Enterprise Runs Sheriff Prieto Letter on Prop 6

Share:
Just over two weeks ago, we had a story on California’s Proposition 6. Part of that story had to do with the fact that a letter to the editor appeared in the Woodland Daily Democrat from Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto.

It turned out that that same letter appeared in numerous newspapers across the state, each having the respective County Sheriff as the author.

Sheriff Prieto writes:

“Whether California faces rosy or gloomy times, we must always make public safety the number one priority. If our streets, parks and schools aren’t safe from gang violence and other crimes, then nothing else really matters.”

He goes on to argue:

“Democratic members of the Budget Conference Committee have approved deep cuts to public safety programs including the Citizens Option for Public Safety, which provides for front-line law enforcement, and the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act while altogether eliminating several vital programs such as California’s Methamphetamine Interdiction Program and the Small and Rural County Sheriffs Grant Program. Combined with a proposed corrections package that puts some offenders back out on the streets without supervision, these cuts will significantly exacerbate the ability of law enforcement to provide essential public safety services. These programs are critical in preventing our most at-risk youths from joining gangs, getting involved in drugs, and entering a lifetime of crime.”

What else does this law do according to Sheriff Prieto:

“In addition to protecting important gang prevention and intervention funding, this initiative prohibits bail to illegal aliens who are charged with violent or gang crimes; it creates tougher punishment for gang crimes, drive-by shootings, methamphetamine distribution and victim intimidation; it helps victims who have been intimidated by gang criminals and it funds victim-witness protection programs in our communities.”

Finally he gives you the link to a place where you can get more information: http://www.safeneighborhoodsact.com/ .

I point this out once again because there in yesterday’s Davis Enterprise was the same letter bearing the signature of Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto.

Now when Woodland Daily Democrat editor Jim Smith found out about this little scheme, he was not that happy.

The Woodland Journal Blog was the first to point this out.

We followed up with an article that detailed the proposition itself along with the Sheriff’s comments on August 14, 2008.

On August 15, Jim Smith put a blurb in his editorial.

Last week, The Democrat published a letter to the editor allegedly written by Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto, titled “Our communities suffer the most from public safety cuts.”

I write “allegedly” today, because an alert reader noted at the local Woodland Journal blog site that the letter was the same as others sent to newspapers across the state, some of which also published the letter atop the names of county sheriffs.

Some of those sheriffs named were Tom Bosenko of Shasta County, and Dean Wilson of Del Norte County.

First, my congratulations to an alert reader. I urge anyone who spots these letters – which are called “Astroturf” – to let us know.

It turns out the letter was submitted en masse by the “Yes on Prop. 6” Committee to sheriffs throughout the state.

Yolo Sheriff Ed Prieto is listed as a backer of the “Yes on Prop. 6” measure.

I understand very well why some otherwise well-educated people submit letters that have in fact been written by someone else. Sometimes, people have trouble putting their thoughts together to form a cogent explanation about why they feel the way they do on a particular issue. Sometimes, the letter provided is just so much better written. Sometimes, there’s too much going on at the time to permit a person time to sit down and put his own thoughts on paper.

In any respect, now that we know Sheriff Prieto is a backer of Prop. 6 and will put his name on something he didn’t write, we will be on our guard against future letters from him. It’s not that we don’t trust our sheriff to submit original commentary, we just don’t know when his submissions will be original commentary.

Given the reaction of Jim Smith, it will be interesting to see how Davis Enterprise Editor Debbie Davis reacts.

Law enforcement groups have support proposition 6, but there is a long and growing list of opponents as well.

Some of the opposition to Proposition 6 includes the California Democratic Party, the California Professional Firefighters, the California Labor Federation, former Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard Parks, the California Teachers Association, California National Organization for Women, the Los Angeles City Council, the League of Women Voters, California Church IMPACT and the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. [Click here for a full list of opposition]

The ACLU has come out against the proposition as well. They say:

“This dangerous initiative would deepen the budget crisis by diverting billions of dollars annually from schools, hospitals, and violence prevention programs into the criminal justice system. It is a misguided effort to incarcerate more and more people, including youth.”

Meanwhile in a stroke of deep irony, one of the major sponsors and backers of Proposition 6, Henry Nicholas III was indicted on 21 charges in June.

