Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Juvenile Diversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would broaden who county juvenile departments can serve with diversion funds
Summary
Senate Bill 816 clarifies definition of youth and allows county juvenile departments to use juvenile crime prevention funds to serve non-adjudicated youth, proponents said, restoring pre-2021 scope for diversion efforts.
County juvenile department leaders and Oregon Youth Authority staff told the House Judiciary Committee that Senate Bill 816 restores language to allow local diversion plans and juvenile crime-prevention funding to serve non-adjudicated youth when appropriate.
Debbie Martin, legislative coordinator for OYA, said a 2021 wording change unintentionally narrowed who counties could serve with juvenile crime prevention diversion funds. “The language change in this bill allows counties the ability to offer services funded by JCP dollars to non adjudicated youth,” Martin said, but she emphasized the change does not require counties to serve non-adjudicated youth — counties retain discretion.
Nut graf: Supporters described SB 816 as a technical correction that would let counties offer services earlier in a youth’s trajectory to reduce escalation into commitment, preserve local flexibility and better align services to community needs.
Wasco County Youth Services Director Molly Rogers testified for the Oregon Juvenile Department Directors Association in support, saying the ability to serve youth prior to formal adjudication helps provide specialized interventions (for example, services for complex behaviors or fire-setting) that otherwise may not be reimbursable and helps reduce out-of-home placements.
Rogers said diversion funding is an investment to keep services local and reduce commitments to youth correctional facilities; OYA noted the statewide youth-correction population has declined substantially over the last decade.
Ending: The committee closed the hearing on SB 816; proponents asked the committee to move the technical fix forward to preserve flexibility for county plans.
