Georgia parole review [Spring 1996]

G-A P2. 00
ijPI
P'l
11OJb{ I

Public safety remains his mission

Former police chief
Jim Wetherington
joins Parole Board
When Jim Wetherington retired from his 36-year career with the Columbus Police Department last November, he thought he was ending his law enforcement career. But a month later he was back at work on public safety issues from a new perspective-as a member of the Board of Pardons and Paroles.
"I'm so grateful for the opportunity to use all my experience in a way to serve the entire State," he says. "After years of dealing with the results of crime, I'll be looking hard at those we parole. I have no patience with repeat offendeIs o!" tho~e _!hat just create havoc for society."
In making decisions-parole or others-Wetherington believes you study the facts but ultimately trust your instinct. "And then be willing to live with your decision," he adds.
That philosophy did not evolve slowly during 36 years of enforcing the law but quickly, at the start of his career, in one incident.
Off duty from his new job as a Columbus cop, Wetherington, his wife Shirley and three-yearold daughter were stopped at a traffic light when four teenagers jerked open the driver's door, dragged him to the pavement, robbed him, and began beating him. His terrified wife struggled to hand him his gun while he yelled for her to put it back.
"I knew I would not have to shoot. We were in a well-lighted area with people around. I did not want to shoot someone's child."
A bystander rushed to his aid, and the juveniles fled. They were later apprehended. The incident became a definition-of a young cop who could think rationally while under attack and of a city which valued such restraint.
Living up to such a heroic reputation acquired early in a career can be intimidating. "It was a life-defining event for me. I was tested many times after that," Wetherington says. "But I firmly believe that just because you have the authority and justification doesn't mean you use force. I tried to live by that standard and later, when I became chief, establish it as the standard for my officers."
continued on column 4

Wetherington's successes during his 14-year leadership of the police department are well known to Columbus citizens and state law enforcers. Among the highlights, Columbus was named the safest city in the Southeast in 1994 and, the following year, the eleventh safest in the country. The accredited police department was recognized statewide and nationally for its innovative programs, such as a diversionary sentencing program for young, first-time substance-abuse offenders.

Paralleling his agency's success, Wetherington accumulated numerous personal honors,

including recognition by statewide law

enforcement chiefs as the 1994 Georgia

Police Chief of the Year.

"Building public confidence and

---- ---giving-Columbus-citizens a-sense of

security was my mission," Wether-

ington says. "I wanted my officers to

do their job with compassion and

respect for the victim. I wanted them to

understand that any crime-even the

theft of a lawn mower-has an impact

on the victim. I think police do a better

job and operate on a higher level when

they understand how victims feel."

Wetherington believes that holds

~E~ BOARI? MEMBER JIM WETHERINGTON began his criminal Justice career In 1959 as a Columbus police officer. He became chiefin 1981 a positi?n he held until he retired in 1995. In 1993 Gov. Zell Miller appointed Wetherlngton to the Board ofCorrections and then in December 1995 to the
Board ofPardons and Paroles.

true for Parole Board members too. Yet he also realizes that fairness and concern for the long-range safety of the citizens-two of his strongest personal values-will compel him to make some unpopular decisions as well.

"As a police chief or a parole board

member, you learn that you can't

satisfy everyone. You learn what you

can about the situation and deliberate,

but then you vote from the heart. That's

all you can do."

His particular brand of analysis and

acting from the heart has garnered the

public's trust since that 1960 life-

defining incident. I

"You learn what you can from a situation and deliberate, but then you vote from the heart."
Jim Wetherington

2 GEORGIA PAROLE REVIEW

THOMASTON PAROLE OFFICER DANA BROOKS checks on one of his parolees on electronic monitoring. The Board now requires certain maximum-levelparolees to serve theirfirst few months under the restrictive electronic
monitoring program. Only if they demonstrate good behavior and attitude will their parole be continued.

Board's new program:

straight from prison to electronic monitoring

Electronic monitoring (EM) moves from the back door of parole to the front in 1996. Used since 1991 as a final sanction before parole revocation, it is now hooked up to parolees serving for violent or sex offenses as soon as they leave prison. This additional level of supervision is possible thanks to the addition of 800 electronic monitoring units since October, bringing the agency's inventory up to 926.
Monitoring is prevention Although still used as a punitive
measure during supervision, electronic monitoring on the front end is considered a preventive measure, according to Deputy Director for Program Services Renee Phillips.
"Most inmates benefit from increased structure during the first few months of parole, but halfway houses are scarce. Electronic monitoring provides structure for the parolee and reduces risks to the community while the parole officer determines the parolee's conduct and motivation."
Each parole district now has a supply of monitoring units and a parole officer trained as the electronic monitoring technician. In large districts this parole officer supervises an entire caseload of electronically monitored parolees.

