Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, March 7, 1995 TAG: 9503070097
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: SARAH HUNTLEY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
It was November, five months into the fiscal year, and Mike Lazzuri knew the Court Services Unit's budget was in trouble. With more than half a year to go, the money from Roanoke County had run out, but the demand for services hadn't.
As courts grapple with rising juvenile-crime rates, more children than ever are being placed in detention facilities. And once there, an overloaded docket almost guarantees them a longer stay.
Take a look at the figures from Roanoke County:
Eighty-four juveniles were locked up for a total of 589 days between July 1993 and February 1994. During the same seven months this fiscal year, 97 youths were housed in detention facilities for a total of 1,282 days.
``Detention time for juveniles in our area has just about doubled,'' said Lazzuri, director of the Court Services Unit that works with kids who come through the Roanoke County and Salem juvenile court systems. ``Two years ago, the average stay was 7 days. Now it's 13.2 days.''
As the social problems continue to grow, so, too, do costs. The juvenile detention facility charges Roanoke County and Salem $68.15 per child per day, Lazzuri said, and that adds up.
By the end of October, the unit had spent more than the $62,385 the county had allocated for the entire year. The deficit had reached $29,608 by the start of the new year, and Roanoke County Administrator Elmer Hodge told the Board of Supervisors last week to expect the total to jump to $111,000 before June 30.
Salem also is anticipating a Court Services Unit deficit. At the end of December, Lazzuri's office had spent nearly 94 percent of the money Salem City Council had allocated for the fiscal year.
``It's a real problem, but I don't have any control over detention costs,'' Lazzuri said. ``These kids come before the judges, and in most cases their parents have tried everything else. We've moved away from the truant child who doesn't listen to his or her parents. We are moving to the kid who is out there raping, stealing and carrying firearms. What are the judges to do? They have a responsibility to protect the juvenile and the community. It would be irresponsible not to lock them up.''
The Court Services Unit receives much of its funding from the state, but the county is responsible for covering office expenses, utilities and detention costs. There are three types of detention: a 24-hour secure facility that houses the most severe juvenile offenders; outreach programs that focus on daily supervision; and crisis intervention programs that provide temporary residential care.
Secure detention is the big-ticket item, Lazzuri said, and it's also the most difficult cost to predict. The rates per child increase annually in January, halfway through the fiscal year, he said. In addition, the number of juveniles in the system and the amount of time they stay detained hinge on factors that vary from year to year.
Part of the problem is the court docket. Both juvenile and adult courts are jammed, lengthening the amount of time between detention and trial, Lazzuri said. Starting next week, Roanoke County juvenile courts will add an extra day to the monthly calendar to alleviate the problem, but that's unlikely to be a fix-all.
``There's only so many hours, so many days that the court can hear cases,'' Lazzuri said.
To bring costs down significantly, the county may have to consider creative solutions. Among them: use of in-home electronic surveillance devices; contracting detention services to private companies; and joining with other localities in the region to open additional facilities.
First, however, the county has to realize that the budget figures are out of line, Lazzuri said.
``I think it's a disservice to the citizens of the county to present the budget figures too low so we can project a balanced budget,'' said Lazzuri, who added that his unit's detention costs have run higher than the target budget for several years. ``Sooner or later, the extra revenue isn't going to be there.''
Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss said previous budgets have given ``modest recognition'' to the rising costs of detention, but he acknowledged that ``they haven't kept pace with what's becoming the norm.''
``We're not in the position of having a child go without help, but we recognize that we have a problem of potential magnitude,'' Chambliss said. ``These issues have been talked about, and it's something that needs attention. I'm more concerned about how we are going to deal with the problem in the upcoming [1995-96] budget than in this current budget.''
by CNB