HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/04/2010 06B CWCMH Crisis Intervention Team Diversion Program Reports from the Public Safety Committee 0 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
• Item No. (4
For Meeting Of May 4, 2010
ITEM TITLE: Updated Reports from the Public Safety Committee regarding CWCMH
Crisis Intervention Team Diversion Program
•
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy Police Chief Kelly Rosenow
CONTACT PERSON /TELEPHONE: Deputy Chief Kelly Rosenow - 575 -6210
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
At the April 21, 2010 meeting of the Council Public Safety Committee, a report was provided
to the committee members regarding the CIT diversion program. This program was partially
funded through general fund reserves for a 6 month pilot program. Although the committee
does find value in the program, they cannot recommend continuation of funding for the
program given the current economic conditions facing the City. The following reports are
0 being forwarded to the full council from the Public Safety Committee for their review with the
recommendation that the Council not continue funding the CIT diversion prgoram.
Resolution Ordinance Other (Specify) Report
Contract Mail to (name and address):
Phone:
Funding Source
APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept reports.
•
BOARD /COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Public Safety Committee recommends the
Council discontinue funding of the CIT Diversion Program.
COUNCIL ACTION:
III
City of Yakima
Police Department 200 S. f Street Yakima, , %, %, :051PNA
® Samuel Granato, Chief of Police Washington 98901 �� < =' 0.1.'-±.0
' �, ;, FNS 1
Telephone (509)575 -6200 Fax (509)575 -6007 4 %'�
MEMORANDUM
April 26, 2010
TO: Honorable Council Members
City Manager Dick Zais
FROM: Deputy Police Chief Kelly Rosenow
SUBJECT: CWCMH Crisis Intervention Team Diversion Program
At the April 21, 2010 Public Safety Committee the police department presented the
attached information regarding the CIT program. As noted in CWCMH's report, the
CIT program is not utilized by the Yakima Police Department. There are a number
of reasons for this, as described in the Deputy Chief's memorandum.
The CIT program was funded by the council in October 2009 as a six month trial
program, ending March 31, 2010. The six month trial program cost over $132,000
• and to continue would cost an additional $132,000 for 2010 and twice that much in
2011.
It is unfortunate the program did not receive the success it needed to survive.
Those with mental illness do not always belong in jail, unfortunately the structure of
this law makes it very difficult to use effectively.
Based on the cost of the program and the restrictions put upon us by the law,
neither the police department nor the Public Safety Committee can recommend the
continual funding of this program. The police department is dedicated to helping
those with mental illness and will continue to work with CWCMH to develop
programs effective to our needs.
III
City of Yakima
Police Department 200 5. f Street Yakima, , %, .�,
0 Samuel Granato Chief of Police Washington 98901 �� ' r° o ` „ l
,
Telephone (509)575 -6200 Fax (509)575 -6007 `� %'
MEMORANDUM
April 15, 2010
TO: Dick Zais, City Manager
FROM: Sam Granato, Chief of Police
Kelly M. Rosenow, Deputy Chief of Police
SUBJECT: CIT Behavioral Review
The Yakima Police Department recognizes the importance of ensuring those arrested
who are suffering from mental illness receive the proper treatment. The options for
mental illness treatment in our city facility is very limited, as such they are housed at
the Yakima County Department of Corrections.
The CIT program was introduced to Yakima County law enforcement a number of
years ago by Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health (CWCMH) in
41) partnership with Yakima County. The Yakima Sheriffs Department and Yakima
Police Department were designated as pilot projects. Training was conducted for
law enforcement offices, elected officials, administration, and command staff.
In fall 2009 the city was notified by CWCMH of funding issues with the CIT program.
The city funded the CIT program for the amount of $132,041 for six months. The
continuation of funding was based on the success of the program and more
importantly if it would assist in reducing jail costs at YCDOC.
The six months time period has expired and a progress report has been submitted
by CWCMH, attached. As noted in the CWCMH report, statistics for October 2009
through March 2010 indicates Yakima Police Officers used CIT four (4) times, as
compared to the Yakima Sheriffs Department who used the program two (2) times.
