Showing posts with label Orange County Commissioners. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Orange County Commissioners. Show all posts

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Taxpayer-Funded Jail Supervision: A Failed System

We have been educating all of you regarding defendants that are being released on tax dollars for serious offenses and the fact that they often have lengthy criminal histories, failures to appear for court and violations of probation.  In our own back yard in Orlando, Florida, Orange County Commissioners also fund a taxpayer-funded release and supervision program.

The Community Corrections unit of the jail is funded at $6.3 million dollars, $5.9 million of which is allocated to personal services (salaries, fringe benefits), while only $421,610 is allocated to operating expenses.  This unit operates both pretrial and post-supervision programs.  The Home Confinement program that was recently shut-down due to inadequate monitoring was operated under the Community Corrections Unit.  Orange County Mayor Teresa Jacobs shut-down the program saying, “Her concern is that there is potentially a development of a culture of complacency that just cannot be tolerated when we are talking about public safety.” 

The county also funds a pretrial services program to the tune of $2.8 million dollars, which again is operated under the Community Corrections unit and is supposed to supervise defendants in the community while their case goes through the court system. 

Now the county wants to hire a consultant to the tune of $100,000 to tell it what is wrong with the Community Corrections unit.  The Mayor already said what is wrong with it. A culture of complacency and a major lack of accountability

You have a huge bureaucracy within the county government system; it's jail department has continued to grow in scope and outside of its intended purpose, with staffing and operational costs taking a huge chuck of the funding as evidenced above.  When you continue to grow these community supervision programs with taxpayer dollars, you also grow the bureaucracy and end up with government responsible for supervising defendants in the community.  It becomes the norm rather than the exception.

Post-adjudication supervision programs such as pretrial diversion, community service, probation and work release, if run correctly, can have an impact on recidivism and help defendants get back on the right track.  The move to establish more taxpayer-funded pretrial services programs began in the 1990s to help assist the indigent first-time, non-violent offender to be released from jail.

The ongoing and very intense movement from organizations that support taxpayer-funded programs is to try and convince county governments that money bail discriminates against the poor and that all financial releases should be eliminated.  They claim they have a much better system for determining the risk level of defendants using “evidence based practices,” to enable them to supervise defendants more effectively in our communities.  Their motto: people arrested for a crime should be helped to get out of jail as easily as possible to go back to their lives and support their families and be productive members of society. 

The support or needs for victims of crimes are never even mentioned. 

As we have recently learned with the Orange County, Florida Home Confinement unit and their dismal lack of supervision, the focus must be realigned on what methods work the best for ensuring accountability in the criminal justice system.  Too many times we have heard judges say that the, “Pretrial services unit will keep tabs on you.”  I am sure they also assumed the Home Confinement unit was doing the same. 

Judges often order taxpayer-funded supervision along with a bail bond to enforce conditions of release, such as GPS monitoring or drug testing.  That is an important function if taxpayer-funded programs really kept tabs to make sure defendants are adhering to those conditions.  Home Confinement was one of the programs charged with enforcing conditions of release – but when a defendant is able to have over 100 violations and nothing is done about it – it makes you wonder how much they really have vested in community safety and doing their job successfully.

Why do you think the supervision level of the Home Confinement program was so lax? 

Could it be that the staff that operated the program simply disengaged at the end of their shift knowing it was someone else’s responsibility to take over? 

Could it be that there was no real “skin in the game” for Home Confinement staff if a defendant had a violation? 

Could it be that there was no “financial accountability” for Home Confinement staff? 

After all, they are county employees in a huge bureaucratic system that has multiple layers of tape to discipline a county employee.  Even the county employees responsible for the lack of monitoring for Bessman Okafor that led to the death of Alex Zaldivar, have not been fired – just reassigned.

Do we really need to pay a consultant more tax dollars to tell us what is wrong?

The private bail industry, which has been proven to provide the most efficient and effective means of pretrial release, doesn’t get to disengage at the end of the day.  We have so much “skin in the game” we can’t disengage.  And our financial accountability is at the maximum . . . because if we don’t do our job and a defendant fails to appear for court, we must pay the full amount of the bond to the court.  We can’t just pass the problem on to the next shift.  We have a vested interest in knowing where the defendant is at all times and with the help of the people that put up money or property for a defendant’s release, making sure the defendant doesn’t commit a new crime and adheres to all conditions of release.

The private commercial bail industry will gladly assist Mayor Jacobs and the court with sharing our knowledge and centuries of experience in best practices for supervising defendants and ensuring they are accountable to the criminal justice system. 

Taxpayer dollars should be used more wisely in the criminal justice system, such as for inmate identification and providing the court with information to make informed release decisions.  

Not for displacing the most effective and efficient system of supervision and putting that burden on the taxpayers.

Public policy affects public safety.

Monday, March 18, 2013

Orange County, FL. Community Corrections Unit: taxpayers still paying for release and supervision

The Community Corrections Unit, part of the Orange County, FL. jail that has come under intense scrutiny due to the failures of the Home Confinement program, continues to supervise both pretrial and sentenced defendants released by the court.

