Print
Comment
Rate
No one expected elimination of juvenile justice agency
Ann Littrell/commentary
In "Treasure Island," the pirate Billy Bones knows his days are limited when he receives the dreaded "black dot" from his former comrade, old blind Pew.
I was reminded of that scene last month when I attended a telephonic conference with other juvenile judges and court directors to learn about the governor's proposal for balancing the budget.
The governor had not yet unveiled her budget plan, so we did not know what to expect, but it was obvious from the mandatory conference call that dire cuts were in store for the state's juvenile justice system.
As we waited to receive the news of the governor's budget plan, we speculated on what programs would be affected. Would the ax fall on court diversion, out-of-home placements or other rehabilitative programs, or would probation supervision take the hit?
The call finally came with news that none of us had envisioned - the governor was proposing to eliminate the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections. Not cut it back, mind you, but eliminate it completely. Closing the department would save the state around $65 million per year, although some of those funds would be returned to the counties to help house, rehabilitate and educate juveniles who would otherwise be under the department's control.
While it was a relief to learn that the "black dot" was not meant for our local programs and staff, it was obvious that closing the department would have a serious impact on the county juvenile court systems.
There are almost 500 juveniles incarcerated in the department's three locked facilities and almost that many more on parole. (A fourth locked facility closed recently due to budget cuts.) Twenty or more of those juveniles are from Cochise County.
The department was created by statute in 1989 after a lawsuit was filed over the treatment of juveniles in the Arizona Department of Corrections. The Department of Juvenile Corrections was tasked by law with housing, supervising, rehabilitating and educating the youths who were committed to it by juvenile court judges.
Commitment of a juvenile to the department is governed by law. The juvenile cannot be under 8 or over 18, and must have been adjudicated for a delinquent act, meaning an act that would have been a crime if committed by an adult, and found to be a threat to public safety. The court also must consider whether less restrictive alternatives are available and whether commitment to the department is a final opportunity to rehabilitate the juvenile as well as a way to hold him or her accountable for serious delinquent acts.
Many of the juveniles committed to the department have substance abuse and/or mental health issues. The majority are there because they had numerous probation violations or because they committed property crimes. Only a small percentage are violent offenders. Most juveniles charged with violent crimes s are transferred to the adult system for criminal prosecution.
Once a juvenile is committed to the department, it is the department, not the juvenile court, that decides how long the juvenile should remain in a locked facility and what remedial and rehabilitative services he or she should have. Upon release from the locked facility, the juvenile is supervised by a department parole officer, not by a juvenile court probation officer.
The department's mandate is to provide secure housing to high-risk youth while providing those youth with treatment, rehabilitation and education. Because of its size and specialized mandate, the department can offer an array of specialized programs such as mental health, sex offender and substance abuse treatment services that are not available in Cochise County or other rural counties.
If the department closes, the Cochise County juvenile court system will have to find a way to provide these rehabilitative services to the high risk juveniles who would otherwise be with the Department of Juvenile Corrections.
The county will also have to ensure the public safety by housing the juveniles in a locked facility and by assuming supervision for the juveniles currently on parole from the department.
How the county will do this is undetermined, although the governor has indicated that additional funding will be provided to help the counties cope with increased staffing and programmatic needs.
The county's present juvenile detention facility is not set up to house the juveniles who would be returning from the department. The juvenile detention center was designed for short-term stays of a few hours to a few months.
The average length of stay at a Department of Juvenile Corrections facility is six months to a year. The detention center lacks the facilities and treatment services needed to house juveniles for that length of time.
The proposal to eliminate the Department of Juvenile Corrections is still just a proposal. It has points to recommend it, such as saving the state more than $65 million per year and potentially increasing the local treatment options for youth within the community, but it also raises many questions and concerns, including the potential costs to the county of providing the youth who would be returning to the counties from Department of Juvenile Corrections control with secure housing, community supervision and necessary behavioral, medical and mental health treatment and care.
The success of the proposal depends on careful planning, interagency cooperation and appropriate funding for staff and services. Whether that can be accomplished in this age of budget cuts is an open question. In the meantime, we're looking for that map to Treasure Island.
(Ann Littrell is Cochise County Juvenile Court Judge for the Superior Court. Reprinted from the Sierra Vista Herald/Bisbee Daily Review.)
In "Treasure Island," the pirate Billy Bones knows his days are limited when he receives the dreaded "black dot" from his former comrade, old blind Pew.
I was reminded of that scene last month when I attended a telephonic conference with other juvenile judges and court directors to learn about the governor's proposal for balancing the budget.
The governor had not yet unveiled her budget plan, so we did not know what to expect, but it was obvious from the mandatory conference call that dire cuts were in store for the state's juvenile justice system.
As we waited to receive the news of the governor's budget plan, we speculated on what programs would be affected. Would the ax fall on court diversion, out-of-home placements or other rehabilitative programs, or would probation supervision take the hit?
The call finally came with news that none of us had envisioned - the governor was proposing to eliminate the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections. Not cut it back, mind you, but eliminate it completely. Closing the department would save the state around $65 million per year, although some of those funds would be returned to the counties to help house, rehabilitate and educate juveniles who would otherwise be under the department's control.
While it was a relief to learn that the "black dot" was not meant for our local programs and staff, it was obvious that closing the department would have a serious impact on the county juvenile court systems.
