ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE

 

Joint Legislative Committee on Youthful Sex Offenders

 

Minutes of the Meeting

Wednesday, December 6, 2006

1:30 p.m., Senate Hearing Room 109

 

 

Members Present:

Senator Karen Johnson, Cochairman

Representative Rick Murphy, Cochairman

Senator Linda Gray

Representative Cheryl Chase

Jason Grygla

Melony Opheim

Jim Haas represented by

  Chris Phillis

Matthew Smith

Kathy Waters

Dana Paul Hlavac

 

Barbara LaWall represented by

  Peter Hochuli

 

 

Members Absent:

Senator Jorge Garcia

Representative Steve Gallardo

Mark Faull

Barbara Hernandez

 

Staff:

Jennifer Eugster, Senate Judiciary Committee Analyst

Amber O’Dell, Senate Judiciary Committee Assistant Analyst

Katy Proctor, House Judiciary Committee Analyst

Ralene Whitmer, House Judiciary Committee Assistant Analyst

 

Cochairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 1:45 p.m. and the attendance was noted.

 

Opening Remarks

 

Senator Johnson stated the hearing will begin with testimony and then the meeting will adjourn and the Committee members will break up into two work groups, in a closed session, in order to discuss possible resolutions to issues that pertain to youthful sex offenders.

 

Representative Chase asked if the public will be able to submit ideas to the Committee since the work groups will work in a closed session.  Senator Johnson said the public will be able to submit ideas to the Committee and there will be one more meeting prior to the beginning of session in order to adopt some of the recommendations to put into legislation.

 

Discussion of Probation for Youthful Sex Offenders

 

Therese Wagner, Division Director, South Field & Sex Offenders, Maricopa County Adult Probation Department, answered questions posed by the Committee Members.

Senator Johnson asked Ms. Wagner to describe the accountability that is present for those employees that violate policies within the Probation Department.  Ms. Wagner stated the Department’s job is to serve the citizens, including offenders, and when complaints are received they are investigated.

 

Senator Johnson asked Ms. Wagner how the complaints against parole officers are received.  Ms. Wagner said the complaints are received in various manners, such as a phone call or a letter.  When a complaint is received, the immediate supervisor addresses the complaint through an investigation in order to determine the facts of the situation.  If there has been behavior by an officer that violates Department policy, there is progressive discipline that is followed, and the appropriate action is taken, which ranges from verbal counseling to dismissal. 

 

Senator Johnson stated, from testimony given by families of youthful sex offenders that have made complaints against probation officers, the officers were given sanctions and she would like to know why the officers were only given sanctions.  Ms. Wagner said she has listened to the testimony of the families and the Department has begun to address their concerns on an individual basis but she cannot speak publicly regarding a specific case.

 

Senator Johnson said some the families did meet with Ms. Wagner and the families reported back that they were pleased with the meeting.  The families believed that the issues regarding parole officers were not known by the Department, and as they were made known, the Department was concerned.

 

Senator Johnson asked how it will be known in the future that complaints and concerns do reach the appropriate people and do not stop at the level of the probation or surveillance officer.  Ms. Wagner stated anytime a family member, an offender, a victim, or anyone in the community has a complaint and they are not satisfied at the level where their complaint is being investigated, they have the right to take their complaint to the next level within the Department.

 

Senator Johnson stated some families made complaints and, because of retribution that had occurred, were afraid to pursue their complaints thinking that their child would receive even more harsh treatment.  Ms. Wagner said this concerns her and the Department does not tolerate any kind of retribution and she would like the families to contact her in order for those actions to be dealt with in the appropriate manner.

 

Representative Chase asked Ms. Wagner if there is anything that can be changed through legislation that can help the Department.  Ms. Wagner stated the Department has been working collaboratively with the Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) and with members of the Committee regarding this issue.

 

Senator Gray asked Ms. Wagner if probation officers specialize in handling certain types of criminal behavior.  Ms. Wagner stated the Department does have a specialized transferred youth caseload and that person primarily deals with younger offenders and some of the cases have been general sex offender cases.  Ms. Wagner added all of the officers do have a great deal of training and specialization with sex offenders in general, however, not as many in the area of youthful sex offenders and the Department is looking at this issue.

 

Ms. Waters distributed an e-mail from Barbara Broderick, Chief Adult Probation Officer, Maricopa County, regarding the demographics of adolescent sex offenders and obstacles they confront (Attachment A).

 

Senator Johnson asked Ms. Wagner to describe how probation revocation works.  Ms. Wagner said the Department has a couple of policies that address probation violation proceedings.  There is the probation violation policy and the policy that looks to see if the Department has attempted every possible avenue to rehabilitate or redirect behavior.  Typically the Department tries several intermediate sanctions to redirect the offender back into compliance with their probation.  With some of the intensive probation supervision (IPS) cases there might be a shorter leash because intensive probation is really home arrest and the Department is charged with knowing where that individual is at all times. 

 

Senator Johnson stated she is concerned with some of the treatment that youthful sex offenders receive in the aspect that they are in treatment with adults and talking about subjects that never would have come to their attention.         Ms. Wagner said the Department is in the process of looking at treatment issues and reviewing the types of groups offenders are placed in.