Electronic monitoring works by continuously recording radio signals sent from the transmitter attached to the parolee's ankle to a monitor attached to the household telephone. If radio contact is interrupted by the parolee moving too far from the monitor, the monitor calls the centralized monitoring center, whose staff immediately telephone the parolee's home to verify the absence. They then notify the parole officer.
The monitoring center can also determine if anyone has tampered with the equipment.
Typically, parolees will be allowed to leave the house for work, for counseling sessions, and other appointments approved by the parole officer. Officers will verify parolee presence at outside activities.
EM is just part of supervision plan Field Services Director James
Bralley emphasizes that electronic monitoring is not a substitute for thorough supervision. "It will be used in combination with all the usual skills the parole officer brings to the job. Electronic monitoring is a valuable technology to use in combination with remedial programs such as substance abuse counseling and other monitoring procedures such as drug screening."

Inmates who will be released to parole with electronic monitoring will learn about the program in prison through discussions with correctional counselors and by viewing a ten-minute educational video produced by the Parole Board.
Household must agree to restrictions Electronic monitoring involves
more than the parolee; everyone in his home surrenders some convenience. Prior to the parolee being released under the program, the parole officer visits the parolee's proposed residence to discuss electronic monitoring with the head of the household. That person must agree to certain rules including limited use of the telephone and canceling special telephone features such as call forwarding and call waiting. While the parolee is under electronic monitoring, the telephone must primarily be considered a monitoring device.
Electronic monitoring is used in most community supervision programs across the nation but usually as a punitive measure for violations. Georgia is one of several states to use electronic monitoring as the first stage of parole supervision. I

STRATEGIC PLANNING STRESSES AGENCY-WIDE PARTICIPATION TO CREATE FUTURE
Employees create vision and mission

DIVERSITY CONSULTANT CARLOS CANTU (seated) talks to Parole Board Strategic Planning Coordinator John Prevost during a strategic planning team meeting. Cantu, who works in private industry, volunteered his services to help the agency analyze its cultural environment and plan its diversity program.

"Weare committed to the goal of a crime-free Georgia," say Parole Board employees. With input from all 825 employees across the state, the agency last year constructed this vision statement for the 21 st century.
Parole Director Chuck Topetzes explains: "Crime-free is an ideal situation-loftier than 'safe Georgia,' which the staff also considered. But the purpose of a vision is to pull you to the destination you want to reach without qualifying it. Individually, as employees and citizens, and collectively, as a state agency, we plan to do everything we can to protect the public, not just for the short-term but for future generations."
Strategic Planning raises accountability
Strategic Planning-a structured process of determining long-range goals and then plotting measurable, short-term steps to reach them-is required of all state agencies. In 1992 Gov. Zell Miller implemented the process to raise accountability within state government.
See Vision, page 4

AROLE CHIEF BOB DICKENSON stores salvaged computers in his Decatur arole offices until a computer technician can check them outfor usability. lthough most are early models, the computers will help field offices update and treamline their work processes.

Recycled computers save money and boost productivity

T

he agency's desire to place a computer on each parole officer's desk is being hastened

by the resourcefulness of several parole

officers who figured old computers

were better than none. And, knowing

the budget was lean, they found old,

free computers!

Systems Development Manager

Mike Nixon reports that in addition to

searching through state surplus equip-

ment, several self-motivated "scouts"

around the state, such as Parole Of-

ficers David Roberts from Albany and

Don Smith from Lawrenceville, and

Parole Chief Bob Dickenson from

Decatur, foraged for discarded comput-

ers at local schools and universities.

"But it was Gwinnett Parole

Officer Mike Vance who hit the

'mother lode' at Georgia Tech," Nixon

says.

Officer Vance says administrators

at Tech and, later, Georgia State

University, were pleased that their

older model computers, insufficient for

their advanced needs, could be put to

immediate and grateful use by Georgia parole officers.
"Instead of just putting them into state surplus, they simply transferred them to the Parole Board, knowing any working computer would get a second life," Vance says.
With a collection of nearly 600 discards, the Computer Services group hired a skilled computer technician on a temporary basis to check the machines for usability or at least usable parts. From the collection he culled 250 working computers and 75 printers.
"These machines don't have capability for sophisticated software," Nixon says, "but they do allow the officer to prepare and store documents and to maintain files, which is a major step."
In addition to preparing investigations, parole officers hope to eventually use computers to record their parolee case notes. Currently, officers manually record detailed supervision activity for more than 18,000 parolees. I

E-mail speeds process

C ommunication quickens. During March parole background investigations from field offices began arriving in Atlanta headquarters within minutes instead of days, thanks to computer modem lines. Previously, the bulky reports, numbering about 500 monthly, were sent through the U.S. Mail and then distributed by hand

within the headquarters office. Mike Nixon, who heads the
Systems Development unit, says plans for electronic mail began several years ago, but it was only last year that the agency had enough computers to establish the communication network statewide.
See Modem, page 4

