Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-04-03 Study Sesison - Palm Desert Police and Contract , ..� CITY OF POEM DESERI 10 FRED WARING DRIVE r; 73-5 40I L PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2 5 7 8 t4 �" ��`,nti TEL: 760 346-061I q4,}o(a 3�N.-,' infoOcityofpalmdesert.org S. NOTICE OF STUDY SESSION OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL • J AND NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Palm Desert City Council will convene for a Study Session Wednesday, April 3, 2013, at 9:00 a.m. in the Administrative Conference Room of the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260. Said Study Session will be for the purpose of discussing the Palm Desert Police Department and the Sheriff's Contract Rate. 01110424ivi- R• H‘L E I. KLASSE , CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA APRIL 2, 2013 NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN AT THE STUDY SESSION. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY SESSION IS INFORMATION ONLY. c la Gp INIro ON RE(v(EED GAGER Office of the Sheriff of Riverside County ; , Stan Sniff, Sheriff 0 co-,? 4 (/) . ,c) 1 e \ --= �`s�DE G� J 958 J AB 109 Realignment: Riverside County Sheriff's Review of Issues and Recommended Legislative Changes 9 0_,,_._ .,z, 3, ,,0 ,___,,,,. .....40_,... c January 17, 2013 3 Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County AB 109 Realignment has brought about drastic changes for the California criminal justice system. One of the major impacts felt in Riverside County has been the shift of responsibility to the local jails for housing a large number of convicted criminals who would have previously gone to state prison to serve out their sentences. Our jail system in Riverside County was already undersized before Realignment, and Realignment has only exacerbated the problem. While overcrowding has become the most visible impact of realignment, it is just one of a host of issues that are quickly becoming the new norm for local jails in California. Although the Riverside County jails had experienced prior periods of overcrowding before Realignment, improvements in headcount management and the efforts of our allied criminal justice partners who effectively kept court cases moving at a reasonable pace and made good utilization of incarceration alternatives resulted with our local jails operating at about 83% capacity before realignment. This was near the Federal Court Order threshold of 90% full, after which the Sheriff's Department was to begin making early releases, but was manageable. This jail status allowed Riverside County police agencies, Probation, and State Parole to book suspects with confidence the person would be held until released by legal process, transferred to prison, or had served their sentence. Jail security was a primary focus, since the jails held some inmates at high security levels while they awaited trial or return to prison,but the majority of the sentenced jail population was comprised of lower security inmates. The jail system offered a variety of rehabilitative programs aimed at short-term inmates to address their educational, vocational, therapeutic, and substance abuse treatment needs as they prepared to return to the community. The Sheriff's Department additionally operated a robust work release and home detention program for eligible sentenced misdemeanants that offered viable alternatives to jail custody while providing valuable volunteer service to the community. Projections showed that more jail beds would be needed in the near future to handle unaddressed past population growth and future growth,and planning was underway to meet this need. As projected when the details of Realignment were first revealed, the demand for local jail beds sharply increased following the implementation of Realignment. By January 2012, this increase overwhelmed the available capacity, causing the need to begin making early releases. Along with a higher number of inmates came a need for more high-security housing as the number of inmates with histories of violence and criminal sophistication rose. These inmates no longer passed through jail relatively quickly, but many were sentenced to long stays in jail. The traditional short-term programs and program housing quickly proved inadequate to address the needs of inmates facing years in jail. The busy work release and home detention programs remained highly important as alternatives to custody for misdemeanants, but also began expanding to serve as possible alternatives for longer-term inmates and as a method to provide a layer of control for select pre-trial detainees who could then be released from custody while awaiting the court process. With jail overcrowding the new reality, there became an increased need to quickly construct additional jail beds to handle the growing jail population and provide adequate space for programs,health care and mental health treatment. Arresting and prosecuting agencies could no longer be certain that inmates booked into jail would remain there until a legal disposition was reached as increasing numbers were released both pre-trial and before serving a full sentence. Page 2 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County Impact statistics as of November 28, 2012, showed 7,054 realignment-related inmates had served time in our local Riverside County jails since implementation, with 902 of those still physically remaining in jail on November 28th.1 This change meant that 902 beds that would have been used in the past to hold the type of inmates traditionally held in county jails before realignment were effectively unavailable. This represents approximately 24% of all the current jail beds in Riverside County. 1,932 of these inmates were sentenced under the new state law wherein certain state prison inmates now serve their sentences in county jail [1170(h) PC], with 205 of them remaining in jail still serving out sentences of three years or more. This growing population of long-term sentenced inmates has clogged the normal in-out flow of inmates, leading to the need to release 6,279 shorter-term inmates early just to make room. While preliminary attempts to utilize other alternatives to jail custody are beginning to make a dent, the early release cycle continues and the jail system remains in crisis. Many have questioned what we can do at this point to solve this crisis. The primary focus needs to be the construction of new jails beds. These jail beds need to be of a type suitable to house the kinds of inmates we are now keeping in our local jails. They need to be secure, safe and efficient to operate, and they need to be located in proximity to where they are needed and close to the type of diverse workforce needed to operate them. There is currently a project underway to expand our jail adjacent to the courts in Indio. This project is a good start to addressing several issues as it corrects the local shortage of jail beds, modernizes and adds additional layers of security over the existing jail, and provides needed jobs to the local economy. But additional jail bed construction is critically needed. These beds need to be high-security, designed to house long-term inmates and deliver appropriate programs to increase the participant's chances for success once they are released. Any new facility needs to be centrally located to serve all parts of Riverside County and should be expandable so more beds and program space can be added to meet future needs. The fact remains that even with a push to build jail beds, it will be several years before any newly constructed jail beds are actually ready to use. Faced with that reality, we must also explore the use of contract beds, either at fire camps or community correctional facilities (like a city jail or jail run by another county), and the Sheriff's Department has entered into dialogue with certain providers who have signaled their ability and willingness to provide beds. While all the details and costs have not yet been determined, we know that under the current requirements these beds will be expensive to operate over the long term and will never be able to meet more than just a small portion of the local need. However, we will likely have no choice but to utilize these options as a stop-gap measure until our local jail capacity is increased. Realignment also encourages local criminal justice agencies to utilize alternatives to physical custody wherever possible if a way can be devised to maintain a reasonable level of participant accountability while keeping our communities safe. Our local correctional system has been using electronic monitoring as an alternative to custody for many years, and we have begun to expand this program to include persons awaiting trial and persons toward the end of their sentences who have shown a desire to successfully reintegrate into their community. The current legal structure under which this expansion is expected to operate has presented many challenges that will need 1 See Appendix A—Riverside County Sheriff's Update to the Community Corrections Partnership dated November 28,2012 Page 3 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County to be addressed. Driven primarily by the State's budget woes, including inadequate prison capacity, AB 109 Realignment was too hastily created. In the year since the changes went into effect, key flaws have been found that need immediate correction by our Legislature. As the full impact and costs associated with Realignment have become increasingly clear, the need for changes in current law has become more and more apparent. Our community recommends strongly and supports the following legislative fixes as most needed: 1) Adequate Funding from the State. For realignment to succeed, there will need to be rapid