Tuesday, September 25, 2007

County’s Criminal Justice Commission Approves Reform Initiatives

Posted by Media Release

Expansion of Mental Health Court A Key Step Forward

As part of an ongoing effort to reform the County’s criminal justice system, the recently formed Hamilton County Criminal Justice Commission (HCCJC) approved two important measures today aimed at addressing different areas within the overall system. 

One initiative approved today proposes to expand the County’s mental health court docket. Currently the mental health court handles a total of 35 inmates at one time, and excludes felony inmates. Working with national models, local service providers, and current mental health court judges, the HCCJC Policy and Structure Committee will look at ways to open the docket up to more inmates that would benefit from the court’s approach. 

Additionally, the Commission will meet with experts from the Ohio Supreme Court Special Courts Docket to examine the County’s docket and make recommendations on how to expand the program. 

“We know there is a far greater demand for service that we provide today,” said County Commissioner David Pepper, who vice chairs the HCCJC.  “The last thing we want is people with mental illnesses sitting in jail, not getting the treatment they need, and then getting locked up again and again because of that illness.”

The other initiative approved today was to adopt a national “best practice” in facilitating offenders’ reentry into the community, called a certificate of rehabilitation. Using model legislation adopted in other states, the HCCJC Reentry Committee will design a certificate of rehabilitation program with specific requirements, and upon completion of the program, offenders will receive a document certifying they have been rehabilitated. States with these programs have found them very helpful when ex offenders apply for jobs, job training programs, licenses, and other programs that require criminal background checks. 

“Offenders reentering the community must earn community trust, and these certificates give us a tool to do that. This gives offenders who have gone through rehabilitation the opportunity to prove they’ve left their old life behind,” said North College Hill Mayor Dan Brooks, who chairs the Reentry Committee. 

Retired federal judge Nathaniel Jones, who chairs the HCCJC, remarked: “The progress we made today demonstrates why we need a comprehensive approach to criminal justice reform. We need to tackle issues at all ends of the system, beginning when inmates enter the system all the way through when they reenter the community. That’s the only way we’re going to have a real impact.”

Socializer!

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.

anon2000 says:
25 Sep 2007  at  11:23 pm | #

The success of this commission and their impact on disadvantaged families is directly correlated to the passing of the Safety Plan.

They performed under their charge by Commissioners Portune and Pepper to identify issues and make recommendations - now it’s up to us if we will do our part and give them the capital to implement the recommendations, starting here and with endless bounds in criminal justice reform

says:
26 Sep 2007  at  08:51 am | #

The new initiatives do not require a bigger jail, nor do they cost hundreds of million of dollars to implement.  Further, there is actually very little that has been accomplished after months of promising action.  For the mental health court, all that has happened is that the criminal justice commission will meet with experts and look at expanding the program.  It took them 6 months to decide to do that?

For the re-entry program, all there is is a promise to adopt a “best practices” program, but the commission hasn’t yet worked out the details.  The certificate of rehabilitation is interesting.  I wonder if the Cincinnati Police will still hold the landlord responsible—as council instructs them to do with the chronic nuisance ordinance—if someone with a certificate gets into trouble again?

This press release shows 1) that the criminal justice commission is working at a glacial pace, and 2) that the “Comprehensive Safety Plan” is in no way a completed plan.  When will there be a real plan?

anon2000 says:
26 Sep 2007  at  11:16 am | #

When will the mental health board itemize what their “plan” for tax dollars will pay for, how about MR/DD, Senior Services, Children’s Services?

The Safety Plan is the MOST itemized levy plan out there with greater protections than any other levy on the ballot.

It seems to me that the opposition really isn’t about all these lesser detracting issues - what is the real reason for opposition?  Really?

Anon says:
26 Sep 2007  at  09:53 pm | #

What an accomplishment! The scarecrow gets a heart the lion gets a brain and the tin man will never fear again. Now the man behind the curtain is going to give certificates for victims of the Draconian marijuana ordinance, if they behave. They can frame them and hang them in the corner office. Additionally we are going to expand the court so we can process more mentally ill and homeless people to improve efficiency in persecution.

Jones says:
26 Sep 2007  at  10:03 pm | #

When will the mental health board itemize what their “plan” for tax dollars will pay for, how about MR/DD, Senior Services, Children’s Services?

The Senior Services program is meted out under the Council on Aging. I suggest you look at their website.

I had the privilege of utilizing services for an elderly family member thru COA.  All financials were carefully scrutinized for the services needed & I had to make co-pays. My family member didn’t qualify for the all-for-free services.

I can certainly pay the few pennies per day thru my property taxes for such programs for the elderly.  Council on Aging is very thorough about ensuring people are reporting incomes vs. services honestly & accurately.  In other words, they won’t entertain lying freeloaders.

Without COA & the senior services programs, I would have had to quit my job, go on welfare, food card & Medicaid. I would have become one of those “poor” people. Another freeloader in the system.

anonYmouse says:
27 Sep 2007  at  01:02 am | #

As MEP points out, these long overdue and still not implemented mental health court reforms do not require millions of dollars.  But, I believe this initiative is in response to the lobbying of the anti-jail tax forces who have been steadily pointing out the inefficiencies and deficiencies of our criminal (in)justice and treatment systems, and, I believe that if the jail tax levy passes, the pressure will be off to complete these reforms!

Lobbying? says:
27 Sep 2007  at  10:57 am | #

It has nothing to do with the ranting of the anti-jail people.  Half of the opponents attack this stuff as “liberal social programs” anyway.  They say we have too many of these things, not too few.

