County

Private Probation Firm Ordered To Assist Ada Sheriff Transition

Citing a refrusal to cooperate with the Ada County Sheriff’s office, Fourth District Administrative Judge Mike Wetherell has issued an order to the private for profit “Ada County Misdemeanor Probation Services, Inc” firm to meet with the sheriff no later than September 3 to insure the orderly transfer of services to the Sheriff.

In his order, Judge Wetherell said, “the Ada County District Court has been advised that Misdemeanor Probation Services, Inc. has refused to meet and confer with the Ada County Sheriff and his designees regarding the transfer of misdemeanor probation services; and the failure to meet and confer on the orderly transfer of these functions would be harmful to the administration ofjustice in Ada County, the largest county within the Fourth Judicial District.”

The GUARDIAN broke the story May 24, 2011 when we published a LETTER from a probationer claiming irregularities in the system. That letter along with literally hundreds of comments from those who claimed to have been abused by the system prompted a class action civil lawsuit as well as a vote by the Ada Commishes to not renew the contract with the ACMPS owner Nancy Cladis. They turned the probation function over to Ada Sheriff Gary Raney, beginning October 1.

Raney has agreed to hire qualified probation officers who can pass the background check from the private firm. Several have failed the back ground check–not surprising given the massive turnover and even arrest of one of the probation officers for embezzlement.

Also in his order, Judge Wetherell reminded Cladis to abide by a contractual agreement to provide one probation officer for every 250 probationers through September 30.

Insiders have told us Cladis attempted to create a new “diversion program,”in essence a reinvention of the private probation company, but it has received a chilly reception among the Fourth District Court judges.

TEXT OF THE ORDER FOLLOWS:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ADA
Order to Require Current Misdemeanor Probation Services)
Contractor to Meet and Confer in Good Faith with the )
Ada County Sheriff and His Designee Relating to the )
Orderly Transfer of Misdemeanor Probation Services )
from the Current Contractor to the Ada County Sheriff ) ORDER
and Requiring the Drafting of a Memorandum of ) No. 12-08-15
Understanding with the Sheriff and Ada County )
___________________________________________________________________________________
)
WHEREAS, the Ada County Commissioners have determined not to renew the current contract
with Misdemeanor Probation Services, Inc. for the provision of misdemeanor probation services
in Ada County for Fiscal Year 2013; and
WHEREAS, the Ada County Commissioners have transferred misdemeanor probation services
from the current contractor to the Ada County Sheriff effective October 1, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Ada County District Court has been advised that Misdemeanor Probation
Services, Inc. has refused to meet and confer with the Ada County Sheriff and his designees
regarding the transfer of misdemeanor probation services; and
WHEREAS, the failure to meet and confer on the orderly transfer of these functions would be
harmful to the administration ofjustice in Ada County, the largest county within the Fourth
Judicial District;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mike Wetherell, Administrative Judge for the Fourth Judicial District, in
accordance with the powers and responsibilities conferred upon me pursuant to Idaho Code
Section 31-878 and the provisions of the current misdemeanor probation contract entered into by
the contract services provider in Section 1(W), I hereby order:
1. The Ada County Sheriff and Ada County commissioners shall, no later than 15 days from
the date of this Order, complete a draft of either a contract or memorandum of
understanding consistent with Idaho law defining the obligations of the Ada County
Sheriff to the Ada County Commissioners and the Court which shall address those
matters addressed previously under the existing contract entitled “Misdemeanor
Probation Services Agreement”, executed between the County and Misdemeanor
Probation Services, Inc. on September 30, 2011.
2. No later than September 3, 2012, the Ada County Sheriff and his designees and the
current contractor and her designees shall meet and confer with one another and
cooperate in good faith and in the public interest in the orderly transfer to the sheriff of
Ada County the functions of the current contractor in the provision of misdemeanor
probation services. The purpose of this meeting shall be to facilitate the efficient
assumption of these obligations and duties by the sheriff of Ada County.
Order re: Transfer of Misdemeanor Probation Services in Ada County
The Court further notes that the current contract provides that one (1) probation officer shall be
provided for each 250 probationers and that said requirement must remain in any future contract
or memorandum of understanding and shall remain in effect under the current contract until
September 30, 2012.
It is so Ordered.
Dated: August 15, 2012
A histrative District Judge
Copy to:
Nancy Cladis, Misdemeanor Probation Services, Inc.
Gary Raney, Ada County Sheriff
Ada County Commissioners
Ada County Magistrate Judges