and steady growth in the number of quality programs available for persons both in and out of custody and an adequate number of jail beds for those who are not willing to participate in other alternatives. Realignment will also continue to drive cost increases for the care and security of the new class of inmates who remain within jail walls. Therefore, it is imperative that funding for Realignment be from a designated source, be adequate to fund the true costs of Realignment, be ongoing, and be guaranteed. A permanent shift in responsibility of this magnitude must be accompanied by a corresponding permanent shift in funding to the local level in an adequate amount to cover the true costs. Without sufficient guaranteed funding, all our neighborhoods and communities could be put at even greater risk. The recent passage of Proposition 30 was an important first step in guaranteeing a base level of funding for Realignment. The proposition offered a constitutional guarantee that certain tax revenues would be remitted to local governments annually to fund program responsibilities transferred to these local governments by the state in 2011, including Realignment.2 The question remains whether the level of funding contained in the proposition will be adequate to begin to address the true costs of Realignment. We have already seen that the current level of state funding falls far short for the current identified needs in Riverside County, and many of the effects of realignment have yet to be fully realized. For example, the amount of money needed to fund the initial budget requests made to the Riverside County Community Corrections Partnership for Fiscal Year 2012/13 totaled $56.7 million, yet the funding provided by the state was less than $43.2 million; a$13.5 million gap.3 Yet these past budget requests only began to scratch the surface of the true need. While the Sheriff's request for FY 2012/13 contained funding to begin using contract beds to meet the immediate housing need for a portion of the long-term population—primarily fire camp beds — that request totaled only $3.7 million, which was then scaled back at budget approval. Just to keep those same 280 fire camp beds funded for the following full-year will require an additional estimated expenditure of almost $5 million.4 On November 28, 2012, AB 109 inmates occupied 902 beds in Riverside County jails. Subtracting the 280 inmates that could potentially be sent to fire camps, the jails system still needs to provide beds for more than 600 AB 109 inmates just to meet current population numbers. Most of the available contract jail beds in California are located in closed facilities owned by several Central Valley cities. It is unclear whether any of 2 From California Legislative Analyst's Summary of Proposition 30. 3 See Appendix B-AB 109 Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee Summary of Budget Requests FY 2012/13. 9 Calculated cost of$4.7 million for CDCR Bed Cost and nearly$300,000 for evaluation&transportation. Page 4 January 17,2013 7 Office of the Sheriff,Riverside County these facilities are adequate to meet the current need,but, assuming a suitable facility was found, early projections set the cost for an adequate number of these contract beds at an additional $20 to $30 million per year.5 These cost numbers do not even begin to reflect the burgeoning prices for in-custody programs and increased anticipated expenditures for enhanced medical care, dental care, and mental health/substance abuse treatment. The numbers clearly show that the current level of state funding, while a start, does not address the full needs caused by Realignment. The costs previously mentioned pertain to some of the increased cost for the Sheriff's Department, yet other partners in the criminal justice system and related human services agencies — like Probation, District Attorney, Public Defender, County Hospital,and Mental Health—are also experiencing increased costs as they manage the effects of Realignment in their own areas of responsibility. The legislature needs to remain cognizant of these direct and ancillary costs, and make provisions so all the impacts of Realignment are adequately funded. 2) Sentences to Local County Jails. Before passage, when AB 109 was still being crafted, those worried that the new law would require long sentences in county jail were directed to the language in the law stating that the types of non-violent,non-serious, and non-sex offense crimes covered by AB 109 carried maximum sentences of no more than three years. This led to the assumption that no sentences given out under Realignment laws would be longer than three years. While technically true for any single sentence, what was not revealed at the time was that many felons convicted under AB 109 have more than one charge, more than one case pending against them, or have sentencing enhancements added to their charges that are designed to be served consecutive to the base charge. As a result, since Realignment, many people have been sentenced under AB 109 to county jail for very long terms. In Riverside County, these consecutive terms have manifested in a sentence for one inmate of as long as 14 years,4 months, and many other sentences exceeding the supposed three year maximum for others.6 The design and construction of county jails in California has traditionally focused on safely and humanely housing arrestees awaiting trial and those serving short-term sentences before returning to the community. County jails were not intended to house inmates for multiple years. County jail programs were never focused on serving inmates with extended sentences. Once the issue of consecutive sentences and enhancements leading to long jail terms became known, the inappropriate placement of long-term inmates in a place designed for short-term housing was quickly recognized as an unintended consequence of Realignment. Legislation was introduced in the 2011-12 session of the California State Senate to clarify that no person should be directed to serve a sentence in county jail if the total custody time was for more than three years. However the proposed legislative fix ran into resistance due to continued state prison overcrowding and budget issues, so the legislation failed passage in April while still in committee.7 A change must be made to take total length of sentence into account when designating where 5 Calculated cost at$60 to$70/day Bed Cost,plus evaluation,transportation,oversight,and local video visitation costs.Many possible additional costs related to Programs and Medical needs are still unknown. 6 The 14-year,4-month sentence initially imposed was later reduced by the court to a sentence of 12 years,8 months in county jail. 7 SB 1441(Emerson)Cap on Sentences Page 5 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County custody time will be served. No person should be sentenced to more than three years 'in local custody, regardless of their offense. Any person sentenced to custody for longer than three years, either for one case or any number of consecutive cases, should instead be sent to state prison, which is better suited to deal with long term incarceration. Although overcrowding and funding issues will undoubtedly continue to plague the state prison system,just as they do local county jails, the fact remains that state prison is the more appropriate place for felons to serve long sentences. 3) Statewide Fire Camps. Another unintended consequence of Realignment has resulted in a crisis filling Statewide Fire Camps with enough inmates of the correct classification for the camps to competently function and offer adequate fire protection for California's vulnerable forests and grasslands. These camps, traditionally cooperative operations between CDCR and either CAL-Fire or a local county fire department, historically drew upon a certain pool of low- level state prison felons in CDCR custody to populate their necessary workforce. Before Realignment went into effect, those types of inmates served their sentences in state prison. Since Realignment, the types of inmates most suitable for Inmate Fire Camps are routinely sentenced to county jails, not state prison. Counties have been told that they may enter into contracts with CDCR to return suitable inmates back to CDCR, but the county has to agree to pay a daily bed rate for each inmate to the camp,plus screening and transportation costs. A change must be made to enable Inmate Fire Camps maintained by CDCR and Cal-Fire to be adequately populated with the appropriate county inmates without burdening counties with all the costs. As previously mentioned, CDCR has indicated a willingness to accept appropriately screened inmates from counties to keep the camps populated, but insists on passing the daily camp costs to the counties since they have not been otherwise funded by the state. This cost is prohibitively expensive and will limit the ability of most counties to send many sentenced prisoners to the fire camps. As a result, the state will suffer during each fire season because they will likely have an insufficient number of fire camp inmates to fight the inevitable wildfires — while the local jails remain overcrowded. In recognition for the valuable service provided across our entire state, California needs to cover all the costs of Inmate Fire Camps as they did before Realignment, or at least require counties to bear no financial burden beyond the cost of local inmate screening and transportation to and from the designated CDCR transfer location. 