What's A Guy Gotta Do Around Here To Get Arrested, Anyway?

Colin Rigley has a funny story and photo in the News Brief section of this week's New Times (http://www.newtimesslo.com/ ) showing Dan DeVaul standing at the reception windows at the County Jail, hoping to get arrested and so go serve his 88 day jail sentence (which was levied when he was found "guilty" of code violations for housing homeless people in sub-standard, overcrowded, illegal, dangerous, code-violating conditions at Sunny Acres, a clean and sober recovery program on his ranch in SLO.)

Sheriff said, No Deal.  He'd have to wait until a court order was issued to arrest him and haul him off to the pokey.

The funny part?  If you read Ron Crawford's email (posted below on Feb 22) the Sheriff's jail facility is NOW overcrowded and so may well be in violation of County code.  Which is why the BOS voted to spend $10 million to build a jail facility to relieve all that likely illegal overcrowding.

But there's Dan, guilty of code violations trying to get into a jail that's . . . .  guilty of code violations?

So, who should issue a code violation citation to the Sheriff?  Dan?

C'mon Jake, it's Chinatown

Ron Crawford, of www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com wrote a letter to the SLO County Board of Supervisors. It’s posted here with permission.


On Sunday, the Tribune did a HUGE front page story on this issue, plus an editorial. Yet nowhere in that article was mention of SB959. Nowhere. Plus, I’m not even sure it was even mentioned in the staff report (though this whole jail project vote had been postponed when Ron first brought SB959 to the attention of the Sups, with one of them saying he was concerned with “the growing empire of incarceration.”)


The vote on this is today. Any bets on what a “broke” county with no interest in “Empire building” will do? Right.



Dear SLO County Supervisors,

Thank you for this opportunity to provide public comment for Item A-4, the women's jail expansion project, on your 2/22/11 agenda.

I urge your board to immediately stop development of the proposed women's jail expansion, and, instead, adopt an SB 959 style program of mandatory home detention, and then use a tiny fraction of the $10 million the county will save by the abandonment of the jail expansion project, to start a women's-only drug and alcohol rehab/prevention program in SLO County.

As I first reported in 2008 at this link:

http://calcoastnews.com/2008/07/crowded-womens-jail-is-big-lawsuit-threat/


... California law allows for counties in the state to enact programs that place "low risk" inmates on mandatory home detention in order to reduce overcrowding issues in local jails.

The law, SB 959, was passed in 2007, and supported by our local Republican assembly member, Sam Blakeslee, the California State Sheriff's Association, and was signed by a Republican Governor, Governor Schwarzenegger, and is already adopted by the vast majority of counties in the state.

SLO County is not one of them.

If your board were to immediately enact an SB 959 style program of mandatory home detention, that would, in turn, immediately remedy two HUGE problems currently facing SLO County government:

1) It would immediately eliminate the massive liability issue that currently exists (and has existed for the past several years, including since SB 959's passage in 2007) at the overcrowded-and-therefore-illegal women's jail facility, by giving the county the option to place the over-the-limit, "low-risk" women inmates, on mandatory home detention, where they will be monitored by skilled, law enforcement professionals.

That move would immediately bring the county into building code compliance with the currently illegal facility.

and;

2) (And, this is really HUGE): Immediately enacting a SB 959 style program would also immediately solve one of the most awkward situations I've ever seen in my 20-plus years of covering local government.

By deliberately housing people in a non-building-code-compliant facility -- as the county continues to do with the women's jail facility, when all it would take to immediately remedy the situation is a simple vote by County Supervisors -- SLO County government is guilty of doing EXACTLY what they are accusing local rancher, Dan De Vaul of doing, yet you're going hard-core-enforcement on him.

See what I mean there? It's a very awkward, and highly embarrassing situation for the county.

