Issue | Background | Findings | Conclusions | Recommendations | Responses | Attachments San Mateo County Detention and

Recommendations 3

• R1

  Page 1
  Continue study of the proposed post-sentence facility for inmates of both genders and move as quickly as possible to fund and build such a facility to replace the Women’s Correctional Center
• R2

  Page 1
  Identify and promptly implement interim solutions to overcrowding at the existing Women’s Correctional Center
• R3

  Page 1
  Implement the above recommendations in the context of the entire detention system, taking into account the special needs of women; and including innovative sentencing alternatives, treatment for substance abuse and mental problems, and programs to facilitate a phased transition from incarceration into society. September 4, 2007 Honorable John L. Grandsaert Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Re: Grand Jury Report: San Mateo County Detention and Rehabilitation Facilities Report Dear Judge Grandsaert: The Sheriff’s Office appreciates the 2006-2007 Grand Jury’s careful study of the issues facing the overcrowding of San Mateo County’s detention facilities and concerns for the effective re-entry of detainees back into society. The findings underscore the complex issues facing both this agency and the State. They underscore the need to cooperatively find solutions to relieve overcrowding and provide successful re-entry programs for those released from custody and enhance their rehabilitation. Recommendations: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors and the Sheriff: 1) “Continue study of the proposed post-sentence facility for inmates of both genders and move as quickly as possible to fund and build such a facility to replace the Women’s Correctional Center.” Response: Concur: Time is a critical concern. The jail populations today are beyond safe levels. This severely taxes our ability to manage today’s inmate populations. We are out of space and fast approaching a situation where there is literally no room to place more prisoners. The five year delay until a new facility can be constructed will place the system at the breaking point sooner rather than later. Additional jail beds must be found in the interim. Time should not be the only critical concern, however. The study and needs assessment must provide an accurate guide for developing capacity in the future and identifying the type of beds required. We should not permit the current crisis to force decisions which will not serve the County’s best interests in the extended future. The recommendations must be based on solid information which guides construction planning. As the needs assessment nears completion, a site for the new facility must be determined and architectural review initiated. This process incorporates the needs assessment to determine the type of building environment. This is where we will match the space with post-sentenced inmate programming and determine staffing. While this process is not a fast one, careful planning helps to prevent costly mistakes with the public’s money during construction on a facility that will last years into the future. The funding process will be a combined effort of San Mateo County Government and criminal justice stakeholders. 2) “Identify and promptly implement interim solutions to overcrowding as the existing Women’s Correctional Center.” Response: Concur: To alleviate the over-crowding issue at the Women's Correctional Center an additional facility(s) must be identified which can provide minimum/medium-security housing for female inmates. Some relief for female inmates may be possible if crowding in the male facility can be addressed which could provide additional space opportunities for the female population to expand into. The Sheriff will be presenting conceptual choices to address the overcrowding to Board of Supervisors at the end of the month. Fiscal implications are being weighed to assist with the decision making process. In this context, the Sheriff will also be providing the Board with a proposal to ensure re-entry opportunities are included with sufficient housing options. 3) “Implement the above recommendations in the context of the entire detention system, taking into account the special needs of women; and including innovative sentencing alternatives, treatment for substance abuse and mental problems, and programs to facilitate a phased transition from incarceration into society.” Response: Concur: The Sheriff’s report to the Board of Supervisors at the end of the month will lay out a number of options for consideration. The options will address both the male and female populations and will recognize the need to provide gender specific programming opportunities. The options will require financial commitment from the County, but will serve as pilot programs for the eventual construction and opening of the new facility. Sincerely, Greg Munks, Sheriff cc: The Honorable Board of Supervisors Grand Jury website COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence County Manager’s Office DATE: September 20, 2007 BOARD MEETING DATE: October 2, 2007 SPECIAL NOTICE: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors FROM: John L. Maltbie, County Manager SUBJECT: 2006-07 Grand Jury Response Recommendation Accept this report containing the County’s responses to the following 2006-07 Grand Jury report: San Mateo County Detention and Rehabilitation Facilities VISION ALIGNMENT: Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government. Goal 20: Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain. This activity contributes to the goal by ensuring that all Grand Jury findings and recommendations are thoroughly reviewed by the appropriate County departments and that, when appropriate, process improvements are made to improve the quality and efficiency of services provided to the public and other agencies.