Who's crowding California's jails

According to a new report, California's jails are full of people who can't afford bail.

California's county jails are overcrowded, and a new report from the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, a criminal justice reform think tank based in San Francisco, says much of the blame lies with California's commercial bail bond system. In "The Commercial Bail  Industry: Profit or Public Safety?" author Amanda Gullings warns that jails will remain overcrowded until they develop alternatives to monetary bail.


According to the report, a large number of people are sitting in California jails because they can't afford bail. Seventy-one percent of California's jail population is pretrial--meaning, people are locked up in county jail but not because they've been convicted of a crime. There are various reasons these inmates are locked up despite not having been found guilty yet--immigration holds, warrants in other states--and the actual number of bailable inmates sitting  behind bars varies from county to county.


In Los Angeles County, roughly 33.75 percent of the county's jail inmates could be out of jail if they could afford (or, in some cases, chose to afford) bail, according to a report prepared last month for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD). Another 11.25 percent are being held without bail by a judge. Theoretically, that means Los Angeles could have about 5,500 fewer jail inmates, if those inmates could afford to bail themselves out, or pay for the standard 8-10 percent premium charged by most commercial bail bonds companies.


This population of bailable, unsentenced inmates is becoming a hot topic for sheriff's departments around the state, as prison realignment kicks into gear. Under realignment, a large number of convicted offenders who used to be sent to state prison have become the domain of county sheriff's departments. LASD expects the daily jail population in LA to increase by 7,000 inmates by the end of 2014.


Steve Whitmore, spokesman for LA Sheriff Lee Baca, says Baca is focused on the bailable population "like a laser beam." Actually doing anything to get that population onto bail alternatives, like ankle bracelet monitoring, is a complicated process, he says. "It's a very difficult negotiation and everyone has to be involved, like the Board of Supervisors."


CJCJ's Gullings says the coming political battle over the pretrial population will be fierce, with the bail industry lobby playing a big role. Between 2000 and 2012, the bail lobby spent $456,480 on political campaigns in California, according to Gullings.


"Right now is a real pivotal moment for the bail industry to sort of undermine the accountability of pretrial services," she says. "Because this is an opportunity for counties to really expand those pretrial services if that’s what they wish to do."


But those in the bail industry insist that bail is still the most effective form of pretrial release. Eric Granof, chief marketing officer for AIA, the largest underwriter of bail bonds in the country, says the bail industry is widely misunderstood because the media perpetuates the "Dog the Bounty Hunter" image of bail agents as just in it for the money. Really, Granof says, they're insurance agents who perform a professional service. Bail, he says, serves its purpose.


"When someone has money on the hook, they’re going to show up,"says Granof. "When they have something on the hook that affects a family member, they’ll show up. When a bail agent has financial responsibility and they’re on the hook, they’re going to make sure that person shows up."


As for political influence, Granof says, "just like any other industry, we have lobbyists, ok? Is it big lobbyists, like the automobile industry or tobacco? It’s nothing like that."


There's a role for pretrial services, Granof says. "Our issue is that we think sometimes it goes a little too far."


That debate is just at its inception: what to do with the pretrial population to free up jail space for new inmates will be a county-by-county battle in California.

Drug laws panel supports reducing possession crimes to misdemeanors

Most but not all members of a drug-law-reform panel convened Tuesday by San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi supported reducing simple drug possession from a felony to a misdemeanor.

The panel, which included San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon, was part of a Justice Summit held annually by the Public Defender's Office.

Gascon led off in supporting a change in California law, as is currently being proposed in SB 1506, sponsored by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.

"For me, this has been a long journey," said Gascon, who is also a former police chief. But "I truly have felt, in my years of working in public policy, that the war on drugs has been a failure," he said.

Gascon said sending young people to prison for drug possession is equivalent to sending them to a "university of crime" and making them more likely to re-offend in the future.

A dissenting voice came from Martin Vranicar, the assistant chief executive officer of the California District Attorneys Association.

Vranicar said some drug users may need the threat of a possible felony conviction and sentence to motivate them to go into treatment programs.

Vranicar noted that most counties currently have diversion programs, but some offenders don't make use of them.

"We've got these programs that allow offenders to escape from criminal sanctions, but people just don't take advantage of them," he told the audience in the Koret Auditorium of the San Francisco Main Library.

At present, California law requires that possession of certain drugs, such as cocaine and heroin, is a felony punishable by 16 months to three years in jail. Possession of some other drugs, such as concentrated cannabis, sometimes known as hashish, can be either a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by no more than a year in jail.

Possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, however, is now only an infraction, punishable by a fine.

Leno's bill, as of Tuesday pending in the Senate, would change the drug possession crimes now classed as felonies to misdemeanors.