There are almost 500 juveniles incarcerated in the department's three locked facilities and almost that many more on parole. (A fourth locked facility closed recently due to budget cuts.) Twenty or more of those juveniles are from Cochise County.
The department was created by statute in 1989 after a lawsuit was filed over the treatment of juveniles in the Arizona Department of Corrections. The Department of Juvenile Corrections was tasked by law with housing, supervising, rehabilitating and educating the youths who were committed to it by juvenile court judges.
Commitment of a juvenile to the department is governed by law. The juvenile cannot be under 8 or over 18, and must have been adjudicated for a delinquent act, meaning an act that would have been a crime if committed by an adult, and found to be a threat to public safety. The court also must consider whether less restrictive alternatives are available and whether commitment to the department is a final opportunity to rehabilitate the juvenile as well as a way to hold him or her accountable for serious delinquent acts.
Many of the juveniles committed to the department have substance abuse and/or mental health issues. The majority are there because they had numerous probation violations or because they committed property crimes. Only a small percentage are violent offenders. Most juveniles charged with violent crimes s are transferred to the adult system for criminal prosecution.
Once a juvenile is committed to the department, it is the department, not the juvenile court, that decides how long the juvenile should remain in a locked facility and what remedial and rehabilitative services he or she should have. Upon release from the locked facility, the juvenile is supervised by a department parole officer, not by a juvenile court probation officer.
The department's mandate is to provide secure housing to high-risk youth while providing those youth with treatment, rehabilitation and education. Because of its size and specialized mandate, the department can offer an array of specialized programs such as mental health, sex offender and substance abuse treatment services that are not available in Cochise County or other rural counties.
If the department closes, the Cochise County juvenile court system will have to find a way to provide these rehabilitative services to the high risk juveniles who would otherwise be with the Department of Juvenile Corrections.
The county will also have to ensure the public safety by housing the juveniles in a locked facility and by assuming supervision for the juveniles currently on parole from the department.
How the county will do this is undetermined, although the governor has indicated that additional funding will be provided to help the counties cope with increased staffing and programmatic needs.
The county's present juvenile detention facility is not set up to house the juveniles who would be returning from the department. The juvenile detention center was designed for short-term stays of a few hours to a few months.
The average length of stay at a Department of Juvenile Corrections facility is six months to a year. The detention center lacks the facilities and treatment services needed to house juveniles for that length of time.
The proposal to eliminate the Department of Juvenile Corrections is still just a proposal. It has points to recommend it, such as saving the state more than $65 million per year and potentially increasing the local treatment options for youth within the community, but it also raises many questions and concerns, including the potential costs to the county of providing the youth who would be returning to the counties from Department of Juvenile Corrections control with secure housing, community supervision and necessary behavioral, medical and mental health treatment and care.
The success of the proposal depends on careful planning, interagency cooperation and appropriate funding for staff and services. Whether that can be accomplished in this age of budget cuts is an open question. In the meantime, we're looking for that map to Treasure Island.
(Ann Littrell is Cochise County Juvenile Court Judge for the Superior Court. Reprinted from the Sierra Vista Herald/Bisbee Daily Review.)
 |
 |
|
| Lower wages for teens may be worth taking a look at | Rebuttal to Stevens' letter to 'set the record straight' |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of bensonnews-sun.com.
Jim Clancy wrote on Mar 3, 2010 10:51 AM:
Thank You for your aricle. Still there remains the question of why the Governor's Proposal-put together by her Budget Office contained misleading and/or untrue informaiton?
The True Facts are:
Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Present population:
Secure Care (Prison) 496
Parole 772
Total 1,268 in ADJC Jurisdiction (the Governor's Budget people painted a picture that ADJC is only responsible for 492 youth-NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
The number in Secure Care (Prison) has decreased steadily- due to an Agency Strategic Plan (Developed in 2006-and is available on request) that believed that the best place for these Juveniles is their community--the probability of turning these youth around- is when they are back home--and services deal not only with them-but their Families (Sounds like regionalization to me--as touted by the Governor's Budget people and advisors).
70% of these juveniles are not going to the Adult system- is a good measure of success--not costing society monies to warehouse these Juveniles in the Adult System. This why the number of incarceration has dropped significantly from 1999--as opposed to the picture painted by the Governor's budget people.
Juvenile are sentenced to ADJC jurisdiction-after failing in probation (Usually Seven Referrals for a felony crime they have committed) and/or have committed a more serious felony offense. What would lead one to believe that if they failed in County Probation-that they would once again be successful again-under County Jurisdiction? Unless the Counties now have the appropriate staff to deal with the juveniles.
The Governor's Budget People paints a picture that the Juveniles sentenced to ADJC have primarily property crimes and drug offense backgrounds. Not true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The fact is that there are a good number that have not only been convicted of property crimes --yet there are also a significant number who have committed violent crimes (25% plus)-such as armed robberies-carjacking, gang related aggravated assaults and yes-even Homicides!!! The Governor's administration also failed to mention that on average there are about 100 sex offenders convicted of child molestation to sexual assault), under ADJC jurisdiction at any one time. The law enacted in the 1990's did not mandate Juvenile Judges to send these type of offenders to the Adult system-discretion was written into that law for good reason. Juveniles can and do turn around!!!
Respectfuly "