Download Zipped File WP 6.1 0731JJTM.ZIP 6,954 Bytes

Juvenile Justice Task Force

MINUTES OF THE
JUVENILE JUSTICE TASK FORCE

July 31, 1998 - 1:00 p.m. - Room 303, State Capitol


Members Present:
    Sen. Lyle W. Hillyard, Chair     
    Rep. J. Brent Haymond, Chair
    Sen. Joseph L. Hull
    Sen. Nathan C. Tanner
    Rep. John B. Arrington
    Rep. Katherine Bryson
    Rep. Blake D. Chard
    
Members Absent:
    Rep. Steve Barth
    Mr. David J. Jordan

Staff Present:
    Ms. Chyleen A. Arbon, Research Analyst


Mr. Gary K. Dalton
Hon. Andrew A. Valdez
Dr. Russ Van Vleet
Ms. Robin Arnold Williams    


    
    
    

    Ms. Susan Creager Allred, Associate General Counsel    
    Ms. Glenda S. Whitney, Legislative Secretary        

     Note:    A list of others present and a copy of materials distributed in the meeting are on file in the         Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel.
                                    
1.    Call to Order and Task Force Business - Chair Hillyard called the meeting to order at 1:13 p.m.

     MOTION: Rep. Chard moved to approve the minutes of the June 26, 1998 meeting. The motion passed unanimously with Sen. Hull, Sen. Tanner, Rep. Haymond, and Mr. Dalton absent for the vote.
    
2.    Recommendations of the Juvenile Justice Workgroup

    Ms. Chyleen Arbon, Research Analyst, presented the recommendations of the juvenile justice work group.
    
3.    Intermediate/Alternative Sanctions

    Mr. Ed McConkie, Director, Utah Sentencing Commission, defined intermediate sanctions and identified some examples of juvenile intermediate sanctions such as work programs, day/night reporting centers, group and proctor homes, and drug courts. He said that the Sentencing Commission has been conducting an extensive study on intermediate sanctions.

    Mr. McConkie explained that the Sentencing Commission has been advocating a more balanced approach in both the juvenile and adult correctional systems by continuing to build facilities to house offenders as well as funding alternatives to prison. The goals of intermediate sanctions are to provide adequate offender supervision and tracking to protect the public, alleviate prison overcrowding, reduce recidivism, maintain cost efficiency and victim restitution, provide judges with more sentencing alternatives, and match offenders with the appropriate sanctions. He said the prison should be reserved for those who have committed violent or egregious crimes and those whose criminal behavior cannot be controlled in less secure settings.
            
    Chair Hillyard asked if there is a mechanism to measure the effectiveness of a program. Mr. McConkie responded that there is not a very good mechanism to determine the effectiveness of a program.

    Ms. Camille Anthony, Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), responded that her office receives federal funding to conduct some evaluations, but resources to conduct longitudinal studies are scarce.

    Dr. Van Vleet said one of the frustrations of the evaluation process is that almost every program has an evaluation of itself. However, the evaluation has to do only with how the person has improved within the program, and most offenders do show progress when measured this way. What has been lacking is any attempt to follow youth or adults after a program.

    Mr. Gary K. Dalton, Director, Division of Youth Corrections (DYC), distributed a handout "DYC Juvenile Justice Task Force Presentation." He read a statement from the American Probation Association Fall Journal titled "What Will the Public Tolerate." The article suggested the public wants more punishment and not more alternatives in their communities.

    Mr. Dalton said the DYC has a menu of services that are available, all of which could be considered intermediate sanctions. He reviewed the programs available and the programming costs.

    Mr. Dalton said one of the dilemmas with intermediate sanctions is that people do not want to have the youth in their communities. He briefed the task force on where the proctor homes and group homes are currently operating in each county. He identified the number of beds and locations of the five observation and assessment facilities, eleven detention facilities, and six secure care facilities. Mr. Dalton indicated there is a need for more alternative sanctions in the form of female offender programs, alcohol and drug treatment, and mental health treatment.                    

    Sen. Tanner referred to a letter he received which indicated that there is a group home task force looking at the issue of locating homes in communities that has asked to report its

findings to the Health and Human Services Interim Committee. He wondered if there is a better audience to hear this report. Ms. Robin Williams said she would make contact with this task force.

    Ms. Rachel Fischer, Utah Children, distributed a handout "Gaps and Solutions in Juvenile Justice Intermediate/Alternative Sanctions." She identified six gaps in intermediate sanctions: 1) Inadequate specialized programs in the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) to effectively deal with juvenile offenders who are referred to DCFS programs; 2) Inadequate programming to differentiate between genders; 3) Few programs in youth corrections which specialize in minority issues; 4) Improvement needed in the amount of vocational programs offered and in the consistency of credit provided for educational programs; 5) Juvenile delinquents committing many different types of crimes for many reasons, with many programs operating under the assumption that delinquency has a singular common cause; and 6) Generic outcome measures, rather than problem-specific measurement.

