Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Probation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Probation chief outlines staffing shortfalls and $360,000 custody contract ask amid $287,000 budget reductions
Summary
Probation and reentry leaders said they cut $287,000 from initial budgets via position eliminations and staggered hiring but face rising custody contract costs — projected at $360,000 — driven by higher average daily population and bed-day rate increases.
Probation and reentry leadership told the board they had reduced the department's initial request by about $287,000 by eliminating two positions and stair‑stepping hires, but they warned rising custody contract rates and higher juvenile average daily population (ADP) are driving a sizable custody budget ask.
Chief Raymond walked supervisors through revenues and expenses for probation and reentry, noting the department had trimmed payroll projections by delaying hires and by removing a probation officer and a legal clerk. He said the department achieved a net county cost year‑to‑year increase of 4.7% after reductions and restructuring. On juvenile custody contracts, the chief cited variability in bed‑day rates across receiving counties — with examples such as Shasta's program rates and programmatic add‑ons — and explained the budget includes a $360,000 projection for custody placements this fiscal year, driven by rate increases, elevated ADP and case‑processing delays.
Board members pressed on apparent mismatches between year‑to‑date payroll spending and reported vacancy rates; staff said differences stem from stair‑stepped hiring and recent salary increases under the county's compensation adjustments. Supervisors asked for time‑studies and more granular statistics to better align staffing levels and to determine whether positions should be refilled or left vacant based on demand.
Chief Raymond also described operational changes after the juvenile hall closure: the county still detains youth but now relies on contracts with other counties (Humboldt first, Mendocino second) and uses standardized detention risk assessments and alternatives to detention where appropriate.
