Santa Clara County Grand Jury • 2011-2012

Grand Jury Report: Ab109/ab117 Realignment: Is Santa Clara County Ready for*

Published: August 27, 2012 8 pages Consolidated Report
View Original PDF

Findings 7 findings

F1
The County, through the CCP, has developed a well thought out and progressive approach to AB 109, based on a strategy of treatment versus re-incarceration. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
F2
The County has missed the opportunity to proactively communicate its work and progress to the community at large. This leaves county residents vulnerable to misinformation. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
F3
The County has not defined the metrics it will use to measure success. State-funded incentive payments will be measured by metrics detailed in the penal code. The respondent agrees with the finding. Response:
F4
The County's CCP is a cross-functional team made up of the right stakeholders who are collaborating effectively on AB 109 implementation. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA: The respondent agrees with the finding.
F5
The CCP recommended and the BOS approved a Re-entry Resource Center (RRC) located in a convenient, central county location, for both AB 109 releases and others being released from county jail. The respondent agrees with the finding. Response:
F6
The Sheriff argues that Elmwood Correctional Facility was not designated to house longer-term inmates and needs funds for facility upgrades. The respondent agrees with the finding. Response:
F7
The County's approach to implementing AB 109 is progressive, evidence-based and focused on treatment versus re-incarceration. It is currently limited to just those individuals that fit the AB 109 N/N/Ns criteria. The respondent agrees with the finding. Response:

Recommendations 7

No Responses Found 2

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office
Santa Clara County Sheriff Elected County Office

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.