Treatment program considered
Mandatory drug treatment pilot program would be an alterative to jail time
Yolo County is considering a mandatory drug treatment pilot program for non- violent offenders as an alternative to jail.
The program comes as a collaboration between Assemblyman Kevin McCarty — who represents a large portion of Sacramento county, as well as West Sacramento — and the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office.
The idea came as a surprise to some supervisors during a Dec. 15 meeting, as it was only awarded a small space on the agenda.
Supervisor Don Saylor said that the only information he had seen was the paragraph in the Legislative Update portion of the agenda.
“Additionally, the District Attorney is interested in legislation to allow for a pilot project in Yolo County to convert excess detention space to be used as a drug diversion/ treatment program for non- violent offenders,” the agenda stated. “Additional analysis of this concept is needed to ensure such a pilot will be compatible with the various detention space concepts and proposals the board will be deliberating on in the coming year.”
However, Saylor moved to consider the pilot program in future meetings.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Jonathan Raven noted that the program would not be converting excess jail space, but would rather be a separate facility.
The location for this facility has not yet been chosen. The DA’s Office has considered using a portion of the juvenile detention facility or the Leinberger Center. Walters House, a substance abuse treatment center, could also be an option.
The bill states that if a court found that a crime was committed wholly, or partially because of drug use or addiction, a defendant would be sentenced to no more than a year in a secure treatment facility. Charges for simple drug- possession are not included.
Chairman Gary Sandy, the representative for Yolo County’s 3rd Supervisorial District, noted that the participants would be assessed before entering the program.
“The dosage, or amount of time, would be guided by an evidence- based assessment,” Sandy explained. “Sentencing would be determined by a judge and only after receiving input from drug and mental health counselors. Yes, this would be a locked facility, but it would not be jail.”
If a defendant completed the program, all charges against them could be expunged from their record.
The program is, in fact, a pilot and would need to be accompanied by a study. The study would include a six- month follow up on participants after program completion. Subsequent arrests and convictions would be assessed during the follow up.
Sandy said that the fact that this program is a novel idea means that some individuals will argue that this idea is not evidence- based.
“Well, I don’t know of another similar program like this,” Sandy stated. “So, it would be hard to have evidence supporting this. That’s why it’s a pilot program and we are hoping that the evidence will show that this type of program works.”
The idea for the pilot program comes from McCarty’s AB 2804.
The bill wanted to “reuse and repurpose” juvenile detention facilities, due to a declining rate of individuals within those facilities over the last 20 years. Although the original plan was to convert a portion of the juvenile detention facilities, Yolo County staff will be considering different locations.
The meeting raised a lot of eyebrows, due to the novelty of the idea.
“In concept, I would support it. Not in isolation,” said Supervisor Jim Provenza. Provenza suggested a continuum of mandatory care. He said that the court could require a mandatory day program instead for those who do not pose a risk to the community or do not require being in a locked facility due for a variety of reasons.
Saylor, again, noted that he did not know enough about the project to move forward, nor did he know what the target demographic would be.
“I am certainly not wanting to use a locked jail facility for a person making a nuisance just because of their appearance,” Saylor said. “I don’t know if we’ve got an evidence- based practice that says that locking someone up or forcing them to go through a rehabilitation or treatment program would be effective, in fact I’ve understood that that’s not an evidence- based practice.”
Sandy said that the target demographic would be those who engage in criminal activity day- in and dayout due to a drug problem.
District Attorney Jeff Reisig reassured the board that this program was very much still in the planning phase, and would consist of whatever the treatment facilitators suggest for a defendant. Reisig said it would be a “treatment- focused alternative to jail.”
During public comment, residents echoed concerns brought forth by supervisors.
“I’m very alarmed by this and I think the public needs a lot more information,” one Yolo County resident said. “We absolutely need to have services for behavioral health issues, but I’m very concerned that the devil is in the details and there’s no details yet.”
Saylor noted that he did agree with the public, but that he would like to see the proposal before completely dismissing the idea.
“From my perspective a great deal of local crime is driven by drug addiction,” Sandy stated. “Local communities need assurance that there is some degree of accountability in the system. Individuals involved in the endless repetition of misdemeanors rob a community of its peace of mind and an overall sense of safety. We can do better. This pilot program would give us a chance to see if we can have a marked effect on the currently revolving door of the criminal justice system.”
The Board of Supervisors voted 5- 0 to move forward with the consideration of the proposal, and noted that they would be reaching out to experts in addiction and mental health.
The next Board of Supervisors meeting is on Jan. 12.