March 8, 2010
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
JUVENILE PROBATION COMMISSION
PROGRAMS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Monday, March 8, 2010
Juvenile Probation Department
375 Woodside Avenue, Main Conference Room 247
San Francisco, CA 94127
Dirk Beijen, Chair
1. Roll call
· The Commission Chair called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. Commissioners Beijen and Chang were present.
2. Public Comment
- No public comments.
3. Review and Approval of the Programs Committee Meeting Minutes of November 4, 2009
· Motion to approve the Programs Committee Minutes of November 4, 2009 by Commissioner Chang and second by Commissioner Beijen. Minutes approved.
· No public comments.
4. Recommending to the Full Commission a Position in Support of "The Youth PROMISE Act", H.R.1064/S.435 (DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEM)
· The Youth PROMISE Act was introduced at the February 17th Full Commission meeting by the Youth Commission.
· COMM Beijen and COMM Chang reviewed the Youth PROMISE Act and the Gang Abatement Act, a competing Act, drafted by Senator Feinstein.
COMM Chang stated that the Youth PROMISE Act reflects the inclusion and rehabilitation toward JPD’s public policy goals.
· COMM Beijen read a draft resolution recommending a position in support of the Youth PROMISE Act, HR1064, to be proposed at the April 14th Full Commission meeting.
· COMM Chang motioned to recommend the adoption of the resolution to the Full Commission, second by COMM Beijen. Motion to recommend resolution passed.
· William Siffermann, Chief Probation Officer, supports the Juvenile Probation Commission’s recommendation. JPD is very happy to see the language in the Act and it is identical to many of the items in JPD’s mission statement, especially the language on evidence based practice and the efforts to enhance the competency of youth in the community that will lead to productive lives. The language in the Act is designed to abate criminal activity, enhance the lives of youths, and reduce more costly ways to address criminal behavior. This reflects other city/governmental bodies in support of this Act, signifies JPD’s support of the Youth Commission, and is going to develop a closer partnership with JPD and the Youth Commission. The Youth Commission maintains a strong legislation presence at the state and federal level that assists JPD’s efforts. JPD does not have the staff to review pending legislation and assess its value to their system, and must preserve any support in policy implementation from Probation, CBO’s, and programming entities. Chief Siffermann expressed his gratitude to the Youth Commission for their support of JPD.
· No public comments.
5. Adjournment (ACTION ITEM)
· The meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.