This is from an ACLU release:

“Billionaire Henry Nicholas III, who donated millions to get two crime-related initiatives on the November ballot, was arraigned on June 16, 2008, on an 18-page, 21-count indictment that includes charges of supplying prostitutes to big-ticket customers, drug use and trafficking, conspiracy, security fraud and making death threats. Nicholas donated a combined total of $5.9 million of critical seed money to Senator George Runner (R-Antelope Valley) and Assemblymember Todd Spitzer (R-Orange) for their “tough-on-crime” initiatives.

The media storm has forced both campaigns to distance themselves from Nicholas, who has resigned his active role in both campaigns. While Assemblyman Spitzer has committed not to spend any of the remaining $2 million their campaign has raised from Nicholas, it was the crucial seed money donated by Nicholas that helped to put both initiatives on the ballot.”

That is what you might call irony, I hope he gets as tough on himself as he wanted to on other criminals.

Stephen Walker, a CEO of a group called Minorities in Law Enforcement wrote this:

“We understand Senator Runner’s goal of trying to address the gang issue. Unfortunately, this measure takes a reactionary approach and does not effectively address the root concerns of the problem. The nature of which the bill was written fails to illustrate how it would actually make our neighborhoods safer. However, it does illustrate how to further overwhelm a prison system that is largely occupied with African American and Latino males by imposing sentence enhancements and targeting these particular demographics. This is especially inconsistent when our state’s Governor has recently proposed a 22,000 prisoner early release to ease the states massive overcrowding challenges.”

According to the California Federation of Teachers:

“The Runner Initiative directs billions of tax dollars to prisons, probation, and police (one billion dollars in the first year, and half a billion per year thereafter; plus additional unfunded mandates that local and county governments will be forced to pay)…”

Congresswoman Barbara Lee:

“The Runner Initiative’s name on the November ballot is as misleading as what it proposes to do for our community. The so-called “Safe Neighborhood Act” will not lead to safer streets, less crime or a reduction in drug dealing in our community. While we all want our communities to be free of crime and safer for our families, the Runner Initiative doesn’t address the core problems or create real solutions. In light of the current California budget crisis, we cannot afford to irresponsibly spend even more California tax-dollars on a failed policy of only funding prisons and criminalizing youth; we must make investments that prevent crime, in our communities where the impact is the greatest. We should be set our sights on finding creative ways to stabilize the economy, provide our children with educational centers of excellence and insist on equal access to the jobs marketplace.”

Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums:

“Everyone wants safe communities. Bringing peace to urban America is perhaps the most difficult and profound challenge facing the country today. However, in this time of crisis, the Runner Initiative is the worst kind of public policy. It plays on our deepest emotions but sets us up for failure. The Runner Initiative is an unfunded mandate that will gut California’s budget. It won’t result in safety and security. Instead it will leave us in more debt with less safety and stability than ever before.”

As I wrote on August 14, 2008, this law seems to have much in the way of unintended consequences that will end up costing the state far more than the initial money upfront.

It seems like this imposes a lot of new rules on the criminal justice system that need to be clearly thought out in terms of their consequences. Voters will often vote for these measures because they want to be tough on crime. This one has a chance to fail because of the economic issues, but frankly some of the provisions could have startlingly unintended consequences.

It seems that the Sheriff’s want the additional resources and I cannot blame them for that. But if it comes at the expense of beleaguered schools, it seems to me that we will just be feeding into the problem of law enforcement in the future by taking money from present education.

So for that reason alone, I am voting against it. And I am alarmed at a number of the provisions in the law. I am saddened to see the Sheriff, one of the very few Democratic Sheriffs in California joining his Republican colleagues and supporting such a measure just to get additional funding.

—Doug Paul Davis reporting

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

52 thoughts on “Enterprise Runs Sheriff Prieto Letter on Prop 6”

  1. Anonymous

    First, its too bad that The Davis Enterprise could not be as alert as the Woodland blog reader before it published ” Sheriff Prieto’s” letter.
    Secondly, to justify mass distribution of the same letter under various Sheriff’s names, is deceptive. To say that (paraphrase) one can understand why otherwise intelligent people have others write letters for them because they cannot cogently express thoughts in writing is
    pathetic (specifically when there is no disclaimer or implied understanding that there is a writer e.g., political speeches).
    Thirdly, this Proposition will do exactly what the ACLU and the CEO of the minority Police Officer’s group says that it will do. This proposition is yet another means to incarcerate more brown and black men; try children as adults; and take away money from schools (aside from effective parental involvement education is one of the most effective means of curtailing gang membership). Our prison system is egregiously overcrowded.
    Where are we REALISTICALLY going to put all these people arrested because of a now broadened net? Take that money and put it into prevention.