For the past few years, county enforcement officials have been hammering away at Mr. De Vaul for violating building codes by, allegedly, housing people in non-building-code-compliant structures, all the while the County is housing people in non-building-code-compliant structures, when all it would take for the county to immediately remedy your illegal situation is one, quick vote, simply to do what most counties in the state are already doing.

You know, now that I see it written that way, as far as SLO County officials are concerned, I can see how reason #2 might actually be even more important than reason #1 (and reason #1 is an amazingly important reason, considering that those illegally housed inmates are ALL sitting on a jackpot right now, and they don't even know it... yet. Let's just hope that one of them doesn't trip on one of those illegal mattresses on the floor, and "injure" their neck, BEFORE you pass a SB 959 program, huh?)

That second situation is flat-out embarrassing for the county, and one quick vote on a SB 959 style program would immediately make that highly embarrassing situation disappear, AND bring the county into building code compliance, finally.

Furthermore, the numbers associated with the jail expansion project, are, again (and there's really no other way to put it), embarrassing -- nearly three times the cost (just to the county) than the national average to house an inmate.

And when compared to the cost of mandatory home detention? There's no comparison.

Here's why:

According to the (September, 2010) staff report, there's enough space at the current facility to legally house 43 inmates. However, also according to the staff report, the average population at the facility is 73 inmates, so, we're talking about 30 inmates here... 30... on average.

According to a 2009 Pew study, that I dug up on the Internet, incarcerating one inmate costs, on average, $29,000 a year in the U.S.

According to the county's staff report, the cost to the county to build the project is estimated at about $10 million (with another $25 million coming from a grant from the state).

I'm going to take that number -- $10 million -- and spread it out over 20 years, for $500,000 a year.

Then I'm going to add that $500,000 per year to the estimated cost of staffing and running the new women's jail facility of $1.8 million a year, for a total of $2.3 million per year, over the next 20 years, to build and operate the facility.

At that number -- $2.3 million per year, to build and operate the facility -- the cost per over-the-limit inmate, for the current average of 30 over-the-limit inmates, is over $76,000 per year... per over-the-limit inmate!

County staff states that as the county's population continues to grow, it's safe to assume that so too will the women's jail population.

At 40 over the limit, it's $57,500 per year.

And at 50, it's still $46,000... per year... per over-the-limit inmate.

Incarcerating one inmate costs, on average, $29,000 a year in the U.S.

According to the 2007 bill analysis of SB 959, "The cost of involuntary home detention electronic monitoring is about $10 per day."

$3,650 versus $76,000. (More than 20 TIMES the difference!)

Additionally, it's important, I think, to reiterate the background of SB 959, and its backers.

SB 959 was supported by our local Republican assembly member, Sam Blakeslee, it was supported by the California State Sheriff's Association, and it was signed by a Republican Governor.

The reason I want to reiterate that, is because, frankly, it makes absolutely no sense for the SLO County Sheriff's Department to NOT back mandatory home detention, 100-percent, yet they are not recommending it to your board at all.

The problem with that? Their arguments against adopting an SB 959 style program in this county make no sense at all.

What? Mandatory home detention for a handful of "low risk" women inmates, where they will be carefully monitored by skilled law enforcement professionals, is going to cause some sort of crime spike in SLO County, and therefore we need to spend millions and millions of dollars on a new, state-of-the-art jail facility?

If that's, indeed, the case, then why does the text of SB 959 read, "This (home detention) program has been very successful in Los Angeles County. The program's success has been two-fold. First, it saves the county money. The cost of home monitoring is $10 a day as compared to $70 a day for an inmate in custody. [And the] program opens up bed space for serious or violent offenders. The state and counties are all experiencing a crisis regarding limited jail [and] prison space. The home monitoring program is an effective solution to assist in alleviating overcrowding."

Again, with the embarrassment to the county... over and over and over on this issue.

I can't speak for all SLO County residents, but I am 100-percent positive that I will still sleep at night knowing that a small handful of "low risk" women inmates are being carefully monitored by skilled law enforcement professionals at home, instead of jammed into an illegal, county-owned jail.

