Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, August 30, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 6
6 (a), review and approve request regarding grant programs, applications, contracts and permissions to continue.
(a), revised application submit ed by a criminal justice planning to the united states department of justice, bureau of justice assistance for permanent supportive housing support services for frequent users of the Travis County jail.
the gentleman has a question.
mr. Defoe, please come forward, question or comment.
either one.
>> thank you, your honor, ladies and gentlemen, yeah, my question for the commission is -- for the court is --
>> mr. Defoe, if you don't hold that microphone and back up a little bit, it will come through perfect.
>> thank you, sir.
>> okay.
>> what is permanent supportive housing support?
if somebody wants to answer.
>> the person to your right wants to answer.
>> the city currently has an initiative to create permanent support of housing and these generally target people that have mental illness and substance abuse problems and the supports part includes case management, mental health group services, medications, substance abuse treatment, counseling, primary care, food, transportation, help in finding employment, and it targets in the case of this particular grant, there are -- we've identified a group of people who are frequent visitors to the jail.
>> okay.
>> that have mental illness and substance abuse treatment, and the research has shown to the extent we can get them into permanent housing, with supports, they're generally homeless as well.
>> okay.
>> they can stabilize and they're not as depend on systems such as the emergency room and the jail to provide their stability.
>> and what is the criteria for citizens that qualify for this sort of assistance?
>> for this particular initiative, there hasn't been criteria set aside other than frequent users of the jail that have cooccurring instances of mental issues and substance abuse, but the larger group has set criteria, I can get that to you.
it's generally people who have used the downtown Austin community court I think it's five times in a year that are assessed with mental illness and substance abuse needs.
>> okay.
thanks, I'll keep my comments short.
I want to say our goal here in Travis County should be keeping people out of jail, instead of supporting the jail/court lifestyle where you're constantly in court and constantly in jail.
I know it has good intentions this program, I question, though, its need.
yes, mental illness is a serious issue.
and we need to support those people that have those problems. We need to encourage families, charities, churches, to do that job.
I just don't think the federal government knows how to run people's lives, so, yeah, I think we need to get people out of jail instead of getting them into that endless cycle.
thank you for getting into that.
>> I have a question about a.
we were also looking at the possibility of utilizing local tax dollars to support permanent support of housing in our budget considerations that are coming up.
if this federal grant is not received, what is the recommendation from just this planning as far as looking to general fund for support for this program.
>> there's actually a committee, an executive -- called the executive finance committee that both myself and sherry fleming are on as well as a lot of the stake holders around the permanent support of housing issue, and our charge is to find funding sources for both the bricks and mortar piece and the supports piece.
I think I -- I don't know.
I can't speak for them because they have not actually come forward with the recommendation, if we don't get this grant that might be a request from -- to both the city and the county to help with the support peace.
>> so at this point, what we're hoping for is a revenue stream that comes from federal income tax, but if we don't get a revenue stream from federal income tax we are looking for a -- the possibility of a local revenue stream from property tax, a more regress sieve revenue stream.
>> I would say, yes, probably yes to that.
again, not speaking for the whole group, but I think that is the intent.
>> we do believe that is more cost effective than allowing to fall through the --
>> right.
they're heavy users of the jail.
they're heavy users of the emergency room.
they're heavy users.
our research has shown to the extent we can get them stabilized in permanent housing, they are less dependent on those systems for help.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
>> move approval.
>> uh-huh.
>> any more discussion on the motion?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
6 (a).
permission to continue the family drug treatment court in the civil courts until the fiscal year 2012.
agreement is fully executed.
mr. Reeferseed you have a question about h?
Commissioner eckhart?
>> my question with regard to the family drug treatment court is actually the same question with regard to the drug diversion court in criminal and the veterans court in criminal.
since all three of these items are grants that we currently receive but we are concerned we may not continue to receive them, they are on the budget.
the question I have is with regard to those three programs, is the reserve set aside for state budget cuts designed to address that if these grants don't come through?
>> that's the intention of it, I believe the department is even -- at least for two out of three have discussed that at a budget hearing.
I don't think we know -- we just don't know if we're going to get the full amount for the grants.
I know there's been two cases where there's a grant in the attorney's office.
looks like we're not going to have funding in f.y.
13.
that is part of the delay, I think, is trying to get the contracts, I guess the state deciding how much we're going to get awarded.
the department will know that and we'll inform the court and you can decide how you want to handle the reserve.
direct appropriation or ear mark at this time, I don't know if it has any new information.
>> I know that the departments have gotten some information from the state on these three grant programs that they're going to get some funding.
I think one of them -- remember correctly is going to be a little less, but it's still enough to cover the staffing for the program, so I think that it's just a delay in the administration, and at the state to get us contracts and changing the budgets at the last minute, but we're pretty sure -- we're 90% sure we're getting the funding for this year, and then it will be a question for the following year.
>> and from the planning perspective, roger, when we get state grants and there's no local match on this, we don't generally do any kind of in house analysis of the program because we are -- we are being analyzed by the state who is the actual funder.
>> I believe that is true.
although I think that they have -- the criminal courts has commissions and evaluation of some of the drug court programs outside of the state through dr. Favela's office.
if I'm not mistaken.
>> the numbers are going back a little bit on family drug court in civil and in drug diversion court and criminal, they're going backwards because they're not able to serve as many people as they've served in the past.
so if the state reduces the funding, I think it would be meaningful for us to take a look at its effectiveness, and consider expansion of funding if we do find it effective both from a policy standpoint and from a budgetary standpoint, because we are seeing -- fewer people being enrolled and fewer people successfully completing their buy because the funding is contracting from the state.
>> approval.
>> second.
>> discussion?
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
continue the drug diversion court and the courts until the fiscal year 2012, move approval.
>> second.
>> discussion.
>> Commissioner eckhart.
>> mr. Reeferseed, do you want to come in on this item.
this is (i).
>> curious, make sure that it's -- I'm sorry, I'm ronny reeferseed, I'm curious to make sure it means less punitive jail time for particularly nonviolent marijuana offenders.
is that kind of the gist of it.
>> I don't think any of us can answer that for you.
why don't you contact one of the criminal judges and ask him about this program.
>> okay, thank you, sir.
>> it is a diversion court.
it is to keep people out --
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
in the criminal courts until the fiscal year 2012, agreement is fully executed.
move approval.
discussion.
Commissioner eckhart.
>> it was the same question.
already answered.
d8 ] and this is number --
>> this is j.
6 (j).
>> okay.
the same kind of idea that for the veterans, I'm just hoping that we can give them better coverage than they're getting on the national va program and I appreciate the county of travis standing up on this issue.
I'm just curious on the details but I'm sure --
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> discussion.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous support including mr. Reeferseed's support.
thank you.
it is 9:47 and I'm looking for the 9:45 time certain group or person.
mr. Eckstein?
mr. Ike stein, if you're nearby and still working for the county, please come in.
we did tell several people that we would call 28 up at ten o'clock instead of 9:47, so we've got a few more minutes before that one.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
