A Closer Look At The Ravalli County Juvenile Detention Center Closure [AUDIO]

The Ravalli County Juvenile Detention Center closed last Friday. The  closure is a portion of the cuts being made by the County Commissioners. Ravalli County Sheriff Chris Hoffman expresses his concerns about the closure.

Hoffman says he is very concerned that the youth leaving Ravalli County will lose their family support network so far from home.

Below are Hoffman’s  letter and Commissioner Matt Kanenwisher’s reply.

October 5, 2011

To: Ravalli County Board of County Commissioners,

In reference to your comments during Monday morning’s meeting, regarding the Juvenile Detention Center (JDC), I wanted to make a couple of clarifications, but did not feel that that meeting was the place or the time.

You hold the office of county commissioner, and at some point, you will have to take responsibility, publicly, for some of your comments and conclusions, particularly when interacting with other elected officials. Specifically, I would like to address the proposal you brought to me and the subsequent conversation which took place two weeks ago. Monday morning the board expressed frustration that I had not gotten back in touch with you regarding that matter. My “failure” to respond to your proposal was deliberate. My staff and I did review the proposal and found it not only lacking, but self-serving and far outside the scope of authority of the board. In short, I had no intention of dignifying it with a formal response.

First of all, it is not my responsibility to solve a problem that the board created. Your proposal to institute the position of “Juvenile Transport Coordinator,” someone who answers to the county commissioners alone, clearly indicated your intention that the board should have control regarding who is incarcerated and who is not. It was your clear and stated intention to have a “go between” or a “check and balance” in an area where you have no business interjecting yourselves. It was not within your scope of authority to make the decisions regarding who we incarcerated when the JDC was open. It most certainly is not within your authority to do so now that you have made the decision to close it. It shocks the conscience that you would go to such great, political lengths to ensure that your decision is not proven folly.

Even more shocking, in a meeting with Commissioner Kanenwisher two weeks ago, he made an allegation that we and officers of the 21^st Judicial District have been arresting and confining juveniles to make a political point, an allegation he made in front of Undersheriff Perry Johnson and Patrol Lt. Steve Holton. I asked for clarification and he reiterated that this is what he believed. In making that accusation, the board is telling us that you believe that people who long ago earned the public trust, would stoop to removing someone’s freedom and violating our sworn oaths, discarding the Constitution of the United States and the State of Montana, strictly for the purpose of making you look bad. That ridiculous accusation has no basis in fact and, is completely unfounded, illustrating incredible ignorance of our system on your part. Further, in my opinion, your proposal, while ostensibly to save money, was in fact an attempt by the board to usurp the roles of District Court Judge and Sheriff, whether you realize it or not, by appointing yourselves to be both, check and balance in these matters, which, again, far exceeds the authority of the board.

I do not question the board’s authority to make budgetary decisions for all county offices and departments, within state law. It is my view that the board of county commissioners has taken on a micro-managerial role and is suffering from “mission creep,” a condition which has caused you to believe that it is your job to manage the entire county, outside of the budget, despite the existence of other elected officials and statutory guidelines. However, nothing in state law gives you the authority to supervise or interject yourself into the operations of the Sheriff’s Office. Let me give you an example: you wish to advise us when we may no longer incarcerate a juvenile. This presumably would happen as a result of a budget shortfall. It then logically follows that at some point you might believe you have the authority to instruct us as to which adult violators we are allowed to incarcerate, or which 9-1-1 emergency calls or coroner calls to answer, for budgetary reasons. However, that is not the case. That job, by state law, is a function of the elected sheriff.

During my time in office, I have yet to see a less transparent process regarding the board’s budget decisions than what I witnessed this year. You, the board, carried out your budget deliberations with little or no input from your office-holding elected peers, your own department heads, and the public at large. The only advice you solicited was with regard to the JDC. You then disregarded the advice you were given by a host of authorities on this subject, choosing instead to rely on your own “informal” number crunching, without respect to any other community issues or concerns. The board has been quoted as saying basically that. Then, yesterday, the board sends a county-wide email soliciting help from us. I must ask, Why now? Where was that solicitation when your original deliberations began? Now, at this juncture, most department heads and elected officials will be fearful to respond and fearful to not respond. Concerning most issues, it matters less what you do and more how you do it. The process is important and, the board’s chosen process has only succeeded in fomenting hostile resentment from nearly every office and department in county government. Sadly, you, the board, missed a golden opportunity to take a team-building approach during “your difficult budget deliberations,” choosing instead to further your own political and philosophical agendas in a carefully constructed vacuum. Certainly, you have succeeded in uniting much of county government, but not in a positive way. It is my considered opinion that the board’s actions have also done no favors for the taxpayer. Rather, those actions have hurt this community in an unprecedented fashion.