  2. Anonymous

    First, its too bad that The Davis Enterprise could not be as alert as the Woodland blog reader before it published ” Sheriff Prieto’s” letter.
    Secondly, to justify mass distribution of the same letter under various Sheriff’s names, is deceptive. To say that (paraphrase) one can understand why otherwise intelligent people have others write letters for them because they cannot cogently express thoughts in writing is
    pathetic (specifically when there is no disclaimer or implied understanding that there is a writer e.g., political speeches).
    Thirdly, this Proposition will do exactly what the ACLU and the CEO of the minority Police Officer’s group says that it will do. This proposition is yet another means to incarcerate more brown and black men; try children as adults; and take away money from schools (aside from effective parental involvement education is one of the most effective means of curtailing gang membership). Our prison system is egregiously overcrowded.
    Where are we REALISTICALLY going to put all these people arrested because of a now broadened net? Take that money and put it into prevention.

  3. Anonymous

    First, its too bad that The Davis Enterprise could not be as alert as the Woodland blog reader before it published ” Sheriff Prieto’s” letter.
    Secondly, to justify mass distribution of the same letter under various Sheriff’s names, is deceptive. To say that (paraphrase) one can understand why otherwise intelligent people have others write letters for them because they cannot cogently express thoughts in writing is
    pathetic (specifically when there is no disclaimer or implied understanding that there is a writer e.g., political speeches).
    Thirdly, this Proposition will do exactly what the ACLU and the CEO of the minority Police Officer’s group says that it will do. This proposition is yet another means to incarcerate more brown and black men; try children as adults; and take away money from schools (aside from effective parental involvement education is one of the most effective means of curtailing gang membership). Our prison system is egregiously overcrowded.
    Where are we REALISTICALLY going to put all these people arrested because of a now broadened net? Take that money and put it into prevention.

  4. Anonymous

    First, its too bad that The Davis Enterprise could not be as alert as the Woodland blog reader before it published ” Sheriff Prieto’s” letter.
    Secondly, to justify mass distribution of the same letter under various Sheriff’s names, is deceptive. To say that (paraphrase) one can understand why otherwise intelligent people have others write letters for them because they cannot cogently express thoughts in writing is
    pathetic (specifically when there is no disclaimer or implied understanding that there is a writer e.g., political speeches).
    Thirdly, this Proposition will do exactly what the ACLU and the CEO of the minority Police Officer’s group says that it will do. This proposition is yet another means to incarcerate more brown and black men; try children as adults; and take away money from schools (aside from effective parental involvement education is one of the most effective means of curtailing gang membership). Our prison system is egregiously overcrowded.
    Where are we REALISTICALLY going to put all these people arrested because of a now broadened net? Take that money and put it into prevention.

  5. triki ricki

    Never have trusted Prieto and, yes, it will be very interesting to see how Debbie Davis handles the “letter issue.” What about the Enterprise’s long-standing policy of verifying letter authorship (especially on ballot and election subjects)?

    But, what really got me to type this was the sidebar. Yes, the Vanguard is a danger to the political establishment; where else in this town can we communicate so openly and freely with so many fellow citizens.

    Great job DPD!

  6. triki ricki

    Never have trusted Prieto and, yes, it will be very interesting to see how Debbie Davis handles the “letter issue.” What about the Enterprise’s long-standing policy of verifying letter authorship (especially on ballot and election subjects)?

    But, what really got me to type this was the sidebar. Yes, the Vanguard is a danger to the political establishment; where else in this town can we communicate so openly and freely with so many fellow citizens.

    Great job DPD!

  7. triki ricki

    Never have trusted Prieto and, yes, it will be very interesting to see how Debbie Davis handles the “letter issue.” What about the Enterprise’s long-standing policy of verifying letter authorship (especially on ballot and election subjects)?

