hoping that the language changes so that in the budget discussion, if anyone that is present, who is party to the round table -- they have to now be part of the presentation. >> the good thing is that all of those partners are here. we see them in the room and we have been meeting with them collectively. they have been doing this for a while and this is not a surprise to any of the partners, but what is happening. this is just like you said. >> you could have the police department -- let's shaved off some of this and go with these guys. and answer the other bookend strategy, that they are going to the merry go round, to take care of the repeat offenders, but all along, it is this population. i would not say that everyone is

in the room that should be. >> the system that we had today, this is not going to work in four months. >> the shares department, please, welcome. >> good afternoon, supervisors. the chief probation officer presented an excellent overview about what this has to offer to the county. i would caution for us to look at these issues, because this is the term that is currently being used. to make this positive. i would caution the board to understand that there are clearly-defined felonies, and

then there are other felonies that we may believe marble -- are violent felonies, or felonies involving sexual abuse that would be excluded as well. some of them include felony child abuse, hate crime, and assault with intent to commit great bodily injury. it is now the property crimes that will be doing their time in a county setting. this is people with a level of violence, at a level of serious offenses, partly a rest or in their history. the idea that this was just property crime -- we have traditionally gotten those people in the system, and we will sentence them to the county jail.

they get a handoff with adult probation, and service as followed. and we have this with a number of people that we can currently serve. but when this law is put into effect, it may be implemented with the without money. this will increase the population of the jail, even with enhancing the release services for people in constructed custody. they are now serving their assignment, with the probation department. and the other group of people, when they are released from state prison, they will go on to the responsibility of the adult probation officer. the positive peace is what we believe -- that we are better at helping these people have a successful entry.

this to end up being very successful and this is why many counties, although concerned about how this will be implemented, are trying to have a positive perspective as to what the potential may be down the road. the initial potential may be very dramatic. this includes monitoring these things, but the california state sheriff's association. they meet regularly -- regularly with the sheriff's office, and we get conference calls about what they are hearing, and what they are saying about the efforts that he is making, but with the legislature is saying, and along with the other agencies, those with serious discussions about what could happen with the funding, for this law. the deal is that this was a

package deal, and this was a realignment of the funding, and having the appropriation piece removed from the bill. and passed by a simple majority with all of the provisions and the funding. this has ever won a little bit concerned. what i try to do, as the chief probation officer -- i was just trying to put together the best estimates about these numbers. and the numbers are based on those who are currently going to state prison. my experience is that some of these numbers are off. we're trying to give you an idea of what could happen to the county system. >> please.

of course, we start with general assumptions. this is how it works, somewhere. is this something that you make work, or something i make work. good deal. i am the lis technical person that i know of. there are some general assumptions with what we are anticipating. this is extended for the november election. we have been receiving this from the state sheriff's association. there is some interest and may be some positive interest in trying to get this extended through the november elections, so the voters will decide on the

constitutional amendment. regardless of what happens, because of the november elections, we also see the impact of realignment. an i am saying that we should leave them in jail. some people are going to get released -- >> you are predicating this on whether or not they win in the election. >> i think that certainly, if they are the winner, it will take some amount of time for the trailing legislation to be enacted with some distinction with what will occur. we are assuming, for the purposes of trying to give you an idea of what may happen, that we will not see any new prisoners as a result of this, being committed to the county

jail because of being arrested, or because of court commitments until january of 2012. and we also assume that we will get the revenue that has been represented as two the governor will agree to of the funding stream is approved of. a local assumption is that there is no change in the police department or the enforcement practices, or with the sentencing practices, and that there are no restrictions added by the courts, to limit the ability to bring these people who are under sentence to the county jail. it does not account in its of partial incarceration, which is something that will be part of a post-release supervision.

they may increase this with the plan and how this will be used. the community programs population -- this is about 130 and this would be the same at the time that we expect some of this to begin happening. the not so good news, and the good news -- the assumptions, if we are not able to increase these programs -- we want to get people out of jail while the list -- there is still time left on the sentence. we have numbers of people, the low-level offenders. the average time is 20, to one

month. this goes to the state on a 4- fiscal year time. we have about 60 people on parole, including people picked up by the department of corrections every week, on some sort of provocation. we do not know how many of those will no longer be on parole because -- who will this continue to follow? and who is going to go on the underlying charges, with either the serious, violent offenders, or to the others that would stay at this level. making some assumptions, based on the best guess, we assume

that half of them will just go away. that would require new charges, and some number of those would be read -- would be arrested on the new charges. and charges would not be filed. we estimate that we will pick up about 42% as a result of this. these are people in on new charges, who were otherwise part of this group, easily readable and sent off to state prison. >> if this is 42 a month, this is an addition to the 60 people per week? what's this is based on those numbers. >> the potential for increasing the jail population -- sort of guessing what may happen with the other group, that have

traditionally been the people who get revoked is about 77. the other thing -- the bad news is that we could see an increase in the jail population. at this point, the jail population would go up considerably, and the smaller jail but has been closed with have to be opened, including operation by a certain time in 2012. >> there is a supplemental coming from the sheriff's department, for the increase of capacity, i believe. and this would be added as well? >> the bulk of the supplemental requests -- this is about the salary money, because of the rate that was added to the budget, the route to multiple

faces that the budget was looking for when this was approved. we did not realize this because this was particularly high. we were able to redistribute this which helped us to keep the overtime costs lower. but we did not have a number of retirements projected and thus hurt the salary. this was an issue with the supplemental. the other, and good news, is that we were able to expand programs based on how we reallocated the staff, and we have the staff to do this at the moment. we suspect that the number of that 77 we could put into community programs to reduce the

direct impact. the second one shows that we could get some number of about 60% of the people who would come on commitment right into a community program, and we would only have to deal with, primarily, the numbers that were too high risk to put out. and we would have a change in who could be revoked. those numbers are how we get to the charts, but the other thing, you talked about the people who will be released. the legislation does not enable any number of people who are currently on the state commitment, that still have prison time left to do. the chief probation officer indicated the supreme court

ruling that may or may not create the immediate release of people. and we came up with a couple of scenarios. they would still be on a state commitment and they would have time to serve. and based on the numbers of the state, we believe that there are 165 of those people who would be absorbent the county level. this would be the worst-case scenario. under that, if there was an immediate release of prisoners, and there was no expansion of the job programs beyond what we currently have, you would see the population of jail rising, and this would have to be fully operational by may of 2012.

