San Joaquin County Grand Jury
• 2012-2013
San Joaquin County Grand Jury Crime - Budget Cuts + Ab 109 ≠ Safe Communities 2012-2013 Case No. 0912 – Amended Report
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 8 findings
F1
1 The staffing of all law and justice agencies in the County has been reduced increasing the threat to the safety of the citizens and their property.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
1 The savings from eliminating 33 correctional officer positions have been partially negated by overtime paid to officers when there are more than 1,252 inmates and therefore does not provide the intended savings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
1 The County Board of Supervisors, before November 1, 2013, approve an increase to the staffing level of correctional officers to fully staff the County Jail including the Honor Farm.
F3
1 The duplication of special units, specialized training and police functions (e.g., property room, dispatch, investigation technicians) cause inefficient use of limited resources.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of Escalon, Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Ripon, Stockton and Tracy, before September 1, 2013, each appoint two representatives, one to represent law enforcement and one to represent the governing body or management, to form an ad hoc committee. The committee’s purpose is to conduct a study on how to increase countywide efficiency of law enforcement agencies by taking a regional approach to some or all of their services. A preliminary report is to be released before December 31, 2013, of actions already taken to increase efficiency and additional actions that will be taken between January 2014 and June 2015.
F1.1
, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Escalon City Council
No recommendations for this finding
F2.1
The savings from eliminating 33 correctional officer positions have been partially negated by overtime paid to officers when there are more than 1,252 inmates and therefore does not provide the intended savings.
No recommendations for this finding
F2.2
County jail inmates who are being released due to jail overcrowding are then able to commit crimes when they otherwise would have been incarcerated, which is increasing the crime problem in the County.
No recommendations for this finding
F3.1
The duplication of special units, specialized training and police functions (e.g., property room, dispatch, investigation technicians) cause inefficient use of limited resources.
No recommendations for this finding
F3.2
There are examples of cooperation between different agencies in the County but each agency still operates autonomously most of the time.
No recommendations for this finding
Additional Recommendations 1
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R14 Public Administrator F2.1, F2.2 Stockton City Council F1.1, F1.2, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.2, R1.4
Conclusions 2
-
CL11, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Escalon City Council
-
CL2Crime in San Joaquin County has put our collective backs against the wall. It is the ever present cancer in our public body and threatens our community’s health. Crime works against recovery from the challenges of the economic downturn, adversely impacts Stockton’s bankruptcy, creates negative perceptions and diminishes scarce public resources. The Grand Jury tackled this high priority, complex, multi-faceted and difficult issue as an investigation in an effort to showcase the challenges and contribute in a meaningful way to the community dialogue. Investment in law enforcement staffing, expanded jail capacity and inter-agency cooperation are those areas which make up but three of many key and interrelated pieces of the puzzle for a comprehensive solution. The recommendations are put forward with the intention of supporting an immediate change as well as creating a foundation for long-term improvements. In addition, there are many good ideas and programs already under consideration including Stockton’s Marshall Plan and the Community Corrections Partnership’s study of community corrections centers. No recommendation the Grand Jury puts forth should be construed as replacing, contradicting or opposing either of these or any other initiative under development. Instead, they are conceived to be complementary and offered as potential ideas to integrate with other approaches to address the crime issue. Finally, the economic health of our communities requires a balance of insuring a safe environment for our residents, while at the same time being fiscally responsible. The responsibility of our public officials, elected and appointed alike, is to manage that balance for both our personal and economic wellbeing. Those working in the law and justice system must continue to work for solutions. Most important of all, the citizens of our County must stay concerned and work with our leaders to make the streets safe for everyone. The Grand Jury’s recommendations, if properly interpreted and effectively implemented, will help to support the restoration of our hope for San Joaquin County to become a safe and secure place to live, now and into the future. Disclaimer Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon specific approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Section 911, 924.1 (a) and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). Acknowledgement The Grand Jury wishes to express its appreciation for the professional efforts made by the many individuals working in the law and justice system. As the Grand Jury rode along with officers during their patrols, toured the County Jail, and talked with our law and justice leaders, the Grand Jury was impressed by the work they were accomplishing. Response Requirements California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to all findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court. The San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors and the various City Councils, where applicable, shall report to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court within 90 days. The San Joaquin County Sheriff, where applicable, shall report to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court within 60 days. Required to Respond to the Following: Agency/Elected Official: Findings Recommendations F1.1, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Escalon City Council F3.1, F3.2 R3 F1.1, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Lathrop City Council F3.1, F3.2 R3 F1.1, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Lodi City Council F3.1, F3.2 R3 F1.1, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Manteca City Council F3.1, F3.2 R3 F1.1, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 Ripon City Council F3.1, F3.2 R3 F1.1, F1.3, F1.5 R1.1.1, R1.3, R1.5 San Joaquin County Board of F2.1, F2.2 R2.1, R2.2 Supervisors F3.1, F3.2 R3 San Joaquin County Sheriff-Coroner- F1.4 R1.4 Public Administrator F2.1, F2.2 Stockton City Council F1.1, F1.2, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.2, R1.4 F3.1, F3.2 R3 Tracy City Council F1.1, F1.4 R1.1.2, R1.4 F3.1, F3.2 R3 Mail or hand-deliver a hard copy of the response to: Honorable David P. Warner, Presiding Judge San Joaquin County Superior Court 222 East Weber Ave., Room 605 Stockton, CA 95202 Also please email the response to Trisa Martinez, Staff Secretary to the Grand Jury at grandjury@sjcourts.org Appendices A. Web Sites Visited B. Site Visits/Interviews C. Community Meetings Attended Appendix A Web Sites Visited Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (Federal). http://www.atf.gov. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (California). http://www.cdcr.ca.gov. Department of Homeland Security (Federal). http://www.dhs.gov. Escalon Police Department. http://cityofescalon.org/departments/police. Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov. Highway Patrol (California). http://www.chp.ca.gov. Lathrop Police Department. http://www.ci.lathrop.ca.us/lpd. Lodi Police Department. http://www.lodi.gov/police. Manteca Police Department. http://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/police. National Institute of Justice. http://www.nij.gov/welcome. Ripon Police Department. http://www.riponpd.org. Stockton Police Department. http://www.stocktongov.com/government/departments/police. Tracy Police Department. http://www.ci.tracy.ca.us. San Joaquin County Sheriff Department. http://www.co.san-joaquin.ca.us/sheriff. San Joaquin County District Attorney. http://www.sjgov.org/da. San Joaquin County Probation Department. http://www.sjgov.org/probation. San Joaquin County Superior Court. http://www.stocktoncourt.org. San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors. http://www.sjgov.org/board. San Joaquin County Public Defender’s Office. http://www.sjgov.org/pubdefender. U.S. Marshals Service. http://www.justice.gov/marshals. Appendix B Site Visits/Interviews Deuel Vocational Institution, CDCR. Tracy, CA Escalon Police Department Lodi Police Department Manteca Police Department Northern California Youth Center, California Department of Juvenile Justice. Stockton, CA Ripon Police Department San Joaquin County Jail. French Camp, CA San Joaquin County Juvenile Probation. French Camp, CA San Joaquin County District Attorney’s Offices. Stockton, CA San Joaquin County Sheriff Office. French Camp, CA San Joaquin Superior Court. Manteca, CA San Joaquin Superior Court. Stockton, CA Stockton Police Department Tracy Police Department Appendix C Community Meetings Attended Anti-crime Event. Held at Victory Park, Stockton, CA. (September 27, 2012) City of Stockton Marshal Plan Symposium. Held at Stockton Progressive Church, Stockton, CA. (February 8, 2013) City of Stockton Operation Ceasefire Presentation, held at Stockton Progressive Church, Stockton, CA. (November 14, 2012) Community Corrections Partnership. Held in Stockton, CA. (Various Dates) San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors. Held in Stockton, CA. (Various Dates) Stockton City Council. Held in Stockton, CA. (Various Dates) Stockton in Crisis: Searching for Solutions. Held at University of the Pacific, Stockton, CA. (September 27, 2012) Town Hall Forum Addressing Violence in Our Community, held at University of the Pacific, Stockton, CA. (November 15, 2012) Bibliography Aungst, Sharon (Ed.). (September 2012). Pretrial Detention & Community Supervision – Best Practices and Resources for California Counties. Partnership for Community Excellence. Bennett, David. (February 8, 2013). Stockton Violence Reduction Plan. Braga, Anthony A. Ph.D. (July 7, 2006). Preventing Violent Street Crime in Stockton, California. California Partnership for Safe Communities. (April 2012). Sacramento Safe Community Partnership (Ceasefire): an Initial Progress Report. Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee. (August 30, 2011). San Joaquin County Public Safety Realignment 2011 Implementation Plan. Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee. (September 25, 2012). San Joaquin County Public Safety Realignment Phase 2 Implementation Plan. Council of State Government Justice Center. (2013). The Impact of Probation and Parole Populations on Arrests in Four California Cities. Deis, Bob. (January 31, 2012). Marshall Plan on Public Safety. Stockton, CA. National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. (September 2001). Reducing Gun Violence - The Boston Gun Project’s Operation Ceasefire. Washington, DC. San Joaquin Civil County Grand Jury. (2011). Budgetary Impact on Administration of Justice in San Joaquin County. Stockton, CA. San Joaquin Community Data Co-Op. (2012). AB109: Public Safety Realignment in San Joaquin County – A Preliminary Evaluation Report: The Situation, Response, and Impact. Stockton, CA. Stanford Law School. (January 2012). Realigning the Revolving Door? An Analysis of California Counties’ AB 109 Implementation Plans. Palo Alto, CA: McCray, A., McCann Newhall, K., & Greenlick Snyder.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office