4) Good Time Credits. Inmates kept in physical custody in local county jails before trial are generally entitled to earn credit for time served before they are sentenced and have that time deducted from the time owed on their sentence. Sentenced inmates also are generally entitled to earn good time and work time credits for time served in local county jails subject to maintaining good behavior and participating in prescribed programs.8 Because of overcrowding, many local jails have developed programs as alternatives to jail. Many of these programs severely limit the movements of participants, require them to submit to electronic monitoring and periodic checks, and require participants to agree to random searches and sobriety checks. While these programs are designed to simulate custody and hold participants in a kind of"virtual"jail,current law does not allow participants to earn time-served or behavioral credits, even when participants fully comply with all the imposed requirements. 8 California Penal Code Section 4019. Page 6 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County A change must be made so that inmates who voluntarily accept placement in programs designed as alternatives to physical custody can earn behavioral and time-served credits if they maintain good behavior and are successful in the alternate programs. One of the underpinnings of Realignment was a belief that local agencies could develop and operate creative alternatives to custody that will keep communities safe while allowing the proper inmates to be appropriately monitored without having to physically keep them in jail. As stated previously, current law gives inmates in local jails credits for time served while awaiting trial and behavioral credits for inmates serving sentences, however; these same credits are usually not available for the same inmates if they voluntarily participate in an alternative program, such as GPS ankle bracelet programs or work release. Realignment allows for these programs,but failed to address the credit issues. As a result, participants in these programs are penalized for their participation and the programs are less attractive as alternatives to custody. A change needs to be made so that time spent in programs where the inmate remains in the virtual custody and control of the jail system, and fully complies with that program's requirements is treated the same as time spent in physical jail custody in regard to credits. 5) Involuntary Work Release. Current law allows county boards of supervisors to set up work release programs in which suitable inmates can be assigned to perform manual labor in lieu of jail time by improving and maintaining streets, parks, and other public facilities for both local governments and selected community nonprofit organizations, removing graffiti, weeds and rubbish, and performing yard and repair work for senior citizens.9 All counties can elect to run programs in which qualified inmates participate voluntarily in work release programs, and counties in which the average daily inmate population is over 90 percent of capacity may attempt to set up programs in which selected inmates can be forced to participate involuntarily. While this sounds like a fine idea on the surface,under current law each type of program has issues that p make them unattractive or unworkable. Voluntary work release in lieu of jail time has been used for several years in Riverside County and numerous other locations. Many valuable hours of community work have been performed over the years by participants directly sentenced to the program by the courts. Participants are uncompensated and are routinely charged an administrative fee to help defray the costs to run the program, as allowed under the law. However, participants in the voluntary program are not entitled to receive good time credits, even if they fully comply with all the terms of the program. As discussed previously, the inability to earn credits makes this program an unattractive option for those currently in custody. This is particularly true in counties like Riverside County that are over capacity in their jails. The inmates who are lower security risks and who comprise the population most suitable for work release are also the inmates most suitable for an early release under the Federal Court Order covering overcrowding. Inmates soon learn that if they participate in the voluntary work release program, it will take far longer to finish their sentences than if they just relax in jail. By staying in jail, they automatically earn credits that drastically reduce the time they must stay. In addition,many of these inmates are also released early due to overcrowding. Both the courts and jails have reported seeing increasing numbers of inmates 9 California Penal Code Sections 4024.2(Voluntary)and 4024.3(Involuntary). Page 7 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff,Riverside County who were initially sentenced directly to work release purposefully fail in the program to get their sentence changed to jail time,only to soon be granted an early release based on overcrowding. The initial legislative answer to this problem was to create a method in which inmates could be involuntarily assigned to a work release program. While this sounded like an easy answer on the surface, a reasonable analysis soon showed that this notion was full of problems and doomed to fail. Just the idea of forcing someone to do manual labor who does not want to participate is problematic. Common sense tells us the quantity and quality of work we could expect to get from such a participant. While these inmates would be able under the law to earn good time credits for days spent in the program — a benefit not afforded voluntary participants — this incentive means little to someone who could also sit in jail and earn the same credit. To make matters worse, legal counsel has advised this kind of involuntary arrangement could open participating counties to all manner of civil claims, for routine medical and dental care, strict liability for work-related injuries, and more claims based on the involuntary nature of the arrangement. To make work release a viable alternative to custody, legislative changes are needed to merge the best features of these two programs so that work release becomes an attractive alternative to physical jail time while providing a vital service to the community and granting participants a benefit. Work release programs must be voluntary so that they are populated with participants who want to be there,but they must also grant participants who fully comply with program terms the chance to earn at least as many good time credits as they would otherwise earn simply sitting in jail. The penal code sections dealing with involuntary work release should be recognized as problematic and removed from the books in favor of improved laws covering a reasonable and practical approach to work release. 6) Medically Infirm Long Term Inmates. An area of concern for the local jails comes from being tasked to care for a long-term inmate population that is inherently older than the past average, more criminally sophisticated, and possessing a greater depth of therapeutic needs at higher levels than has been seen before. We now see more and more cases where inmates are being sentenced to long terms in our local jail facilities with state prison pasts that have serious medical problems. As the costs of caring for these inmates and taking care of their health needs becomes more apparent, a legislative change will be needed to fund adequate local facilities, staff,and services to meet these needs. 7) Inmates with Serious Mental Health and Substance Abuse Issues. Another area of concern comes from the rapid expansion of the quantity and sophistication of inmates committed to long sentences in the Riverside County jails who are diagnosed with serious mental health or substance abuse issues. Besides the inherent increased need for therapeutic staff and costly medications, these categories of inmates often require modified housing and intense security supervision at a higher rate than the traditional jail population. Additionally, while our county jails have historically presented some outstanding and effective programs to address substance abuse, the model currently in use is space and staff intensive, and designed for an inmate who is soon returning to the community. Further programming appropriate for the long-term population will need to be developed and funded, and adequate facilities found, to deal with the growth in these areas. Page 8 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff,Riverside County 8) CDCR Prisoner Transfer Costs. One of the primary effects of Realignment is that a growing number of convicted felons who would have traditionally served their sentence in state prison are now instead serving out their prescribed custody time in county jail. As the number of inmates being held in county jail awaiting transfer to CDCR facilities has fallen, CDCR has begun to shutter certain receiving center locations and repurpose others. As a result,counties are being forced to transport prisoners to a shrinking number of prison intake facilities at far greater distances than previously required.10 This change within CDCR has required a sharp increase in the number of transportation vehicles dedicated to state prison runs as well as the amount of staff trained to operate these vehicles and security personnel needed to safely accomplish these lengthy road trips. As a result, local county jail budgets, which were already seriously strained, have had to absorb the additional costs. California Penal Code 4750 and Code of Regulations, Title II, Section 776 specify that local Sheriffs are entitled to reimbursement for expenses incurred in these transportation runs, yet current CDCR policy limits reimbursement of transportation costs to just $0.185/mile; far below most authenticated mileage rates and far less than actual cost. Legislation needs to be enacted to establish a process for CDCR to follow when making decisions regarding the closure or repurposing of its intake facilities in which local governments have notice and the opportunity for input, and Sheriff Departments should be fully reimbursed for actual,reasonable transportation costs. 