Finally, when I last reported on this story, in September of 2010, at this link:

http://www.blogger.com/goog_37770238

... I spoke with Frank Warren, of the County's Drug and Alcohol Services Division.

I asked Mr. Warren if his department had a women's-only drug and alcohol rehab/prevention program.

He said, they do not.

I then asked him if he has heard of such programs in other municipalities, and he said, "Yes."

I said, "I can imagine how women would very much prefer that arrangement, as opposed to both men and women."

He said, "Yes. That is true. That is what my research shows."

I then asked him why the county doesn't have such a program.

He told me that it is a matter of funding.

With all of the above in mind, here's is what I recommend that your Board do on this entire issue:

1. Immediately stop plans for the current;y proposed women's jail expansion. The design of that project alone is costing the county a fortune (some $2 million to date).

2. Immediately adopt an SB 959 style, mandatory home detention program.

3. Immediately place whatever the current amount of "low risk" over-the-limit women inmates is on mandatory home detention, which will also immediately remove a massive liability issue for the county, and immediately resolve that whole, highly embarrassing, doing-the-same-thing-as-De Vaul thing.

That action will also immediately save the county some $10 million in design and construction costs, and another $1 million-plus per year to staff and operate the proposed facility.

4. Immediately take whatever amount necessary of that $10 million (and I'm sure it will just be a tiny fraction of that amount, but please make it a hefty amount), and start a women's-only drug and rehab/prevention program in SLO County.

5. Then, if the current women's jail facility (now that it's building code compliant thanks to your SB 959 adoption) is really as bad as the Sheriff's Department paints it out to be (and, it kind of sounds like it is, which is another embarrassment for the county... I mean, what are we, Midnight Express all of a sudden?), then use another $1 million, or so, of that saved $10 million-plus, to simply renovate the current facility.

In summary, please immediately stop development of the proposed women's jail expansion, immediately adopt an SB 959 style program, immediately place the "low risk," over-the-limit women inmates on mandatory home detention, and then use a fraction of the $10 million saved to start a women's-only drug and rehab/prevention program in SLO County, and to renovate the current facility.

Thank you for your time,

Ron

Ah, the Irony, the Irony

Dan DeVaul. County Jail. Dan DeVaul. County Jail. Hmmmm, can there be an interesting connection, some six degrees of separation? Well, yes, according to Ron Crawford over at http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com./

Media Actually Does Matter

If you haven’t already put them on your “favorite places, do so: http://www.mediamatters.org/. Critical group since media actually does matter so it’s important to have somebody taking a close look.

Parks Actually Matter, Too

While Sacramento legislators stay stupid and locked in their various ideological battles, I’m going to at least vote for Prop 21, which will cost me a small $18 yearly dink when I register my car next year, but that will get desperately needed money to our State Parks for desperately needed repairs. The ballot measure isn’t perfect, but our dysfunctional legislature won’t do anything about this, so I figure $18 a year is a total bargain if it keeps these treasures – our State Parks – up and running and there for all of us and for those who come after us.

Bill Maher’s New Rule

Yet another dreary story in the L.A. Times about a bible thumping preacher who “declared that his church had created a ministry that ‘delivered’ people from homosexuality.” Yeah, you guessed it. He’s accused of molesting young teen male church members.

Hence comedian Bill Maher’s “New Rule.” If a preacher carries on about homosexuals . . . he’s gay.

Actually, that rule should apply to most everyone who gets all worked up over human sexuality in general. Exceptions: protecting children from predators, keeping Republicans away from farm animals since an alarming number of conservative, "family-values" Republican pols seem to reference that activity a lot, especially when talking about slippery slopes, going from Gays in the Military to Sex With A Cow in an eyeblink. And, of course, violence and coercion never get a pass. But other than that, when it comes to what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms, Jeeze, get a grip.

And remember Bill’s New Rule.

Ya Better Not Laugh, Ya Better Not Cry . .