the program capacity would be maxed out around the same time. we could be in this situation where you are out of capacity. we recognize that there is a flow of people through the back door, without people get released once they're finished with their commitment. that is a difficult thing to project. you don't know how much time is left on the sentence that they are serving. if you start to see more people with five-year sentencing, against 15 months or two years, you will stay longer in the county jail. >> when is the last time that we were fault? >> in december, 2009, we were at

about 2250. and now, we are under 7000. there has been a decline in the population, but also a percentage increase. and this influences of the population shrinks and grows. these are predicated on a population of about 2200. at this time, we are at capacity. it really does pose some challenges. if we see the population rising, regardless of if this takes a couple of months -- there could be issues with capacity further down the line that would put us in the same boat as most counties. these are very close to the

capacity and they will be releasing people early. this is what is happening in other counties. >> relative to your comments earlier, about the programs in san francisco, and i think some counties like san francisco will do well with the returning population. this is because of the programs, mitigating that deal with three-entry. not all counties have the same mindset. and i would think that other counties that treat the situation a little bit differently than we would, would probably look to an incarceration issue, or an alternative sentencing issue. this is uniquely san francisco

and how we would be able to deal with this problem. ultimately speaking, this will require all those other checkpoints, within the sheriff's department or the program system, to be able to incur this added population without upsetting the current base line that they have to deal with right now. and since you framed this on the assumption that -- this is premised on the money that comes with this. whether this is realized through the november election. >> as the chief probation officer has indicated, we are collectively meeting about this, and there are many systems in place, and avenues of communication used to provide the best service that we can as

people go through the jail system, with the incarceration programs. these have their limits with funding and staffing and capacity. we are in contact with the mayor's office, trying to identify the additional capacity that we think that we would need, because this is much less expensive to put someone in the community program. than to keep somebody in the jail bed. >> the standard -- to effectively make certain that they are turned around so they cannot become -- an assumption for the police department to have their services, to arrest somebody again that they have already arrested.

this could actually activate them because they are once again dealing with someone who has been through this, and this will double the obligations and the pressure on the services, to make certain that they are affected, on the added population for the primary responders. >> and part of any expansion for -- service would have an evaluation process. with the agency with a combined oversight by the agency's using this, hoping to accomplish this. even the best efforts, there are some who may have to go through this more than one time. but certainly, as i said earlier, in the long term there -- you may see more because of

this change, and then you'll probably see some kind of toning of this. and assuming that we are successful as in the past, and acting in making people more successful, as they enter into the community, you will start to see this. and if we're lucky, this is happening at a bad fiscal time, but we may see a high spike, farther down the road. this is as much of a financial burden as it's going to be, and an unknown burden as does right now. the next scenario is having the release of those 165 people, and we do not expect for this to be the case. the expansion of the community programs.

in this scenario, we would be able to push the capacity issue, among the population to the latest of september, 2012. to the end of the next calendar year. assume that would not have anyone coming out of the state prison system that we have the house in the county jail. the impact of this will happen sooner. it will happen and the adult probation -- they will have to be more impacted by this. what we see occurring, if we do not expand the community programs, we will see them early on, maybe as early as january. as soon as this may be happening. there are nimble -- a number of

people in the county jail sentence to this, with the community program because of certain factors, the may have orders to stay away. these are people we are inclined not to let out. we have to have the full operation of the little jail. this would take us through july of 2012. this is the 77 people, -- >> i did not hear a gender breakdown. i do not know if we have any more details. >> this is 11% women. this is part of the state

population. we would see capacity and we could continue to use the programs and this is conservative and we hope that we did have many more. this would be in 2012, later on in the year. this is the program for about a year, after we see the start of the realignment process. those are the best guesses, and as far as the revenue, there is some associated with this, but you are looking at about a 60% return. they will give you the state formula, 25,000 for six months.

$25,000 for the long term as well. 18 months. the costs run a little bit higher than the state, and we expect to see a 51% return rate. this will start to go up, we do know that this will offset the impact on the county. there will be some of these and on the other side, we will generate the revenue by holding people who are being revoked. they are waiting to be picked up by the department of

corrections. so, they are giving and taking and will come out ahead. if this is secured to the constitutional amendment. the other big cost, in terms of the sheriff's department is the expansion of programs. this is part of the electronic monitoring did not exist at that time. the expanded use, this is doing some checking with the -- this is the first when they answer

the phone. there under the state grant. there are parole violators, and those drug cases, they may be counting prisoners. this is the best and least please -- least expensive. >> can you single out any program that would be the most to deal with, you mention this because they are monitoring. which started doing this research.

we are doing other checks. most shares department -- departments will rely on monitoring, because this is a sophisticated technology. there are larger number of people out in the community. and that some time, the capacity issues will be affected on the back end. the front end becomes a problem. the sheriff has no -- getting people out on the pre-trial is going to be something that will have to be addressed at some time in the future. many attempts were made to get people