9) Privatized Correctional Facilities. One of the legislative changes made during the process of Realignment was the purported expansion of the ability of local counties to contract for inmate housing." It was widely reported that these changes would allow counties the ability to contract with a variety of jail bed providers, including C13CR, other county jails, municipal jails, and privatized correctional facilities. However, an analysis of the language of the new laws show they were drafted in such a way that the legality of certain types of contracting remains unclear, and current law does not clearly delineate the legal responsibilities to be borne by each party in these contract situations. The new laws specifically created statutes that granted new authority for counties to contract with CDCR for the housing of persons with a felony conviction. 2 However, CDCR has announced that it will not take inmates from counties as long as its own headcount remains above the maximum limit set by the federal courts. When and if the CDCR headcount ever falls below the court-imposed limit, CDCR has reserved the right to close prison facilities and beds instead of making them available to outside entities based on its own evaluation of internal costs and needs. So while contracting with CDCR to hold felony inmates for counties appears viable under the law, in reality it is currently not an option and will not likely be a possibility anytime soon. The new laws also made changes to statutes that covered the housing of inmates in jails owned and operated by other public agencies in California. Previously these types of transfers required 10 Sec Appendix C-CDCR County Delivery System Update "AB 109 and AB 117;also California Penal Code Sections 17.5(a)(8)and 3450(b)(8). "California Penal Code Section 2057. Page 9 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County a court order after a finding that the sending county's jails were unfit or unsafe, and then transfer was limited to contiguous counties." Under the changed statutes, counties were given the authority to contract for jail beds with other public agencies who could then house inmates in their jails and community correctional facilities. Besides the various county jails, CDCR has identified eight publicly-owned community correctional facilities; primarily in Central California. These facilities remain potential candidates to receive jail inmates, although challenges remain in relation to finances and distance. This authority is also scheduled to sunset on January 1,2015. The new laws also authorized county jails to transfer inmates to contracted private correctional providers if those facilities offered appropriate community-based punishment options. Legal counsel has advised us that this authorization appears quite limited and does not appear to grant authority for the county to contract for groups of inmates based on housing needs. The authority seems to require inmates be specifically selected for placement in these facilities only to address a specific need for programming, such as drug or alcohol treatment, counseling, education, or a specifically structured program to meet their particular need, although the exact definition for such programming is left open to interpretation. There was also no legislative direction offered to address the level of local oversight required to mitigate civil liability for inmate treatment or injury while in contracted housing, leading counsel to conclude that the contracting county would very likely maintain the same legal exposure as if the inmate sent to contract housing had remained in county jail. This would place the county in the untenable position of being held liable for any issues derived from their stay in an alternative location, even if that issue were not the direct fault of the county. If counties are to truly be able to contract for outside housing and transfer inmates into contracted housing,these issues will need to be addressed. 10) Tort. Immunity for Local Jails: Realignment has caused major changes in the population demographics of local jails in California and has therefore caused drastic changes in the needs of the local jail population. Standards for jail construction and operations have traditionally focused on meeting the needs of inmates whose jail stay was relatively short. Jail cells and recreational areas were built meeting standards established specifically for the traditional county jail population. Jail inmate educational curriculum, therapeutic programs, and religious activities were solely designed to meet short term needs. The focus of medical and mental health care has been to primarily address only immediate, acute needs. Realignment opened whole new areas of responsibility for local jails on the scale previously handled by state prisons. However, the dawn of Realignment did not change the physical limitations of existing jail facilities, or provide for the mass expansion and renovation that would be needed for local jails to suddenly be able to meet these diverse demands. Inmate rights groups that previously focused their energy on the treatment of state prisoners have already begun to redirect their attention to county jails. This will undoubtedly lead to increased scrutiny on the ability of jails to offer facilities and programs for inmates with longer sentences commiserate with what they would have otherwise received in state prison. While counties are moving to rapidly adapt where they can, they face daunting obstacles. Besides the obvious issue of the cost to make changes, the process of analyzing the need and initiating physical facility changes is alone an impossible feat in the short term. For the inmate rights advocates, the pace of change will "California Penal Code Section 4007. Page 10 January 17,2013 r Office of the Sheriff, Riverside County undoubtedly be too slow and legal filings have already begun in some venues against local jails that were never designed or built to meet"prison"needs. The legislature needs to recognize this issue and take steps to grant counties appropriate immunity from tort claims based on changes forced upon them by Realignment. This immunity should exempt facilities built before Realignment from meeting new obligations brought by the shift to remake jails into "prisons". The immunity should extend to programs and practices for a reasonable amount of time while change is being analyzed and implemented,with funding for these changes provided by the state. 11) Prioritization of Jail Construction Funding: One of the core functions of Realignment was to transfer the responsibility to house certain classifications of inmates from the overcrowded state prisons to local county jails. This change increased the burden for all counties, but this burden has not been felt evenly across the state. Certain counties have felt the increase more heavily due to the total impact of the change, explosive county population growth, and the unique status of their local jail system prior to Realignment. Some counties, like Riverside County, already had large and robust programs in place wherein suitable misdemeanants spent little time in jail and instead served their custody time in work release or electronic monitoring programs. These counties focused their attention and funding on alternatives to custody prior to Realignment, and therefore had not built up a large surplus jail capacity. Other counties, using funding from a variety of internal and external sources, had jail capacity a bit closer to their more modest population growth prior to Realignment implementation. Some of these counties were able to use some of their capacity as a revenue generating source to "rent" out jail space to the federal government. Realignment has purported to encourage the use of alternatives to custody where appropriate,but the reality is those counties with the previous excess jail capacity have been better able to adjust to the crushing impact of the additional inmates being directed to their care. The state has provided some funding opportunities through AB 900 and, more recently, through SB 1022. These funding opportunities will need to continue and grow as the need becomes more apparent across the state. However, for these new jail construction funding grants to be most effective, priority should be given to counties where the need is most critical and where their local county population growth far outpaced their local jail capacity. While attention to programming and re-entry is important, it is important the legislature and regulating agencies involved in directing funding not lose sight of the most acute current need. The decision makers must prioritize grant funding to those counties who are already facing severe jail population caps that force the release of jail inmates back into the community at excessively high rates due to their grossly undersized jail capacity, therefore risking the safety of all our citizens. Page 11 January 17,2013 Office of the Sheriff,Riverside County For additional information,contact: Raymond Gregory, Chief Deputy Corrections Support& Sheriffs Planning rgregory(a,ri versidesheri ff.org Jerry Gutierrez, Correctional Chief Deputy Corrections Operations i i gutier(a,riversidesheriff.org Steven Thetford,Assistant Sheriff sthetfoariversidesheriff.org Office of the Sheriff,Riverside County Stan Sniff, Sheriff 4095 Lemon Street, 2"a Floor P.O. Box 512 Riverside, CA 92501 (951)955-0147 j l gore(a,riversidesheri ff.or g Page 12 - January 17,2013 S10 Y SNIFF cny�f CpR oy, N *tanleu *niii Jr. , /PS/0 E c,ON 1 * 1 P'e