Yes, I know, it’s 114’ and the pavement’s melting and dogs’ tongues are hanging out and we’re all praying for rain. Or a breeze. Just one breeze that doesn’t feel like it’s coming from a convection oven.

However, the holidays are coming and if you have any dog lovers on your list, drop by Paso Pups’ great website at http://www.parks4pups.org/ and scroll down to the bottom and take a look at their new calendar. The photos were taken during “Splash Days” wherein the Parks 4 Pups group reserves the local pool and dog park members, and all others, can reserve a time for their dogs to dive in. The photo on the cover of the 2011 calendar is reason enough to order one. Guaranteed to make you smile every time you look at the calendar. They’re $13.50 and you can get ordering information at the website.

So, dive in!

Come on Out For Some Eats!

SLO-4-PUPs, the group that started the County’s very first off-leash dog park, will be celebrating it’s 9th anniversary, Sunday, Oct 3, at El Chorro Dog Park (off highway 1 across from Cuesta College) with a hot dog BBQ and a dedication for our new entryway. (Full disclosure: I serve on the Board.) The beautiful entry, constructed by R.J. Barrett, was made possible by a donation from Chris Boyle to honor her late Aunt, Lee Boyle. The event will run from 10 – 2, with the dedication ceremony between 11-11:30, BBQ and cake to follow.

Bring your dog and if you don’t have a dog, come anyway.

I'm Waiting, I'm Waiting . . .

So Ron Crawford, over at http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/ posted several column on the fact that county staff DID NOT present the BOS with complete information they needed to make a gazillion-dollar decision, and I noted how the Tribune reported on the BOS postponing their decision but they also DID NOT report on that missing piece of information (concerning SB959 that allowed the county to utilize home detention for non-violent, first-time, suitable offenders & etc. at a humongeous savings, compared to building (and running) an expanded jail) so the taxpayers (who would be on the hook for running said expansion) were in the dark.

So the Tribune reported again that the BOS put the issue on hold so they could review their options BUT the Tribune AGAIN failed to mention anything about SB959) though it did report Adam Hill pointing out that more attention needed to be paid to various “detox and rehabilitation facilities.” So the taxpayers (and Tribune readers) are still in the dark about a couple of things:

1. County staff did NOT give the BOS the complete information they needed to vote on this matter until Ron Crawford pointed out the oversight and alerted the Board members that they were missing some critical information.

2. The Tribune reported NONE of this, so the public has been left in the dark. Which is how the Tribune likes it.

3. But you, dear reader, can follow the latests little dots over on Ron’s blog at http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/

So, Just How Stupid Are We?

This from the Associated Press recent poll of 1,251 adults found:

Most people didn’t know that the provisions they cared and wanted, are actually in the bill, with many of them already taking effect. .

50% mistakenly believe the overhaul of health care will raise taxes for most people this year.

25% mistakenly believe that there are “Death Panels” in the bill.

81% mistakenly believe that the health law would raise the deficit over time (Correct answer from the Congressional Budget Office: it will reduce the deficit over time.)

These same misinformed/mistaken people are likely set to vote for Republicans who have vowed to repeal the health care law, and they’ll likely be voting based on their misinformation. (“Quick, Herbie, let’s vote to Stop Them Death Panels That Are NOT In The Bill”)

Yes, the sound you may hear in Nov is likely to be the shriek that follows the loud bang that comes after the bullet leaves the gun and hits the foot.

Oh, and you just knew THAT was gonna happen . . .

Because the voters didn’t vote in enough progressive/Democrats/Independents who would have voted for a “Medicare-for-All Public Option” in a real Health Care Reform Bill, what the congressfolk they voted for actually created effectively sold the American people right back into the paws of the Insurance Company Monopolies.

And because the voters didn’t make sure they elected people who actually would be looking out for THEIR interests, (not the corporate masters) it was just a matter of time before the health insurance industry would start manipulating the new rules so as to avoid or bypass those rules to ensure that their profits will continue to bloom.