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

  1. Ha! I’m not sure you would call what Ms Cladis is doing “cooperating”. I was in one of her groups a couple of weeks ago, when one of the other probationers asked her what was going to happen when the Sheriff’s office took over. Nancy immediately flew off the handle, became agitated and spoke for over ten minutes about the take over, stating that she was going to try and keep the “clients” she had now, and that once the sheriff’s office did take over, they would find “every reason in the book” to violate our cases and send us to jail. We were not told how the transition would take place, who we needed to contact over there, or where to report for our next appt, only that She was not happy about the change, and how worried we should be that they were taking over. We were also given slips of paper with the county commissioner’s phone numbers and email addresses on them, and were told to contact them if the transition wasn’t a smooth one and that it was at fault of the sheriff’s office if it did not go smoothly so this was who we needed to blame when addressing them. She did not answer questions of who we should contact after October, instead saying “they will contact you”. I find this unlikely, as there are, what, 2,000 people on proabtion? The Sheriff’s office cant be planning on contacting that many people to tell them when and where they need to be for probation?? She was rolling her eyes, waving her arms all over the place, and spent over half of group bringing it up or making snide remarks. She seemed to be very resentful and even bitter. Makes sense I guess, as she is losing her business. But her behavior was not conducive to a “good faith” transfer of services that Judge Wetherall is ordering.

  2. The Idaho Department of Corrections is really nothing more than legalized terrorism, and all those who support it are nothing more than 21st century Fascists, so this is a ridiculous, why care who is in charge when the whole system is fundamentally flawed. Until we eliminate this broken system in its entirety, and rebuild something in its place that works (like treatment and not continuing the stanford prison project), we are just continuing an exercise of insanity, repeating the same actions over and over again expecting something to change.

    EDITOR NOTE–You are a bit confused. While you may not like IDOC, they’re not involved in this issue at all. It is a private company and Ada County only.

  3. oh; well I hate them too….

  4. Let's be adults
    Aug 27, 2012, 7:25 pm

    Nancy how old are we? Just because you didn’t get your way does not mean you get to sabotage the system. Probation is changing hands no matter who likes it or not. Refusing to cooperate with what’s going to happen just makes you look vindictive. Be satisfied in knowing that you’ve had this contract for many years without being questioned but your reign is up. The gravy train is coming to an end, don’t go out confirming what people have thought about you over the years and that’s that you have been in it for the money. Show some dignity and cooperate! It’s people’s lives we are talking about here not your ability to get even.

  5. I was told by my PO tonja at my appointment that if I paid for 2 months I don’t have to come in next month. Has anyone else heard this? Is this legit? Or am I being set up for a violation? It sounds as if nancy is not cooperating, are they trying to screw us? I was also told the sherifs office would contact us, is this true? I just feel like I might possibly be thrown to the wolves cause nancy isnt cooperating. Guardian is there a number or address we can call to find out what we need to do cause im not getting direction?

  6. Everyone working for the current system turn your shirt inside out and raise your right hand.

  7. A county function should never have been downloaded to a “for profit” entity. It just opens the door to fraud and abuse.

