This article clearly shows all the different state programs, and likely there are many more, which receive money THROUGH Bryne Grants. Is it any wonder why some lawmakers sacrifice former sex offenders to save these grants? Advocates need to address these other state programs in commentary fighting the Adam Walsh Act.1-22-2011 Maryland:
UPDATE: Note to readers, the 10% Byrne Grant deduction is applicable to a state for every year of noncompliance, not just for one year. This is why so many Advocate calculations are incorrect, they calculate for one year and fail to show following year/s.
Feds Tie Grants to State Compliance with Washington Mandated Standards
WASHINGTON (January 21, 2011) - Maryland lawmakers thought the flurry of seven bills passed last year brought the state's sex offender registry in line with federal standards, but they discovered differently this week and now face a tough choice: Enact legislation to register juvenile offenders for life, or risk losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants.
The state will forfeit 10 percent of its Byrne Justice Assistance Grants for next fiscal year if it does not make the sex offender registry compliant with the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 by June 30. That could mean registering sex offenders as young as 14 for the rest of their lives.
Bill Toohey, the director of communications at the Governor's Office of Crime Control and Prevention, said 10 percent would have amounted to about $600,000 this year.
A search of that office's Awarded Grants Database revealed that 117 projects at the state, county and municipal level are receiving Byrne funding -- from as little as $1,540 to as much as $278,332.
"There's a whole wide array of services that are funded by (Byrne grants)," Toohey said. "That's why it's so valuable."
State Sen. Brian Frosh, D-Montgomery, sponsored a successful 2009 bill to give judges the authority to require the registration of juvenile sex offenders they considered a threat to reoffend. But Frosh said instituting mandatory lifetime registration of juveniles is something that requires careful deliberation.
"I'm not sure it's something we ought to be leaping into," Frosh said. "We are talking about juveniles, after all, and there is evidence that they can be rehabilitated."
Frosh, a lawyer, has warned about possible unintended consequences of such measures in the past. He used the fad of teen "sexting," or sending nude pictures to friends via cell phone, as an example of an offense that could lump juveniles in with violent criminals on the same registry.
"It's a mark that will hamper somebody for the rest of his or her life," Frosh said. "I mean, it's necessary in some cases, but I'm not sure that we want to paint this with a broad brush."
Maryland is not alone in its struggle for compliance -- far from it. Frosh said only four states meet the federal standards for sex offender registry so far because the federal legislation is hard to interpret.
But law enforcement agencies across Maryland rely on Byrne grants.
Baltimore has 14 programs receiving Byrne funds, including a Prostitution Diversion program ($59,071 in grant money), an Inter-Agency War Room Coordination program ($207,440) and a "YouthBuild" program focused on reducing criminal recidivism rates for juveniles ($110,080).
The Baltimore Mayor's Office on Criminal Justice received $278,332 in grant money for its Sexual Assault Response program last year. According to GOCCP, the program "encourages reporting of sexual assaults, improves case investigation protocols and techniques, and provides support and services to victims." It is using the grant money to provide training, equipment and personnel.
The program's director, Sheryl Goldstein, said now would be an especially tough time to lose 10 percent of the Byrne grants.
"There really isn't anywhere to make up money like that in today's economic climate, unfortunately," Goldstein said. "Everybody's being squeezed and certainly local governments are feeling the pain of budget cuts and reduced revenues."
Smaller cities also benefit from the Bryne grants. Brentwood, population 2,838, revived its police department in 2009 after it was disbanded in the 1970s. The town received $77,440 in grant money to modernize the new department with computers, a server and camera equipment.
"I don't know what we would have done (without the Byrne grant)," Brentwood Mayor Xzavier Montgomery-Wright said. "We would have probably been operating on a much smaller scale, meaning maybe one computer system for a number of officers and an admin person. How do you function like that from a public safety standpoint?"
While there's no discussion of losing the grants entirely, Toohey said losing even 10 percent "would make a very significant impact."
But there's some resistance in both branches of the State House to enacting the federal mandates for putting juveniles on the sex offender registry for life.
"I don't think that any decisions have been made yet about necessarily how to address some of the concerns," Delegate Kathleen Dumais, D-Montgomery, said. "Even when we passed the bills (last year) the majority of us were doing it because we didn't certainly want to lose any Byrne money. But at the same time, many of us thought that some of the federal requirements were pretty stringent. ... Putting juveniles on a public sex offender registry was really something that gave all of us a great deal of heartburn." ..Source.. ANDY MARSO
4 comments:
I live in Maryland and I was at the hearings last year...the Byrne funding was a huge part of the decision-making process, EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE PLENTY OF PEOPLE AT THOSE HEARINGS WHO POINTED OUT AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT THE NEW LAWS WOULD NOT BRING US INTO COMPLIANCE BECAUSE OF THE JUVENILE REGISTRATION PROVISION. Maryland legislators knew, or should have known, that what they were doing would not prevent the loss of funding. They used the Byrne $$ as a way to justify passage of a terrible bill that was actually little more than an election-year vote grab by our incumbent governor and retribution directed at an entire class of people following the tragic murder of Sarah Foxwell by a RSO in late 2009. It has resulted in hundreds of names added to the registry, literally thousands mistiered, mass confusion, and has given the less enlightened counties the ammunition to ramp up the harassment of RSOs in a big way. Stay tuned for more of the same.
If registry laws are only deemed a "civil" regulatory scheme for public safety then why are the politicians concerned with juveniles being on the registry for life? Second, why can they recognize the registry ruins a juveniles life but do not care that it ruins anyone over 18's life as well? They are making an admission to the punitive nature of the registry in their comments.
How can any legislator measure a lifetime of offender registration vs $500k? In my state we will receive 600k for Byrne fund and it will cost an additional $9 million to implement the first year and $7 million the following year.It would be wiser to take the small loss up front. Most states through studies now know that recidivism percentiles are lower than all other crimes committed. This is all hysteria hyped legislation governed by fundamentally unconstitutional laws. Shame on our federal, state and local governments.
It is absurd that this is not blatantly obvious to all. Incarcerating people whomever they are is just big business.We are concerned about these Byrne Grants and losing the funds they provide, if we had laws that worked and did not have the burden of having to incarcerate people that are not dangerous whether youthful offenders or otherwise we would have plenty of money and tons left over to fund these programs enough to truly make an impact. It is ridiculous that a few hundred thousand dollars gained, requires tens of millions to implement and manage... Where is the sense in that. Not to mention the senseless disruption of individual lives and families. What are our legislators thinking when drafting these bills and signing them into law?
Post a Comment