And, sure enough, step one was reported in the L.A. Times: “Insurers to stop issuing policies for kids.”

Want to buy a separate, stand-alone policy for your sick kid who has a pre-existing condition? Sorry. None available from ANY health insurance company at any price. No longer selling them. Nope, sorry.

Ah, yes, there’s the first salvo. Sans the solid check-and-balance of a solid Medicare-for-All option (which the voters COULD have ensured and that would have been available for themselves, had they voted for the right candidates) we’ll all now have to start a little list, because the elimination of things the insurance companies are going to offer in their policy coverage are going to start coming in, one by one.

Yep, once again, that sound you’ll be hearing from this point forward will be the continuing shriek as one-by-one the bullets keep hitting the voter’s feet, all shot from the gun in their very own hands, bang-Owww!-bang-Owww!-bang.

Hip Bone Connected to the Shoulder Bone . . .

Karen Velie’s story over at Cal Coast News should be old news to Los Ososians. I especially love Able Maldonado’s suggestion that if the local DA doesn’t look into this matter of the Wallace Group, (seriously, like a “real” case, like actually interviewing key people involved) then folks should contact the state Attorney General or the Governor. Bwa-hahahaha. I never knew Abel had such a droll sense of humor.

Read it and weep, at http://calcoastnews.com/2010/09/allegations-of-misdeeds-dog-the-sewage-plant/

Can I Have Mustard With That?

Let’s see, Meg Whitman’s spent $119 million for her bid to be governor. In 2008, there was about 17 million registered Ca. voters. If she just paid each voter to vote for her, how much would that be per registered voter? Or maybe just pay Dems & Independents to vote for her, let’s say 8 million. How much would that be? Meg’s always going on and on about how she would kick-start the economy again. So, what could be that? Talk about trickle-down.

Shhhhh, DO NOT Inform Your Readers

Few days ago I posted a link to Ron Crawfords blog (http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/) wherein Ron spills the beans over an important law allowing for home detention for qualified prisoners – at a HUGELY cheaper price – and how that information had been withheld from the staff report to the BOS who were only given the option of spending tons of money to build a new jail expansion or face overcrowding & etc. As Ron reported, “staff” told him that they would include that in their upcoming BOS presentation.

This morning, however, the Tribune reports on the presentation, but makes NO MENTION of this third option. But here’s what it does note: Vince Morici (administrative analyst) and Sheriff’s Dept. Chief Deputy Rob Reid “warn that timing is important, insofar as the county’s ability to receive state money is concerned.”

Yup, that’s how you Empire Build here in Chinatown: Ignore cheaper alternatives, “forget” to bring that information up in your staff report, (you can always count on the Trib to overlook critical information that you “forgot” to mention as well – no need to keep the taxpayers in the loop) then “warn that timing is important, insofar as the county’s ability to receive state money is concerned,” as in We Gotta Build NOW (and incur an additional $1.6 million in ongoing operating costs) Or We’ll All Die In The Streets Like Dawgs (and pay no attention to a much cheaper, and perhaps better, alternatives. They don’t involve bricks & mortar Empire Building! )

On A Happier Note

Café Musique, that grandly bizarre and wonderful quasi gypsy/caberet-ish group of extraordinary musicians (On their last CD they played “Hernando’s Hideaway” with a straight face and made you really hear that song as a piece of music for the first time.) will be celebrating the release of their second CD and will be performing at the Steynberg Gallery (SLO) on Friday, Sept 24, at 7:30. Tickets $15. Can call (547-0278) to reserve a ticket via credit card or pay at the door.

Spend or not Spend?

Tuesday, at the BOS, we'll find out if the County is rolling in money and willing to blow a whole lot of it when they actually have a thriftier option, or whether the BOS will decide that they have other options than those given to them by staff. For some background, see Ron Crawford's post at http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/. 

We're in [out of] the money, we're in [out of] the money . . . .