 

Representative Murphy asked Ms. Wagner how she would feel if the Department  mandated that a youthful offender can only be placed in a therapy group with similar offenders and how the Department would develop criteria to do this in a way that is not overly burdensome.  Ms. Wagner stated there is treatment for individuals until they turn 18 and then there is a service gap.  One of the recommendations is to look at some possible funding for that age group.  The Department is looking at the treatment process and how to differentiate between risk, type of offense, and age. 

 

Mr. Hlavac asked Ms. Wagner to define which age group needs a different set of treatment options.  Ms. Wagner said the age group is 25 and under.

 

Ms. Opheim stated, for her, the issue of treatment comes back to notification.   One out of five juvenile treatment centers will take an adjudicated adult and she would gladly take some of the transferred youth but she would need to notify the community and that would put her in danger of losing her business.  Youthful offenders would receive treatment with other juveniles that have committed the same kinds of crimes but there are many barriers for those who are willing to treat them because of the notification laws.

 

Mr. Grygla stated, developmentally, youthful sex offenders are “fluid” in their gender identity, sexuality, boundaries, and the ability to control their personal identities and this is why placing them with adult offenders for treatment is inappropriate.  Appropriate treatment for those that commit offenses as children needs to remain a priority so they can eventually be released into the community.

Senator Johnson asked Ms. Wagner what the connection is between treatment and probation because according to the testimony of some of the families, therapy and probation are closely tied and often times therapy reinforces what probation wants, which causes a conflict of interest.  Ms. Wagner stated the Department takes a victim-centered approach and is about managing offender behavior in the community and collaboration. The Department works closely with law enforcement, treatment, probation, polygraphers, victims, and families.  Also, there is a contract oversight administrator in place to help do a better job of determining what treatment program an offender goes into and to provide oversight to help eliminate the appearance of a conflict of interest.  This collaboration is important because treatment and supervision working in conjunction is better for the offender and the community.

 

Senator Johnson stated she hopes the Department is looking at this issue because when a therapist contracts with Probation their allegiance might be more towards Probation than towards the offender.  Ms. Wagner said the Department wants providers to make decisions based on what is best for the case.

 

Senator Johnson asked Ms. Wagner who manages the chaperon program.     Ms. Wagner stated there is not one person in charge of the program but there are criteria and goals the Department would like potential chaperons to meet along the way because they want them to play a part in helping the offender to regulate their behavior and keep victims and potential victims safe. 

 

Representative Murphy asked what can be done to help solve situations where a parent or relative is willing to go through the chaperon program but is met with barriers preventing the offender from living with them.  Ms. Wagner stated a parent or relative may not be eligible to be a chaperon due to factors such as community notification laws and the density issue.

 

Senator Johnson stated many youthful offenders are automatically being remanded to adult court without any kind of hearing before a judge.  If the Committee was able to effect some kind of legislation that states a person under 18 would need to go before a judge, maybe there would not be as many remanded to the adult court and the youthful offender can go into therapy and group homes without the notification.  Ms. Wagner stated that would serve that particular population and the community at large much better.

 

Senator Johnson asked Ms. Wagner if it is correct that the chaperon program is 52 weeks in length and costs approximately $3,300.  Ms. Wagner said she did not have the exact information but would provide the Committee with that information.

 

Senator Gray stated according to the testimony of some of the families, there is a concerted effort by probation officers to prohibit offenders from seeing family members and she is concerned about this.  Ms. Wagner stated that should not be happening but the Department will investigate those cases individually as families bring them forward.

Senator Johnson asked if the probation officers are working with the youthful offenders to adjust and get the proper therapy that they need as opposed to the harassment and bias that was mentioned in testimony by family members.       Ms. Wagner stated the Department’s mission is to rehabilitate offenders and help change their behavior because that ultimately benefits the victim and society at large.  There are policies in place to address violations by officers but most of the officers do a fine job and are very committed to the Department’s mission.

 

Senator Johnson asked what is being done to those officers that have multiple complaints against them.  Ms. Wagner stated the Department is looking at each complaint a case at a time and also looking at system changes.  She said the Department has an investigative policy, will look into what comes forward, and take the appropriate action based on the facts.  Also, the Department recently moved the IPS teams under her management and hopefully this will begin to align philosophies and management of youthful offenders.

 

Senator Gray asked if there is a point in time when the judge, public defender, prosecutor, social worker, and probation officer get back together to check the progress of a youthful offender.  Ms. Wagner stated that does not happen on a regular basis and typically happens only through a violation process or if someone files a motion.

 

Ms. Waters asked how the chaperon process originated.  Ms. Wagner stated the Department sought input from each provider and generally the goals are the same but she would need to check on each individual program as far as how many sessions they require people to go through and would report back to the Committee with a history of the program.

 

Senator Johnson stated she is also interested in obtaining a history of the chaperon program because there are three mothers in her district that went through the program and were appalled at the sessions they went through.

 

Senator Johnson thanked Ms. Wagner for her help and stated she believes they can make some changes for the better in this population where there are problems.

 

Prior to the Committee members adjourning to their work groups, Senator Gray distributed a handout to the Committee entitled “Understanding Juvenile Sexual Offending Behavior:  Emerging Research, Treatment Approaches and Management Practices” (Attachment B).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Bill Ritz

Committee Secretary

 

 

(Audio recordings and attachments on file in the Secretary of Senate’s Office/Resource Center, Room 115).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------

 

Joint Legislative Committee on Youthful Sex Offenders

December 6, 2006

Page 6

 

 

---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------