By Andrew Creasey
Appeal-Democrat
MARYSVILLE, Calif. — Realignment — the shifting of prisoners from state facilities to county jails — is still making its mark locally, but the extent of the impact varies between Yuba and Sutter counties.
An April state auditor report identified prison overpopulation as a lingering issue of realignment, also known as AB 109 for the legislation behind the program. County jails across the state released 37 percent more inmates in June 2014 than were released in September 2011, before realignment began, the auditor reported.
But that is not an issue in Sutter County, said Sheriff J. Paul Parker.
“We’ve never been too full where we’ve had to make releases based on overpopulation. We’ve never released anyone early,” Parker said. “We were afraid the jail population would increase because we were getting prisoners from state prison, but it didn’t work out that way.”
Instead, issues surrounding realignment in Sutter County have more to do with the type of inmate the jail now holds, Parker said.
Once used primarily as a holding facility while the accused awaited trial before (depending on the verdict) being sent off to state prison, the county jail now serves as a long-term holding facility, complete with hardened, seasoned criminals with increasing needs, said Jim Arkens, county administrator.
As a result, jail medical costs are increasing rapidly, Arkens said. “These state prisoners are very savvy in how to cause issues,” Arkens said. “They complain about everything and expect treatment for it. They know the key words to get a trip to the hospital. They want different medications than we have to supply them.”
Before realignment, jail medical costs hovered around $1.5 million. In 2013-14, the cost was $2.8 million. For the current fiscal year, the jail medical budget is $2.6 million. The county has spent $1.9 million of that budget so far.
And although the legislation is approaching its four-year anniversary, these problems haven’t gone away, Arkens said.
“I don’t think we’re getting used to it, that’s for sure,” Arkens said. “We don’t like it, but it’s here to stay.”
In Yuba County, the impact of realignment is more muted.
“For us, realignment is almost old news,” said Jim Arnold, chief probation officer of Yuba County. “In probation’s world, it’s here and gone, and it’s business as usual now.”
Probation did see an initial increase in probation cases and now has about 120 individuals on probation that would otherwise have been sent to the state.
But funding from the state allowed the department to hire three new probation officers and several new counselors, which has mitigated the increases in probation cases, Arnold said.
“It was hectic in the beginning, but we adjusted,” Arnold said.
Sutter County probation had a similar experience.
“At the end of the day, it really isn’t a big deal for the department anymore,” said Donna Garcia, chief probation officer. “This is our new normal. It’s business as usual for us now.”
Since the beginning of realignment, the department has supervised 305 post-release community supervision and 64 mandatory supervision offenders, both of which were not required prior to realignment, Garcia said.
To cope with this increased case load, the department used state money, provided for in the legislation, to hire an additional supervising probation officer and four deputy probation officers.
County administrator Robert Bendorf said jail medical costs have increased, but not to a great degree.
Yuba County Sheriff Steve Durfor did not return calls for comment. In an April 2014 Appeal-Democrat report, he said the county had never released an inmate they felt shouldn’t be released.