It appears the user of CIT is County Probation (who also supervises Municipal Court
probationary people). This really does not assist our officers or lower the city's jail
costs.
As noted in CWCMH's report, Yakima City /County Probation Services is largest user
of the CIT program. With the Toss of the City of Yakima CIT program funding it is
not expected Probation Services will have the capacity to fund the program. At this
time we are not sure how this will affect the city's inmate housing costs at YCDOC.
III
•
i
The city's prosecutor's office and police department are implementing other
sentencing alternatives, such as GPS Electronic Home Monitoring, and GPS
Electronic Home Monitoring with alcohol sensors. We are anticipating these two •
new sentencing options will be place into practice and assist in deferring the cost
inmate housing.
Lt. Finch has supplied a report, attached, as to the effectiveness and use of the
program by police officers. As noted in previous conversations, to qualify for the
CIT Diversion program requires the offender not to commit certain types of crimes.
This appears to be a very significant obstacle to the program.
To continue to fund this program in 2010 will most likely cost the city another
$132,000. The police department cannot fund this program without incurring
additional reductions in personnel. We also recognize the City's Reserve Account
cannot absorb this cost impact.
Unless there are changes to the State Law and /or CWCMH develops a post booking
and /or the court orders the program as part of the offender's sentence, we do not
believe at this time CIT can be an effective tool for the department. We do not
recommend the City of Yakima continue to fund this program. At this point of time
it is not cost effective.
We recommend the police department continue to work with CWCMH, Yakima
County, and the various courts in developing other options such as grant funds to
improve the delivery of CIT services (via a post booking program), discussion with
our Legislators for changes in the requirements for qualification to receive CIT
services, and /or to impose sentences which includes mental health assessments and
allow the inmate to access the CIT services in a location other than YCDOC.
2
® City of Yakima 200 S. 3rd Street
Police Department Yakima, Washington 98901
Samuel Granato, Chief of Police Telephone (509) 575 -6200 Fax (509) 575 -6007
oL
Inter- Office Memorandum
Date: April 4, 2010
To: Deputy Chief Rosenow
From: Lt. S. Finch
Subject: Behavioral Health Diversion Program
This memorandum is in response to your March 30, 2010 email to me, directing me to complete
a report regarding the Behavioral Health Diversion Program, or "CIT" as it is sometimes
0 referred to. As you are aware I only recently returned to the patrol division, so my knowledge of
the parameters of the program, the requirements of the program, and the officer's utilization of
the program are very limited. Therefore, I polled the sergeants on Blue Team to solicit their
responses to your questions, and they also spoke to their respective squads about the program.
The responses I received are listed below, after each of your questions. One response you will
notice on more than one occasion is that the officers do not receive any feedback on how many
persons get diverted, if they are successful in the diversion program, what the disposition rate is,
etc.
1. How many Patrol Officers /Sgt's have been trained in the program?
I spoke with Officer Fowler of the training office regarding this question. He advised that most
all of the officers should have received the initial eight (8) hour training in this program, as this
was presented as an in- service training. There are additional officers (he did not supply more
specific numbers but said they are available if needed) that have attended a forty (40) hour
class in this program.
2. Why this program is under utilized by patrol?
"A" squad
They believe there are too many restrictions with CIT. As you're aware, people
arrested for serious crimes, D.V. related arrests, etc do not qualify for CIT. Rarely
are people actually arrested for shoplifting, trespassing, etc. Custodial arrests
411 normally come into play when the suspect has no identification or is fighting with the
Loss Prevention Officer or under the influence of alcohol or drugs. If the LPO detains
a subject that may qualify for the program and that suspect has been cooperative,
1
they are released and a report is written and shipped to the PD and a summons is
issued so there isn't any police contact with them. Urwin told me that at night MHP's
resources are very limited so it takes a longer period of time to get things
accomplished. He said the officer is required to have the entire report/case done •
before they can be taken to the placement facility which takes additional time.
