In 1989, the Ventura County District Attorney's Office became the first office in California to successfully introduce D.N.A. "genetic fingerprinting" evidence in a criminal case.


 

Remarks of District Attorney

Gregory D. Totten

 

to the

Ventura County Board of Supervisors

concerning the

  FY 2007/08 Budget

June 18, 2007

 

 

Madame Chair, members of the Board, Mr. Johnston, good afternoon. Our materials in the Preliminary Budget book begin at page AJ-1.

 

Each year at budget time we are confronted with lots of numbers and I know, for me at least, sometimes it's easy to lose sight of the human side of those equations. So while I will be discussing workload and staffing figures in a few moments, I want to begin by putting a face on the decisions you will be making concerning the District Attorney's Office.

 

Earlier this year, I returned to the office late one afternoon and was informed that a veteran prosecutor was waiting to see me about something important. This particular lawyer enjoyed the respect and affection of his colleagues. He was an encourager of others who possessed a wonderful sense of humor and an unyielding passion for our work. When I arrived at his office, I was struck by the grave look on his face and assumed he was ill or had suffered a family tragedy. Instead, he looked up from behind his desk and said, "Greg, I am going to retire, I don't want to retire, I love my job, I love this office and love helping people, but the pace has just gotten too fast and I can't keep up with this caseload. I am worried that I am going to make a mistake and someone is going to get hurt or worse and I just can't allow that to happen."

 

Notwithstanding my protests and efforts to encourage him to hang in there, he retired. And when he walked out that door, he lost something that was important to him - a job he loved. But in a much larger sense, all of us lost something important that day; the District Attorney's Office lost a skilled, 20-year prosecutor, the County of Ventura lost a dedicated public servant, and our community lost someone who cared deeply about justice and those impacted by crime - someone who would have continued to make a difference had he stayed.

 

And I must tell you - this grave concern about making a mistake - is shared by the majority of our prosecutors because caseloads are so daunting. And your Board needs to know that mistakes will occur not because of lack of will or dedication or skill, but because we no longer have the resources we need to keep up. And when we make a mistake, bad things happen; evidence is overlooked, guilty people walk free, victims may even be hurt, and in the end justice suffers.

 

So today, I want to make an urgent appeal for the attorney positions requested in our supplemental policy item. These positions are not only essential to the quality of justice and safety in our community, but are also vital to ensure that the goals of programs you have previously approved are actually realized.

 

Our supplemental budget request for 12 additional FTEs, is not a wish list. It is my personal and professional estimation of what is needed right now to keep our community's criminal justice system in balance. But, I am also mindful of the budgetary challenges you face, including concerns about revenue projections, cost of necessary capital projects and the retirement fund. For this reason, I am focusing my comments on the policy item seeking additional prosecutors because that is the area of greatest need.

Later this evening, when you begin budget deliberations, I ask you to keep in mind several important factors about the District Attorney's Office and our current circumstances:

  • First, the growing disparity between our increasing workload and reductions in staffing
  • Second, the need to maintain balance within our system of justice, and
  • Finally, the human impact of your decisions.

 

Let me briefly put each of these considerations in perspective for you.

Disparity between Workload and Staff :

 

This chart shows the 15 percent decline in District Attorney staffing since 2002. In total, today we have 45.5 fewer FTEs, than five years ago. We have lost 15.5 prosecutors, 13 investigators, 7 victim advocates, and 9 other support staff. Today's staffing levels are comparable to levels of ten years ago. In fact, our loss of FTEs equates to 20 percent of the 226 General Fund FTEs the County has lost since 2002/03 - this for an office that represents only 2.3 percent of the General Fund.

 

Meanwhile, the volume of cases presented for criminal prosecution by local police agencies is exploding. Last year we reviewed a record 38,465 cases - a 12 percent increase over the number of cases reviewed in 2002. And given the volume of cases submitted thus far in 2007, we are on a pace to exceed this number by a significant margin this year.

 

The responsibility to decide whether a case should be filed stands at the core of what prosecutors do; it is a check and balance in the criminal justice system that is vital both for protecting the innocent and ensuring that cases are neither overcharged nor undercharged. Last year, it took the equivalent of 10.4 full-time deputy district attorneys or 12 percent of our entire prosecutor staff just to handle the complaint review responsibilities.

 

We filed 1,582 (7 percent) more misdemeanors, and 727 (16 percent) more felonies than in 2002. Both our felony and misdemeanor filing figures are higher than at any time in the office's history.

 

Other workload indicators across the office are also dramatically higher when compared with 2002 figures:

 

  • We issued 78 percent more subpoenas - 101,410 versus 56,907.
  • We processed 42 percent more pages of discovery - 1,163,841 versus 817,257 (2004)
  • We served 54 percent more victims - 6,350 versus 4,133.
  • We filed 56 percent more sexual assault cases - 1,770 versus 1,138.
  • Perhaps most disturbing of all, we filed 366 percent more gang cases - 391 versus 84.

 

Relationship between Police and Justice Agency Resources and Workload:

 

The criminal justice system is a system in the true scientific meaning of the word. There are two inputs - the victim and the accused. The system is composed of many parts in proper proportion: law enforcement, public defenders, prosecutors, the courts, probation and correctional institutions. The output, of course, is justice.the very quality of which depends on the balance of each component within the system.

 

The number of police officers has a direct impact upon the volume of work for the entire justice system, and when the numbers of peace officers increase withoutcorresponding growth in other justice system agencies, imbalance follows. More police officers mean more contacts, more arrests, and more case filings.

