Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Probation Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Thirteenth Circuit probation office approves minutes, bills and departmental reports; discusses staffing and budgets
Summary
The Thirteenth Circuit-wide probation meeting in July 2025 approved the previous meeting minutes, accepted department reports and authorized payment of June bills while reviewing juvenile and adult caseloads and probation-fee collections across LaSalle, Bureau and Grundy counties.
Get email alerts on the Probation Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Thirteenth Circuit-wide probation meeting in July 2025 approved the previous meeting minutes, accepted department reports and authorized payment of June bills while reviewing juvenile and adult caseloads and probation-fee collections across LaSalle, Bureau and Grundy counties.
Susan, probation department staff, presented statistics for June: LaSalle County had 107 active juvenile cases with 10 administrative cases, Bureau County 20 active juvenile cases with four administrative, and Grundy County 15 active juvenile cases with one administrative; circuit juvenile totals were 142 active and 15 administrative, and 157 youth on probation. For adult caseloads Susan reported LaSalle 499 active (274 administrative), Bureau 113 active (48 administrative) and Grundy 140 active (195 administrative), with circuit totals of 752 active, 517 administrative and 1,269 people on probation.
Susan also summarized probation‑fee activity for June: LaSalle ordered $3,450 (ordered to date $60,750) and collected $5,198.68 (collected to date $37,313.66); Bureau ordered $2,400 (ordered to date $12,600) and collected $570 (collected to date $6,074); Grundy ordered $8,689 (ordered to date $41,418) and collected $1,534 (collected to date $16,756.29). Circuit totals reported were $14,539 ordered for the month (ordered to date $114,768) and $7,302.68 collected for the month (collected to date $60,143.95).
On routine finance items the department presented county bills for June: LaSalle County $1,038.19 (including an emergency housing payment of $300), Grundy County $850.42 (including a cell‑phone reimbursement that had been paid twice, delaying voucher processing), and Bureau County $1,065.29 (including contract services with SBM). The Aid and Dependent Children fund paid $450 to the LaSalle County Detention Home in June, leaving a fund balance of $241,332.09.
The board voted by voice to approve the prior meeting minutes, accept the departmental reports and authorize payment of the presented bills.
Susan reported one juvenile residential placement (placed May 1) remains active in LaSalle County at a per‑day cost of $554.46.
Chair announced two imminent resignations: a LaSalle County juvenile officer leaving this week and a Bureau County adult officer leaving next week. The positions have been posted; interviews are expected in the next two weeks with the department aiming to fill them by mid‑ to late‑August. Clerical positions are currently filled. A problem‑solving court position for Wasell County remains on hold pending an accreditation eligibility check by AYC (as discussed by staff), after which hiring will proceed.
On budgeting, staff said budget documents are being prepared for review with Judge Ryan. The chair will present budget materials in Bureau County on Aug. 19 and will coordinate with Grundy County and auditor Stephanie to finalize numbers. The department plans to increase certain client‑services line items to accommodate an anticipated 30/70 formula for probation‑fee use and to cover growing needs such as psychological evaluations. Staff noted typical psychological evaluations cost about $2,000 and psychosexual evaluations by Dr. Stapleton run about $2,700; the Juvenile Redeploy grant normally covers psychosexual evaluations but exceptions may require local payment.
The office is also obtaining pricing for forensic testing and similar services, checking vendors including Mopria Dixon and Chris Sandvik at First Priority Forensics, to determine the most cost‑effective option for clients who cannot afford testing.
Chair closed public comment with no speakers and set the next meeting for Aug. 13. The meeting adjourned after a voice vote.