    But, what really got me to type this was the sidebar. Yes, the Vanguard is a danger to the political establishment; where else in this town can we communicate so openly and freely with so many fellow citizens.

    Great job DPD!

  8. triki ricki

    Never have trusted Prieto and, yes, it will be very interesting to see how Debbie Davis handles the “letter issue.” What about the Enterprise’s long-standing policy of verifying letter authorship (especially on ballot and election subjects)?

    But, what really got me to type this was the sidebar. Yes, the Vanguard is a danger to the political establishment; where else in this town can we communicate so openly and freely with so many fellow citizens.

    Great job DPD!

  9. Anonymous

    The flood gates opened after 9/11 on public safety spending. Now is the time to ponder what we are getting for that money – not dole out more.

    “Take that money and put it into prevention.”

    I completely agree!

  10. Anonymous

    The flood gates opened after 9/11 on public safety spending. Now is the time to ponder what we are getting for that money – not dole out more.

    “Take that money and put it into prevention.”

    I completely agree!

  11. Anonymous

    The flood gates opened after 9/11 on public safety spending. Now is the time to ponder what we are getting for that money – not dole out more.

    “Take that money and put it into prevention.”

    I completely agree!

  12. Anonymous

    The flood gates opened after 9/11 on public safety spending. Now is the time to ponder what we are getting for that money – not dole out more.

    “Take that money and put it into prevention.”

    I completely agree!

  13. Former Lamar Supporter

    Agree with triki ricki, DPD; you’re doing a great job and providing a real service to the
    community.

    Now, if you can only find some “extra” time to expose the actual driving force behind the greatest danger facing Davisites:
    the Charter City ballot measure.

    As we begin the Labor Day weekend, let’s all give thanks to DPD and all of the other folks who are working, while the rest of us laze about and stuff ourselves with ribs or veggies. Don’t forget the workers!

  14. Former Lamar Supporter

    Agree with triki ricki, DPD; you’re doing a great job and providing a real service to the
    community.

    Now, if you can only find some “extra” time to expose the actual driving force behind the greatest danger facing Davisites:
    the Charter City ballot measure.

    As we begin the Labor Day weekend, let’s all give thanks to DPD and all of the other folks who are working, while the rest of us laze about and stuff ourselves with ribs or veggies. Don’t forget the workers!

  15. Former Lamar Supporter

    Agree with triki ricki, DPD; you’re doing a great job and providing a real service to the
    community.

    Now, if you can only find some “extra” time to expose the actual driving force behind the greatest danger facing Davisites:
    the Charter City ballot measure.

    As we begin the Labor Day weekend, let’s all give thanks to DPD and all of the other folks who are working, while the rest of us laze about and stuff ourselves with ribs or veggies. Don’t forget the workers!

  16. Former Lamar Supporter

    Agree with triki ricki, DPD; you’re doing a great job and providing a real service to the
    community.

    Now, if you can only find some “extra” time to expose the actual driving force behind the greatest danger facing Davisites:
    the Charter City ballot measure.

    As we begin the Labor Day weekend, let’s all give thanks to DPD and all of the other folks who are working, while the rest of us laze about and stuff ourselves with ribs or veggies. Don’t forget the workers!

  17. Anonymous

    How about that! Before the internet those just-sign-your-name mass mailed letters worked. Not anymore. Thank you, as always, for bringing this information to our attention.

  18. Anonymous

    How about that! Before the internet those just-sign-your-name mass mailed letters worked. Not anymore. Thank you, as always, for bringing this information to our attention.

  19. Anonymous

    How about that! Before the internet those just-sign-your-name mass mailed letters worked. Not anymore. Thank you, as always, for bringing this information to our attention.

  20. Anonymous

    How about that! Before the internet those just-sign-your-name mass mailed letters worked. Not anymore. Thank you, as always, for bringing this information to our attention.

  21. Mike Harrington

    I dont think it was inappropriate for Sheriff Prieto to use language from a political organization and sign his name to it.

    In every local campaign I have seen, people write letters, and pass them to others to be signed, if they agree with the thoughts and positions.

    I can usually spot them, if I know the letter signer, but who cares? The signer certifies to the positions.

    That said, I am still studying the ballot issues and know nothing, yet, about Prop 6.