In a video message to the conference, Leno said felony convictions make it harder for reformed drug users to obtain the housing, education and jobs they need to turn their lives around.

"We really perpetuate a chronic underclass, which benefits none of us," under the current drug laws," Leno said.

The three other panelists -- San Francisco Probation Chief Wendy Still, Deputy Public Defender Tal Klement and Drug Policy Alliance Executive Director Ethan Nadelman - supported changing the law and also called for broader societal reforms.

"You have to look at the underlying problem, and not just lock people up," Still said.


Via: http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local-govt-politics/drug-laws-panel-supports-reducing-possession-crime/nPGy9/

Agency that runs California courts 'dysfunctional,' report says

The agency that runs the California court system has become "dysfunctional" and bloated with high-salaried bureaucrats and requires a major overhaul, according to a report ordered by California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye.

The 300-page report, which will be presented to judicial branch leaders next month, comes as the courts are trying to stave off large budget cuts from Sacramento. Although ordered by Cantil-Sakauye and written by a committee she named, the highly critical evaluation may undermine the chief jurist's efforts to roll back projected budget cuts of about $544 million.

The committee of 11 judges said the Administrative Office of the Courts, the San Francisco-based agency that runs the court system, is overstaffed, "top-heavy" and unwieldy. The office has strayed from its required task of serving the courts and become controlling, deceptive and secretive, the judges said.

"The top-level decision-making process of the AOC became insular, with a top-down management style limiting input from those within the organization," the report said. The judges cited 17 positions with maximum annual salaries at or above $175,000, "numerous positions" with salaries in excess of $100,000 and a staff attorney who was permitted to telecommute from Switzerland.

The problems occurred during the tenure of retired Chief Justice Ronald M. George and retired administrative office Director William Vickrey, the report said. During that time, new committees, rules and programs were established at the behest of the Judicial Council, the courts' governing body headed by the chief justice, the report said. The council failed to keep a close eye on management and bureaucracy as staffing swelled to 1,100, according to the analysis.

The report recommends greater oversight by the Judicial Council, a restructuring of the bureaucracy, regular internal audits, staff cuts and possible relocation of the Administrative Office of the Courts from pricey office space in San Francisco to Sacramento.

Cantil-Sakauye acknowledged that the report contains "hard criticisms" and noted that downsizing and restructuring are already occurring. She said staffing will be down to 860 by June 30 because of ongoing layoffs.

The Alliance of California Judges, a dissenting group that has complained about the court bureaucracy, called the evaluation "an A to Z indictment of an out-of-control organization." The group said the report confirmed what the Alliance has been saying for years: "The AOC is broken at its very core and has been allowed to run itself … for well over a decade."

Via: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-court-costs-20120530,0,4305785.story

Justice Dept. Defends Public’s Constitutional ‘Right to Record’ Cops

As police departments around the country are increasingly caught up in tussles with members of the public who record their activities, the U.S. Justice Department has come out with a strong statement supporting the First Amendment right of individuals to record police officers in the public discharge of their duties.

In a surprising letter (PDF) sent on Monday to attorneys for the Baltimore Police Department, the Justice Department also strongly asserted that officers who seize and destroy such recordings without a warrant or without due process are in strict violation of the individual’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

The letter was sent to the police department as it prepares for meetings to discuss a settlement over a civil lawsuit brought by a citizen who sued the department after his camera was seized by police.

In the lawsuit, Christopher Sharp alleged that in May 2010, Baltimore City police officers seized, searched, and deleted the contents of his mobile phone after he used it to record them as they were arresting a friend of his.

Last year, the Baltimore Police Department published a General Order to officers explaining that members of the public have a right to record their activity in public, but the Justice Department said in its 11-page letter this week that the order didn’t go far enough and pointed out several areas where it should clarify and assert more strongly the rights that individuals possess.

The right to record police officers in the public discharge of their duties was essential to help "engender public confidence in our police departments, promote public access to information necessary to hold our governmental officers accountable, and ensure public and officer safety," wrote Jonathan Smith, head of the Justice Department’s Special Litigation Section.

Smith cited the 1991 videotaped assault of Rodney King while he was being beaten by law enforcement officers as an incident that "exemplifies this principle" of public oversight.

"A private individual awakened by sirens recorded police officers assaulting King from the balcony of his apartment," Smith wrote. "This videotape provided key evidence of officer misconduct and led to widespread reform."

He noted that the issue was particularly important in Baltimore, "given the numerous publicized reports over the past several years alleging that BPD officers violated individuals’ First Amendment rights."