SHERIFF-CORONER * ,t, , k RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA "'°' Stanley Sniff, Jr. has served as the 13th Sheriff of Riverside ,lk'04, i,_ . County since October 2, 2007. Elected in 2010, he took /'' _., ,,,, office in January 2011 for a full 4 year term. He is the third Sheriff to also serve as Coroner-Public Administrator / ' i 1, L.. after that Department was merged in 1999. The Riverside ;r- County Sheriff's Department was created in 1893 and is the second largest Sheriff's Department in California with 4,600 full-time staff and over 1,600 volunteers. He oversees countywide patrol operations,jail operations, court security and coroner investigations. The department has an operating budget of 535 million dollars for the current fiscal year. Sheriff Sniff has over 36 years of law enforcement experience and is the eldest grandson of one of the pioneering date and citrus families of the Coachella Valley and grew up in the Indio area. His father, the late Stan Sr., served 25 years as a La Quinta City Councilman. He joined the Coachella Police Department in 1975 after graduation from the San Bernardino Sheriff's Academy and then transferred to the Riverside County Sheriff's Department in 1979, initially assigned to the Indio Station, serving across the Coachella Valley. His initial expertise was in traffic enforcement and accident investigation and he was instrumental in creating the department's very first specialized traffic safety programs. He has held subsequent assignments in uniformed patrol operations in Riverside, the San Gorgonio Pass area, and Southwest Riverside County. As a Captain he held command assignments of the Robert Presley Detention Center in Riverside, the Banning Sheriff's Station and the Ben Clark Training Center. As a Chief Deputy he held assignments over Training and Personnel, East and West county patrol operations. As an Assistant Sheriff he was assigned oversight of all county court operations, jail operations and patrol operations divisions. A retired colonel in the Army Reserve, Stanley Sniff was commissioned as an Armor officer out of the OCS program in 1973 at the U.S. Army Infantry School, Fort Benning, GA. He served 30 years in a variety of military staff and command assignments in infantry, armor and cavalry units. 13 April 2012 UNOERSHE.,FF o4,4! S .l iF'n 0�S,0e �,, (gti1tiin i, i, Either ,w , . •.. UNDERSHERIFF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA On July 12, 2010, Sheriff Sniff appointed Colleen Walker as his _°- Undersheriff. In this position, she serves as his chief of staff. ki t Undersheriff Colleen Walker was raised in Indio, Ca. Her father, . , Don Manton, moved the family to the Coachella Valley when he r began his career as an officer with the Indio Police Department. .ter Undersheriff Walker is an alumnus of Indio High School and s ^ College of the Desert. ; ' s Undersheriff Walker has been with the Riverside County Sheriff's k --'- Department for over 33 years. Her first assignment was as a Dispatcher at the Indio Sheriff's Station. In 1980, Undersheriff Walker was promoted to Deputy Sheriff at the Indio Station. Undersheriff Walker achieved the rank of Investigator in 1984, and was assigned to the crimes against persons unit. Her specialties were the investigations of sexual assault and crimes against children. Undersheriff Walker was promoted to Sergeant in 1988, and she was transferred to the new Palm Desert station in 1989. Undersheriff Walker held a variety of assignments during her 12 years as a Sergeant, including Investigations, Target Team, Patrol, and Administration, but her favorite was as the supervisor of the bicycle unit! Undersheriff Walker was a department peer supporter for 15 years. Undersheriff Walker was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant in 1999, and was transferred to the Banning Sheriff's Station. She returned to the Palm Desert Station in 2000, and held positions in Patrol, Traffic, Investigations and Administration. In early 2005 she was transferred to the Indio Sheriff's Station. Undersheriff Walker achieved the rank of Captain in January 2006, and assumed command of the Indio Jail.Undersheriff Walker took command of the Indio Sheriff's Station in May of 2007. She served as Chief of Police for the contract cities of La Quinta and Coachella. In January 2008, Sheriff Stan Sniff promoted Undersheriff Walker to Chief Deputy. She was in charge of support services for the Riverside County Sheriff's Dept. As such, she was responsible for the Ben Clark Training Center, Sheriff's Personnel, Dispatch, Technical Services Bureau, CAL-ID, Information Services Bureau, and PSEC (the new radio system project). In June of 2009, Sheriff Sniff appointed Undersheriff Walker to Assistant Sheriff. She was in charge of Field Operations, which includes the patrol stations for all unincorporated areas and contract cities within the county, the Special Enforcement Bureau (SWAT, Hazardous Device Team, and Aviation), the Special Investigations Bureau (Narcotics, Central Homicide Unit, and Intelligence), Gang Task Forces, Sexual Assault Felony Enforcement(SAFE)teams, and the Sheriff's Emergency Response Team. Undersheriff Walker has a B.S.degree from the University of Redlands. She is a member of Women Leaders Forum, Soroptimist International of Riverside, College of the Desert Alumni Association, Desert Actors Network and recently served on the board of The Valley Partnership for five years. In September of 2010 she was honored by the Riverside YWCA as a Woman of Achievement. Undersheriff Walker lives in Palm Desert with her husband, Wayne Walker, a retired lieutenant from the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. They have three adult children, and two grandchildren. 27 December 2013 AS JNS �Ricc lit o 2. II III. 1111am iI. Po Porto ASSISTANT SHERIFF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Assistant Sheriff Bill Di Yorio joined the Riverside County Sheriff's Department in 1980 after completion of the Southern 1 IF California Peace Officer's Basic Training Academy. As a „ Deputy Sheriff and Investigator,he worked at the Lake Elsinore Station and served five years on the Department's Emergency Response Team (SWAT). As a Sergeant, Assistant Sheriff Di j Yorio worked the Riverside Jail and the Moreno Valley Police Department. In 1995, he was promoted to the rank of Sheriff's Lieutenant and worked assignments at the Moreno Valley Police Department and the Southwest Detention Center. In 1999,Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was promoted to Captain and assumed command of the Southwest Detention Center. After one year, Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was transferred to the Robert Presley Detention Center in Riverside. In 2002, Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was reassigned to the Moreno Valley Police Department where he served as the city's Chief of Police. During his tenure as Police Chief, Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was an active member and past President of the Morning Optimist Club of Moreno Valley and served as Vice President of the Moreno Valley Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. In 2006,Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was promoted to Chief Deputy Sheriff and was assigned to oversee the department's Corrections Division. In this position,Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was responsible for the operations of the Robert Presley Detention Center, Southwest Detention Center, Larry D. Smith Correctional Facility, Indio Jail, Blythe Jail, inmate transportation services, and the Planning and Research Unit. In August 2008, Sheriff Stanley Sniff appointed Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio to the rank of Assistant Sheriff. In 2009, Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio retired after serving over 29 years with the department. At the time of his retirement, Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio was responsible for oversight of the Sheriff's Department's Administration, Corrections, Courts, and Coroners Divisions. Retired initially in 2009, he returned to active service in 2012. Assistant Sheriff Di Yorio is a United States Army veteran and has lived in the Riverside area since 1962. He earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice from California State College, San Bernardino. 29 November 2012 µsly ANT SHERIFF .4cY gtit • �RS,o co *true ttfurb 3 yr E T •R ASSISTANT SHERIFF * RIVERSIDE COUNTY CALIFORNIA * 1 Assistant Sheriff Steve Thetford joined the Riverside County Y =, Sheriff's Department in 1987. Assistant Sheriff Thetford has ,, worked a variety of assignments. He has a law enforcement background in corrections, field patrol, civil liability, internal affairs investigations, and SWAT operations. He has completed . . tours of duty at the Sheriff's Department's Indio Jail, Indio Station, Palm Desert Station, Banning Station and Sheriff's 111 Administration. In addition, he served on the Coroner/Public �,. Adminstrator committee that served on that department's l merge into the Sheriff's Department. As a Lieutenant he held the City of Palm Desert's dedicated position acting as their first Assistant Chief of Police. Assistant Sheriff Thetford later promoted to Captain and held the command assignment at Palm Desert Station serving as the Chief of Police for the contract cities of Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage, and Indian Wells. In January 2008, Assistant Sheriff Thetford was appointed to Chief Deputy and initially oversaw the Department's West Field Operations Division. He was later assigned to oversee the Sheriff's Department's Corrections Support and Planning Division where he was the lead executive dealing with AB 109 Realignment preparations for the department, the biggest change to California's criminal justice system. In addition, he has been directly involved in new jail and patrol station construction for the past 2 years. In December 2011, Sheriff Stanley Sniff appointed Steve Thetford to the rank of Assistant Sheriff. In this capacity, he oversees the Sheriff's Administration, Corrections, Courts, and Coroners Divisions. Assistant Sheriff Thetford has a Bachelor's Degree in Criminal Justice from Chapman University and is a 2000 graduate of the FBI National Academy. He is a former Adjunct Faculty member at College of the Desert, and was the 2007 Chairman of the Board of the Coachella Valley Narcotics Task Force (CVNTF). Assistant Sheriff Thetford was also the Secretary for the 2011 Riverside County Law Enforcement Administrators Association board(RCLEAA). Assistant Sheriff Thetford, along with his wife Stacy, have lived in the Coachella Valley since 1988 and have two children. 