The resulting investigation and shut-down of the Home Confinement program began when it was learned that no one at Orange County Corrections alerted any judges of Bessman Okafor’s 109 curfew violations, and who later murdered Alex Zaldivar while defying the home confinement order.  If a Judge had been notified of the curfew violations, he/she could have ordered Mr. Okafor to be put back in jail or put on more stringent monitoring.  Mr. Okafor should have been thoroughly monitored while on home confinement but he wasn’t.  He was not the only one.  Further investigations also show that an accused attempted murderer, carjacker and robber also violated their home confinement numerous times.

Supervision of defendants by any entity charged with doing so by the courts is paramount to public safety.  That responsibility must be taken seriously.  While a taxpayer-funded or private supervision system cannot one hundred percent prevent a defendant from committing a new crime while on supervision, the level of supervision and monitoring can drastically ensure more accountability.

Neither system has a crystal ball by which it can tell when someone is going to make the wrong moral decision and commit a crime.

However, the expertise and tools to supervise defendants in a successful manner – and the financial accountability on the line – can influence the end result.

The fact that the Community Corrections Unit, which also managed the Home Confinement program, is still supervising pretrial defendants pending the outcome of their case in our community begs to question if they know what their charges are up to.

The Pretrial Services program is charged with supervising and monitoring defendants released pretrial – even those who have a monetary bond, adding another taxpayer-funded layer of expense on top of supervision by the private industry.  Keep in mind that the supervision method for the vast majority of defendants simply entails them calling into an automated telephone answering system once a week or once a month.  

If you think that only defendants charged with minor offenses or who may have a minor criminal record are being released into the Pretrial Services program, think again.  Below are just two examples of defendants with lengthy criminal histories, failures to appear and violations of probation, that were released into the program February 26 and 27, 2013. 

William Robert Moore: charged with violation of probation on a charge of burglary of a conveyance (felony) and petit theft (misdemeanor); he was released on taxpayer funds on February 26, 2013
  • Mr. Moore has 12 prior misdemeanor convictions and 6 prior felony convictions in Orange County alone 
  • His criminal history in Orange County started in April of 1991 and continues today
  • His prior felony charges include: possession of a controlled substance (3 arrests); burglary of a conveyance (3 arrests); driving with license revoked as habitual offender; attempted aggravated battery; tampering with witness to hinder communication to law enforcement; possession of cocaine.
  • His prior misdemeanor charges include: resisting law enforcement without violence (2 arrests); battery; possession of drug paraphernalia (arrests); driving under the influence (2 arrests); obstruction by disguised person; possession of cannabis less than 20 grams; petit theft (3 arrests); driving with license suspended/revoked with knowledge (2 arrests); attaching tag not assigned; leaving scene of accidents with property damage; possession of narcotic equipment.
  • He has 7 prior failures to appear for a court appearance.
  • He has 8 prior violations of probation
Michael Steve Hill: charged with possession of cocaine (felony) and possession of drug paraphernalia (misdemeanor) on February 7, 2013; there was motion for pretrial release or reduction of bond on February 15 and a hearing on February 26, at which time Mr. Hill was released into the Pretrial Services program.  He was also released on a contempt of court charge for a writ of bodily attachment for not paying previous court costs and fines.  His taxpayer-funded release was revoked on March 7, 2013 when he committed a new crime and was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and resisting law enforcement without violence.  
  • Mr. Hill has 18 prior misdemeanor convictions and 14 prior felony convictions in Orange County alone 
  • His criminal history in Orange County started in April of 1998 and continues today
  • His prior felony charges include: theft greater than $300 (4 arrests); possession of a controlled substance (5 arrests); petit theft/2 prior convictions (9 arrests); escape; sexual battery with deadly weapon and force; armed robbery with a weapon; false imprisonment; 
  • His prior misdemeanor charges include: theft less than $300 (6 arrests); resisting merchandise recovery (2 arrests); resisting law enforcement without violence (2 arrests); possession of drug paraphernalia (8 arrests); driving without a valid driver’s license (2 arrests); trespass in structure or conveyance.
  • He has 3 prior failures to appear for a court appearance.
  • He has 3 prior violations of probation
These are just two examples but there are so many more.  Since January 1 of this year up to March 2, 2013, 244 defendants have been released into the Pretrial Services program to be supervised.  This doesn’t include the defendants ordered into the Pretrial Diversion program, Alternative Community Service program or Probation – all supervised by the Community Corrections Unit.

On the other hand, the private commercial bail industry has been proven to be the most effective and efficient system of pretrial release – and we use no taxpayer funds.  Commercial bail offers many layers of financial commitments and thus accountability in the criminal justice system: the insurance company as surety on the bond; a bail agent’s contract with the insurance company; the bail agent’s own funds with the insurance company; and third-party indemnitors on the bond.

The commercial bail industry has the lowest failure to appear and recidivism rates of any other jail release method.  And if someone does fail to appear, we cover the costs of getting that defendant back to the court’s jurisdiction and not the taxpayer.

If these releases don’t make you angry, take some time to review more of the jail’s releases on your tax dollars.  The Clerk of Court can direct you on how to obtain the registries with all of the release information.  

If these releases do anger you, speak up and let your county commissioners know how you feel about your tax dollars being spent to “supervise” defendants who were arrested for a criminal offense.  Budget work sessions are already being scheduled and your tax dollars only go so far.

Public policy affects public safety.
UA-9822877-1