  22. Mike Harrington

    I dont think it was inappropriate for Sheriff Prieto to use language from a political organization and sign his name to it.

    In every local campaign I have seen, people write letters, and pass them to others to be signed, if they agree with the thoughts and positions.

    I can usually spot them, if I know the letter signer, but who cares? The signer certifies to the positions.

    That said, I am still studying the ballot issues and know nothing, yet, about Prop 6.

  23. Mike Harrington

    I dont think it was inappropriate for Sheriff Prieto to use language from a political organization and sign his name to it.

    In every local campaign I have seen, people write letters, and pass them to others to be signed, if they agree with the thoughts and positions.

    I can usually spot them, if I know the letter signer, but who cares? The signer certifies to the positions.

    That said, I am still studying the ballot issues and know nothing, yet, about Prop 6.

  24. Mike Harrington

    I dont think it was inappropriate for Sheriff Prieto to use language from a political organization and sign his name to it.

    In every local campaign I have seen, people write letters, and pass them to others to be signed, if they agree with the thoughts and positions.

    I can usually spot them, if I know the letter signer, but who cares? The signer certifies to the positions.

    That said, I am still studying the ballot issues and know nothing, yet, about Prop 6.

  25. Meagan

    It would be more honest of Sheriff Prieto to say he endorses the language of the group, and then publish that language. When he signs his name to a document and doesn’t confess that he didn’t write it, he’s not telling the whole truth.

  26. Meagan

    It would be more honest of Sheriff Prieto to say he endorses the language of the group, and then publish that language. When he signs his name to a document and doesn’t confess that he didn’t write it, he’s not telling the whole truth.

  27. Meagan

    It would be more honest of Sheriff Prieto to say he endorses the language of the group, and then publish that language. When he signs his name to a document and doesn’t confess that he didn’t write it, he’s not telling the whole truth.

  28. Meagan

    It would be more honest of Sheriff Prieto to say he endorses the language of the group, and then publish that language. When he signs his name to a document and doesn’t confess that he didn’t write it, he’s not telling the whole truth.

  29. Micah

    Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

    Yours truly,

    Ed Prieto

  30. Micah

    Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

    Yours truly,

    Ed Prieto

  31. Micah

    Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

    Yours truly,

    Ed Prieto

  32. Micah

    Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

    Yours truly,

    Ed Prieto

  33. Anonymous

    The following response to a Sac Bee article about Gang Violence responses was sent to the Sacramento Bee Forum, August 25, 2008. Don Meyer is Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer.

    “The Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC) has supported and continues to support rehabilitative programs that work effectively to reduce re-offense. So it was with great appreciation that we read your August 24, 2008 article, Gang Violence and the way in San Jose, which acknowledges our collective experience: evidence based programs with measurable outcomes, delivered with fidelity and fiscal accountability reduces recidivism.

    Of particular interest was the data supplied in the article “About 20 percent of the youths served were gang members, an additional 31 percent were gang supporters and the rest were described as ‘high risk’.” There is ample scientific evidence that several programs, when delivered with fidelity, reduce recidivism in both delinquents and adult offenders. Some examples are Aggression Replacement Training (ART) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT), to name a few. A great deal of research on correctional programs has been conducted over the past thirty years that validates effectiveness of some programs and destructiveness of others. Significant and encouraging information can be reviewed at the Washington State Information of Public Policy website (WSIPP), which confirms my previous statements.

    We know the following: Risk to reoffend is directly related to at least eight criminogenic indicators. These include a history of anti-social behavior, anti-social personality pattern, anti-social attitudes, anti-social associates, family/marital issues, education/employment issues, substance abuse, unproductive use of leisure/recreation time.

    For a community to address crime (including gang issues), research indicates you must adhere to three principles. Risk principle: To maximize effect on recidivism, treatment should be targeted toward higher risk, rather than lower risk offenders and the population of treatment groups should not be aggregated by risk (one size does not fit all). Need Principle: Treatment should be targeted toward dynamic risk factors, also known as criminogenic needs. These are risk factors that can be changed (e.g. substance abuse, gang involvement, anti-social thinking) as opposed to those that are static (e.g., prior record) Responsivity Principle: Treatment should use behavioral and structured social learning rather than unstructured, nondirective, or “getting tough” approaches.

