Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Electronic Monitoring Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends retroactive approval of electronic monitoring contract amid questions about program growth
Summary
The committee moved to forward a retroactive three‑year, $3.4 million contract for electronic monitoring to the Board after the Sheriff's Department said participation rose from about 100 to roughly 400 per month following a 2018 appellate decision; supervisors urged a broader review of why the justice‑involved population increased.
Get email alerts on the Electronic Monitoring Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Crispin Hollis of the Sheriff's Department presented a request for retroactive approval of a contract for electronic monitoring services (described in the contract caption as St. Jude Offender Services and verbally referenced by the presenter as Sentinel). The contract term in the record runs from Aug. 1, 2019, through July 31, 2022, with two one‑year options and a total not‑to‑exceed amount of $3,400,000.
Hollis said the electronic monitoring program provides a court‑ordered alternative to incarceration and that program participation increased substantially after a February 2018 appellate ruling (referred to in the record as the Humphrey's decision) that required courts to consider ability to pay and nonmonetary alternatives when setting bail and release conditions. He told the committee monthly participation rose from about 100 before the ruling to roughly 400 per month and noted that for people placed on pretrial release, "over 90 percent show up to court." Hollis also said enforcement for noncompliance is supported by a contractor (identified in the record as Warren Services Group) when necessary.
The Budget Analyst Office noted the contract was competitively selected and that California Penal Code requires governing‑body approval; the Budget Analyst recommended approval. Supervisors used the presentation to press for broader analysis of who is being placed on electronic monitoring, the demographics and offense types involved, and whether courts are over‑relying on monitoring as a release condition.
Chair Feuer moved the resolution to the Board with a positive recommendation and the committee took that motion without objection. The record shows the committee intends the broader questions about program scope and demographic outcomes to be subject to future study and discussion.
