February 17, 2015

Honorable Board of Supervisors

Alameda County Administration Building
1221 Oak Street, #536
Oakland, CA 94612
Re: 50% of Public Safety Realignment Funding for Enhanced Public Safety, Budget Savings
Dear Board of Supervisors:
The Ella Baker Center for Human Rights proposes that Alameda County invest approximately 50% of
public safety realignment funds on innovative alternatives to detention and community-based reentry
programs and services. Based in Oakland, CA, the Ella Baker Center works to advance racial and
economic justice to ensure dignity and opportunity for low-income people and people of color.
Proposal
Decades of unfettered tough on crime sentencing and policies have consistently placed Californias
recidivism rate among the highest in the nation. The states failures have challenged counties to take on the
its responsibilities through 2011s AB 109 Realignment. Since that geographical shift, counties find
themselves at a crossroads: Should they continue to regurgitate the same failed public safety policies or is it
time to take a different approach?
We believe Alameda County is poised to take a different approach. By investing nearly 50% of
realignment funding into cost-effective and outcome improving reentry supports, the county will realize
significant savings, better outcomes for Alameda County residents, and safer neighborhoods. Specifically,
we propose the following:

Fund successful reentry and reduced recidivism in Alameda County. Within two fiscal years,
allocate approximately 50% of public safety realignment funding, beginning in the current fiscal
year and thereafter, for the following purposes to support successful re-entry:
o Employment training and placement assistance, including but not limited to, On the Job
Training (OJT), apprenticeship programs, soft skills development, and transitional jobs
o Housing support, including but not limited to, transitional housing, supportive housing, and
housing vouchers.
o Additional wraparound services, including but not limited to, education programs,
substance abuse treatment, mental health and health services, transportation assistance, and
assistance in obtaining IDs (driver license, social security card, etc).

AC Sheriff
Probation
District Attorney
Public Defender
Transition Center
Education/Employment
BHCS
Housing
SRJ Transition
E CRIMMS
Evaluation
Innovations
Community Capacity
Building Fund
TOTAL

CCPEC
Proposal
$18,000,000
$3,250,000
$1,250,000
$1,250,000
$550,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$425,000
$500,000
$425,000
$0
$1,000,000
$3,000,000

Ella Baker Center

Proposal 2014-2015
$13,705,000**
$3,250,000
$1,250,000
$1,250,000
$550,000
$5,445,000
$2,000,000
$700,000
$500,000
$0
$0
$3,000,000
$3,000,000

Ella Baker Center

Proposal 2015-2016*
$12,350,000***
$3,000,000
$1,250,000
$1,250,000
$825,000
$5,775,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$300,000
$0
$0
$3,000,000
$3,900,000

$34,650,000

$34,650,000

$34,650,000

*Projected
** This calculation is based on the average number of realignment beds calculated from July2014-January 2015 (8,447) and multiplied by
$135.20, the daily cost of bed space at Santa Rita Jail.
***This calculation is based on the projected number of average beds (7,611), taking into account the average reduction in realignments beds
from July-December 2014 (average decrease of 9.9% per month), and multiplied by $135.20, the daily cost of bed space in Santa Rita jail.

Invest in innovation and expedient service delivery to reduce recidivism. Set aside $3 million
annually for the Innovations in Reentry Fund (IRF). Provide that 65% of the IRF be used for its
current purposes and 35% for grants exclusively to partnerships between or among housing
providers, social service providers, education/employment service providers, mental health service
providers, and/or other wraparound support service providers to explore coordinated and integrated
service delivery models. This enhancement to the IRF allows the county to continue exploring
innovative practices that could result in better outcomes and both short-term and long-term public
safety savings.

Provide technical and program support for service providers to reduce recidivism. Provide that
50% of this Community Capacity Building Fund (CCBF) be used for its current purposes and 50%
to enhance and expand program/service delivery by community-based service providers who are
recipients of the technical support, as defined by the current purposes of the CCBF. The BOS
wisely created the CCBF that will provide much needed technical support to service providers and
support interagency collaboration. Service providers need these additional resources to ensure the
successful implementation of the technical support provided by the CCBF.

Background
Post-realignment, Alameda Countys jail population has actually declined.i Since realignment, the total
number of felony arrests in the county has decreased by 11%ii and by nearly 28%iii in Oakland. Homicides
in Oakland have dropped by nearly 22% post-realignment.iv Nearly 4 out of 5 occupied jail beds in Santa
Rita, the fifth largest jail in the nation, are occupied by individuals detained pre-trial. In addition, some of
Santa Ritas jail beds are actually occupied by residents from other counties, like Monterey and Sonoma,
through negotiated contracts between county sheriff departments.v Finally, the passage of Proposition 47
will result in further reductions in the jail population and significant savings to the county.
These statistics indicate that crime rates are declining and jail beds are largely unoccupied by Alameda
county residents convicted of a crime. More importantly, they call into question the prioritization of the
countys public safety realignment funding allocations in previous years, as well as the current proposed
budget. Approximately 27% of the total realignment budget went to programs in the 2013-2014 fiscal year
while the Sheriff and Probation departments total share exceeded 60%.vi In fact, the Sheriff received an
additional 10% in General Fund assistance.vii On the other hand, Contra Costa County adopted a series of
de-carceration policies and dedicated 60% of their public safety realignment funding on reentry programs
and services, resulting in an astonishing drop in their recidivism rate by 21%.viii Recidivism has indeed
increased in counties that prioritized enforcement funding over reentry services.ix
50% for Enhanced Public Safety, Budget Savings
Post-realignment, Alameda County has engaged in some promising practices including the Innovations in
Reentry Fund and the Community Capacity Building Fund. Most recently, Alameda County will be one of
11 counties profiled by the Public Policy Institute of California and the Board of State and Community
Corrections to identify effective and efficient recidivism reduction practices.
The county can capitalize on this momentum by moving realignment resources where it is needed most
reentry supports and alternatives to detention. Declining crime rates and empty jail beds indicate there
is no justification to dedicate the majority of realignment funding for incarceration and supervision.
Santa Ritas bed count has reduced dramatically in the past year and will continue to drop due to declining
crime rates, the increased use of split sentencing, and the passage of Proposition 47. For example, the
number of realignment bed days dropped a whopping 30% when comparing December 2013 with
December 2014.

