Government Accountability on Juvenile Delinquency
By Larry Bolinger
A reflection of the meeting concerning diversion programs between Bolinger and the Box Butte County Commissioners, County Attorney, and County Clerk.
Bolinger: I have run for public office several times and over the past couple of campaigns I have argued to create change in how our government handles Juvenile Delinquency. I do have a background in working in a correctional facility. I also have a Bachelor of Science degree, majored in Political Science, and minored in Criminology, wrote 3 books on politics. I also have a Master of Public Administration degree. So, when I advocate for change, it is usually done based on facts that I put together through research analysis utilizing credible sources.
I had passed along information about a need to change since roughly 2018 to both city and county officials. The police department has shown to have been working on some diversion programs. But there is a lack of effort when talking to the City Council and County Officials. To have a successful diversion program you have to have a working relationship between the city and county. To create a diversified diversion program you utilize the city's assets. Statistics on diversion programs show a reduction in recidivism rates and a decrease in expenses. But, a primary excuse I get is it is “not my job.” A good politician can influence change whether it is in their specific job responsibility or not. Someone in office has a greater chance of creating change than a person out of office. In the meeting, nobody took notes, and nobody showed an interest in looking at my research. A couple of Commissioners flipped through the handout that I got from the “Voice for Children” group, but they only had time to look at the pictures rather than read the information. The County officials went on the defense and created plenty of excuses and finger-pointing. In my 20 years of experience in politics, the refusal to accept facts and create excuses and finger-pointing and refusal to be accountable usually leads to nothing being done. The argument got loud when Commissioner Steve Burke asked me if I thought if the commissioners could tell the County Attorney what to do, then he asked the County Tourney if he could tell her what to do and she said no. He was obviously being a smartass and trying to insult my intelligence on government affairs. However, I was the only person in the room with an education in government affairs. My statement is that the County Commissioner position is the highest government body for the County and they can influence change or choose to do nothing. What they have been doing is choosing to do nothing.
Burke kept on yelling about where the information came from and I told him several times that the researched information that I gave had cited information. But he kept asking. So I explained to him that in a “Research Analysis,” they put the cited information at the end of the research. That information was in front of him but he refused to look. So he kept on asking again and again. I did have doubts that Burke knew what cited information meant. But for the record, the cited information was from state websites, books on Criminology and Sociology that were taught at the University of Nebraska, and article reviews of several legal briefs. After I left the meeting, it dawned on me that Burke did not know what “Cited information” meant.”
If the people at the meeting had taken an interest in this subject matter, they would have reviewed my research and known the information I provided was factual. They would have been more focused on improving the system rather than defending a system that is obviously failing. They would have had the time to review the cited source of information and fact-check every statement. A responsible elected official would have done that if they had the education.
My request to be on the Count Commissioner agenda:
“I am inquiring about what the county has put together in the form of diversion programs to decrease the recidivism rates of juvenile delinquency.
I have sent the county information several times over the past 4 years. I have an extensive education in criminology from the University of Nebraska.
The study that I sent in showed that diversion programs have reduced recidivism rates by as much as 60% in adults and 40% in children. The study showed that making kids part of the system and having them go through the juvenile court system has increased criminal activities while diversion programs decrease criminal activities.
A recent study in 2023, showed that 95% of Nebraska is utilizing diversion programs in one form or another and we are seeing a reduction in recidivism rates. Box Butte County is part of the 5% that shows that we have done absolutely nothing and we have one of the highest recidivism rates in the state. It also shows that Box Butte County has one of the highest penalties for juveniles in the entire state.
The past two City Police chiefs have worked on diversion programs. The brick wall in utilizing diversion programs comes from the County Attorney, Sheriff, and Judge.
As a politician, I pushed this issue when I ran for Attorney General and Legislature. That is 4 years of pushing for a change where the county has failed. I also talked about this through 2 interviews for County Commissioner. I am shocked that Box Butte County is showing zero participation in diversion programs in a state-wide research analysis.
Our leading Colleges provide information about diversion programs in both sociology and criminology classes.
I am requesting this to be on the agenda for discussion with the commissioners and the people who are directly involved in this system. I would like to know what they are doing to bring our diversion programs system up to date.
One of the main things that is pushed in diversion programs is utilizing drug courts. It is very tough to fight drug addiction if you don’t have a drug court and a proper rehab program. For Box Butte County, there is no Drug Court system and the closest dry out clinic is 300 miles away. The excuse why our county won’t start a Drug Court System is that it would take a lot of work to get it started. The County Attorney said she reviewed drug counts with Scottsbluff County and looked over all the things that would need to be done and it would be a lot of work. Our County representatives get paid to work, but won’t implement a program because it would mean they would have to work. It is something that would save lives, but it would mean that people who are paid to work, would have to work. The information I provided was several months of voluntary time. I wasn’t paid for anything, but I did the work. Then we have someone who is paid to do the work, they simply do not want to.
In part of the discussion, I brought up the issue of truancy and running kids through the court system and running the parents of those kids through the court system. Kids go to juvenile court and get a penalty, and then the parents of those kids are charged with misdemeanor charges. A misdemeanor charge for the parents goes on their permanent records. They are labeled criminals forever. A couple of the commissioners did not understand that. One of them argued that kids are not charged with misdemeanor charges. So I had to explain again that the kids are penalized in a Juvenile Court, and then the court system charges their parents with misdemeanor charges. The parents did not break the law but are being penalized for their kid's actions. Anybody with an education in Constitutional Law could argue that as being a violation of the 8th Amendment. As it is an adjust penalty for a crime that was not committed by the person being charged. One of the Commissioners asked me what should be done. I said, “Quit Doing IT.” It should have been obvious that if our system is failing, you change the system. When Box Butte County has one of the highest recidivism rates in Nebraska, it shouldn’t be under my scrutiny, it should be under the state's scrutiny as to why this small community has a failing system. The County Attorney stated that she had one person who successfully past a diversion program. Roughly 2007, there were significant changes in how our government handles truancy and juvenile delinquencies. The change in procedure took part of that job that was done through Human Services and put more focus on pushing the authority to the County Attorney with a focus on “tough on crime”. With that initiative, the focus was forcing kids and parents of those kids into court. For BoxButte County, that resulted in one child being helped by utilizing a diversion program over the past 20 years. Then the County Attorney and County Commissioners argue the research that was done that showed Box Butte County doing nothing or next to nothing on diversion programs. They denied the research because they have a diversion program that helped ONE child. The research showed that Box Butte County has one of the highest recidivism rates and a continued increase in the recidivism rate is a failing system. If the meeting had been handled in a professional and responsible manner, they would have accepted the facts presented by the in-depth research analysis where information was gathered from leading education authorities in the State. Take that information and simply put together a plan to improve policies and procedures concerning Juveniles.
If the meeting was something that would have been useful, we would have reviewed what could be done in way of diversion programs and set up goals to achieve them, but most of the meeting was denial, finger-pointing, and giving themselves a pat on the back for helping one kid over the past 20 years. Diversion programs are utilizing the town's assets. Those programs would be such things as:
Larry Bolinger
Author and Political Activist
www.scottbolinger.website
Research Analysis
Ch. 25 of "Politics: Last of Defiance" by Scott Bolinger
Truancy
Juvenile Court vs. Social Service Mediation
Introduction
Truancy and Juvenile Delinquency have been a concern for many years. However, it is the responsibility of the judicial system to weigh the impact on the child as well as the impact on the community and choose the best course of action. A proper research analysis can provide the necessary information to allow an educated response which can lead to an improved process.
I do remember years ago when Governor Heineman of Nebraska reduced grants for youth correctional facilities to put more focus on “at-home responsibility” rather than sending kids away to a correction facility. Putting a kid through a Juvenile Court system because he/she skipped a class does not fix the issue at home. “In May 2013, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman signed into law Legislative Bill 561, a major reform bill aimed at improving the juvenile justice system in the state. The law shifts the supervision of all juvenile offenders in the community from the Department of Health and Human Services to the Office of Probation Administration in the Nebraska Supreme Court, which places a renewed emphasis on a diversion through community-based programs focused on the rehabilitation of youth involved with the criminal justice system.” (The Justice Center, The Council of State Governments). This was a little misguided. What happened is it changed from having mediation through the DHHS to making a push to have more kids go through juvenile courts and fining parents with misdemeanor charges by utilizing the Office of Probation Administration. This was a tough-on-crime tactic that put the fate of the children in the hands of the County Attorney.
The Truancy in Alliance, NE. was a topic of discussion for the BoxButte County Commission and School Board in their agendas in December of 2020. There was a write-up in the Times-Herald in December of 2020 titled “Commissioners Kill Virtual Learning At Slagle Building” written by Kathryn Kellar that goes over what was discussed in the Commissioners meeting. In the article, Box Butte County Attorney Curtis wanted to utilize the Slagle building to run classes on Zoom to help the kids meet educational goals. But, trying to force kids to use the Slagle building might not meet the needs of the entire community as it might not be easily accessible. To actually support equal rights you have to meet the needs of the entire community.
The County Attorney’s options to try and fix the truancy problems were to force the kids to utilize the Slagle building or put the child that skipped classes in a juvenile court system and file charges against the parents giving those parents misdemeanor charges that would go on their permanent records. If those are the only options that were considered, our government has failed the people it’s supposed to serve. With the issues of the pandemic and the risk factors to the children, parents should have the choice to allow their kids to go to a public school or use online or homeschooling. That should not be the County Attorney's decision.
Studies in Sociology and Criminology have shown that rehab programs have decreased recidivism by more than 40%. A Juvenile Justice system based on penalties is not a rehab program. Social Services, schools, PSR officers, and parents working together is in my opinion a better choice for a better community-based program. By working together you take away the damage that a court system can do to the social development of the child.
Paul Hammel wrote an article in the Omaha-World-Herald on 10 March 2021 titled “Nebraska Legislature narrowly advances bill to provide diversion programs for truant kids.” The article covers the LB568 bill that is on the state Legislative agenda. The bill would focus on counseling rather than a court for kids who skip school. This bill was introduced by Senator Patty Brook. This bill would remove truancy as a status offense that would require a juvenile court hearing. This would eliminate a juvenile court hearing for truancy and replace it with a concentration on the root causes of absenteeism. Brooks states that the current system contributes to the “school-to-prison” pipeline. She states that 70% of kids who end up in juvenile court will end up in adult court. (Hammel, 2021)
Questions:
Hypothesis: I hypothesize that kids have a higher dropout rate when pressured through a Juvenile Court system compared to utilizing Social Service Mediation. Research analysis does prove that decreased education increases crime. I also hypothesize that kids who have gone through a Juvenile Court system have a higher percentage of continuing criminal activities into adulthood compared to kids who went through Social Service Mediation. To help give insight and prove the hypothesis I have researched several literature reviews, law reviews, and case reviews and put together a logit regression. I believe the research is important because it can show the impact our current system has had and could give reason for a need to change.
Literature Review
“Truancy is defined as the habitual engagement in unexcused absence from school.” (Zang, Willson) A survey conducted by Zang and Willson from Texas A & M University in 2003 consisted of 230 middle school kids. This survey showed that 30% of the kids deliberately missed school and 10% were often truant. The study showed that parents who spent more time with their children helped improve their cognitive development. Parents who manage their kid's academic achievements are more likely to stay in school. Students in a disorganized, unsafe, or unsupportive environment are at high risk for absenteeism and truancy. (Zang, Willam, 2010)
The study conducted in South Carolina from 1986 – 2006 on Juveniles being referred to the system showed that the average was 14.47 years old, 55% were referred once, 19.0% were referred twice, and 26.1% had three or more referrals.
A cross-tabulation showed that low-income families have a 60% higher likelihood of committing truancy. The study also showed that truancy offenders were referred to the system more often than other offenders and had more probations than other offenders and were significantly younger than the “other” offenders. 7,195 children incurred a second offense, 1,243 led to second truancy, and 5,952 conducted other offenses. Studies show that the younger a child was at first referral was more likely to have a second referral. Those with a second referral at an increased age had a greater chance of other offenses. Minority children were at a greater risk for a second truancy compared to other offenses than majority children. The 2007 study showed that truancy offenders had more incarcerations and more probation than other offenders. The numbers suggest the need for effective intervention. A major reason for truancy is due to difficulties with school. So kids may use truancy to distance themselves from an environment that they feel threatened by. (Zang, Willam, 2010)
A book written by Paul Sharp and Barry Hancock (1995) called “Juvenile Delinquency Historical, Theoretical and Societal Reactions to Youth” researched the effects of restitution. Restitution has been shown to have some positive impacts on recidivism. None had high recidivism rates that participated in restitution like those that received probation or detention conditions. The effects on recidivism, restitution had 10% fewer crimes but did not receive statistical significance at the .05 level. (Sharp, Hancock, 1995)
A book written by Larry Siegel and Brandon Welsh (2018) called “Juvenile Delinquency. Theory, Practice, and Law” was used in a Juvenile Delinquency class at UNO. Larry Siegal has an MA and Ph.D. from the State University of NY at Albany and was a teacher at Northeastern University, the University of Nebraska at Omaha, Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire, and the University of Massachusetts – Lowell. Brandon Welsh is a professor of criminology at Northeastern University and received his Ph.D. from Cambridge University. In their book, they state that 750,000 youths are arrested each year and those charges range from loitering to murder. Chronic delinquent offenders are recognized as a serious social problem. Looking at social problems you look at the contributing factors to those behaviors which could include abuse, substance abuse, neglect, education, or peer relations. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention was created to identify the needs of youths and to find policy initiatives. Their goal is to remove status offenders (which would include truancy) from secured lockups, detention centers, and post-disposition treatment facilities. In the progress that was made to restructure status offenders, the Juvenile Courts worked against that progress by relabeling “status offenders” as “delinquent offenders” to keep them in the system to be able to have control over them. Studies have found that “the effects of the formal processing on status offenders can increase the likelihood that they will get involved in subsequent delinquency.” (Siegal, Welsh, 2018) This is a clear cause for reform. Many states have changed from a juvenile court system to a community-based system utilizing community resources and family support centers. Studies show that many status offenders have serious emotional problems and may engage in self-destructive behaviors. (Siegal, Welsh, 2018)
Case Review
State V. Rice. 204 Neb.732,285 N.W.2d 223 (1979) concluded that a violation of the law is not in itself, evidence of neglect under section 43-202 (2)©, R.R.S. 1943. In this case, the State of Nebraska challenged the district court’s decision and held that the appellee ( Leslie Rice), was not a dependent child and that her parents had not violated Nebraska law in educating their child in a non-accredited, home school, religious-based program. The parents created a non-accredited religious homeschooling program for their child and were modeled and assisted by an accredited private religious school. The court found that the child’s academic needs were being met even though the parents were not certified teachers. The state argued that in not attending a state-certified program, the parents and child were violating the mandatory attendance laws and thus were necessarily in violation of the dependency statute by not providing a state-approved education. The court held that the statute relating to compulsory school attendance and the statute regarding the neglect of children did not pertain to the same subject matter and could not be construed in pari materia. The court held that dependency required a showing of severe parental misconduct that jeopardized the child's well-being, not the mere technical violation of a statute. The court held that the child and the parents were not in violation of the state laws regarding neglected and abused children. It was argued that Neb. Stat.ch.79 does not equate nonattendance with neglect under Neb.Rev.Stat. & 43-202 (2)© and that if it did, it would have said so.
In re Interest of Rice, 204 Neb. 732, 733, 285 N.W.2d 223, 224, 1979 Neb. LEXIS 1180, *1 (Neb. November 13, 1979)
Law review:
“The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preventions Act (1974) (JJDPA) is based on a broad consensus that children, youth, and families involved with the juvenile and criminal courts should be guarded by federal standards for care and custody, while also upholding the interests of community safety and the prevention of victimization.” (juvjustice.org) The JJDPA provides for a juvenile justice plan with federal funding to improve programs and operations. One of the core requirements is to work on the deinstitutionalization of status offenders and focus on alternatives to placing juveniles into detention facilities and work on removing any racial or ethnic disparities that are in the juvenile justice system. From the branching of the JJDPA created the “Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,” which creates effective education, training, research, prevention diversion, treatment, and rehabilitation for juveniles. (Juvjustice.org) Which also led to such programs as the “Runaway Youth Program” and the “National Institute for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.”
The Nebraska truancy law requires school districts to refer students to their county attorney when the child has been absent for at least 20 days within a school year. This would include kids ages six to eighteen or who have reached the age of sixteen and have withdrawn from school under section 79-202 of the state statute. Nebraska statutes on truancy state that a violation of the law is not, in itself, evidence of neglect under state statute 43-202(2)©, R.R.S. 1943. But Subdivision (3)(a) of sections 43-247 and 79-210 makes a minor child’s parents or guardians culpable for the child’s truancy. (Nebraska Legislature.gov)
Methods:
I researched the data from the ADA at Berkeley post-election. I ran a “Logit Regression” tabulation between the dependent variable “has ever been stopped and quested by police (v162297,” and the independent variables age (v161267), Native (v161310c), Latino v161309), white (v161310a), black (v161310b), and income (v161361x). The logit regression tabulation is done to show if there are increased policing activities based on age, race, or income.
To add additional information to the research I would need to:
The value of the constant term is .701. There is no zero code in the independent variables so we cannot interpret the constant term. The age variable has the strongest T-statistic (closest relationship) to the dependent variable at 6.413. The highest regression coefficient is for people that are Native which is at .-533 and Black with a coefficient of -.481. One unit change in identifying as a Native creates a change in being stopped by policy by -.533. Blacks would be at per -.481. Both Native and Black are statistically significant as the probability for Natives is .010, Black is at .004, and age is .000 which is p<.05, two-tailed test. That suggests that there is a high probability that you would be stopped by law enforcement if you are Native, Black, or of a specific age. This would be interpreted as rejecting the null hypothesis as people who stopped and were questioned by police may be influenced by the many variables (age, race, income). Based on the Native coefficient of -.533, p< .01, two-tailed test.
Conclusion:
The research showed that white children were in the system for truancy more often compared to black children. But more black children were in the system for other offenses. That could bring into question if white children receive a lesser penalty on average than black children. In the logit regression, it showed that more children that were Natives or Black were stopped by police and questioned than the other variables.
Senator Brooks's assessment said that 70% of kids that are put into the system as a child will repeat criminal activities as an adult, citing there is a much greater decrease in recidivism when we utilize more focus on root causes and counseling.
The impact of social skills starts at a young age. The largest impact on developing social skills comes from the parent. Early childhood development and our school system play an additional role in developing social skills. When a child is taken away from parents and a regular school system and ran through a Juvenile Court and placed into the system it takes away those fundamental social skill development. That leads to increased recidivism. When children repeat those offensives, they receive more incarceration rather than pinpointing the specific cause of the problem. By not addressing the issue in many cases leads toward continued criminal activities into adulthood. The conclusion to this research is to look at community programs such as utilizing community resources and family support centers. As many status offenders have serious emotional problems and may engage in self-destructive behaviors and the effects of formal processing on status offenders can increase the likelihood that they will get involved in subsequent delinquency.”
References:
Kathryn Kellar, Alliance Times-Herald
Kellar, Kathryn. (2020). “Commissioners Kill Virtual Learning At Slagle Building.” Times-Herald. Commissioners Kill Virtual Learning at Slagle Building - Alliance Times-Herald
CSGJustice Center Staff. (2013). “Nebraska Emphasizes Community-Based Services and Comprehensive Reentry Programming for Youth.”
Nebraska Emphasizes Community-Based Services and Comprehensive Reentry Programming for Youth - CSG Justice Center - CSG Justice Center
Juvjustice.org. “History of the JJDPA.” Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act | CJJ (juvjustice.org)
Nebraska Legislature.gov. “Nebraska Revised Statute 79-201.” Nebraska Legislature
In re Interest of Rice, 204 Neb. 732, 285 N.W.2d 223, 1979 Neb. LEXIS 1180 (Supreme Court of Nebraska November 13, 1979, Filed ). https://advance-lexis-com.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RXP-6DP0-003D-B2YP-00000-00&context=1516831.
Zhang, Dalum. Willson, Victor. (May 2010). “Truancy Offenders in the Juvenile Justice System: A multicohort Study.” Texas A&M University.
https://www-jstor-org.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/stable/43153821?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=truancy&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dtruancy%26sd%3D2010%26ed%3D2021&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3Af14c142497a850d0acd55769541a3c11&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents%20%20%20
Sharp, Paul. Hancock, Barry. (1995). “Juvenile Delinquency Historical, Theoretical and Societal Reactions to Youth.” Prentice-Hall, Inc. (pg. 410-421)
Hammel, Paul. (10 March 2021). “Nebraska Legislature narrowly advances bill to provide diversion programs for truant kids.” Omaha World Herald. https://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/nebraska-legislature-narrowly-advances-bill-to-provide-diversion-programs-for-truant-kids/article_6f719235-48f6-55be-b292-37191b780a12.html?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_&fbclid=IwAR1aHmV9Jl5ZrUjCzrPOFx9UP4IqwxpG6l33MwXek8OZeBfNJCRT3pV8D5A%20%20%20
SDA. Berkeley.edu. ANES (2017)
https://sda.berkeley.edu/sdaweb/analysis/;jsessionid=B4DE8B0D1780BC5CC9EF7DD403CF0780?dataset=nes2016
Siegel, Larry. Welsh, Brandon. (2018). “Juvenile Delinquency. Theory, Practice, and Law.” