Meeting Information
Douglas County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
AGENDA
December 13th, 2016
11:00am – 12:30pm
1. Review and approve CJCC meeting minutes from October 18th, 2016
2. Overview of Racial Bias Training curriculum - Captain Brixius and Sergeant Hogue LPD
3. Behavioral Health Court update – Sharon Zehr
4. Pretrial Monitoring program update – Shannon Young
5. Work group update: Considering the high representation of persons of color in the Douglas County criminal justice system
6. Work group update: Considering the high representation of persons of color in the Douglas County Jail
7. Work group update: Considering alternatives to incarceration to reduce the jail population
8. Data Driven Justice update – Robert Bieniecki
9. Introduce plan for 2017 meetings – Robert Bieniecki
10. New business/discussion
11. Next meeting January 24th, 2017
December 13, 2016
Douglas County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Meeting (CJCC)
County Commissioner Mike Gaughan, chair, called the regular meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 13, 2016.
ATTENDANCE
Those in attendance included: Mike Gaughan; David Johnson (by phone), Edith Guffey, Susan Hadl, Pam Weigand, Chuck Epp, Ken McGovern, Scott Miller, Leslie Soden and Charles Branson. Ex-Officio members included: Craig Weinaug, Michelle Roberts and Mike Brouwer. Also attending from the KU School of Social Welfare assisting the meeting Margaret Severson and Jason Matejkowski; and Robert Bieniecki, CJCC Coordinator.
MINUTES
Susan Hadl moved approval of the CJCC minutes for 10-18-16. Motion was seconded by Gaughan and carried.
OVERVIEW OF RACIAL BIAS TRAINING CURRICULUM
Sergeant Hogue, LPD, gave an update to the Council on the fair and impartial policing training with the Lawrence Police Department. The training opened officers to the fact that everyone has biases based on race and ethnicity. Hogue said we have an outdated notion of how bias manifests itself into society, implicit and unconscious. Officers are constantly making decision about people all day. The idea is “we are not doing things bad, but we could be doing it better.” Hogue said it is easy to say “Just don’t do it. Don’t be biased.” He wants officers to take a look at their biases and understand that they do have them. The officers have engaged in great discussions and have been appreciative of the training. One of the areas he has received feedback on is “profiling by proxy” and learning to deal with others who are biased. Hogue said he has learned he does not have to respond to a citizen when he receives a call that is based on bias and no laws are broken.
Bieniecki asked if there is a refresher course offered. Hogue said there is an online refresher course with the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center (KLETC) offered.
Bieniecki asked if he trained the Sheriff’s office and other agencies in the County. Hogue said he trains new recruits. Approximately 10-12 deputies have been through the recruit class.
Guffey asked if there is any national data to give insight into how the training is going. Hogue responded at this point, no. However, researchers are at the beginning stages of this training. They plan to draw information from five larger agencies.
Gaughan asked what projects are being used to engage officers. Hogue replied Big Brother and Big Sisters. He hopes to see these relations grow into more. Officers have lunch with the kids and sometimes play basketball with the kids. Responding to students while in uniform is important to community engagement. The vast majority of the officers take the training seriously and want to make a difference.
Gaughan asked if the bias training is easier with new recruits. Hogue responded, yes and easier with younger officers.
BEHAVIOR HEALTH COURT UPDATE
Sharon, Zehr, Mental Health Clinician, gave an update on the Behavior Health Court. She was hired on December 1, 2016. She is currently working with Judge Pokorny, District Attorney’s Office and defense attorney, to fine tune the procedures and protocols, and develop the referral process. Their mission is to: enhance public safety, reduce recidivism of criminal defendants who suffer from serious mental illness and co-occurring disorders by connecting these defendants with community treatment services; and define appropriate dispositions to the criminal charges by considering the defendants mental illness and the seriousness of the offense.
They are targeting individuals whose mental illness is the driving force behind the incident that brought them into the system. The primary goals of the behavioral health court is to reduce the use of incarceration and repeated interactions with the criminal justice system for mentally ill persons, to improve coordination between the mental health and criminal justice system, to connect or reconnect mental ill persons with needed mental health and other support services, and to improve the quality of life for people with mental illness and co-occurring disorders. This is a behavioral mental health court targeting primarily those with severe mental illness. They are also expecting people with co-occurring substance abuse issues, though presently they are focusing on severe mental illness as the primary concern. The primary referral is looking at defendants with misdemeanor non-violent charges that are related or caused by their mental illness. Defendants must be a Douglas County resident and agree to participate in the program for 12 months. Those with other more violent charges will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Zehr anticipates most referrals will come through the “A” program which is collaboration with Bert Nash and the Douglas County jail, and then be approved by the District Attorney’s office. Once Bert Nash has screened and determined the candidate has a mental illness, then the case will be brought to the team to make a final determination. Participants will attend a court hearing once a week and will receive incentives and positive reinforcement to finish program.
