Five months after San Benito County’s chief probation officer
was placed on administrative leave and two months after she and the
county officially parted ways, it appears that the necessary steps
are being taken to fill that important position.
Five months after San Benito County’s chief probation officer was placed on administrative leave and two months after she and the county officially parted ways, it appears that the necessary steps are being taken to fill that important position.
That’s the good news. The bad news is that the Board of Supervisors still has not taken over responsibility for appointing new members to the county’s Juvenile Justice Commission, which is required by law to act in an advisory role in the hiring of the new chief probation officer.
Presently, the Juvenile Justice Commission is made up of just three people. According to the state Welfare and Institutions Code, the commission is supposed to have at least seven members and could have as many as 15.
The job of keeping the commission’s seats filled and the commission itself active now falls to Superior Court Judge Steve Sanders. But as one of only two Superior Court judges in the county, Sanders already has a full docket. In the past, the commission itself recruited potential members, who were then appointed by the presiding judge. But recent experience has proven that informal system to be ineffective.
Last year, the commission’s membership dwindled to just one and the commission essentially became inactive. The timing couldn’t have been worse, as problems at the county Probation Department became a crisis.
The Juvenile Justice Commission is charged by law with oversight of Juvenile Hall and is also mandated to operate a delinquency prevention program. Beyond that, it has an official advisory role in running the county Probation Department.
The Board of Supervisors already makes appointments to various county boards and commissions, from the Planning Commission to the Fish and Game Commission to the Parks Commission. Having the supervisors assume responsibility for appointing new members to the Juvenile Justice Commission while a judge presides over the commission’s work would not only strike a good balance of responsibilities but could well help us avoid future problems like the one we now face.
Meanwhile, progress is being made in filling the vacant seats on the Juvenile Justice Commission. Judge Sanders is reviewing applications and has said he expects to name the new members by early April.
Again, that’s good news. But it’s also important that we fix a fundamental flaw that allowed the Juvenile Justice Commission to slip into inactive status.