  8. Monthly check-in or collection letter
    Aug 27, 2012, 8:30 pm

    The monthly check-ins that people are told to fill out no longer ask questions pertinent to supervision and accountability. Now, instead of questions like “have you been charged w any new crimes” or questions about drug/alcohol use and what you’re learning in classes, the form is regarding how much you owe on your cost of supervision and questions regarding how you plan to pay all arrears BEFORE Oct 1st. And being told that you will pay it in full or you will go to jail is the focus of your monthly meeting, instead of addressing why you’re ON SUPERVISION. I think this alone speaks volumes about Nancy’s agenda at this point.

  9. I heard misdemeanor probation was shut down today….

  10. The Guardian seems to be way off track on this one. Instead of taking tips from “insiders”, it would be the responsible thing to provide information from the court system from reliable sources.

    Ada County Probation did refuse to recently meet with the Sheriff’s Office because they had already met with the Sheriff on two different occasions declining to mentor his staff on how probation is run. The Sheriff and his staff have no experience in misdemeanor probation, nor should they as he is elected to run law enforcement, not probation. It is a conflict of interest and not the same circumstances of the Idaho Department of Corrections.

    The ongoing requests made by the Sheriff’s office can not be performed and must come from the court.

    The order states the Sheriff and his designess and the contractor and her designees are to meet by September 3rd. This meeting was held today by contractor and the Sheriff’s designees. The Sheriff was not present as cited in the order. The Sheriff’s Office does not have a final transistion plan in place, the contractor does.

    “Raney agreed to hire qualified probation officers who can pass the background test.” Four people working at probation applied for a job. One was hired as a resource and needs supervision per Sheriff Raney and three were turned down. Two are certified probation officers that passed the background check with POST Academy through the Idaho State Police and the third was clerical who passed a check with the Ada County Prosecutors Office. The officer arrested also passed the background check and was Post Certified.

    In 14 years only this one employee committed a criminal act and it was probation that led the investigation. Several acts of criminal behavior have occurred with employees of the Sheriff’s Office over the years and three very recently.

    “Massive Turnover”. What’s massive? Look at the turnover at the SO and other departments.

    The reminder of the contractual agreement of 1 PO to 250 clients is also directed to the Sheriff.

    The first part of the order places the burden on the Sheriff and the Commissioners to complete a contract outlining the responsibilities of the Sheriff to provide probation. This should have been done months ago. Do only contractors have guidelines but not local government? They will be required to show that the level of service is not degraded from the current services. That might be hard to do with no experienced probation officers. The current probation office has years of combined experience .

    As to “money”, the Idaho Statute cites $75 a month for probation fees. This is the same fee the Sheriff will charge. As for the private contract, it has not cost the taxpayers one dime in 14 years. The current contractor also offered to transistion to a separate county department at no cost to the taxpayers. Your taxdollars will now support a very large budget for the Sheriff to run it. More fees will be charged to the probationer for his programs and jail. Look at the budget to see how much money was generated from the offenders, and where it was placed in the budget. Millions. So every time a probationer is now violated and given a sanction of jail time with options or given discretionary time by the Sheriff’s Department, more money is collected at $25 a day plus administrative fees for jail alternative programs. Seems like a conflict of interest on imposing violations and discretionary time when your office generates income from the action??? If you have to serve 30 days, be prepared to pay $800 up front for a program. If it is 6 months to serve, plan on $4800.00. If you make minimum wage, you can bring home $360 (minus withholdings) to your family for the month. If you can’t pay, you will serve straight jail time that cannot exceed $500 and can add to jail overcrowding. Much cheaper for an offender to do straight jail time that is very expensive to the county.

    It’s time to quit pointing a finger at a private contract that has provided excellant service for 14 years and was fully supported by the judiciary just two years ago with new proposals submitted on a new RFP for probation. This office also cares about the rights and fair treatment of an offender.

    The articles of “breaking news” in May 2011 prompting the lawsuit naming THREE defendants has been heard in District Court and can not proceed without naming Ada County in the lawsuit as the contract was followed as directed. These same UA fees are charged throughout the state of Idaho in misdemeanor probation. No profit was generated from UA’s and fees are charged by the testing labs in Ada County. The Sheriff’s Office will also direct offenders to the labs who charge the offender the fee.