"B" squad
During the inception of this program officers attempted to divert arrestees on several
occasions and the staff at CWCMH were not aware of the program and did not know
how to proceed with the diversion. The process took a long time and was frustrating for
the officer. I believe that this has been resolved, but that stigma remains. Historically,
we are at the mercy of CWCMH when we have someone in protective custody, often
waiting for hours for an MHP to arrive for an evaluation. I realize that the evaluation
process is different than the diversion process, but again, if the officer has a choice to
resolve the incident quickly by citing and releasing or booking then they will usually take
that approach.
"C" squad
I don't know that the program is being under - utilized as much as it is being over-
regulated. It appears that there is a very specific person that can fit into that
program. On evenings, it is difficult to fit an arrestee into the program when most of
the people we encounter for arrest have either drugs, alcohol, or both on board. Acts
of violence also prohibit placement and as you know, DV arrests require mandatory
booking.
"D" Squad
(It should be noted that Sgt. Cortez is currently the sergeant on "D" squad. His knowledge of
the program is also very limited, and his responses are from his squad)
The squad felt that they may not have enough information regarding the program,
because based on the little information they have, they felt the program was limited as to
who qualified and felt the only persons that qualified are theft suspects.
3. What are the challenges encountered by patrol officers who wish to divert a person
to CIT? This may include the person is too intoxicated, the law does not allow
diversion, etc...
"A" squad
A couple of the officers said when they have attempted diversion, they ended up dealing
with the
same person again within a day or two. They have found it is easier to book the
individual so
they aren't dealing with that same person again within a short period of time.
"B" squad
Some of the challenges include awareness by the officers. Very few offenders qualify
for the diversion program, mainly because of assaultive behavior; therefore the process •
is not used on a routine basis. I believe that when we contact someone that may qualify
for the program, oftentimes the officer does not consider the program because of the
2
awareness issue. The majority of the people we contact do not qualify for the program
due to assaultive behavior either in the present or in the person's past.
0 "C" squad
Due to call volume or activity, it is much easier and timely to book someone into jail than
have to wait for a MHP. Lately, officers have been waiting for up to two hours for a MHP
to arrive for things such as a consultation with a suicidal person.
"D" squad
Officers felt some challenges were only a small percentage qualified and the persons
that did qualify were repeat offenders. Also the additional paperwork is time consuming.
4. Are patrol officers being directed by the Sgt or Lt to utilize the program if someone is
in custody who may qualify? If not, why?
"A" squad
One of the questions the officers had for MHP is how many people have been diverted
through our department and what is the disposition rate. How many of those folks have
completed the guidelines of the Diversion program, how many have had to be ultimately
arrested either by the officer or by warrant and how many of those cases have there
been no disposition
to.
"B" s uad
This program has been promoted by CWCMH during several of our musters. The first
level supervisors encourage officers to utilize the program, but again most of the
offenders we contact do not qualify. Officers who have diverted offenders do not receive
any feedback as to what has occurred to the offender. In all of the diversions, or
potential diversions, that have been done on my squad, the officer contacted me and we
discussed the case to determine if the offender meets the criteria for diversion.
"C" squad
I recall recently a suicidal person who had a visit here with a MHP. CIT was suggested,
but for whatever reason I cannot recall, placement there was not an option and the MHP
wound up asking if we could book the individual in City Jail on other charges. I am sure
there is some confusion as to when officers can place the officers into the program.
Most of the individuals that we encounter also have a previous history of violence which
excludes them from the program.
"D" squad
The officers felt the program was not really being emphasized by supervisors because
they could not recall any incidents where a subject actually qualified.
Again, my recent return to the patrol division prevents me from offering any personal experience or
insight into the program itself. However, from the responses I received, I would offer the following
O ndensed answers to your questions.
3 .
1. Training in this program was presented during an in- service training program, so most
officers should have received at least the preliminary eight (8) hour training. Some
additional officers have attended a forty (40) hour program. I was reminded by the training
office that getting officers trained in this program resulted in the department receiving
several Tasers.
