Hold Government Accountable for Pretrial Release Policies

Note: this article was published on Gainesville.com on April 22, 2010

In response to the April 18, 2010 article in the Gainesville Sun titled, "Sheriff opposes bills that could crowd jail cells": The Florida legislation in no way takes away judicial discretion to order a defendant into mental health or drug court programs or other forms of community supervision, such as GPS monitoring, even if the defendant is not eligible under the legislation for taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs. Treatment is an important alternative to incarceration and the bills do not, "undercut" the policy for a judge to order such treatment.

The bills most simply put require defendants who can afford to pay for their own release from jail to do so. Advocates of taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs want the public and our elected officials to believe that if a defendant can't be released under their program, they will automatically languish in jail. The opposite is true. Defendant who have the ability to pay for a bail bond typically do so within 48 to 72 hours. Thus, taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs can then focus on defendants whom they have determined do not have the ability to pay for their own release or who do not have family or friends who can do so for them.

The bills are not a, "bailout" for the bail industry. In a country built on the backs of small business, does the bail industry have a special interest in preserving the livelihood of hundreds of hardworking, independent bail bond agents. Yes. The bail industry is no different than any other small business in its efforts to protect against government intrusion. But just as important, the bail industry has a special interest in educating the public on how their tax dollars are being used to subsidize the release of criminals and a special interest in warning taxpayers about pretrial release practices that affect their public safety.

If local control of taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs had any consistency whatsoever, perhaps statewide legislation wouldn't be needed. However, the Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability (OPPAGA), the arm of the Legislature that is charged with evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of Florida's taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs, has stated that such programs' annual reports do not contain outcome data required by statute. If they even submit them. Further, programs that do report data use different methods to compute the data, to the point that there is not enough data to compare defendants released on your tax dollars to those released through the private sector. Not only are millions of taxpayer dollars going to fund these pretrial release programs, but then the data can't even support the effectiveness of the programs.

The majority of people across this country are law-abiding citizens. The work hard, pay their taxes, try to raise a family and protect them along the way. They know the consequences for criminal behavior and choose to avoid unlawful behavior. So why then should law-abiding and responsible citizens be asked to subsidize the release of people who choose not to be law-abiding but who instead willingly commit crimes - many over and over again?

Florida's reporting counties allocated $26,582,463 in tax dollars to fund pretrial release programs, which for the most part are created locally by an administrative order and not by legislative action and are not regulated as other components of the criminal justice system. The average cost to the taxpayer to release a defendant under Florida's pretrial release programs based on the funding is $1,511.56 per defendant. Some counties simply decided not to report to the Legislature as required while others only submitted information they deemed important. Is that accountable behavior to our citizens?

Jail populations are down all over Florida and much of the country, yet taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs are using scare tactics and telling your elected officials that the, "sky will fall and millions of more taxpayer dollars will be needed if the Florida bills pass." In reality, counties with taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs have higher costs of detention per-capita and higher per-diem rates than counties without pretrial release programs. In fact, 39 Florida counties do just fine without such programs.

It's time to hold government programs accountable to the citizens who fund them. Public policy affects public safety.

Deborah Jallad
President
Accredited Surety and Casualty Company, Inc.

Note: to view the article on Gainesville.com go to:
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20100422/NEWS/100429825/-1/opinion

The Importance of Bail vs. Taxpayer-Funded Pretrial Release

Why is bail important in the criminal justice system?

Bail, provided by a licensed surety agent, is an insurance contract that guarantees the appearance of a defendant in court. An estimated 30 percent of defendants released on taxpayer-funded pretrial release remain at large after one year from failing to appear for court. The percentage for bail? 19 percent! Private surety bail has the lowest failure to appear and fugitive rates.

Bail is guaranteed by the 8th and 14th admendments in the United States Constitution: many defendnant's don't have the full amount of the bond to post in order to be released from jail so they borrow usually 10 perent of the face value of the bond from a bail agent to get out of jail, much like you pay for any other insurance policy. The bail agent then accepts financial and physical responsibility for that defendant.

Bail relieves jail overcrowding: by facilitating the release of defendants who can afford to pay a bond, private surety bail helps take away the burden of jail overcrowding and paves the way for a taxpayer-funded pretrial release program to focus on indigent defendants charged with non-violent crimes to be released. After all, these are the very people who need help the most - not those who can pay for their own way out of jail.

Bail is privately-funded and costs the taxpayer nothing: your critical tax dollars can then be use for other important services and programs.

Bail agents are accountable financially and physcially for defendants: bail agents are financially responsible for defendants they release on bail. If a defendant fails to appear for court the bail agent must either produce the defendant or pay the full amount of the bond to the court.

Bail agents pay all costs of extradition for defendants who fail to appear and are re-arrested: under a pretrial release program more of your tax dollars are used to try and apprehend criminals who fail to appear.

Bail agents invest and instill financial incentives by integrating family and friends as guarantors of the bond. Defendants are held accountable through their contract with the bail agent.

Bail reduces county costs.

Bail agents and the insurance company they represent are accountable to the court.

Promoting public safety . . . reinforcing accountability!

Pretrial Release: Is this Issue on the Radar for Candidates for Orange County Mayor?

Pretrial services/release programs are facing increased scrutiny across the nation for their liberal release procedures and minimal supervision practices. In today's tough economic environment, many government-funded programs and services are being cut, including public safety. Elected officials must look closely at how limited tax dollars are spent, while still balancing the budget.