    As for the so called hundreds of complaints, look at the source. A public elected official we all know as Sharon Ullman did her number on the current probation office by soliciting complaints from these sites, blogs, and elsewhere. Her ongoing remarks of investigation and grave concerns leads offenders to respond. She even met with disgruntled employees. The majority of the responses came from the same people replying over and over again throughout the whole story. Let’s have a county official do this with the Sheriff’s Office and see what kind of complaints come in.

    Sheriff Raney and Commissioner Ullman have wanted to take this contract for years. It never worked in the past with their requests, but this new angle of unethical politics seemed to do the job.

    I hope the Guardian will take the time to validate the facts. In aftermath of it’s prior articles posted, The Guardian posted another article in March 2012, stating “what appeared to be credible complaints”. Why would the other two Commishes approve the contract for another year if they were credible? As for yet more insider information on a diversion program, nothing was ever submitted to the magistrate judges, so its odd it received a chilly reception.

    As far as “Brad”, he does not exist. If he would like to provide a real name, check with the other probationers in his group.

    Jim, check the contract, you can be seen every sixty days. Probation rarely does this unless you have done well on probation to date, so consider it a compliment.

    And finally, NO ONE has gone to jail for not paying their supervision fees in the current probation office. Check with the magistrate judges.

    .

  11. Ten—-My oh my how rumors fly around on blogs, guess you should check out the doors to probation. They are not shut down.

  12. I would like to comment on the Guardian’s statement “Several have failed the back ground check–not surprising given the massive turnover and even arrest of one of the probation officers for embezzlement”. I think it is very unfair to judge all PO’s by the actions of one crooked man. I was a PO for ACMPS and I wanted to keep my job when the transfer took place. I have many years of experience, my degree and am POST certified. I passed the Sheriff’s oral board, the polygraph and had my background investigation only to receive an email saying I would not have a firm offer of employment. I was not told what they did not like about my background or why they would not hire me. I took my job very seriously, I was a fair PO and my goal was to help my clients. I cannot speak for other PO’s but I will not be put in the “Plew category”. As for the way the office is being ran I think it is disgracefull and a shame that it had to end this way. Since 4 PO’s have been laid off caseload numbers are probably around 500 per PO but I guess since all they are doing is collecting fees it doesn’t matter much. I just hope no one in the community is hurt since clients are not being supervised properly. Maybe this will be a life lesson to Nancy or a wake up call that she needs to start being held accountable like she always told us PO’s was the goal for the offenders.

  13. Criminal behavior?
    Aug 28, 2012, 9:11 am

    “informed”, you have only had ONE criminal complaint about a PO? Are you forgetting a few months ago a complaint was given to the commissioners about your former assistant sexually harassing him? And that he had over 200 text messages from her to back up what he was saying? I’ve read the texts and there was NO DOUBT he was being harassed. I have and will continue to encourage him to pursue a lawsuit. This was all swept under the rug quietly, makes me wonder how many more things are out there. And to top if off this employee now works for Canyon County Probation. Makes me angry that charges were not filed and she still ends up with a job.

  14. Nancy (Informed),
    Of COURSE I’m not using my real name, that would be foolish to do. For one, I am still under your supervision and know it would NOT end well for me if I told you exactly who I was or which group I was in. Now that we have that obvious note out of the way, I’m curious to hear your response as to what I actually had to say, and not so much emphasis on what my identity has to do with anything. And possibly a response to “Let’s be Adults”, or “monthly check-in”. This article is about the glaring fact that ACMPS had to be ORDERED to cooperate. It struck me as childish that a company built on professionalism had to be told how to act respectful. We understand you had the business for 14 years; but you no longer have it, they concluded it would be better ran by someone else. That’s not what’s in question here. What’s under the microscope is how you are handling things right now, and the motive behind it. Is it true that you’ve changed your check-in forms to questions about fee collection? Is it true you have taken countless clients off of color code, no longer testing them to ensure public safety? Is it true that caseloads are over the mandated 250 per PO? Jim mentioned he was told that if he paid 2 months of COS, he wouldn’t have to report for 60 days. Sounds like it has nothing to do with his compliance, more so the ability to pay more money. Do you care to respond to any of the REAL questions being raised in this article or the comment section?