2. It appears that the program may not be getting utilized enough for a couple of reasons. The
response by CWCMH appears to be a detriment, or at least it has been in the past. I do
know that getting them to respond to even suicidal persons in a timely manner is usually the
exception, not the rule. I understand that the mental health professionals are busy, and
CWCMH is understaffed, however that is also the case for the officers calling for their
assistance.
The second reason is that there are very few people that the officers come into contact with
that qualify for the program, for varying reasons. There have also been cases where the
subject qualified for the program, but chose not to participate in it.
It may be beneficial to review some of the reasons that an officer may come into contact
with a subject, or "Potential Charges" that would qualify a subject for the program, as
compared to what is normally done with a subject under the same circumstances.
• "Drug Use"
Any drug use other than the use of marijuana, and /or possession of marijuana under
40 grams, would constitute a felony. Felony arrestees do not qualify for this
program. Those that would be charged with the use of marijuana and/or possession
of marijuana under 40 grams would be issued a criminal citation and released •
pending an appearance in court anyway, barring any other mitigating factors.
• "Possession of Drug Paraphernalia"
Barring the presence of any mitigating factors, this misdemeanor offense is also
one in which the subject would receive a criminal citation and be released pending
their appearance in court.
• "Harassment"
Unless the offense rises to the level of felony harassment, this offense is also
usually handled the same as the previous two. In fact, it is seldom that an officer
would even do that, as most of these types of cases involve ongoing issues and are
referred to the detective division.
• "Petty (sic) Larceny"
As a general practice, officers do not respond any longer to shoplift offenses. The
loss prevention officer completes a report and the subject receives a court date
through the mail. If an officer responds to a shoplift it means that the subject either
does not have any identification, has resisted apprehension, has assaulted the loss
prevention officer, etc. In any of these circumstances, the subject would not qualify
for the program and would be booked. If an officer responds to a theft call other
than a shoplift, those are also routinely handled through the detective division.
4
• "Trespassing"
A subject is typically not arrested or given a citation for trespassing, unless they
have been "trespassed" from the premises previously. In other words, if an officer
is sent on a "trespass" call, it is usually what is referred to as "an unwanted guest ".
The officer is present when the property owner advises the subject that he is not
welcome on that property again, and the officer notes the subject's identifiers in the
call. If the subject goes onto the property again, the next responding officer is made
aware that the subject has previously been "trespassed" from the property. In that
case, the officer may issue a criminal citation and release the subject pending their
appearance in court. However, in a majority of these cases the trespassing is
habitual, or the subject is intoxicated or under the influence of narcotics, or the
situation involves previous domestic violence issues. In any of those cases, the
subject would not qualify for the program.
• . "Probation Violation"
Probation violations are addressed with the issuance of a warrant. In those cases,
the officer is commanded by a judge to arrest the violator and place them into
custody until they can be seen by a judge or magistrate. Officers have no discretion
in these cases.
• "Other"
Some of the offenses listed in this category were "dine and dash" and "driving
• without a.license ". "Dine and dash" is a petit larceny, which was covered above.
"Driving without a license" can encompass many different offenses. If the subject
has verifiable identification and simply does not have a driver's license, the normal
procedure is to issue a criminal citation and release the subject. If the subject has a
third degree suspended license, and has no prior failure to appear issues, that
subject is also normally cited and released. If there are other factors which have
caused the subject's license to be suspended in the second or first degree, those
factors normally necessitate booking the subject into jail.
3. I believe the answer to this question was outlined above. Even if the officers want to
utilize the program, either the subject does not qualify for the program, or there are other
mitigating factors such as mandatory booking on certain offenses. The vast majority of
those that officers come into contact with do not qualify either because of their condition at
the time, their behavior in the past, the offense does not meet the criteria, or the subject
refuses to take part in the program.
4. It sounds to me like the officers and supervisors are communicating regarding the potential
use of the program, when on those rare instances the subject qualifies for it and there are no
other mitigating circumstances.
Hopefully this answers your questions satisfactorily.
Lt. Steve Finch
Patrol Division
Yakima Police Department
5