    One of the ongoing sources of frustration for community corrections has been the lack of a dependable revenue source, funds that are held hostage by budget crises, and a general lack of understanding about how to address crime reduction scientifically and effectively. It is clear that consistent funding needs to be provided to local community corrections which includes probation, community-based organizations, treatment providers, jails, juvenile institutions and the entire law enforcement component.

    What is also increasingly clear is that the community and the taxpayers should demand accountability and results for the funding it provides.

    Don L. Meyer, President Elect, Chief Probation Officers of California., 1415 L Street, Sacramento, California 95814, (916) 447-2762″

  34. Anonymous

    The following response to a Sac Bee article about Gang Violence responses was sent to the Sacramento Bee Forum, August 25, 2008. Don Meyer is Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer.

    “The Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC) has supported and continues to support rehabilitative programs that work effectively to reduce re-offense. So it was with great appreciation that we read your August 24, 2008 article, Gang Violence and the way in San Jose, which acknowledges our collective experience: evidence based programs with measurable outcomes, delivered with fidelity and fiscal accountability reduces recidivism.

    Of particular interest was the data supplied in the article “About 20 percent of the youths served were gang members, an additional 31 percent were gang supporters and the rest were described as ‘high risk’.” There is ample scientific evidence that several programs, when delivered with fidelity, reduce recidivism in both delinquents and adult offenders. Some examples are Aggression Replacement Training (ART) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT), to name a few. A great deal of research on correctional programs has been conducted over the past thirty years that validates effectiveness of some programs and destructiveness of others. Significant and encouraging information can be reviewed at the Washington State Information of Public Policy website (WSIPP), which confirms my previous statements.

    We know the following: Risk to reoffend is directly related to at least eight criminogenic indicators. These include a history of anti-social behavior, anti-social personality pattern, anti-social attitudes, anti-social associates, family/marital issues, education/employment issues, substance abuse, unproductive use of leisure/recreation time.

    For a community to address crime (including gang issues), research indicates you must adhere to three principles. Risk principle: To maximize effect on recidivism, treatment should be targeted toward higher risk, rather than lower risk offenders and the population of treatment groups should not be aggregated by risk (one size does not fit all). Need Principle: Treatment should be targeted toward dynamic risk factors, also known as criminogenic needs. These are risk factors that can be changed (e.g. substance abuse, gang involvement, anti-social thinking) as opposed to those that are static (e.g., prior record) Responsivity Principle: Treatment should use behavioral and structured social learning rather than unstructured, nondirective, or “getting tough” approaches.

    One of the ongoing sources of frustration for community corrections has been the lack of a dependable revenue source, funds that are held hostage by budget crises, and a general lack of understanding about how to address crime reduction scientifically and effectively. It is clear that consistent funding needs to be provided to local community corrections which includes probation, community-based organizations, treatment providers, jails, juvenile institutions and the entire law enforcement component.

    What is also increasingly clear is that the community and the taxpayers should demand accountability and results for the funding it provides.

    Don L. Meyer, President Elect, Chief Probation Officers of California., 1415 L Street, Sacramento, California 95814, (916) 447-2762″

  35. Anonymous

    The following response to a Sac Bee article about Gang Violence responses was sent to the Sacramento Bee Forum, August 25, 2008. Don Meyer is Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer.

    “The Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC) has supported and continues to support rehabilitative programs that work effectively to reduce re-offense. So it was with great appreciation that we read your August 24, 2008 article, Gang Violence and the way in San Jose, which acknowledges our collective experience: evidence based programs with measurable outcomes, delivered with fidelity and fiscal accountability reduces recidivism.

    Of particular interest was the data supplied in the article “About 20 percent of the youths served were gang members, an additional 31 percent were gang supporters and the rest were described as ‘high risk’.” There is ample scientific evidence that several programs, when delivered with fidelity, reduce recidivism in both delinquents and adult offenders. Some examples are Aggression Replacement Training (ART) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT), to name a few. A great deal of research on correctional programs has been conducted over the past thirty years that validates effectiveness of some programs and destructiveness of others. Significant and encouraging information can be reviewed at the Washington State Information of Public Policy website (WSIPP), which confirms my previous statements.

