The Thin Blue Line Gets Thinner Plumas County Jail Report Executive Summary:

Conclusions 4

• CL1 Page 34
  It is painfully obvious that Plumas County needs a new jail. The Sheriff and staff are working tirelessly to acquire a USDA loan and grant monies to purchase the property formally known as the Trilogy building in East Quincy near the Animal Shelter for a new jail facility. The Trilogy building is large enough to accommodate the Sheriffs’ current needs and their projected needs far into the future. This modern facility has additional space to house the Probation Department, the daily reporting center and the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) better serving all parties if located in the same building. The building is in near move-in condition and has a backup generator, and a large modern computer server room that is currently up to date and functional. The 4.5 acre parcel is also large enough to accommodate the construction of a modern modular jail facility. This would meet current Uniform Building Code (UBC) and CSA requirements and thereby likely result in the removal of the Federal Consent Decree for inmate population. This site also provides the opportunity for the installation of photo voltaic energy system (solar energy) to offset the cost of utilities. Should the acquisition of the Trilogy property fall through, the Board of Supervisors should be prepared to move forward in purchasing property away from parks, ball fields, and schools in an area recommended by the Sheriff. Any monies put forth for the existing jail is putting good money after bad. The current jail would still be in proximity to public roads and the little league field. It is still a linear facility which lacks segregation; is not ADA compliant, and is a threat to public safety. The Grand Jury again reiterates that continuing to allow the jail to operate in non-compliance and a known unsafe manner leaves the County of Plumas open to litigation and extreme financial risk. Above all the Plumas County Grand Jury is factually concerned that the jail in its failing condition presents a great risk to public safety. Reports issued by the Civil Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Civil Grand Jury. 27
• CL2 Page 35
  Plumas County Jail Report ATTACHMENT AB-109: California Assembly Bill 109 California Public Safety Realignment – aka AB‐109 BACKGROUND: On January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution, the California State Legislature declared a fiscal emergency. In May 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered California to fix its overcrowded prison problem. Citing constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment the Supreme Court gave California a two-year deadline to drastically cut inmate population in its 33 prisons to 137.5% of capacity by May 2013. Seen as a way to address both problems, AB-109 came into existence to address the fiscal emergency and to comply with the Supreme Court order. Touted to the public as historic legislation to close the “revolving door” of low-level inmates cycling in and out of state prisons, AB-109 was signed into law by Governor Edmond ‘Jerry’ Brown on April 5, 2011 and became effective on October 1, 2011. AB-109 was enacted against the backdrop of a severely overcrowded California state prison system, but the statute says it was enacted to combat recidivism and not because of overcrowding. DISCUSSION: For cost-saving purposes, AB-109 allows non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offenders to serve their sentence in county jails instead of state prisons. By keeping these low-level offenders out of state prisons, the state claims it can save almost half a billion dollars (10% of its budget) annually. However, it does so at the expense of the 58 counties in California. Transferring the responsibility and expense of managing prisoners from the State to the counties has placed a tremendous financial load on the counties. The state does provide some revenue to the counties to cover costs associated with the implementation of AB-109, but nowhere near the amount needed to house, feed, medicate and rehabilitate these prisoners as directed by the law. 28
• CL3 Page 36
  Plumas County Jail Report Realignment: The 600 + page Bill was part of the state budget process in early 2011, and as such, it was not open to the legislature for debate and was passed in a 48 hour frenzy to meet the state budget deadline. AB-109, now being called “prison realignment” is really a cost saving effort by the California legislature as it shifts the responsibility for incarcerating many low-risk inmates from the state to its counties. Realignment describes the process of significant change in the California criminal justice system. The legislation changed the penal code and sentencing laws to allow new offenders to be sentenced to local jails rather than to state prison. Realignment makes huge changes in California criminal law, with more than 500 statutes being amended. However, for the most part realignment does not change how things work for serious crimes, violent crimes or sex crimes. People who commit those kinds of offenses will still be eligible for state prison. Realignment adds nearly 60 additional crimes that are not defined in the Penal Code as serious or violent offenses but at the request of law enforcement were added as offenses that would be served in state prison rather than in local jails. Realignment means that thousands of less-serious felony offenders now face a jail sentence or out-of-custody supervision (similar to probation), while before they would have been eligible for state prison. Realignment means that the state will continue to incarcerate offenders who commit serious, violent, or sexual crimes, but the counties will supervise, rehabilitate and manage low-level offenders. Critics of AB-109: Critics of AB-109 say it saves money at the expense of public safety. AB-109 allows non- violent, non-serious and non-sexual offenders to serve their sentences in county jails and not in state prisons. However, the law only considers the criminal’s last offense in determining if he/she qualifies as a low risk offender, not the individual's entire criminal history. Thus a gang member or a child molester with a history of assaults and/or robberies could be arrested for possession of a small amount of Methamphetamine “meth” and instead of the court taking his/her ENTIRE criminal record under consideration, this person could magically become a “low risk” offender based on JUST the meth charge. These offenders are deemed as "low risk" to the community despite their proven history of involvement in more serious criminal activity. Sentencing more serious offenders to jail rather than state prison has forced counties that already have crowded jails to release less serious offenders who are serving time for crimes such as auto theft, burglary, grand theft, forgery, illegal drugs and counterfeiting. 29
• CL4 Page 37
  Plumas County Jail Report Many of the county jails in California are faced with significant capacity issues. Seventeen counties, including Plumas County, already operate under court orders limiting how many inmates that can be held in their local jails. Ninety-three percent of all county jails were already operating at their full capacity, prior to realignment. Since AB-109 has been enacted, many non-serious offenders that are being paroled do not report to Parole Officers because they no longer fear "Parole Violations" that would send them back to state prison. If they do receive a parole violation, their sentence is served in a local jail under the jurisdiction of the Probation Department. Serious offenders that are paroled have to commit a serious parole violation to be sent back to state prison. AB-109 transfers responsibility for supervising certain kinds of felony offenders and state prison parolees from state prisons and state parole agents to county jails and probation officers. This is burying the Plumas County Sheriff’s Department and the Probation Department in extra work. APPENDIX: State Prison Population Reports: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Reports_Research/Offender_Information_Services_Branch/Populati on_Reports.html AB-109 & AB 117 An Overview: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/layoffresources/docs/realignment/AB_109-PowerPoint- Overview.pdf http://www.ca-public-safety-realignment-act.com/pdf/Realignment-Fact-Sheet-CDCR.pdf 30

No Responses Found 1

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