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.

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.

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

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.

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.

.

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.

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.

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.

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!

Welcome to the beginings of Orwell’s 1984……

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

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.

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

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?”

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.

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.