 

The next slide demonstrates that, with the exception of the Sheriff's Department, every police agency in Ventura County employs more peace officers today than in 2002:

 

•  Oxnard Police Department:   + 28 (209 to 237)   or 13.4%

•  Ventura Police Department:   +  7 (127 to 134)   or 5.5%

•  Simi Valley Police Department:   +  5 (120 to 125)   or 4.2%

•  Santa Paula Police Department:   +  2 (29 to 31)   or 7.0%

•  Port Hueneme Police Department:   +  2 (24 to 26)   or 8.3%

•  California Highway Patrol:            + 20 (93 to 113)   or 21.5%

TOTAL:   64 (602 to 666) or 10.6%

 

During the time that these additional positions have been in place, the number of cases submitted to the District Attorney's Office for review has increased by 4,138 cases.

 

Last year, your Board made a series of wise budget and contract decisions that enhanced the Sheriff's ability to recruit new deputies. And as the Sheriff noted during his budget presentation, the 90 vacancies he had last year are now filled. Ultimately, this means more cops on our streets and significantly more cases entering our justice system. Earlier this year, you also wisely approved additional funding for the Sheriff's Gang Unit. Since inception, this unit has already made 62 arrests, including 32 felonies. Simply stated, the benefits of these investments in law enforcement are marginal at best if we at the District Attorney's Office do not have the resources to do our part.

 

By law, every one of these arrestees must be released within two court days if charges are not filed by the district attorney. Unless there are enough prosecutors to timely make the right filing decision, resist bail for dangerous defendants, effectively argue countless motions, attend hearings, and ultimately prepare for trial, your wise investments will bear little fruit.

 

Two weeks ago, the Public Defender told you that due to increased caseloads their office was at the "breaking point." I fully agree with their comments about the impact of workload increases. An attorney can handle only so many cases and still provide competent legal representation.

 

My attorneys are also at their breaking point.

 

Both the Public Defender and the District Attorney workloads far exceed recommended national standards for attorney caseloads (of 150 felonies or 400 misdemeanors per year).

 

This next chart is a comparison based upon the adopted budget of attorney reductions over the last five years in the offices of the District Attorney and the Public Defender. It reveals that the Public Defender has virtually the same level of attorney staff they had in 2002 while we are down 15 percent (15.5 fewer prosecutors). Let me be clear, I am not suggesting that the Public Defender does not need this staffing.

 

Consider however, that the Public Defender handles only 59 percent of the cases we file. And, for the most complex and time-consuming cases we prosecute, the Public Defender handles just 44 percent of the homicides and 15 percent of complex white collar and fraud cases. The balance of our cases are handled by a panel of conflict lawyers known as Conflict Defense Associates and approximately 60 lawyers that make up the private criminal defense bar. We also prosecute many cases involving private defense counsel from Santa Barbara , Los Angeles and Orange Counties .

 

Attorney competence is vitally important in both offices. When the Public Defender reaches the absolute limit of cases he can handle, he can refuse to accept more cases. The District Attorney has no such option. When the District Attorney exceeds his limit, it costs the citizens of this county and state a quality of justice.

 

Let me give you a few examples:

 

  • We have 550 cases backlogged waiting to be reviewed for filing, some dating back to last year.
  • Another 500 cases have been reviewed, but have not processed with the courts by our clerical staff.
  • The number of pending cases set for jury trial has increased by 29 percent just since February - from 1,295 to 1,666.
  • We don't have hard data, but all of our supervisors are reporting that continuances, dismissals, and the length of time cases are in the system are increasing.
  • Most distressing, since 2003 the first year of reduced staffing our volume of jury trials has increased by more than 60 percent (101 to 163) and our jury trial conviction rate has declined by 9 percent.

 

The increasing numbers of peace officers, when combined with the disproportionate share of attorney reductions we have suffered has created an imbalance in the criminal justice system that is apparent to all that are participants in it. In fact, I encourage you to contact the presiding judge or assistant presiding judge to get their perspective on the impact our lack of staffing is having.

 

Human Impact of Board's Decision:

 

Aside from all of the indicators, in the District Attorney's Office, we deal not in abstract conviction rates or subpoenas or mere widgets but the lives of real people.

 

An employee from another County department recently spoke with a colleague of mine and made light of our concerns about adequate staffing, stating that he felt safe and the community feels safe . Most of us in this hearing room today do feel safe. We can afford to live in neighborhoods where crime is a rarity. But I can tell you that there are people living in neighborhoods in all five districts that don't have the same sense of personal safety. They worry about crime and its impact on their families and they are besieged every day by vandalism, narcotics, and violence. And for them, the numbers will never tell the whole story.

 

And indeed even those numbers are starting to show cause for concern. Yes, we remain one of the safest metropolitan areas by FBI standards, but violent crime was up substantially in 2006:

 

  • 12.8 percent in the City of Ventura ,
  • 16 percent in Simi Valley ,
  • And, 4.6 percent in Thousand Oaks .

These increases are well above both the national rate of increase of 1.3 percent and more than double the violent crime increases in most similarly sized cities such as Burbank, Downey, Daly City, and Chula Vista.

We have carefully managed our budget over the last five years to avoid the necessity of mid-year adjustments from the contingency fund - this includes avoiding the use of our $500,000 mitigation account referenced in the preliminary budget book and an additional $242,000 in our share of Proposition 172 funds. These funds would more than offset the first year costs of the requested attorney positions. While I am mindful of your practice with one-time funding, today I am asking you to make an exception for our budget next year.

 

Without the addition of the attorney positions noted in my supplemental request, the quality of justice in our county will suffer even further. The fine men and women of this office have exhausted their ability to do more with less.

 

Thank you. I am available to answer any questions you may have.