These things are part of the plan.  The “lobbying” of those against the plan will make it far more difficult to pay for any of these reforms, or any other.

anon says:
27 Sep 2007  at  02:06 pm | #

So Mr. Jones - you’re admitting that the Senior Services Levy, along with every other levy fail to itemize exactly what they will spend their funding on and that decision is made at the discretion of the board, after the fact.

Thank you.

So the claims to itemize THIS levy is just a shell game of complaints that aren’t founded on any precedent for any other such levy—good to clear that up.

So, again—what IS the real reason for opposing the CSP?

JFD says:
27 Sep 2007  at  10:24 pm | #

MEP#2: “ that the “Comprehensive Safety Plan” is in no way a completed plan.  When will there be a real plan?”

Where MEP, is your plan?

says:
28 Sep 2007  at  05:16 am | #

Why does MEP need a plan of his own, to note that the billion dollar “plan” presented to us is not really a plan?

CincyCapell says:
28 Sep 2007  at  07:35 am | #

Because he’s running for City Council Dean, that’s why.

This has been another addition of simple answers to simple questions.

County Emperors says:
28 Sep 2007  at  11:06 am | #

JFD, MEP isn’t a CC and doesn’t get paid to come up with “the plan”. He has identified many problems with the current system and the current outline of a plan to make a plan.

Even if he did have a real plan, it’s not going to be on the ballot so it doesn’t matter. If Pepper and Portune had done their jobs they would’ve reached out to the NAACP while they were trying to make a plan and had real public hearings.

Instead they have smoke and mirrors, a catchy (Orwellian) title and have pushed for special elections and to impose a massive and regressive jail tax on us against our will.

says:
28 Sep 2007  at  03:00 pm | #

"MEP isn’t a CC and doesn’t get paid to come up with “the plan”.
 
What utter bullshit! Patton wants us to elect him to be a leader of this City, and you’re telling us that he doesn’t need to have a plan of some sort?
 
This is typical of Patton; he complains, pisses and moans about how ‘wrong’ things are, but he doesn’t have a single remedy, idea or plan to offer the public which will solve any of those alleged ‘wrongs’.
Patton’s got no ideas, no plan, no cash and no supporters (except for the 4 or 5 so called Green riffraffs who frequent this blog). He’s a big zero, and he doesn’t have any chance of getting elected to Council.

Jones says:
28 Sep 2007  at  11:34 pm | #

So Mr. Jones - you’re admitting that the Senior Services Levy, along with every other levy fail to itemize exactly what they will spend their funding on and that decision is made at the discretion of the board, after the fact.

I suggest, Anon 2:06, that you go back & re-read what I posted. I did not admit to any program levy failing to itemize spending or anything. Actually, I advised that people go to the COA website for a look at what they offer in assistance for the elderly.

I don’t know much about the other programs, other than several years ago there was a huge scandal involving the MHRDD.  They were blowing taxpayer money on all sorts of frills. They couldn’t move heaven or hell to get a levy passed.

However, I can say with relative confidence that the Council on Aging does a wonderful job of wisely managing the levy money for the continuation of services for senior citizens. Only a modest percentage is budgeted for salaries, administration & functionality.

Actually, this is one levy I’ve always had confidence in & always supported it without reservation.

You’re so very welcome, Anon 2:16.  And yes, I can excuse your crass remark. 

For the re-entry program, all there is is a promise to adopt a “best practices” program, but the commission hasn’t yet worked out the details.

Seeing you have all the answers, MEP, are these jackasses going to have something on this best-practices re-entry program before the election?  You know, I find this to be rather damned nervy that these bozos are attempting to jam this feel-so-good & safe bullsh#t down voters’ throats & out their a$$es.  Then, to beat it all, they don’t have all their ducks in a row!

I don’t buy shoes without trying them on. I don’t buy a melon without thumping it first before pitching it in the basket. I’m not voting for this crap at all, if what you say is true, MEP, although I have doubts about most of your stuff.

MEP, they can’t do re-entry certificates in the case of those slipping into Section 8 housing. There’s a federal law in place that criminals of any sort can’t live in taxpayer gifted housing. Sorry you have a problem with the nuisance property ordinance. I bypass the police & leave irate phone messages for uncaring landlords at all hours, letting them know exactly what the next steps will be. I don’t have to tolerate their unruly & undisciplined tenants. It’s quite successful.

Emperor's wear no clothes says:
29 Sep 2007  at  12:02 pm | #

“MEP isn’t a CC and doesn’t get paid to come up with “the plan”.

What utter bullshit! Patton wants us to elect him to be a leader of this City, and you’re telling us that he doesn’t need to have a plan of some sort?

Rich Brockelmann, it isn’t BS. Patton does have as comprehensive of a plan as the so called CSP. His plan won’t be on the ballot and Portune and Pepper failed to get real public input. Their public hearings were a joke. They weren’t well planned, publicized or attended.

Patton doesn’t piss and moan, he asks questions gets information and helps inform the public. I guess reporters shouldn’t report on things unless they have an alternative plan to present according to your thinking.

Michael is showing great leadership by doing research, asking good questions, finding problems so that we can find solutions. The jailocrats just want us to trust them without questioning their billion dollar plan. They don’t want to debate.

CincyCapell says:
29 Sep 2007  at  06:03 pm | #

"Patton doesn’t piss and moan, he asks questions gets information and helps inform the public. I guess reporters shouldn’t report on things unless they have an alternative plan to present according to your thinking.

Michael is showing great leadership by doing research, asking good questions, finding problems so that we can find solutions.”

Reporters aren’t running for a seat on council. MEP asks questions alright, but he doesn’t have any answers. He doens’t have a platform nor a plan, and soesn’t offer any leadership.

says:
29 Sep 2007  at  06:09 pm | #

CincyCapell.

Someone told me they had reason to believe you are affiliated with the Charter Party…