14 December 2011 f ASSISTANT SI1 , GAR J= •JLic II II r i( it x * \ S/dE co agnLL ;+ ASSISTANT SHERIFF r * * - RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA * y Assistant Sheriff Lee Wagner has been a member of the ,.,.. " . Riverside County Sheriff's Department since 1991. He has over , 26 years in law enforcement. He began his law enforcement , 4 career in 1984 when he joined the Los Angeles County Sheriff's z. °F tDe Department (LASD). While workingfor LASD, he worked , a } , "' '� 4 sNEF� both the corrections and patrol divisions. After joining the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, he worked as a patrol � `. i.,. ' , i deputy at the Riverside Station. As a Sergeant he was assigned it to Court Services. As a Lieutenant,he managed Court Services in Western Riverside County, the communications center, records bureau and patrol operations at the Jurupa Valley Station and Moreno Valley Police Department. Assistant Sheriff Wagner was promoted to the rank of Captain in January 2007, and assigned to Sheriff's Court Services-West Bureau. As a commander in Court Services, he was responsible for the security of several court facilities spread throughout the Western and Central Riverside areas as well as the execution of orders issued by the Court, and the service and enforcement of civil process. He commanded the Court Services Bureau until January 2008, at which time he was re-assigned to the Jurupa Valley Sheriff's Station, where he also served as Police Chief for the contract city of Norco. In January 2009, Assistant Sheriff Wagner was apppointed to Chief Deputy. As Chief Deputy, he oversaw Central Field Operations, which includes Southwest, Lake Elsinore, Hemet, and Cabazon stations, the Gang Task Force, Sheriff's Emergency Response Team and Sexual Assault Felony Enforcement Team. In January 2010, Sheriff Stanley Sniff appointed Assistant Sheriff Wagner to his current rank. In this capacity, he oversees Administration, Corrections, Courts, and Coroners. Assistant Sheriff Wagner obtained a Master's degree from California State University, Dominguez Hills in Behavioral Science. He also earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Behavioral Sciences and a minor in Criminal Justice from California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Assistant Sheriff Wagner is also a 2003 graduate of the FBI National Academy. 25 August 2010 s? Sy4;• .43 a �-n -o > itAlm ,4 4, it EG 4 � p CHIEF DEPUTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA *-_ , "f Chief Deputy Mitch Alm has been a member ofthe Riverside `x' County Sheriff's Department since 1988, and attended the I *< 4 , 107th Basic Peace Officers Academy. Chief Deputy Alm `z ;� has worked a variety of assignments while with the Sheriff's ,Ytr,:i'?' t Department. He has a law enforcement background in a corrections,field patrol,personnel,and special investigations. 4 ,, Chief Deputy Alm started his Sheriff's Department career ' Q, .`' being assigned to the Riverside Jail. He then completed assignments in field patrol at both Moreno Valley and Southwest Stations, working on various teams such as; Problem Oriented Policing, School Resource, and Community Oriented Policing. As a Lieutenant, he was assigned to oversee the Sheriff's Personnel Bureau, and was selected as the first Chief of Police for the new contract in the city of San Jacinto Chief Deputy Alm was promoted to Captain and held command assignments at the Southwest Station, Hemet Station, and the Special Investigations Bureau. Chief Deputy Alm has been an adjunct faculty member at both Riverside and Mt. San Jacinto Community Colleges since 1999 and 2005. Chief Deputy Alm holds both a Bachelor of Arts and a Master of Arts Degree in Criminal Justice from the California State University of San Bernardino. Sheriff Stanley Sniff appointed Chief Deputy Alm to his current rank in July 2010. He oversees the West Field Operations for the Department consisting of the Jurupa Valley, Perris, and Moreno Valley Stations, Media Information, and Special Investigations Bureaus. Chief Alm along with wife Catherine, has lived in the city of Temecula since 1991. They have one son, Russell. 14 September 2010 at f-t ' S,DECcS 3JL11)n Anb „„„ ,( CHIEF DEPUTY f RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ,� Chief Deputy John Anderson joined the Riverside County Sheriff's Department in 1990. He began his law * :11,- "'s" enforcement career in 1983 when he joined the Los Angeles '' ( ' ' .r County Sheriff's Department (LASD). While working for 7; lit i LASD, his assignments included both the corrections and ow patrol divisions. In 1990, his first assignment with the Riverside County ,`3'' Sheriff's Department was as a patrol deputy at the Riverside Station. In 1996, Chief Deputy Anderson was promoted to the rank of sergeant and transferred to Sheriff Court Services-West. In 1999, he was transferred to the Moreno Valley Station, where he served as a patrol sergeant, traffic sergeant and detective sergeant. In 2003, he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant and transferred to the Lake Elsinore Station, where he managed patrol operations, the Problem Oriented Policing team (POP), the traffic unit, the detective unit, and served as the administration lieutenant. In 2004, he was transferred to the Southwest Station where he managed patrol operations and special teams. In 2005, he was transferred to the Moreno Valley Station where his assignments included managing the traffic, patrol, the SET, POP, and the detective units. In 2008, he was promoted to the rank of captain by Sheriff Stan Sniff and served as the Chief of Police for the Moreno Valley Police Department. In May of 2012, he was promoted to Chief Deputy by Sheriff Sniff and currently oversees West Field Operations, consisting of the Jurupa Valley, Moreno Valley and Perris Stations, and the Special Investigations Bureau, as well as the Sheriff's Media Information Bureau. Chief Deputy John Anderson holds a Bachelor's degree from Southern Illinois University. Chief Anderson and his wife Linda have lived in Riverside since 1996. 16 July 2012 ctiw DEpLIIY Q JAY S Fie IN i �s,o ��J2 3Jttnqt1 CrEtrU . 4( i CHIEF DEPUTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA * * 4.0 Chief Deputy Joseph Cleary joined the Riverside County ' Sheriffs Department in January 1984. He attended the 94th ♦ Basic Peace Officers Academy. In April 1984, he began his first assignment as a Deputy Sheriff at the Indio Jail. He transferred to the Indio Station as a patrol Deputy in 1986. Transferring as a patrol deputy to Riverside Patrol and Investigations in 1987, he began to work patrol in the contract city of Moreno Valley as a member of the Moreno Valley Police Department. In 1990, he was promoted to Investigator within the Moreno Valley Police Department. In 1992, he was promoted to Sergeant and returned to a corrections assignment at the Robert Presley Detention Center. Reassigned to the Moreno Valley Police Department in 1995 he remained there, working patrol, narcotics, investigations, and traffic until his promotion in 2003 to Lieutenant. As a Lieutenant, he was assigned to the Jurupa Valley Sheriffs Station, Robert Presley Detention Center, Corrections and Planning Unit, and the Moreno Valley Police Department where he was responsible for patrol operations, investigations, and administration. He was promoted to Captain in September 2008, and assumed command of the Lake Elsinore Sheriffs Station where he also served as the Chief of Police for the cities of Lake Elsinore and Wildomar. Sheriff Stanley Sniff appointed Captain Cleary to Chief Deputy in 2010. He currently oversees the departments Court Services Division and Coroner/Public Administrators Operations. Chief Deputy Cleary holds a Master of Public Administration Degree from the California Baptist University, a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Criminal Justice from the California State University, San Bernardino. He is also a 2006 graduate of the FBI National Academy. He is married with two children. He has been a resident of Riverside County since 1980. 