Eliminate or Fully Fund Short-term State Prisoners in County Jails

 

The MICA Board of Directors urges the Legislature to scrap the present short-term offender program and have the state pay the full cost of housing state prisoners held in county jails for both short-term offenders and supervised release violators.

 

Since July 1, 2003 short-term offenders (STOs) with less than six months to serve at the time of commitment to the Commissioner of Corrections must be housed in county jails.  This budget balancing measure was a direct shift of a state responsibility to county property taxpayers and should be dropped.  As a result, county property taxpayers have absorbed tens of millions of dollars of costs over the last five years.  This has taken away the ability of counties to complete transportation projects and other important community services simply to house over 1,400 state prisoners a year.

 

MICA appreciates the Legislature’s efforts to mitigate this problem by increasing the per diem to approximately $30 per day last session.  Unfortunately, the number of short-term offenders has been over 25% higher than predicted by DOC for bed space that costs counties between $55 and $65 a day.  This does not include the additional costs for transportation and medical services not covered by the state.

The DOC is now considering renting additional bed space from county jails for supervised release violators.  Such a program will further challenge counties without enhancing public safety or taking into consideration best practices for reentry. For both supervised release violators and short-term offenders, the state should purchase available bed space from counties just as other counties, the federal government, and neighboring states do.  Renting space in this fashion allows each of the jurisdictions to better manage their bed space needs and negotiate for beds available from neighboring jurisdictions and private providers. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re-establish the States/County Partnership to Provide

Community-Based Corrections and Public Safety

The MICA Board of Directors urges the Legislature to restore funding levels for corrections and public safety programming within the community, which have lagged in the past decade despite significant increases in criminal penalties.  The MICA Board of Directors requests that no new sanctions or mandates be created without an appropriation of sufficient state funding to meet the local costs.

 

For several decades there was an equal partnership between local units of government and the state in delivering public safety and correctional services.  This Minnesota model of providing these services in the community was recognized as one of the best in the nation.  This partnership has allowed for the delivery of public safety and corrections at a very low cost and in an effective manner.  The state was able to maintain one of the lowest prison populations per capita while still keeping our recidivism low.

 

Unfortunately, that successful partnership is in peril.  Over the past decade, the state's financial commitment to this partnership waned while property taxpayers have been picking up an ever-increasing portion of the tab.  For example, since 2003 counties under the Community Corrections Act have seen their portion of responsibility increased by over $20 million.  The state's commitment to the CCA subsidy actually declined from 2003 to 2006.  The Legislature did make a significant increase in the subsidy last year, but this only brought it back to a $1.3 million increase since 2003. 

 

Since 2001 state funding for prisons has increased by 44.2%, DOC operations 36.8% and public defenders 28.9%.  During this same time period, community services in the state budget, which include county aid for corrections, only increased 8.3%.  Despite the lagging state funding, counties have taken on additional responsibilities for increased sex offender penalties, new sex offender supervision standards, the meth epidemic, increased county responsibility for drug offenders, and short-term offenders.  The Sentencing Guidelines Commission is proposing a downward departure for drug offenders this year.  This would again increase county responsibility without any appropriations increase.

 

We request the state move towards a single, need-based state funding stream that would recognize financial costs when penalties and programming are increased in order to avoid shifting the burden onto property taxpayers.  Further, the Legislature should provide a substantial increase in funding in order to reestablish the full partnership in providing community services for public safety and corrections.

 

Ensure that Drug Courts are True Collaboratives

Between Counties and the Court System

and that the Treatment Funding is Sustainable

The MICA Board of Directors requests that the 2008 Legislature make certain the funding for drug courts meant for enhancing treatment and supervision in the communities is not diverted to court administration.  Further, supervision and treatment funding for the drug court initiatives should be ongoing base funding to insure that these programs are sustainable.

 

MICA welcomes creative and innovative ways of dealing with alcohol and other drug (AOD) dependency and criminal issues.  Drug courts (or problem-solving courts) have shown some promise in this area and it is appropriate for the Legislature to look at encouraging the expansion of these

should take into account when developing funding initiatives for drug courts.

 

Drug courts should be collaborative efforts developed at the local level.  The Legislature must recognize that drug courts are not the only answer and any initiative needs to avoid duplication of other successful programs already established in the communities.  Our current court, corrections, and human services systems are designed to operate on a local level, which allows the development of programs that respond to individuals, families and communities, something a one-size-fits-all state program will never accomplish.  While the judicial, legislative and executive branches of government are significant parties to the system, counties know their communities best.  State and judicial participation should be a collaborative effort with counties leading. 

