OLA#: 016-03J

LEGISLATIVE ANALYST REPORT

TO: Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors

FROM: Office of the Legislative Analyst

DATE: June 6, 2003

SUBJECT:Employee Suggestion No. 445: Merger of the Adult and Juvenile Probation Departments

EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION

The employee suggests that the City's Adult and Juvenile Probation Departments should be combined to form a single probation department. The employee suggests that it is not necessary for the City to support two distinct departments, one for juveniles and one for adults.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Based upon our preliminary analysis, we conclude that a merger between the Juvenile and Probation Departments would generate only minimal cost-savings, as discussed below. Furthermore, merging these two departments would require submitting a ballot proposal to San Francisco voters to repeal Proposition L that created the City's Juvenile Probation Department. However, the deadline for the November 2003 ballot has passed. The City may, of course, submit a ballot proposal at a later date. In the interim, the Office of the Legislative Analyst (OLA) recommends that the Board of Supervisors establish a working group comprised of representatives from Juvenile Probation, Adult Probation and the Trial Courts to more thoroughly investigate whether a merger between the two departments is worth pursuing.

ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS

The City and County of San Francisco (the "City") has two distinct probation departments, one for juveniles and one for adults. All other California jurisdictions have a single probation department with juvenile and adult subdivisions.¹

The Adult Probation Department is mandated by State Penal Code Sections 1203.5 and 1203.6, Welfare & Institutions Code Section 270 and the City Charter Section 7.101, while the Juvenile Probation Department is authorized by City Charter Section 7.102.

In 1989, San Francisco voters approved Proposition L which created a new city Juvenile Probation Department managed by a seven-member commission appointed by the Mayor. The commission is authorized to hire a Chief Juvenile Probation Officer who supervises the day-to-day operations of the Department.

Merging the Juvenile and Adult Probation Departments would therefore require the Board of Supervisors to submit a ballot proposal to voters to repeal Proposition L and amend Charter Sections 7.101 and 7.102.

The Juvenile Probation Department consists of five divisions: Administration, Probation Services, Juvenile Hall, Log Cabin Ranch and Children's Baseline (community programs). Each of these divisions has its own director and staff. The Adult Probation Department, on the other hand, consists of four divisions (Administrative Services, Investigation, Community Services - Outreach and Specialized). Each of these divisions also has its own director and staff.

The employee suggests that merging the two departments may offer cost-savings resulting from the elimination of overlapping positions and administrative support. The Juvenile Probation Department recently analyzed the organizational structures of other California probation departments and concluded:

"With the exception of an additional chief probation officer, other upper management positions- such as division directors and facility manager - are staffed similarly to San Francisco. A merger would yield little to no cost savings from upper management. [Furthermore] There is likely no cost savings or other benefit from merging areas such as administrative support or buildings."²

Despite these conclusions, the Legislative Analyst believes that merging the two departments would still generate cost savings. Eliminating one of the two chief probation officer positions in San Francisco would save approximately $120,000 to $133,000 in salary costs. Combining staff in a merged probation department would in theory reduce administrative support costs. However, we would like to note that whether or not merging the two departments saves the City money might not be the most appropriate guideline for determining whether the City should take this action. A separate Juvenile Probation Department undoubtedly provides benefits to youth, which voters recognized when Proposition L was approved in 1989.

As stated above, merging these two departments would require submitting a ballot proposal to San Francisco voters to repeal Proposition L that could not be placed on the ballot until 2004. In the interim, the OLA recommends that the Board of Supervisors establish a working group comprised of representatives from Juvenile Probation, Adult Probation and the Trial Courts to consider the following issues:

· Whether the benefits of a merger outweigh any associated costs (fiscal and otherwise).

· Whether a merger will offer any opportunities for increased efficiencies resulting from the elimination of overlapping positions and administrative support.

· How to address any differences in salaries and benefits for two sets of employees.

Ultimately, initializing a merger between the San Francisco Juvenile and Adult Probation Departments is a policy matter for the Board of Supervisors.

¹ Telephone interview with Al Lammers, California Board of Corrections, June 6, 2003.

² Analysis of a Proposal to Merge the Adult and Juvenile Probation Departments in San Francisco, San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department, June 9, 2003.