Gaughan asked for more clarification on the once-a-week court hearing. Zehr said if someone is making appointments and progressing and taking their medications, the team may decrease their number of court dates.
Guffey asked how many people they plan to see per month. Zehr said she hopes four or five by the end of January after that maybe two or three per month.
Gaughan stated the Lexington program sees 13 in their program; and the City of Topeka had five people in their mental health court last year. We have budgeted for 30 for the year.
Epp said he feels we should be able to work with more than two defendants per month. Zehr said it depends on the buy-in to the program. It must be voluntary and they must commit to a year.
Gaughan asked if the year commitment could be adjusted to the course of treatment. Zehr responded with progress maybe the program can be shortened. There is a graduation at the end of one year and charges are dismissed.
Weigand asked what incentives are planned. Zehr said applause from the audience, praise and possibly gift cards.
Guffey asked why there is such a low number expected for the mental health court. Zehr said there are many other programs in place for people with mental health issues with continuance for intervention. Branson added we already have standard diversion plans already in the program. Some defendants may be likely candidates and already diverted out of the system. This program is designed to take on tougher situations. These candidates are people we see on a repeat basis that have been in trouble before that were excluded from diversion with persistent mental health issues, typically in jail every six months.
PRETRIAL MONITORING PROGRAM UPDATE:
Shannon Young and Michelle Roberts updated the Council on Pretrial Monitoring Program.
The first goal is to reduce the number of failures to appear in court and reduce any crimes committed while on the pretrial program. Two things they are doing to make sure that happens: 1) New system for anyone out on pretrial will receive an electronic call reminder through Notify set at different intervals. This system is being used to notify jurors. 2) They are looking at different electronic monitoring companies and products they have to offer. Several companies have offered the group to sample 10 units on a trial basis. Inmates have been out 122 days that normally have been in custody. So far Roberts said she is pleased with results. She is not sure Douglas County will use all of the products, but she has received positive feedback. The group is working with Dr. Beck on developing new criteria and incorporating that into models.
Soden was interested in getting this information out to the public. Roberts stated the group needs to do more work before advertising, but the program is moving in a positive direction. We need to get policies and procedures down before asking for funding.
Hadl asked if anyone would be prohibited from participating. Roberts said if someone were to be probationary status but is sitting in jail because of an inability to pay then this is an option. There will be different levels of monitoring from arrest to conviction or plea. If someone is sitting in jail and presentenced because of a prison case, they will not be recommended for this option.
WORK GROUP UPDATE:
Group 1: Considering the high representation of persons of color in the Douglas County criminal justice system:
The group met a couple of times and realized they have many questions about the data. At the last meeting Captain Heffley and Jason Hodges, Network Manager, with LPD gave a hands-on description how the system gathers information from car stop to how info is entered. They also talked about how to study the data down the road and discussed possibly bringing in Leslie Fridell or an equivalent to study the information.
WORK GROUP UPDATE:
Group 2: Considering the high representation of persons of color in the Douglas County Jail.
Lieutenant Brown explained the booking process with the Spillman system. She talked about how the data was entered and what data is available. The Sheriff’s office recently hired a data analyst.
WORK GROUP UPDATE:
Group 3: Considering alternatives to incarceration to reduce the jail population.
Judge Kittel asked that we table the journal entry topic until next month because we have a new judge swearing in. As for working with Dr. Beck on pretrial monitoring, the group is looking at court processes and court flow. The discussions have been enlightening.
Gaughan stated we have looked at Spillman from a booking perceptive and began a discussion on how the information shows indicators of race in jail. Looking from a jail perceptive the system is robust and designed to make management of jail more productive for staff. It is also challenging to get good data out so it matters how the data gets in. We may need to look at training on input.
Epp said there is a lot of data in the system now that addresses some of our questions. However, some key forms of data are not there. Some important questions about contact between officers and members of the public in regard to race are not addressed. Chief Khatib has a proposal on how to gather that information which will fundamentally address those gaps. It will take time and resources.
Gaughan asked Soden to send around Chief Khatib’s report on changing the citizen policing policies to a citizen board. Soden said the City Commission will be receiving at first reading at 4:00 p.m. tonight and will be receiving public comment.
DATA DRIVEN JUSTICE UPATE
Bieniecki stated the Data Driven Justice Update will be turning over to NACO which will be the new entity for the program. Bieniecki will provide information for participating in the phone call webinars.
INTRODUCE PLAN FOR 2017 MEETINGS
Bieniecki provided a calendar of six meetings in 2017. After discussion, some meeting dates may be rescheduled, TBD.
NEXT MEETING
• Next Meeting: Monday, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:00 a.m., in the County Commission Chamber
Gaughan moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion was seconded by Soden and carried.
Time and Date