    We know the following: Risk to reoffend is directly related to at least eight criminogenic indicators. These include a history of anti-social behavior, anti-social personality pattern, anti-social attitudes, anti-social associates, family/marital issues, education/employment issues, substance abuse, unproductive use of leisure/recreation time.

    For a community to address crime (including gang issues), research indicates you must adhere to three principles. Risk principle: To maximize effect on recidivism, treatment should be targeted toward higher risk, rather than lower risk offenders and the population of treatment groups should not be aggregated by risk (one size does not fit all). Need Principle: Treatment should be targeted toward dynamic risk factors, also known as criminogenic needs. These are risk factors that can be changed (e.g. substance abuse, gang involvement, anti-social thinking) as opposed to those that are static (e.g., prior record) Responsivity Principle: Treatment should use behavioral and structured social learning rather than unstructured, nondirective, or “getting tough” approaches.

    One of the ongoing sources of frustration for community corrections has been the lack of a dependable revenue source, funds that are held hostage by budget crises, and a general lack of understanding about how to address crime reduction scientifically and effectively. It is clear that consistent funding needs to be provided to local community corrections which includes probation, community-based organizations, treatment providers, jails, juvenile institutions and the entire law enforcement component.

    What is also increasingly clear is that the community and the taxpayers should demand accountability and results for the funding it provides.

    Don L. Meyer, President Elect, Chief Probation Officers of California., 1415 L Street, Sacramento, California 95814, (916) 447-2762″

  36. Anonymous

    The following response to a Sac Bee article about Gang Violence responses was sent to the Sacramento Bee Forum, August 25, 2008. Don Meyer is Yolo County’s Chief Probation Officer.

    “The Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC) has supported and continues to support rehabilitative programs that work effectively to reduce re-offense. So it was with great appreciation that we read your August 24, 2008 article, Gang Violence and the way in San Jose, which acknowledges our collective experience: evidence based programs with measurable outcomes, delivered with fidelity and fiscal accountability reduces recidivism.

    Of particular interest was the data supplied in the article “About 20 percent of the youths served were gang members, an additional 31 percent were gang supporters and the rest were described as ‘high risk’.” There is ample scientific evidence that several programs, when delivered with fidelity, reduce recidivism in both delinquents and adult offenders. Some examples are Aggression Replacement Training (ART) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT), to name a few. A great deal of research on correctional programs has been conducted over the past thirty years that validates effectiveness of some programs and destructiveness of others. Significant and encouraging information can be reviewed at the Washington State Information of Public Policy website (WSIPP), which confirms my previous statements.

    We know the following: Risk to reoffend is directly related to at least eight criminogenic indicators. These include a history of anti-social behavior, anti-social personality pattern, anti-social attitudes, anti-social associates, family/marital issues, education/employment issues, substance abuse, unproductive use of leisure/recreation time.

    For a community to address crime (including gang issues), research indicates you must adhere to three principles. Risk principle: To maximize effect on recidivism, treatment should be targeted toward higher risk, rather than lower risk offenders and the population of treatment groups should not be aggregated by risk (one size does not fit all). Need Principle: Treatment should be targeted toward dynamic risk factors, also known as criminogenic needs. These are risk factors that can be changed (e.g. substance abuse, gang involvement, anti-social thinking) as opposed to those that are static (e.g., prior record) Responsivity Principle: Treatment should use behavioral and structured social learning rather than unstructured, nondirective, or “getting tough” approaches.

    One of the ongoing sources of frustration for community corrections has been the lack of a dependable revenue source, funds that are held hostage by budget crises, and a general lack of understanding about how to address crime reduction scientifically and effectively. It is clear that consistent funding needs to be provided to local community corrections which includes probation, community-based organizations, treatment providers, jails, juvenile institutions and the entire law enforcement component.

    What is also increasingly clear is that the community and the taxpayers should demand accountability and results for the funding it provides.

    Don L. Meyer, President Elect, Chief Probation Officers of California., 1415 L Street, Sacramento, California 95814, (916) 447-2762″

  37. Poor Taxpayer

    Funny, I don’t see this as all that big a deal. So Sheriff Prieto is not good at writing himself, so had someone do it for him, then signed his name to it. How many politicians do you know who do this, and no one is all up in arms about that!

    That said, to me, Ed Prieto’s letter and Prop 6 is nothing more than a hand being put out for more funding for police, just like fire, teachers, etc. Of course fire and teachers are against Prop 6 – it may mean less money for them.