    Judge Mark J. Andrus, Second District Juvenile Court, identified from an urban perspective some of the needs regarding intermediate sanctions: 1) Secure confinement for children under the age of 12 who are violent offenders; 2) An intermediate sanction that deals with truancy; 3) More work camp programs; and 4) A holding facility for residential sexual offenders who are not progressing in the program because of mental retardation or other problems.

    Judge Scott N. Johansen, Seventh District Juvenile Court, suggested six areas of focus regarding intermediate/alternative sanctions: 1) Continue to research and gather data to determine outcome measurements of state supervision and its success; 2) Require an accounting of the sentencing guideline money; 3) Address truancy and educational neglect issues; 4) Appropriate more funding for restitution programs; 5) Require parents to pay for restitution; 6) Stop sending youth back home to a toxic environment; give DYC access to DCFS parenting classes; and 7) Re-evaluate secure care with its high costs and low success rate. He suggested teaching basic competency skills such as cutting hair, carpentry, or welding.

    Mr. William Dinehart, Legislative Fiscal Analyst, said over the last ten years the biggest problem in developing new facilities is the focus on cost per bed. He said if the task force believes there should be an increase of vocational space, it should communicate this to the Capitol Facilities Committee.

    Mr. Dalton explained that DYC is in the process of looking at a vocational plan that would offer employers incentives to employ youth and keep them working. He reported that statistically a youth needs to be engaged in a job for six weeks in order to ensure they will stay at the job.

4.    Serious Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Program (SHOCAP)

    Chief Doyle Talbot, Layton City Police Department, distributed a handout "SHOCAP Davis County" and Mr. Alan Pratt, Davis County Sheriff's Office, Davis County SHOCAP Officer, made the presentation. Chief Talbot said the program has been successful and he has invited others in the state to become involved with SHOCAP.

    Mr. Pratt reviewed the handout and presented an overview of SHOCAP which is an interagency case management system that enables the juvenile justice system, schools, and human services agencies to make informed decisions about the small number of juveniles who repeatedly commit serious crimes. He discussed the three goals of the SHOCAP program: 1) Identify serious habitual offenders in the community; 2) Provide interagency services to meet the variety of needs these juveniles have thereby reducing recidivism; and 3) Enhance the collaborative supervision of SHOCAP to provide for and improve community safety and security.

    Chief Talbot recommended to the task force that if this program is going to be implemented statewide, there needs to be a SHOCAP coordinator at the state level.

    Sen. Tanner recognized the need for an appropriation to implement this program in the metro counties in the next two years.

    Rep. Chard recognized not only the need for a coordinator but also the need for a trainer to help the other agencies put the agreements together. He would like to see the task force continue to endorse this concept.

    Sen. Hull spoke in support of the concept of having a state coordinator/facilitator so that there is some description to establish a budget for appropriation.

    Chair Hillyard asked Ms. Anthony to follow up on these recommendations and report to the task force next month.

    Mr. Pratt suggested formalizing the interagency agreement throughout the state.

5.    Use of Out-of-State Resources

    Mr. Gary K. Dalton, Director, Division of Youth Corrections, referred to the handout distributed earlier from DYC on the "Actual and expected numbers of youth in out-of-state placements." He reviewed the chart of out-of-state agencies for alternatives to secure care. He reported that there are 42 youth in out-of-state placements as of May 29, 1998. He indicated he

would like to request an additional $500,000 for another 13-14 out-of-state beds in next year's budget.

6.    Interstate Compact

    Ms. Kristine Prince, Administrative Office of the Courts, distributed a handout "Interstate Compact on Juveniles" and presented an overview. She said the Interstate Compact on Juveniles was adopted to serve the ends of justice, protect the welfare and safety of the juvenile, and to protect the community. The basic purpose of the compact is to assist in the return of runaways, escapees, and absconders, and to provide cooperative supervision of probationers and parolees. She expressed concern that Utah receives more youth from out-of-state than it sends out. She reported that Utah is supervising 135 juveniles from out-of-state.

    Mr. Gary K. Dalton, Director, Division of Youth Corrections, discussed the problems with the Interstate Compact and recommended coordinating a response for the state. He also suggested administering the compact in one office.

7.    Adjournment

    MOTION: At 4:15 p.m., Rep. Haymond moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously.

[Back to the Interim Directory][Back to the Monthly Schedule][Back to the Committee Listing] Utah State Legislature