The Justice Department’s interference in the local civil case was surprising yet significant in that it put not only Baltimore but also every other city police department around the country on notice that interference in such recordings was unconstitutional. It was sent to Baltimore days after several media and civil rights organizations sent U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder a letter insisting that the Justice Department take action against agencies that arrest people who record officers.

"Since the Occupy Wall Street movement began, police have arrested dozens of journalists and activists simply for attempting to document political protests in public spaces," the letter to Holder stated. "A new type of activism is taking hold around the world and here in the U.S.: People with smartphones, cameras and Internet connections have been empowered with the means to report on public events."

While individual cases didn’t necessarily fall under the Justice Department’s jurisdiction, the letter acknowledged, the suppression of speech was a national problem that had to be addressed at the federal level.

"Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of access to information are vital whether you’re a credentialed journalist, a protester, or just a bystander with a camera," the organizations asserted.

In the document he sent to Baltimore, Smith said that, except under limited circumstances where a person recording police activity engaged in actions that violated the law, jeopardized the safety of a police officer, a suspect, or others, or incited others to violate the law, police officers should not interfere with a recording and should never seize recording devices without a warrant. They should also be advised "not to threaten, intimidate, or otherwise discourage an individual from recording police officer enforcement activities or intentionally block or obstruct cameras or recording devices."

Policies should prohibit officers from destroying recording devices or cameras and deleting recordings or photographs under any circumstances, Smith wrote.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/05/justice-dept-defends-publics-constitutional-right-to-record-cops/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oj_OEV-a3no

by Kim Zetter, Wired.com

Video above shows a New York City police officer attempting to prevent a New York Times photographer from capturing images during a public demonstration.

Cities' homeless crackdown: Could it be compassion fatigue?

A growing number of cities across the United States are making it harder to be homeless. Philadelphia recently banned outdoor feeding of people in city parks. Denver has begun enforcing a ban on eating and sleeping on property without permission. And this month, lawmakers in Ashland, Ore., will consider strengthening the town's ban on camping and making noise in public.

And the list goes on: Atlanta, Phoenix, San Diego, Los Angeles, Miami, Oklahoma City and more than 50 other cities have previously adopted some kind of anti-camping or anti-food-sharing laws, according to the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty.

The ordinances are pitting city officials against homeless advocates. City leaders say they want to improve the lives of homeless people and ensure public safety, while supporters of the homeless argue that such regulations criminalize homelessness and make it harder to live on the nation's streets.

"We're seeing these types of laws being proposed and passed all over the country," said Heather Johnson, a civil rights attorney at the homeless and poverty law center, which opposes many of the measures. "We think that criminalization measures such as these are counterproductive. Rather than address the root cause of homelessness, they perpetuate homelessness."

A number of organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against the city of Philadelphia this month in response to its feeding ban.

Mark McDonald, press secretary for the city's mayor,Michael Nutter, said the measures are about expanding the services offered to the homeless, adding dignity to their lives and about ensuring good public hygiene and safety.

"This is about an activity on city park land that the mayor thinks is better suited elsewhere," he said. "We think it's a much more dignified place to be in an indoor sit-down restaurant. … The overarching policy goal of the mayor is based on a belief that hungry people deserve something more than getting a ham sandwich out on the side of the street."

If people come inside for feeding programs, they can be connected with other social service programs and possibly speak with officials such as substance abuse counselors and mental health professionals, McDonald said.

Critics argue that bans on feeding and camping often leave people with no where to eat or sleep because many cities lack emergency food services and shelters. Meanwhile, citing people who violate such ordinances costs cities money when officials try to follow up on such cases and hurts people's ability to get jobs and housing, because many develop criminal records.

In 2007, the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty filed a lawsuit against Dallas contesting its ordinance that restricted locations where groups could share food and prohibited many groups from providing food in locations where they had served homeless people for years. A trial is scheduled to begin this month.

"It is a good thing when you see municipal governments paying attention to the homeless population and trying to find a number of solutions to the crisis," said James Brooks, theNational League of Cities' program director for community development and infrastructure. "Cities have an obligation not only to the people in the parks but to people in the wider community to prevent a public health problem."

Brooks' group supports the ordinances and said they are holistic approaches to solving a problem that will not simply end by giving people shelter. The key to helping homeless people is to get them indoors where social service workers can help them, Brooks said.

An opponent of the measures, Neil Donovan, executive director of the National Coalitionfor the Homeless, sees the ordinances as possible signs of "compassion fatigue."

"People are getting frustrated and getting angry at the issue," he said. "The person who is asking for money outside a coffee shop, the person who is camping just outside the ballpark, the chronically homeless are getting the brunt of this anger."