    It is all about the money, and picking the taxpayers’ already lean pockets. I wholeheartedly agree with some of the above commentary, that mentions we need more accountability in the way tax dollars are spent.

    I would guess more than 50 cents of every tax dollar is completely wasted. It is just too easy for the powers that be to spend OPM – Other People’s Money.

  38. Poor Taxpayer

    Funny, I don’t see this as all that big a deal. So Sheriff Prieto is not good at writing himself, so had someone do it for him, then signed his name to it. How many politicians do you know who do this, and no one is all up in arms about that!

    That said, to me, Ed Prieto’s letter and Prop 6 is nothing more than a hand being put out for more funding for police, just like fire, teachers, etc. Of course fire and teachers are against Prop 6 – it may mean less money for them.

    It is all about the money, and picking the taxpayers’ already lean pockets. I wholeheartedly agree with some of the above commentary, that mentions we need more accountability in the way tax dollars are spent.

    I would guess more than 50 cents of every tax dollar is completely wasted. It is just too easy for the powers that be to spend OPM – Other People’s Money.

  39. Poor Taxpayer

    Funny, I don’t see this as all that big a deal. So Sheriff Prieto is not good at writing himself, so had someone do it for him, then signed his name to it. How many politicians do you know who do this, and no one is all up in arms about that!

    That said, to me, Ed Prieto’s letter and Prop 6 is nothing more than a hand being put out for more funding for police, just like fire, teachers, etc. Of course fire and teachers are against Prop 6 – it may mean less money for them.

    It is all about the money, and picking the taxpayers’ already lean pockets. I wholeheartedly agree with some of the above commentary, that mentions we need more accountability in the way tax dollars are spent.

    I would guess more than 50 cents of every tax dollar is completely wasted. It is just too easy for the powers that be to spend OPM – Other People’s Money.

  40. Poor Taxpayer

    Funny, I don’t see this as all that big a deal. So Sheriff Prieto is not good at writing himself, so had someone do it for him, then signed his name to it. How many politicians do you know who do this, and no one is all up in arms about that!

    That said, to me, Ed Prieto’s letter and Prop 6 is nothing more than a hand being put out for more funding for police, just like fire, teachers, etc. Of course fire and teachers are against Prop 6 – it may mean less money for them.

    It is all about the money, and picking the taxpayers’ already lean pockets. I wholeheartedly agree with some of the above commentary, that mentions we need more accountability in the way tax dollars are spent.

    I would guess more than 50 cents of every tax dollar is completely wasted. It is just too easy for the powers that be to spend OPM – Other People’s Money.

  41. Old Skool Davis

    How man more boneheaded moves does this current Sherrif have left to make? 1.) The escape from his jail. 2.) The Rosenberg hand slap on the Topete trial. 3.) Roughing up some 95 pound gay winos adjacent to the court house. 4.)Lending his name to a generic political chain letter?

    Where is a decent contender to replace this guy come election time? Yep! You got it……
    Nick Concolino!!!

  42. Old Skool Davis

    How man more boneheaded moves does this current Sherrif have left to make? 1.) The escape from his jail. 2.) The Rosenberg hand slap on the Topete trial. 3.) Roughing up some 95 pound gay winos adjacent to the court house. 4.)Lending his name to a generic political chain letter?

    Where is a decent contender to replace this guy come election time? Yep! You got it……
    Nick Concolino!!!

  43. Old Skool Davis

    How man more boneheaded moves does this current Sherrif have left to make? 1.) The escape from his jail. 2.) The Rosenberg hand slap on the Topete trial. 3.) Roughing up some 95 pound gay winos adjacent to the court house. 4.)Lending his name to a generic political chain letter?

    Where is a decent contender to replace this guy come election time? Yep! You got it……
    Nick Concolino!!!

  44. Old Skool Davis

    How man more boneheaded moves does this current Sherrif have left to make? 1.) The escape from his jail. 2.) The Rosenberg hand slap on the Topete trial. 3.) Roughing up some 95 pound gay winos adjacent to the court house. 4.)Lending his name to a generic political chain letter?

    Where is a decent contender to replace this guy come election time? Yep! You got it……
    Nick Concolino!!!

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for