!"#$"%&'$"%("')%&*")'+#,*#$%-*./%
012340125%

(34+'8"

012+'$"

-./+'$"

()*+'$"

537+'$"

536+'$"

(34+'$"

012+',"

-./+',"

9.:"

()*+',"

'#!!!"
'!!!!"
&!!!"
%!!!"
$!!!"
#!!!"
!"

Source: Email correspondence from Assistant Sheriff Brett Keteles

On the other hand, nearly 1 in 5 county residents live under the poverty threshold and Oaklands
unemployment rate is nearly 17% higher than the state average.x These rates are drastically higher for the
formerly incarcerated population. Research has shown that 40% of crime is directly attributable to
poverty.xi The indisputable correlation between poverty and crime indicate that a smart public safety
strategy must focus on creating support systems and economic opportunities for people leaving jail to
reduce recidivism and create strong communities. Further, investments in reentry programs rather than
jails is a more cost-effective approach. Jail beds cost nearly $50,000 a year while providing an On the Job
Training (OJT) employment opportunity costs $4,000 and can provide paid job experience that can lead to
a long-term position. Studies show that fewer people leaving jail will recidivate if they are employed,
especially if their wages are above the minimum wage.xii Investing in supportive housing programs has
saved nearly $15,000 per person, per year due to reductions in jail stays and hospitalizations.xiii Without
stable housing, people are 7 times more likely to recidivate.xiv
Alameda County is at a critical juncture. We can be a leader and a model in California with our innovation
and smart public safety strategies, or revert to the failures of the past. Jails do not make safe communities.
Jobs, education, and opportunities make safe and strong communities. We welcome the opportunity to
discuss our proposal in detail with you. Please contact at our Policy Director, Jennifer Kim, at
Jennifer@ellabakercenter.org or (510) 285-8234, should you have any questions. We look forward to
hearing from you.
Respectfully,

Zachary Norris
Executive Director
cc:

Susan Muranishi, County Administrator

LaDonna Harris, Chief Probation Officer and CCP-EC Chair
Alex Briscoe, Health Care Services Agency Director
Members of the Community Advisory Board

Lofstrum, Magnus and Steven Raphael. Impact of Realignment on County Jail Populations. Public Policy Institute of California. June 2013. Found at:
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_613MLR.pdf
Office of Attorney General. CJSC Statistics: Arrests. Found at: https://oag.ca.gov/crime/cjsc/stats/arrest-dispositions
iii
Office of Attorney General. CJSC Statistics: Arrests. Found at http://oag.ca.gov/crime/cjsc/stats/arrests
iv
http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/police/documents/webcontent/oak050934.pdf
v
http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_25322643/east-bay-jail-takes-wine-country-inmates
vi
http://www.acgov.org/board/com_calendar/documents/Public_Protection_September_11_2014_minutesI.pdf
vii
Id
viii
JFA Institute, Contra Costa County: A Model for Managing Local Corrections January 2014. Found at http://www.cafwd.org/reporting/entry/contracosta-county-shines-bright-as-example-of-ab-109-success.
ix
Public Policy Institute of California, Do Local Realignment Policies Affect Recidivism in California? August 2014. Found at:
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_814MBR.pdf.
x
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Found at:
https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=city:CT0653000000000:CT0667000000000&fdim
_y=seasonality:U&hl=en&dl=en
xi
Harry Holzer et. al., "The Economic Costs of Childhood Poverty in the United States," The Journal of Children and Poverty, Vol. 14, No. 1 (March
2008): 41-61, at 49.
xii
Christy Visher, Sara Debus, and Jennifer Yahner (Washington Urban Institute), Employment After Prison: A Longitudinal Study of Releasees in Three
States. 2008. Available at: http://www.urban.org/publications/411778.html.
xiii
Corporation for Supportive Housing, FAQs about Supportive Housing Research: Is Supportive Housing Cost Effective? 2011. Available at:
http://www.csh.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Cost-Effectiveness-FAQ.pdf.
xiv
Corporation for Supportive Housing and National Alliance to End Homelessness. Building on the Second Chance Act: Housing as the Foundation for
Successful Reentry. 2009. Available at: http://www.metropolisstrategies.org/documents/BuildingonSecondChanceAct_Housing_Concept_Paper5-1909.pdf.
ii