
Comm. Grossman said that this could be done, similar to how contracts are done, with conditions attached to it.
Chief Williams said for the record, he welcomes it. He supports it with the kinds of provisions mentioned. Also, regarding his suggestion for 70% of meetings be held at LCR, it was not an adversarial suggestion. It would be good for the staff and youth see people there on a regular basis. It also makes a statement to staff that it is important to take the time to be there.
Comm. Dupré moved to create an advisory committee to work on LCR with the Program Committee, contingent upon the Program Committe, the Chief, Johnny Miller and the City Attorney’s office establish protocols, expectations, and timelines.
Alfredo Bojorquez said that the potential for LCR is great, but it needs to be focused. There needs to be a good aftercare program that immediately links kids coming out with CBOs. His experience with the LCR Steering Committee last year showed him how valuable such a committee would be to getting things going at LCR.
The question was called and upon voice vote, passed 7-0.
6. (ACTION) Consideration of Program Committee’s recommendation regarding continuation of Population Management Contract with Bayview Hunter’s Point Foundation, in the amount of $140,000.
Comm. Hale turned over the Chair to Vice President Dupre, and acknowledged a conflict of interest on this item.
Comm. Arámburo gave a short summary of the discussion that occurred in the Program Committee, on this item. She said that a positive thing about this program is the cost relative to placement, per person, which was about $10-12K vs. about $35K. There are 7 girls, 6 boys in it now. Capacity is 15. PO Kwanza Morton was credited with developing a lot of the practices around the proposal, which was put together by Barbara Johnson and B. Wertz.
Comm Richard asked what services are given to them after electronic monitoring is done. Wertz said that whatever case plan is set up for them is continued after they’re taken off monitoring.
He mentioned one youth who was being recommended to CYA, but given the chance on this program, and successfully completed it, thus negating the need for commitment to CYA. Comm. Arámburo said that there was a policy issue regarding electronic monitoring which the Commission never addressed, so this is an experimental program that seems to be accepted by the youth, families, and courts, so maybe the Commission doesn’t need to have the discussion. It also appears to be a tool utilized by the Casey Initiative. The one concern Comm. Arámburo did have was answered by the Chief, that the contract is not a sole source contract. It was a modification of a contract, then an extension of that modification. This contract will be the first full year contract. Comm. Arámburo said her concern was that the original contract that was extended was actually a very different program, the Intensive Home Based Supervision. She asked if this was correct. The Chief said he wasn’t sure but thought that it was correct. Comm. Arámburo said that this program is a post adjudicated electronic monitoring, detention diversion program. She asked the City Attorney if this impacts any requirements requiring sole sourcing. Is that a different contract or can there just be an extension of a modification.
John Kennedy said that he would have to see the original RFP in order to ansewer the question.
There was no RFP for an electronic monitoring program. The Chief said that this contract is for services that are similar to the IHBS program, for which the original contract was written. The difference to this one is that it is augmented with electronic monitoring, and that is not a part of this contract but paid for from another source. Wertz affirmed this. The electronic monitoring portion has been work ordered from the Sheriff’s Dept. Comm. Arámburo said she understood the IHBS program to be different, not working with youths awaiting placement.
The Chief said that perhaps the Commission or its committees would like to have a discussion about the City’s contracting process and what mandates every department has to meet for their contracts, so that the Commission is comfortable with what this Dept does in its contracting.
Comm. Arámburo proposed that as a policy matter, the Dept use the RFP process, as favored by the Brown Act and Sunshine Ordinance.
The Chief stated that the vast majority of contracts from the Dept goes through an RFP process. Those that don’t meet every city requirement and mandate that proscribes negotiating appropriate contracts. He said that these contracts aren’t just done in isolation by slight of hand, they meet many tests to get them done.
Comm. Dupré asked for a motion. Comm. Chuck asked what was the recommendation from committee. Comm. Arámburo said that absent an opinion from the City Attorney on the appropriateness of it, the Program Committee recommended it. John Kennedy reiterated that he’d have to look at the RFP to give an answer.
Comm. Chuck said that given the positive recommendation from Program, and pending no irregularities in the contracting process, he moved to approve the recommendation. It was seconded. Upon roll call vote, the action passed, 6-0-1 with Comm. Hale abstaining.
(public comments)
There was none.
7. (DISCUSSION) Committee Chair Reports
Comm. Hale explained that he included this in the agenda so that Chairs have the opportunity to report items that their respective committees were dealing with. Also, if Chairs had items they wanted to put on Commission agendas, they should inform the Secretary.
· Program Committee
Comm. Arámburo said that the discussion yesterday was very positive. They reached some resolution about how we look at different available outcome measure programs, and the Dept may be doing an RFP in the future, to bring into the fold any impact the detention reform initiative might have on the choice of a database management system. A subcommittee of the JDAI stakeholders group will look into the available data systems being used, and report back to the Commission. (committee minutes available on the website).
· Finance Committee
Comm. Ricci reported that the Committee has had to postpone its meeting. She will be attending a workshop on contracting in the city, held by DHR.
· Facilities Committee
Comm. Chuck summarized a little of the discussion from its Oct. 3, 2001 meeting. (minutes are posted on the Commission’s webpage).
(public comments)
8. (DISCUSSION) Announcements, requests for future agenda items.
Comm Richard reported that the SF Brown Bombers pop warner football team has been revived after a 3 yr absence. They have 4 teams in the play-offs this year. He credited this to the hard work of their Athletic Director, Damone Hale.
Comm. Dupré requested that Comm. Chuck give some closing remarks, and to close this meeting in memory of the Chief’s son.
There was an announcement about the LCR Family Day event, this Saturday.
The Chldren’s Caucus is also this Saturday.
Comm. Hale reported that the JJC Court/Wardship Committee will be reviewing the placement policy for the Dept and if appropriate making recommendations.
He also reported that Dr. Gary Zomalt, exec director of Family Mosaic, is leaving to become associated with Fresno’s city government.
He, Rosa Sanchez, and Chad Jacobs (both deputy City Attornies) discussed the issue of conflict of interest situations such as tonight. If there are any questions, they can be addressed to John Kennedy.
Comm. Hale said that he made the following comments with the best of motives. Judge Feinstein is a vey committed judge. He has appeared before her as a youth advocate. He has found her to be sincerely concerned about what happens to young people. When she spoke at the last Commission meeting, he too was moved, and it only helps and benefits the Dept when the Commission is responsive to the stakeholders. At the same time, he is mindful that she is young in her position as a judge. She has a long history of involvement with juvenile justice in San Francisco. But this staff needs to understand that this Commission recognizes that there have been few issues raised by the public, or stakeholders that this staff has not identified or attempted to address or in many cases have addressed effectively. He would gladly sit with any Commissioners and talk about the La Honda site, because it has a great potential. As criticism comes, the Commission needs to be mindful that there is a professional staff that has done an extremely important and effective job. That is not lost on this Commission, and everything this Commission offers is done with the intent of moving us (the Dept) forward.
This is important to say because the Judge, because of who she is and the role she plays, needs to be put into the context that it is not a criticism or a knock on the Dept. It is, in his understanding, andhis work with Judge Feinstein, meant to assist the Commission in doing what they do, better.
Comm Richard added to his previous comment about the Brown Bombers, that one of those teams in the play-offs is his.
Comm. Arámburo asked for clarification regarding confidentiality of juvenile records and the Commission’s mandate. Is it his role to represent the Commission before Judge Hitchen’s to expand the standing order. It is inconsistent that other groups including PrIDE (AJI) can have access to juvenile files when the Commission is excluded.