Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Community Corrections Grant topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee authorizes community corrections grant application to support jail programming

Muskegon County Courts and Public Safety Committee · June 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee authorized the county office to apply for and accept Office of Community Corrections funding for FY 2026 to support jail programming aimed at lowering prison commitments and improving recidivism; staff said program-level metrics are reported to the state, not countywide recidivism.

The Muskegon County Courts and Public Safety Committee authorized the county to apply for and accept grant funding through the Office of Community Corrections to support programming in the jail for the 2026 year.

Scott Landelman, of the Office of Community Corrections, described the action as the office's routine annual grant application. "This is just our annual grant application that we have to do every year just for programming primarily in the jail," Landelman said. He said the programs aim to "lower the prison commitment rate, improve recidivism and reduce the jail population."

Landelman told the committee the grant program requires reporting on the specific programs that the grant funds rather than producing a countywide recidivism metric. He said Muskegon County's prison-commitment rate is currently "right around 20%," which he said is about the state average, and that when he started in 2009 it was 29.4%.

The motion as presented in the meeting included an amount that the transcript rendered as "201,015 thousand"; the meeting record does not clarify whether that figure was misstated in the motion text or how it should be formatted. Committee members asked questions about outcomes and data reporting and then approved the authorization by voice vote.

The committee did not specify an implementation schedule or list of program providers in the meeting record; reporting requirements were described only at the program level, not as a countywide recidivism measurement.