    EDITOR NOTE–Please try to address issues of general public concern here. While we can provide a forum, the GUARDIAN just isn’t the place for detailed complaints and responses on the daily operation.

  15. Thank you very much, I am attempting to become informed with facts rather than here say, but not quite sure where to start. There seems to be a lot of controversy surrounding the subject, just starting to research for myself….please forgive my ignorance.

  16. My apologies GUARDIAN. However, I do believe that the fact that she is not inquiring about new crimes, contact with the police, drug/alcohol use or anything else pertaining to probation on her check in forms that clients are forced to fill out is a public concern. She has taken the majority of clients off of color code; meaning, they know they are not being tested, what is to keep them from using and putting others at risk? Allowing POs to supervise more than 250 people on a monthly basis? how can one effectively supervise that many clients? These topics were brought up because I do feel they should be a concern of the public. It was not my intent to complain about the daily operation, more so shed some light on failure to properly supervise,and the increased danger this poses to the citizens of Ada County.

  17. It’s absolutely ridiculous to think that the Sheriff’s Office has no plan in place and that’s why Nancy won’t cooperate. As they have already had probation officers attend the POST academy, have supervisors in place, have a building and funding in place. Just because Nancy does not like their plan is no reason not to cooperate.
    I also find it ridiculous to think that the Sheriff’s Office wanted “mentoring” from Nancy’s staff due to their lack of experience. If I’m not mistaken the vast majority of Nancy’s Probation Officers had NO experience before they started either. In fact the last 2 hired were straight out of school with no work experience, however one is a nephew of her’s and the other her nephews friend. As they say…it’s all in who you know.
    Nancy I really hope you start cooperating. All this angst doesn’t do any good especially to the people you say you are there to help.

  18. i am currently on probation and when i went in this month my PO was gone. I was told he was laid off due to not enough money to be able to pay him and then I come to find out that the sheriffs office is taking over in a month! I was never told about this in advance by my PO. The PO that saw me was very short with me and she told me that in Oct I would have to find out who my new PO is going to be. I was given the new check in form that just asked about money. I was told if i didnt catch up by 10/1 i would be taken to small claims. I was also taken off color code and told to use the extra money to catch up on my fees. I am on probation for a DUI 2nd and though I no longer drink this makes me nervous since I know several people who were in my alcohol classes still drink and they are also on probation. I really liked my old PO and I didnt even get a chance to see him one last time. I feel this office is just throwing in the towell and tring to make it difficult for everyone involved. I am now just praying that the sheriffs office runs probation better and that they have clients best interest in mind unlike misdemeanor probation!

  19. Informed 2—That is great there is a plan but when will it be shared with us clients? Will there be any information given to us or the public? I would like to know how the Sheriff’s will run probation differently? Will UA’s be mandatory for everyone even if drugs or alcohol isnt an issue and wasn’t related to the crime? Will there be house checks? Please don’t leave everyone in the dark.