20 December 2011 • e _ De.tp 0 iSttuinunb co (6rtgoru CHIEF DEPUTY :4( RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Chief Deputy Raymond Gregory joined the Riverside County Sheriff's Department in 1990. He began his law enforcement career at the Colorado River Station where he worked both • in corrections and patrol. He was later assigned to serve as abc. a courtroom deputy at the Larson Justice Center in Indio. Promoted to investigator, he transferred to the Sheriff's Administrative Investigations Bureau where he conducted internal affairs investigations. In 2002, he was promoted to sergeant. As a sergeant, he worked at the Larry Smith Correctional Facility in Banning, then as a patrol watch commander and supervisor of the Forensic Services Bureau at the Indio Station. In 2007, he promoted to lieutenant and was assigned as the assistant police chief for the City of La Quinta. He was promoted to captain in 2009 and was assigned as commander of the Indio Jail. In 2010, he returned to command the Indio Station and served as the Indio Station's last commander and the first commander of the new Thermal Sheriff's Station. In this assignment he also served as police chief for the Coachella and La Quinta Police Departments, and as Chairman of the Coachella Valley Narcotics Task Force. Chief Deputy Gregory was promoted to his current rank in March 2012, and now oversees the Department's Corrections Support and Planning Division. He serves as the lead executive dealing with jail headcount management and programs designed to combat jail overcrowding and inmate recidivism. His division is also responsible to manage all new facility construction for the Department, including upcoming jail expansion projects and new jail construction. Chief Deputy Gregory is a long-time resident of the Coachella Valley. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from California State University, San Bernardino. He also holds a Master of Arts in Management degree from the University of Redlands. Chief Deputy Gregory and his husband, Eric Ornelas, have two sons and one grandson. 4 16 July 2012 o GNI pUTY ` Q�QJc,(9yF�i� ��S/DE co 4Jirri (!httiirri CHIEF DEPUTY =' RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Correctional Chief Deputy Jerry Gutierrez has been a member of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department since 1990. He is the first Correctional Chief Deputy in Riverside County Sheriff's Department history. He has over 20 years k of experience in Riverside County Jail Operations. ■: Correctional Chief Deputy Gutierrez was appointed on July 12, 2010 and was assigned to oversee the Corrections Operation. The Corrections Operation consists of facilities in Blythe, Indio, Banning, Temecula, and Riverside. In July 2008, Correctional Chief Deputy Gutierrez was promoted to the Department's first Correctional Captain position and then assigned to the Sheriff's Department's Planning and Research Unit. Correctional Chief Deputy Gutierrez was then assigned to the Southwest Detention Center as the facility commander in 2009. Prior to promoting to Correctional Captain, Correctional Chief Deputy Gutierrez' past assignments included Classification Lieutenant at the Robert Presley Detention Center, Administrative Lieutenant at the Southwest Detention Center, and the lead Corrections Trainer at the Ben Clark Training Center. In addition, he served as a Correctional Sergeant, Correctional Corporal, and Correctional Deputy working various assignments within the Department's correctional facilities and at the Ben Clark Training Center. Correctional Chief Deputy Gutierrez holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Workforce Education and Development from Southern Illinois University and a Masters Degree in Public Administration from California State University San Bernardino. He currently teaches Administration of Justice courses at Chaffey College. Correctional Chief Deputy Gutierrez resides with his wife and three children in the City of Rialto. He is very active in his community, serving as a Commissioner for the Rialto Planning Committee. 14 September 2010 _ t F F.U JY SNI• T o •n J 9CIE O LtIEk 1 _ CHIEF DEPUTY k * ll RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA fit Chief Deputy Sheriff Rick Hall has over 23 years of law �. enforcement experience and is a life-long resident of Riverside County. He joined the Riverside County Sheriff's Department after graduation from the Riverside Sheriff's Academy in 1985 and was initially assigned to the Blythe Station. While . I set+ there he performed a variety of assignments including patrol, corrections, Emergency Services Team (EST/SWAT), boat patrol, search and rescue and the Sheriff's Dive Team. He has subsequently served in a variety of patrol assignments in Riverside, Jurupa, Perris, Canyon Lake, Mead Valley and Lake Matthews. As a Senior Investigator he was assigned to the Special Investigations Bureau where he investigated major-level narcotics trafficking, clandestine lab operations and served as the coordinator for the Campaign Against Marijuana Planting (CAMP) program in Riverside County. As a Sergeant he held assignments at the Robert Presley Detention Center, the Riverside and Perris Stations, and supervised the Administrative Investigations Unit (Internal Affairs).As a Lieutenant,he managed patrol and administration divisions in Moreno Valley, commanded the CAL-ID Bureau, oversaw floor operations at the Southwest Detention Center and developed the Supervised Electronic Confinement Program for the Corrections Division. Upon promotion to Captain in September 2006, Rick Hall was selected to serve as the 5th Chief of Police for the City of Moreno Valley. Serving a population of approximately 188,000, the police department provides patrol, traffic, investigations, gang/narcotic enforcement programs, a Problem Oriented Policing Team and a variety of other services through the Community Services Unit and Volunteer Services program. Chief Deputy Rick Hall was appointed to his current rank by Sheriff Stanley Sniff in September 2008, and oversaw West Field Operations. In July of 2009 he was assigned oversight of Administration and Training, which includes responsibility for the Ben Clark Training Center, Personnel Bureau, Communications Bureau, Information Services Bureau, Technical Services Bureau and the CAL-ID program. Chief Deputy Rick Hall holds a B.S. in Public Administration from the University of LaVerne where he graduated Magna Cum Laude. 25 August 2010 DE. 041�Y SU1Y • F rt 11igu� JJIi�bnr e CHIEF DEPUTY• �( RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA �' iC , Chief Deputy Rodney Vigue began his career in law enforcement while serving in the United States Marine Corps as a Military Policeman. He joined the Riverside County Sheriff's Department in 1985 and attended the 99th Basic Peace Officers Academy. „aN Chief Deputy Vigue has worked a variety of assignments and served communities from Blythe to Riverside. His background includes corrections, patrol, investigations, and SWAT operations. His first assignment was in Blythe where he worked the jail and as a patrol Deputy. He was promoted to investigator in 1991 and assigned to the Special Investigations Bureau in Riverside. In 1993, he was promoted to the rank of sergeant and returned to Blythe. In 1998, he was transferred to the Indio Station where he worked as a patrol watch commander and supervised the investigations section. In 2002, he was promoted to Lieutenant and assigned to the Palm Desert Station. During his tenure at Palm Desert Station, Chief Deputy Vigue managed patrol operations, station administration and was the liaison for the contract cities of Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage. In January 2008, Chief Deputy Vigue was promoted to Captain and commanded the Indio Sheriff's Station, where he also served as the contract Chief of Police for the cities of Coachella and La Quinta. He was appointed to the rank of Chief Deputy in July 2010, and currently oversees the Department's East Field Operations. Chief Deputy Vigue has a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Criminal Justice from Chapman University and is a 2004 graduate of the FBI National Academy. He is a member of the FBI National Academy Associates, the National Tactical Officers Association, and is a charter member of the California Association of Tactical Officers. Chief Deputy Vigue and his family live in the Coachella Valley. 4 November 2010 j llittefii i 6o'u,z1iti heu 4!'sz i' r S�PRt.ET SIOFF • .2`5- COROZg` 2 *I __ ,_ . fecifrt „, 14 L ti \ 4 yy ' DEG ..., / T ` 958 �."1 .is / \ \` A T - / y� ` (...a.:*ynTy 1 - SHERIFF I STAN SNIFF y * � BA,MA,ARMY CGSC ; / ` ,' UNDERSHERIFF 't t COLLEEN WALKER - t / BS LEE WAGNER,BA,MS,FBI ACADEMY STEVE THETFORD,BS,FBI ACADEMY W"iLLIAM DI YORIO,BS ASSISTANT SHERIFF ASSISTANT SHERIFF ASSISTANT SHERIFF FIELD OPERATIONS CORRECTIONS ADMIN/COURTS/CORONER k A ,, F ' r':* ' vAt .7: 'k �� ,.1 > ' JOHN ANDERSON,BS MITCH ALM,BA,MA RODNEY VIGUE,BA,FBI ACADEMY WILL TAYLOR,BA CHIEF DEPUTY CHIEF DEPUTY CHIEF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE WEST FIELD OPERATIONS CENTRAL FIELD OPERATIONS EAST FIELD OPERATIONS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES IC ** *1 1 ` il a'.' d 1 v •• JVc�29, 20/2 RICK HALL,BS JOSEPH CLEARY,BA,MA FBI ACADEMY RAYMOND GREGORY,BA,MA FRRY GUTIERREZ,BS,MS CHIEF DEPUTY CHIEF DEPUTY CHIEF DEPUTY CORRECTIONAL CHIEF DEPUTY \, SUPPORT SERVICES COURTS,PERSONNEL CORRECTIONS SUPPORT CORRECTIONS OPERATIONS -T- .?z-ue z&/de 'ea-cuz-Ly, . 1 e the s- _Lep a z/tntent tn�,.. (Oaoyp pOcic ev 2012 F ;? 6204Onfnane/e7S/ SLI=Shuman Leudtnhip Institute 1O r C0' FBI=Federal Bureau of Ins eaigation, '=POST Command College * *\ f 1! it * , * ' * r ' 1* % t41 1 or . 4, — , : t . ' 1, ts A., Alki ' .. Y ' t2 f CYNTHIA MAYMAN,BA.MA.FBI ACADEMY,SLI LAMES MCELVAIN,BA.MA,PH.D JOSEPH MCNAMARA DAVE NORDSTROM,BA CAPTAIN,2009 CAPTAIN,2008 CORRECTIONAL CAPTAIN.2010 CAPTAIN,1999 SOUTHWEST DETENTION CENTER(SWDC) BEN CLARK TRAINING CENTER(BCTC) LARRY D.SMITH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY(LSCF) CORONER/PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR c k t c* * ilk tip ♦ K • * * li gi _ .1 4 11 1 41 fi1 `` ,, xt 4 S..' ilk i ., : ..... ,. .r - ANDRE O'HARRA JOEL ONTIVEROS.BS ROBERT PEEBLES.BA.FBI ACADEMY JOHN PINGEL.BA GEOFFREY RAYA,BA,M.A.SLI CAPTAIN,2009 CAPTAIN.2012 CAPTAIN.2012 CAPTAIN,2009 CAPTAIN,2012 SOUTHWEST STATION MORENO VALLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT CABAZON STATION SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS BUREAU(SIB) INDIO&BLYTHE JAIL �.. -. *4,t r r ** f 4, 4s sr, 4. . . 