3 GEORGIA PAROLE REVIEW

REVIEWING CLAIMS Shawanda Reynolds-Cobb reviews an application with Program Director Derek Marchman. They must determine ifportions ojthe claim shouldfirst go to another agency Jor reimbursement; the Fund covers only those out-oj-pocket expenses not handled by others.
For further information contact Crime Victim Compensation Program c/o CriminalJusticeCoordinating Council 503 Oak Place, Suite 540 Atlanta, Ga. 30349 FAX: 404-559-4960 PHONE: 404-559-4949

$200,000 PAID TO VICTIMS LAST YEAR
Georgia gives more than sympathy

T he gunshot that shattered David Sherrer's spine also shattered his financial stability. Although the $1,000 check he received six years ago from the newly created Crime Victims Emergency Fund didn't begin to cover his enormous medical debts, it did help the Milner resident heal emotionally.
"I realized that the State was making a real effort to help me through a difficult time in my life," Sherrer said at the time. "That concern meant a lot tome."
With $100,000 from the State General Assembly and a matching amount from the federal government, the Crime Victims Emergency Fund was formed in 1990 to help victims with financial problems resulting from violent crime. Lost wages, medical treatment not covered by insurance, and funeral expenses are among the financial consequences compounding the emotional and physical problems suffered by crime victims and their families.
Parolees pay into Fund Income for the program was
boosted in late 1991 when the Parole Board mandated that parolees serving for certain violent offenses pay a $10 monthly fee into the Fund. That collection totals about $200,000 annually. Also hiking the Fund in 1992 was the additional ten percent-up to $25.00-penalty assessment on each state DUI fine. The General Assembly continues to allocate $100,000 to the fund yearly. The federal government is the only other contributor; it reimburses the state 40 percent of whatever amount was paid to victims the previous year.
As of July 1995 the maximum compensation grant is $10,000. To date, no one has been awarded that amount. The average grant award is $2500 to $2800, which is also the national average.

The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) administers the Crime Victim Compensation Program, as well as several other criminal justice programs for the state.
Claims Manager Shawanda Reynolds-Cobb at the CJCC evaluates each claim before presenting it to the Program Director Derek l\1archman for final review.
Consistency is essential Marchman says that awards are
appropriated through a strict interpretation of law and policy. "We must be firm in order to be consistent and fair," Marchman says. "The applicant can still appeal a denial to the Board, but consistency is very important in dispensing compensation money."
Reynolds-Cobb notes that consistency is important in all communication with victims. "For instance, if you assist one applicant with finding a counselor you must assist other victims in the same manner." she says.
"Even though evaluating claims is business-type work, you must conduct it with empathy," she says. "Because a 1995 law requires that crime victims be told of the Fund during their first law enforcement contact, we get phone calls from victims earlier than beforeoften before they've talked to victimwitness counselors. Therefore, we have to be prepared to deal with whatever situation that victim presents when we pick up the phone. We must be there for victims who have not yet released their feelings about the crime."
Program began cautiously Marchman received 790 applica-
tions for claims last year but expects that number to increase substantially in coming years due to the 1995 law mentioned above and to their own efforts to publicize the program. However, Marchman feels confident that increased claims will not deplete the Emergency Fund.

"Our program began slowly, giving modest awards," Marchman notes. Some states have had to resort to giving IOUs or reduced compensatory amounts," he says, "but Georgia's program is solid, thanks to the foresight of the founders in establishing wellthought-out guidelines. This is a program Georgians can be proud of." I
Vision, from page 3
In addition to the vision, Board employees revised the mission statement and expanded the agency's belief statement. They also defined the most important "strategic directions" leading to fulfillment of the mission. Among those are improving communication with each other and the public, expanding victim services, developing better supervision techniques, and cultivating and expanding alliances with other agencies.
Teams of parole employees statewide are now working on projects in each strategic area. I
Modem, from page 3
Board employees conduct background investigations on every paroleeligible inmate entering prison. Until March the agency relayed these investigations in the same manner it had for decades: the investigating officer prepared a longhand report which a secretary then typed, copied, and mailed to the central office.
Now district office secretaries prepare finished copies on computer and upload them daily to the central electronic network, saving time and money, as well as storage space. As computer availability increases, parole officers will compose their investigations on computer, eliminating another step and expediting the process even more.-

4 GEORGIA PAROLE REVIEW

GEORGIA PAROLE REVIEW is published by the
State Board of Pardons and Paroles Fourth Floor, East Tower
Floyd Veterans Memorial Building 2 M.L. King, Jr., Drive, S.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30334
Garfield Hammonds, Jr. Chairman
Bobby Whitworth Vice Chairman
Timothy E. Jones Member
Jim Wetherington Member
Charles J. Topetzes Director ofParole
Marsha Bailey Editor
Copyright 1996 by State Board of Pardons and Paroles. Permission is granted to reproduce text from GEORGIA PAROLE REVIEW provided attribution is given, with the exception that this permission does not extend to any material copyrighted by others. Photographs may not be reproduced except by permission. The editor welcomes suggestions and comments.