So why are county and state governments across the country continuing to spend millions of tax dollars on pretrial services/release programs to release and "supervise" criminal defendants when the private sector does so for free and much more effectively? Why for example is the National Association of Counties, a membership organization whose primary members are counties that use tax dollars to pay a membership fee, advocating for increased use of taxpayer funds to establish, run and manage pretrial services/release programs locally?

In Orange County, Florida, the private surety bail industry has been instrumental in bringing to light the kinds of releases happening through the jail's pretrial services/release program, which is funded at $1.7M. Using the jail's own information required through the Citizens' Right-to-Know Act, the industry was able to prove that defendants charged with serious offenses, who had lenghthy prior criminal and/or driving offense histories, failures to appear and violations of probation, were routinely being released through the program - all without ever seeing a Judge. After such releases were made public to the citizens and a legal challenge was filed with the 5th District Court of Appeal, the Chief Judge and other elected officials suddenly decided to change the release process, which now requires a Judge's order for release through the pretrial services/release program.

A victory for the industry for sure, yet the same level of funding is still in place even though jail staff are supervising many less defendants than previously. And a new disturbing trend is taking place: the Initial Appearance Judges are now ordering more defendants into the program without any financial conditions and continued limited supervision. Defendants are being released for domestic violence, petit theft, burglary of a conveyance, driving with license suspended/revoked, no valid driver's license, possession cannabis and drug paraphernalia, possession of oxycodone, battery, DUI, trespassing after warning, criminal mischief and aggravated battery on a pregnant person! All released free of charge on your tax dollars!

Seven candidates are running for Orange County Mayor, three of which are incumbents: Commissioners Mildred Fernandez, Linda Stewart and Bill Segal. The three incumbents are thoroughly versed in the issues regarding the private surety bail industry's concerns regarding the amount of taxpayer money going to run a huge bureacratic program and the effect on public safety.

Pretrial services/release programs have no constituency to back their cause except their own narrow interests - that of maintaining the status quo and their government funding. Florida legislation is being proposed that would require more accountability from these programs; they are fighting it because they are fearful of further transparency that may ultimately result in less taxpayer funding.

The candidates for Orange County Mayor should take note that their constituents do not support such programs. In response to a mailer sent to thousands of households regarding the types of releases occurring through Orange County's pretrial services/release program, citizens emphatically insisted that they did not want their tax dollars spent to reward criminal behavior! Counties are not required to establish and/or run a pretrial services/release program; if Judges want to release defendants with no monetary conditions, they have discretion to do so already - it's called release on recognizance. The only function county or state governments should consider funding regarding pretrial services is to provide enough adequate staff to perform the investigatory function into a defendant's background for a meaningful first appearance session so that a Judge can make an informed release decision. This one critical function would save significant tax dollars by eliminating the remaining unnecessary functions of pretrial services/release programs.

If the candidates for Orange County Mayor care about how your tax dollars are spent in the future, they should listen to your concerns and make the issue of pretrial services/release programs a part of their platform and lobby for greater accountability and transparency.

Accountability and Transparency for Pretrial Release Programs

Orange County Government in Orlando, Florida approved their final 09/10 fiscal year budget of over $3 billion dollars this September. The budget had to be balanced by using reserve funding, freezing hundreds of unfilled county positions, abandoning park and other county projects, curtailing travel for training and conferences and even using federal stimulus funds.

Much discussion was given to the $1.7 million dollars of taxpayer funds budgeted to the pretrial services/release function at the jail, which screens, releases and supervises defendants charged with serious and/or repeat criminal and driving offenses. Hundreds of such defendants never see a judge for their release.

Many offenders released through a pretrial release program are financially capable of posting a bail bond, and many have done so in the past. Why should taxpayer funds be used to release an arrested individual who has the means to do so themselves? Why not utilize such taxpayer funds to release truly indigent individuals arrested for non-violent, first-time offenses, as was the original intent of pretrial release programs? Why are your tax dollars being used to compete with private enterprise that does a more effective and efficient job of supervising defendants released from jail?

Promoting a dangerous taxpayer-funded release system that offers little to minimal supervision, while attacking the private surety bail industry with hundreds of years of success behind it, highlights government bureaucracy at its best! Not only are taxpayers continually being asked to open up their wallets and spend more on government services, but now another bureaucratic organization, the National Association of Counties (NACo), is also asking for you to spend more. NACo "represents" county governments nationwide, and is promoting to county elected officials to create or expand their taxpayer-funded pretrial release systems because money bail is wrong.

Public organizations using taxpayer funds should be accountable for the wise use of such funds and transparent in their effectiveness or non-effectiveness. Taxpayer-funded release systems are neither financially or physically accountable for defendants released under such programs; no one is physically keeping in contact with a defendant and/or their family and making sure the defendant appears for court. In addition, pretrial release programs receive no financial penalty if a defendant fails to appear for court. Your tax dollars are funding the program regardless.

Taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs are complaining that they must provide to the public detailed information on the defendants released through their programs; they say such requests are burdensome and time consuming. Are they afraid of being transparent by providing proof of their effectiveness? National studies have shown the ineffectiveness of unsecured release and thus why such programs fight against transparency.

Don't be fooled by their rhetoric or claims of helping their communities by releasing people who have a "right" to unsecured release. The real issue is the lack of public safety and potential danger our communities face when defendants are released back into our communities with no accountability for their actions. Public agencies using taxpayer funds should be transparent and open to providing the most effective services possible. Taxpayer-funded pretrial release programs have been shown time and time again to be ineffective by having the highest failure to appear and fugitive rates. Money bail has worked for hundreds of years because it is effective and accountable to the criminal justice system.

Public policy affects public safety.