  20. Welcome to the beginings of Orwell’s 1984……

  21. Meeting. Notice you did not get a reply from Informed 2, aka Sharon Ullman most likely. That’s because there is no plan, they have no idea what they are doing. Those so called probation officers were not PO’s when they attended the academy, in fact, they were not even suppose to be there under statute as they did not work for a probation agency. With Sheriff Raney on the POST council, he gets to abuse his political power to bend the rules. They have never worked one day in a probation office along with the so called supervisors. As far as the mentoring, I saw the e-mails from Raney asking for it. Should they post that also? And yes, they have a building and funding, you gave it to them with taxpayer money. You also gave him his shiny new Tahoes and pay raises to all his employees. Did you also give him his own personal $25,000 raise he wants? Maybe you could get the dynamis money back and give that to him also. He’s going to need it to build more jail cells to house offenders who can’t pay for his programs.
    As far as the two newer PO’s at their office, they came with college degrees and POST Certification with in house training in a real probation office. So why does Raney want probation? Follow the money, or maybe he’s bored with law enforcement.
    Ms. Cladis should be relieved to get out of the political mess that goes on in Ada County. I have no idea why she has tried to hang on.
    His next target is Boise City. Check with the Mayor, it is well rumored he proposed to take over Boise City Police also. He already tried with Garden City and Meridian, a no go for him. Guess he thinks he can do everybody’s job better than they can. He also tried for the Marshall’s Department, another no go. He’s also asking for more money from the small communities.

    Ah, the power and control. Wow, what an ego.

  22. How long does a comment await moderation?EDITOR NOTE–Until I get access to the here in Michigan. Go Broncos

  23. ex probationer
    Sep 3, 2012, 9:23 pm

    all I know is I am glad Im not on probation any longer…. the jail time will come down fast and furious…. feel sorry for those of you still on probation… and I feel sorry for the tax payers… youll be paying for this debaucle..

  24. So, does anyone send a second sample to an independent lab? Yes cost money, but I wonder what you’d find. Labs behaving badly seems to be very common these days. Many have a very credible sign post out front, but cut corners to save time and money/profit.

  25. HumptyDumptyWasPushed
    Sep 27, 2012, 12:03 am

    i’m bringing lawsuit to probation. when the time is right, the treatment i recieved will be returned in kind.

  26. Anybody have some new info on probation terms/conditions today?

  27. Nancy sent an email to all her employees when Sharon Ullman lost the election that merely said “victory”. Well today my friend I repeat that same word back to you “VICTORY”

  28. Please post any information about the new probation program. I had a similar experience to “meeting”.

    My last meeting was about the money, my PO also didn’t work there anymore, the stressed out lady who claimed to have 720 cases, told me not to worry about testing, and here is a number for ADA Sheriff Misdemeanor to call after 10/1.

    I did call the # today, and the fees will be the same, received the name of a new PO, but no information about testing or changes.

    So I guess the reason I am writing is to find out:

    1. Are we supposed to continue the Global testing call in colors thing?

    2. And really just do nothing until our “orientation time?”

  29. I was originally told to keep testing during my appointment last month, and my color is rarely called, however, this was relayed to me from an intern taking the place of my PO. I’m attending “orientation” tomorrow and will post what I find out.

  30. I went in today…nothing has really changed except we can pay probation fees online now. Continue testing if you’re on color code. Orientation was filling out new probation forms similar to what we filled out when we first got on probation. We sat in the waiting room for a couple hours before a group of us went to a backroom for 5 minutes to sign compliance forms and then left. We have to call at month’s end to schedule our next PO meeting.

  31. Kazbaa…can you tell me how the new office compares to the old ACMPS? Is there any more security? Do the PO’s all have their own offices still? I heard all the new PO’s are fairly young. I had Ms. Thompson before and really liked her. I am not sure who my PO will be now but I will find out soon. Thanks.

  32. Can anyone tell me if Greg cowles still a PO since this change? His tyranny is what caused me to abscond from probation and I want nothing more than to make this right and continue with my life but I will not come back to be stuck with such a heartless vengeful person again. I am a law abiding man whom admittedly made a mistake I was eager to overcome and move on and was happy with the terms I agreed to in terms of plea unfortunately the terms were thrown out day one and replaced with a color group and weekly drug classes (I had never failed a us nor was my original crime drug related) between the verbal threats the constant screaming and piling classes after classes til I was broke. He said be in my office Monday two days after our last meet and I knew he was gonna throw me in why I couldn’t say but I knew.. I freaked out and didn’t go. Been looking back ever since and I’m sick of it. I just want to be back on te right track.

Enter your email address:

Categories