Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Pretrial Diversion topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

J RAC reviews probation caseloads and diversion outcomes, cites estimated jail-cost savings

J RAC · July 16, 2026
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

Probation staff reported full staffing and 623 adults on probation; speakers said pretrial supervision saved the sheriff an estimated $163,000 in 2025 and the prosecutor reported the pretrial diversion fund is healthy.

Probation and prosecutor representatives told the Judicial Resource Advisory Committee that local pretrial and diversion programs continue to reduce incarceration costs and that program fund balances remain healthy.

A probation official reported the office is fully staffed with 13 full-time employees and cited a caseload of 623 adults and 46 juveniles. The official said collection activity has improved this year and that pretrial supervision has measurable cost benefits.

"In 2025, people placed on pretrial supervision would have cost the sheriff an additional $163,000," a presenter said, citing a 90-day average as a conservative measure and adding that many pretrial cases last longer than 90 days.

The prosecutor provided an overview of misdemeanor diversion work and a statutory breakdown of how diversion-related fees are distributed; the prosecutor said felony pretrial diversion remains rare in the county. The prosecutor also told the committee the pretrial diversion fund is "very healthy," with a balance reported as roughly $275,000 at the time of the meeting.

Drug court outcomes were highlighted as well: participants were described as achieving tangible outcomes, including employment and housing; one recent graduate had secured a job and later purchased a home. Speakers said among the recent graduates they were aware of, no recidivism had been detected, though they cautioned that the sample size is small and definitions of recidivism vary.

Next steps: Committee members asked staff to continue compiling cost-savings data to present to county decision-makers and to use outcome statistics in advocacy around grant funding and program sustainability.