4 ,04 . r k -,- .1..i,., # .kr. 3V 04( * .i,,,,j 0 0' 04, ... if., ,, si. , o iti - ..4 ANDREW SHOUSE,BA,FBI ACADEMY KEVIN VEST,BA.MA RAY WOOD.BA,FBI ACADEMY DEAN WRIGHT,BA CAPTAIN,2012 CAPTAIN,2011 CAPTAIN.2012 CAPTAIN,2012 THERMAL STATION PALM DESERT STATION COLORADO RIVER STATION DISPATCH r I AGENDA CONTRACT LAW ENFORCEMENT MEETING RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT February 27, 2013 Meeting Location: Moreno Valley Police Station Multi-purpose Conference Room 22850 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos Moreno Valley Meeting begins at 9:30 a.m. I. Welcome/Introductions Assistant Sheriff Bill Di Yorio II. Booking Fee overview Assistant Sheriff Bill Di Yorio III. Records Management System Rate Lieutenant Mark Potter IV. FY 2012-13 Law Enforcement Rate Director of Administration Will Taylor V. Round Table Next Meeting: To Be Determined RIVERSIDE COUNTY shST.AN1.EY SNIFF. SHERIFF t '^If P.O. BOX I • RIVI.RSIDE.CALIFORNIA t1 5O2 • (4)50 955-2 0 • 11\ 0151) 955-2$2S 27 February 2013 Dear Contract City Partners, The Riverside County Sheriff's Department has had a long and collaborative history with each of your communities in providing police services. We have tried especially hard since I took office in 2007 to encourage local responsiveness to each community. while stimulating initiative and creativity, local identity and ownership. all while stabilizing our personnel assigned to your communities so they know the community and the community knows its officers. We are proud to serve each of your communities. and each of your communities has made us a far better law enforcement organization. There have been some recent concerns on contract city costs that I would like to address, put to rest, and then add some context. Hopefully this will also clear up some misinformation and provide a summary about how the process works. Although many of you are well aware of these issues. I trust this additional information adds-clarity for newer city staff and elected leaders. The Board of Supervisors has always directed the Sheriff's Department to obtain full cost recovery (direct and indirect) associated with contract policing. Each year we project the next year's rate prior to the fiscal year start. During the actual fiscal year, typically mid-year or later. the actual rate is calculated and billed retroactive back to the start of the fiscal year (FY). This has always been controversial because the final rate is calculated so late in the fiscal year. but Board policy requires that near "real-time" current FY labor costs are determined, not using those of the prior FY. This is especially critical when labor union MOU's have pay step increases, or added benefits in place. In other areas separate from labor costs, the contract rate utilizes the prior FY real costs (e.g. services and supplies). The contract city rate is cost-effective because the sheer size of our agency spreads many of those costs over wide shoulders — the bigger our agency. the "wider" those shoulders and generally the more cost-effective. Specifically in our patrol division, patrol costs are spread wider or narrower as the unincorporated staff levels increase or decrease. The Board of Supervisors set staffing ratios in the unincorporated area. and those changes can impact our rate, just as a hiring freeze can. The process on the rate is transparent: the cost-factoring sheets break down every detail and arc shared with each of our contract city partners. They are shared to not only be open and transparent. but also to get input back on errors or potential issues. Eventually all of the rates arc approved by the Board of Supervisors later in the FY after our discussions with our city partners, Page I of 2 and we are then directed to apply them retroactively to the current FY start. The Government Code Sec. S 1350 prohibits our department from obtaining any form of profit or other fudge factor subject to negotiation. The rates are what they are, and they are uniformly applied. Service levels can be adjusted up or down by our contract city partners, but the Sheriff does not have the authority to deviate from Board-approved rates. The Sheriff does not negotiate contracts or MOU's with any of our county's labor unions. Issues regarding employee's salaries and benefits are negotiated directly with the Board of Supervisors, through their representative, typically the County Human Resources Director. The Sheriff is solicited for input, but does not negotiate. Any labor cost increases associated with those negotiations are passed throughout the department immediately and continuously. In contrast, the contract city rate for our policing services is taken in a single "snapshot" once a year when that rate is calculated, hence the need for it to be as accurate as possible. This year's contract city rate will increase 4.7%, although we had projected last year for planning purposes that it would be 5%. It is good that it came in under the projection, but I think it would be helpful to touch upon why it went up, especially when most communities are struggling under severe fiscal constraints, making difficult forced choices on public expenditures, and could clearly use relief from any increases this year and next as our national fiscal crisis begins to stabilize. You should each be aware from numerous news media accounts during FY 11-12 that the various county labor bargaining units negotiated MOU salary and benefit increases this FY and following years with the Board of Supervisors. The Sheriff stands as the ethical "gatekeeper" on contract city rate issues. Our responsibility is to make certain that the county does not subsidize the separate cities, and cities do not subsidize the county areas. I hope this brief letter is helpful in understanding the cause of the rate increase, and that each of you will understand that the Sheriff's Department is very proud of our collaborative relationship with each of your communities and is ever mindful of our fiscal responsibility to be cost- effective and good stewards of our increasingly precious public safety dollars. There are no costs from any of our Sheriff's operations that have caused any part of this 4.7%contract rate increase. If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me at(951) 955-0147. Sincerely, STAN SNIFF, SHERIFF SS:jg Page 2 of 2 FY12/ 13 Contract City Rate $ 132.69 per hour 4SSI F I ED SWORN SUPPORT PERSONNEL SUPPORT $33.56 PERSONNEL COWCAP $8.50 $1.62 CENTRAL DISPATCH FIELD TRAINING $10.30 $1.48 °� ,..•� INFORMATION SERVICES Other $1.00 $8.15 . _...:.... ADMINISTRATION $0.97 TECHNICAL SERVICES $0.74 PATROL OFFICERS PERSONNEL RECRUITING $72.18 $0.72 ACCOUNTING&FINANCE $0.63 TRAINING CENTER $0.62 CONTRACTS&GRANTS $0.37 Riverside County Sheriff's Legislative Sheriff • Assistant Jessica,ore Stan Sniff Sheriff's Department I Executive Assistant II j Executive Assistant I Undersheriff Mai la WWII IC Colleen Walker I Operations Corrections Courts/Administration/Coroner stant Sheriff Assistant Sheriff Assistant Sheriff Wagner Steve Thetford William Di Yono I I I f I. I I I I I K d Field Operations _ East Field Operations _ Corrections Operations _ Corrections Support — Courts _ Support Services _ Administrative Services Coroner 1 PA :hidDeputy Chief Deputy Correctional Chief Deputy Chief Deputy Chief Deputy Chief Deputy Director of Finance '-,muty Mitch Alm Rodney Vigue Jerry Gutierrez Raymond Gregory Joseph Cleary Rick Hall Will Taylor "Chief Joseph Cleary Court Services East Professional Standards t bazon Station Colorado River Station Indio Jail Coordinated Custody — Ben Clark Administrative Services — Bureau Coroner/Public Robert Peebles - Capt.RayWood — Capt.Geoffrey Raya — Training Center — Mana Manager Capt.Virginia Busby — Administrator's Bureau p P Y Y —Management Unit(A8109) "Capt.Jeff Kuhel Cat James McElvain g I Capt.Mike Judge P Antonio Saldana i Capt.Dave Nordstrom )epartment Blythe Court Services r Administrative Services -9 Program Blythe Jail Court Services West/ CAL-ID — Court Liason/Headcount — Court Services Central Administrative Services Unit — Chief forensic Pathologist Management Unit Capt.JeNK,trel LL Scott Madden _ Manager LL Mark Bostrom Mark Fajardo amet Station Palm Desert Station C.Lt Guy Fredrickson p Bob Meyers I.Scot Collins Capt.Kevin Vest Larry D.Smith _ I DispatchlFleeUkdortnalion Assistant Public Correctional Facility County Administrative Internal Affairs Services Bureau C Capt.Joseph McNamara Planning Unit Center Security Unit { — Administrator Elsinore Station Thermal Station C.Lt.Jennifer McConville Capt.Dean Wright Lt.Raul Vergara Linda Samsom Tetley Kern edySmiih " Capt.Andrew Shouse Robert Presley Personnel Detention Center _ Lt.Cheryl Evans Public Safety Enterprise thwest Station Capt.Patricia Knudson Communication Project Andre O'Harra Special Enforcement Lt.Eric Briddick Bureau— Capt.Ron Berry Riverside County ng Task Force , Regional Medical Center Technical Services Bureau anard Hollingsworth Special Weapons Detention Care Unit Lt.Mark Potter and Tactics exual Assault Southwest Detention Administrative Lieutenant ny Enforcement, Hazardous — Center Lt.Ronald Heim Device Team Capt Cynthia Maymin Of Emergency Crisis Negotiation Administrative Sergeant ?sponse Team Team g Robert Perdue Sgt.James Wilson Riverside Sheriff inter Response Off-Highway Vehicle Chaplain Corps Enforcement I rch and Rescue - Aviation — CCW Unit al Liaison Unit Felony Warrant Earl Quinata Enforcement Team f Legislative Unit Sergeant Organizational Chart —jI Sgt.Jeffrey Reichman _. February 2013 - - e ruary 28, ,, ' {31 rYis `� a t r **=Temporary assignment to be held until position is filled *a "�.,::°�''