L.A. Unified Can Apply for Federal Race to the Top Funds

Los Angeles Unified School District Supt. John Deasy. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times)

For the first time, L.A. Unified and other individual school districts can apply for federal Race to the Top grants, bypassing California officials, including the governor, who had objected to the rules for receiving the education-reform incentives.

The draft rules, announced Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Education, will allow school systems to vie for funds that had been unavailable to any state that was unable or unwilling to compete for the grants.

"We're wide open to new strategies, new approaches," said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan in a conference call. "Every district in America can apply."

Race to the Top was launched by the U.S. Department of Education under President Obama in 2009. It was intended to spur states into adopting education policies favored by the administration, including revamping teacher evaluations to include student test score data. Three times California applied and lost.

Most recently, in 2011, senior state officials took California out of the running: They declined to endorse an application submitted by a consortium of districts, including those in L.A., Long Beach, San Francisco and Sacramento.

The money was too little to pay for what was required, a particular burden during the current budget crisis, according to state Supt. of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, Gov. Jerry Brown and other officials. But there also were philosophical objections to using student test scores as one measure to evaluate teachers.

The largest state teachers unions also have opposed using this data in performance reviews, unless teachers approve it as part of a collective bargaining agreement.

In 2010, the state's first application was weakened by the unwillingness of some teachers unions and school districts to sign on.

The new guidelines for the $400-million pool include the requirement that districts remake teachers evaluations. In Los Angeles Unified, schools Supt. John Deasy is moving in that direction.

"We intend to apply," Deasy said. "We've been waiting for this. We're ready for this. Everything we've done has laid the groundwork for a strong application."

If successful, L.A. could receive $25 million, much less than the $100 million the district could have obtained in an earlier funding round.

Still, the money would prove valuable for advancing such district initiatives as an evaluation system now being tested by volunteers in some schools.

Deasy is planning to expand the program districtwide, but faces a legal challenge by United Teachers Los Angeles, the teachers union.

UTLA could play a role in the Race to the Top bid.

"Local buy-in," including from teachers unions, "and commitment to reform is very important," Duncan said.

Stanford education professor Linda Darling-Hammond believes the emphasis is misplaced.

"Evaluation is actually a tiny aspect of the entire puzzle," Darling-Hammond said at a talk Monday to teachers and union activists at the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools in Koreatown. "The big issue for the U.S. is inequality." The nation has "continually disinvested in schools that serve children who live in poverty."

A contrasting view appeared in a report released Tuesday by Communities for Teaching Excellence, a locally based organization funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The report called for linking improved evaluations — including the use of student data — to decisions on whether teachers should receive and retain tenure protections.

The group saluted recent changes to tenure laws in other states. In Tennessee, teachers now must work five years to earn tenure; California teachers earn tenure after two years. Tennessee teachers also must rank in the top two of five categories for overall performance in the two years before achieving tenure. And teachers can lose tenure if they are rated ineffective for two consecutive years.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0523-teachers-evals-20120523,0,3011182.story

Governor wants to cut funding in school science

Science and technology may stimulate the state's economy, but the governor wants to cut funding for a second science requirement in high school.

The California finalists for Intel's Science Competition have developed truly amazing things; they began their projects in high school. The genetic test James Thomas of San Jose generated will be helpful.

"I created a model that actually has 92 percent accuracy in predicting the on-set of alcoholism in individuals," said Thomas.

The technology Jessica Richeri of Riverside developed will change the way we drive.

"My research finds a way to avoid traffic jams in the future with an autonomous robotic vehicle," said Richeri.

Supporters believe this illustrates how innovation can stimulate California's economy, that these kids are tomorrow's 

job creators, and it all begins with STEM: science, technology, education and math.

But because of California's continued budget crisis, the governor proposes to cut the second year science 

requirement in high schools to save $245 million.

For decades, schools have always gotten reimbursed by the state for teaching a second science class, but Gov. 

Jerry Brown wants to move away from state mandates because they're too expensive. He dropped by the science fair and said the cuts mean districts will have to find the money themselves to continue the program.

"I personally went to the School Board and said this is a good requirement, but we want the locals to pick up that up. Otherwise, they charge us," said Brown.

Critics say, though, after years of decreased state funding, schools can barely keep the lights on, let alone pay 

for science curriculum.

"The problem is all of this is being done during a time when other states and other countries are boosting their 

science and technology education to make their students and their population more competitive in this global 

market," said Matt Gray from the California STEM Learning Network.

The other problem is University of California and Cal State both require two years of science for admission. So if 

you're in a school where you can't take a second class, it'll be tough to get in.

What are the options?

"I go to Carnegie Mellon University," said Richeri.

"I'm going to MIT this fall," said Thomas.

Sounds like a California brain drain.

Via: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/politics&id=8674570