In the past week, two California cities - Riverside and San Bernardino - have repealed most of their "Crime-Free Multi-Housing" programs, which were designed to improve tenants' safety but have been criticized for destabilizing families, especially in low-income communities of color.
The program helps landlords choose better landscaping and lighting, and promotes neighborhood watch groups. City of San Bernardino Public Information Officer Jeff Kraus said it also established rules against criminal activity.
"Tenants were required to sign an addendum to the lease that, if there was illegal activity by either the tenant or the guests, that the tenants could be evicted," said Kraus. "And that component is where some of the controversy lies."
There have been cases in other cities where people were evicted even when the alleged crime took place elsewhere, or when there was no arrest or conviction.
Families have been uprooted when one member ran afoul of the law. And domestic violence survivors have been evicted after calling police.
San Bernardino will still help apartment complexes harden their property against crime, but agreed to scrap large parts of the Crime-Free Multi-Housing program as part of a settlement in a case over delays in the city's adoption of a state-mandated housing element.
Attorney Anthony Kim is a staff attorney with Inland Counties Legal Services, which brought the suit. He noted that the program required landlords to do a universal background check on all tenants.
"It's already pretty difficult for individuals to reintegrate themselves into society after getting out of jail," said Kim. "And everyone deserves housing, and having a record should not be any sort of precluding element to that."
A number of people testified against the program at the Riverside City Council meeting, including Desiree Sanchez - a member of the Inland Region Housing Justice Coalition and senior policy advocate with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California.
"The removal of the program will ensure the city does not increase homelessness by putting an end to illegal evictions," said Sanchez. "And that's strengthening the public safety and economy of the City of Riverside."
The City of Hesperia recently withdrew its program after a federal lawsuit said it discriminated against Black and Latino renters.
get more stories like this via email
Loretta Rush, Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court, has released the 2023-24 annual report for the state's courts.
The report shows Indiana's judicial system is taking big steps to tackle the mental health crisis. The Supreme Court recently launched the Office of Behavioral Health and hired Brittany Kelly as its behavioral health specialist, making Indiana the tenth state in the country to embed a mental health professional within its judiciary.
"She's off and running. She's had hundreds of inquiries from around the state. She's meeting with judges," Rush outlined. "She's helping with things like competency evaluations, access to Medicaid, how do I get somebody who's going through dementia through the court system?"
Rush pointed out Kelly will help the courts manage the mental health and substance use issues flooding Indiana's courtrooms daily. The latest report shows more than 1 million cases passed through the courts this past fiscal year, including almost 20,000 involuntary mental health hearings and a sharp rise in protective orders for domestic violence.
Rush highlighted the strain on local courts, noting about 70% of people in jail have behavioral health issues.
"How do we make sure we have diversion programs in place? How do we make sure that the services we're ordering for people to do are the right services?" Rush asked. "We've done a lot at the national level with regard to substance abuse and mental health, realizing programs that are working."
The judiciary is working with state agencies to reform policies and address the impact of mental health issues on the system. Kelly has training in both social work and law, and helps judges connect with treatment resources to get people the support they need and keep them out of jail.
get more stories like this via email
Survivors of crime are speaking out against Proposition 36, which goes before California voters in November.
The ballot measure would increase penalties for some theft and drug crimes - and undo parts of Proposition 47, which took savings from decreased incarceration and put the money into harm-reduction programs.
Tinisch Hollins, executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice, spoke Wednesday at the opening of a new trauma recovery center in Oakland.
"It's pushing the state to move back towards 'tough-on-crime.' We are pushing back on that. You need to prioritize resources to create trauma-recovery centers because this is the way to create safety in our community." Hollins said.
Supporters of Prop. 36 say current laws are too lenient, particularly concerning retail theft. But the state legislative analyst has suggested Prop. 36 will send many more people to jail, increasing criminal-justice costs anywhere from tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
Hollins said that would mean less money for programs that actually address poverty and desperation - the root cause of crime.
"Folks who have been touched by incarceration, folks who are experiencing homelessness, folks who are experiencing barriers to employment, they can actually get a full range of services to stabilize," Hollins added. "Think about how impactful this will be if we're able to continue expanding this model."
Advocates of Prop. 36 project that it would mean $850 million less over the next decade for trauma recovery centers, mental health, drug treatment, victim services, re-entry and crime-prevention programs.
Disclosure: Californians for Safety and Justice contributes to our fund for reporting on Criminal Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Groups across Alabama are joining forces to advocate for big changes to what they see as the state's flawed parole system.
In a panel discussion led by the group Alabama Values, speakers focused on improving the parole process and addressing its broader impact.
John Woods, who spent 10 years repeatedly being denied parole, shared his story. He said the system creates a sense of hopelessness, not only for those behind bars but also their families and shared a recent conversation with another person still waiting for a chance at parole.
"He said, 'I'm going out into society every day working a real a job,'" Woods explained. "He said, 'I go home every other week.' He said, 'I haven't did nothing and I've been there for seven years.' He said, 'What more can you get out of me in a work release?'"
Despite work release programs proving many individuals are not a threat to public safety, panelists noted few are granted parole. The latest Alabama Department of Corrections report showed state prisons are holding more than twice their intended capacity. The overcrowding, combined with rising violence, has heightened concerns.
Katie Glenn, policy associate for the Southern Poverty Law Center, cited the parole board's inconsistent application of its own guidelines as a major issue.
"The guidelines that the parole board uses, if they actually followed them, something like 70% of people who are up for parole would be paroled," Glenn contended. "I think now, we're seeing numbers as high as maybe, like, in the 20%."
Alison Mollman, interim legal director for the ACLU of Alabama, suggested borrowing parole models from other states to make improvements, including offering virtual attendance for parole hearings and reducing the lengthy wait times between hearings.
"In Alabama, you can be set off -- or you can have to wait for another parole hearing -- up to five years," Mollman pointed out. "That's a really, really long time, and I think a lot of times we hear, in the legislature, them wanting to move things so that everybody has to wait five years. But in states like Louisiana, most people wait one year."
Mollman also favors gradual release programs to reintegrate people through structured stages, as well as restorative justice practices, which allow some offenders to seek reconciliation with victims. The Alabama Legislature's next opportunity to address parole system issues is in its 2025 session.
Disclosure: Alabama Values Progress contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, LGBTQIA Issues, Reproductive Health, and Social Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email