In closing, the board has made its bed and now the entire community must lie in it. I will tell you now that I, for one, refuse to go back to a time in this county’s history when juvenile delinquents knew that there would be few consequences to their actions – that they would in most cases simply be cited and released, often to reoffend. Public safety is my first and foremost concern, in particular: the protection of life and property. It is my opinion that the board’s actions this year have recklessly disregarded the basic functions of local government and diminished our ability to serve the people of Ravalli County. While some members of our community might applaud these actions from a fiscal standpoint, and commend the board for making the “hard decisions,” I submit that the board has made the easiest, most unimaginative, and most short-sighted decisions it could have. In reality, the board has left the hard decisions to those of us who are actually responsible for providing tangible services to the community. Our population is larger than it has ever been, our taxes are not going down, demand for services are not significantly reduced, yet our ability to provide fundamental services continues to diminish. Every citizen in this county should be asking, what is the purpose of local government? The board of county commissioners should ponder that question hardest of all.

Sincerely,

Sheriff Chris Hoffman

RESPONSE

Sheriff Hoffman,

In response to accusations that decisions were made in a vacuum, were not transparent, etc.  You are fully aware that during the budget process several meetings were convened where the JDC was discussed. At every meeting I asked if there were costs we were not considering, we simply could not have been more open or more inclusive in this process. I flatly reject any accusation which states otherwise because it is untrue.

After the decision was made to close the JDC we convened an additional meeting where we offered to play whatever part the Courts or Sheriff’s office would like us to play. We offered to propose solutions or to receive them. We offered to allow your office to drive the transition process and asked for suggestions and proposals. None were offered nor have there been since. That meeting in fact was a shameful display of unprofessionalism. In a subsequent meeting which you referred to, you shouted out me for some time and still offered no input. We proposed the idea of a “coordinator” to receive the youth and transport when it was not feasible for your department. This was met with raw hostility.

I have never, in any way, asserted that it was somehow within our authority to dictate who was and was not incarcerated. In fact I clearly stated it was not the within the Board’s authority and any statement to the contrary is simply untrue. I did note, however, that it seemed to me that our numbers were sharply higher. I checked these numbers and, in fact, in the first quarter of FY11 we had 35 youth while in the first quarter of FY12 we had 66. I called Robert Peak at the state office and explained we had no way to know if this was appropriate or not but, given the current climate in Ravalli County, I wanted to make sure someone with the appropriate expertise had a look. He reported to me that Youth Court’s numbers were actually lower than last year but that Youth Court may have, perhaps, over-utilized the facility and that he had discussed this at length with Youth Court. I am happy to stand corrected in terms of the apparent increase of youth relative to youth court. Your objection, then, is to the fact that I was willing to ask the question. For this I do not apologize and believe that it is well within the parameters of my office to ask such questions as they arise. Indeed, it is within any citizens ability and authority to do so.

My discussion with Robert Peak was very helpful and I am grateful for it. I do wonder if the numbers of detained youth I received are incorrect. The other obvious explanation may be that the increased youth are a result of increased arrests rather than increased probation violations. Mr. Peak was very clear as to which offenses were legally detainable, and which offenses most appropriately warrant detaining a youth. Again, I did not do this in a public forum or seek to disparage anyone’s office or performance. I did not “accuse” anyone of anything. In private I proposed the possibility and my concern that the increase in youth may be in response to our closing of the JDC, but hoped that was not the case. If the increase in numbers (almost double) are statistically insignificant then that will become apparent over time. But given the response I have received in many of the conversations over the last few months it is certainly a valid question. And truthfully that is to the root of the problem. It is my belief that  often times individuals tend toward feeling that they are above questions. But I won’t be bullied, harassed, or deterred from asking them.

I agree that there is currently a very poor atmosphere among Ravalli County departments and I regret that. But the plain truth here is that I did everything within my ability to include everyone on the process and decision to close the facility. Furthermore, the Youth Court and Sheriff’s office have done very little to offer suggestions or input as to how this process should develop in the near future. I would hope that at this point, rather than rally the troops or continue intentional non-participation in discussions which will establish the process for detaining youth in Ravalli County, that all who are involved would put your minds together and establish a policy as to the process. We are happy to play as little or as great a part in that process as you like and have continuously offered our assistance and asked for direction.

For the record, we meet tomorrow at 3PM to discuss and possibly sign a contract with MCDF or RYO or both. We welcome anyone’s input at the meeting or via email.

Thanks,

Matt Kanenwisher