 

The funding mechanism should ensure that treatment and supervision funding is sustainable and ongoing.  Any appropriation for drug courts should ensure that base funding continues flowing to both existing and new drug courts.  The Legislature should be careful that any state program not create new unfunded mandates that would be passed on to county property taxpayers.  If this occurs, few counties will want to create or expand drug courts in the future.

 

Reinstate Reimbursement of 800 MHz

Subscriber Unit Subscription Fees

The MICA Board of Directors urges that the Legislature reinstate the payments of annual 800 MHz subscriber unit subscription fees from the 911 fee.

 

Prior to the merger of the Metro Radio Board into the Allied Radio Matrix for Emergency Response (ARMER), subscriber unit subscription fees that are imposed by the units’ vendors for annual software upgrades were paid by the Metro Radio Board out of their share of the 911 fee.  The current position of the Department of Public Safety that administers ARMER is that payment is a local government responsibility.  Counties and other local governments labored under the assumption that the 911 fee increase and resulting increased appropriations for the 800 MHz system authorized by the 2007 Legislature would allow for continued state payment of that fee.  The 2008 Legislature should explicitly authorize payment of the annual subscriber unit subscription fees from the 911 fee.  

 

Certificates of Rehabilitation

The MICA Board of Directors requests that if the Legislature develops a program to provide certificates of rehabilitation for offenders who have successfully completed their probation it should be done in a way to protect county property taxpayers from liability and any additional costs.

 

Several other states already have a program where offenders who have successfully completed their sentence and probation can obtain a certificate of good behavior or rehabilitation.  This is done to assist reentry into society by making it easier for ex-offenders to find employment and housing.  This concept is gaining popularity among some Minnesota policymakers in lieu of making it easier to expunge criminal records.  County probation officials recognize the benefit of a certificate of good behavior program to help offenders reintegrate back into the community.  Nonetheless, the MICA Board of Directors would urge the Legislature to proceed with caution.  If the certificates are awarded simply as an administrative action by county probation, it could create significant liability for county taxpayers if the offender commits another crime.  In order to avoid creating this liability, a certificate should only be awarded by a District Court Judge rather than a probation officer or county official.  Additionally, they should only be issued after the offender has clearly proven that they have met all their probation requirements.  Further, any certification process should be done in such a way as to avoid adding more costs to county corrections and county taxpayers.

 

CriMNet

The MICA Board of Directors supports the ongoing development and implementation of an integrated statewide criminal justice information system with adequate state general fund support.

 

MICA counties provide a significant portion of the public safety services in Minnesota, and they understand the critical need for accurate up-to-date information in order to keep our communities safe.  These counties will continue to provide the bulk of information necessary to make sure any future integrated criminal information system is successful.  Nevertheless, the infrastructure necessary to integrate public safety information throughout the state is a function that should be paid for by the state general fund.  Counties support other ongoing funding sources so long as they are sustainable and do not shift anymore costs onto county property taxpayers.

 

Provide Sufficient Funding for Public Defender

Representation in Child Protection Cases

The MICA Board of Directors urges the 2008 Legislature to clearly identify the Board of Public Defense as responsible for providing representation of all parties in CHIPS cases and to provide necessary funding for the Board to meet this responsibility.

 

Over the past decade, the Board of Public Defense has assumed responsibility for providing the representation of both children and adults of children in protective services (CHIPS) cases, but the statutory authority remains confusing.  Counties gave up significant state aid in the 1990s in order to allow for the public defenders' budgets to be increased so they could handle these types of cases. Counties do not have the appropriate staffing to provide quality representation at affordable prices.

 

Proponents of county funding argue that requiring counties to pay for representation of adults in child protection cases will reduce the number and costs of cases.  However, counties already pay for the social worker, prosecutor, probation officer, and out of home placements, so there is no fiscal incentive for counties to bring CHIPS cases in lieu of other forms of intervention.  Counties are working hard to reduce the overall cost of child protection cases while still assuring the safety of children.  Counties do not need additional unfunded mandates to motivate them to find efficiencies in CHIPS cases. 

 

Juvenile Sex Offender Registration

The MICA Board of Directors supports narrowing juvenile sex offender registration to those offenders designated EJJ or specifically ordered to register by the court. 

 

Several public safety professionals recognize the importance of a strong treatment component for juvenile sex offenders.  Despite popular belief, most juvenile sex offenders will successfully rehabilitate if given appropriate treatment.  Unfortunately, the sex offender registration law has discouraged some judges from fully adjudicating juvenile sex offenders as delinquent in order to avoid the stigma of registration.  As a result, the amount of time counties have to provide treatment is severely limited.  Therefore, MICA would support giving discretion to the judges to determine whether a juvenile should be a registered sex offender in order to ensure longer supervision and enhance the chances of successful rehabilitation.