Marin [County] officials reject panel’s call for juvenile detention outsourcing

A grand jury proposal to cut costs by closing juvenile hall and contracting out for services is unwarranted and unreasonable — and not in the best interest of Marin’s youth, county officials said.

The grand jury proposed sending Marin’s young lawbreakers to facilities run by neighboring counties and using the complex for other public services, in light of rocketing costs that amounted to more than $900 per youth per day.

The investigative panel found that the county spends about $3.7 million a year and employs 21 people to run the 40-bed Marin County Juvenile Hall around the clock — yet its average daily population was just about nine inmates in 2014.

But the county administration, in a formal response to the jury that rejects its recommendations as “not warranted or reasonable,” said a local juvenile hall is preferable for troubled kids.

“We believe there are significant benefits to serving our juveniles in Marin so they can maintain positive relationships with their family and support systems,” the county administration said. “We are exploring ways we can make the facility more cost effective, but we believe it is very important to maintain a facility in our community to ensure the best outcomes for our youth.”

The jury’s report, “Marin County Juvenile Hall: A Time for a Change,” raised eyebrows at the Civic Center, where Chief Probation Officer Mike Daly is highly regarded for innovative, progressive leadership. County supervisors will review the jury report and county administration response Tuesday morning.

The administration contends the jury’s juvenile hall plan is not in the best interest of Marin’s youth and is impractical as well. Probation officials in Napa and Sonoma are not interested in contracting with Marin, and getting to distant facilities would be problematic, disruptive and costly for families, youths and defense attorneys, the response said. In addition, juveniles would not get the same level of mental health and “community transition services” available in Marin.

“In short, the grand jury recommendations do not sufficiently take into consideration what is in the best interest of the minor and his or her family structure, and do not adequately anticipate the additional costs and impacts of contracting out to another county,” the administration said.

The grand jury found that Marin’s juvenile offender population has declined as the county sought alternative programs for youth offenders rather than locking them up. Easing marijuana possession laws reduces youth arrests, the jury noted.

In Marin, the number of youth detentions fell from 1,674 in 1995 to 253 in 2014, according to the jury. The average daily population at Marin County Juvenile Hall has dropped from 30 in 2005 to 9.2 in 2014, with a median incarceration period of 8.4 days. But the daily population varies widely, the county noted, with the average so far this year being about 15.

With the decline in population at the hall, the cost-per-offender has increased astronomically, the grand jury said. In 2014, the daily cost per inmate figured out to $902 — nearly twice as much as in 2011.

State law requires counties to have juvenile halls, but it also allows counties to operate joint facilities. The jury identified at least six counties that have no juvenile jails but contract with other counties, with daily costs of $85 to $190 per youth inmate.

September 13, 2015

Marin Independent Journal

By Nells Johnson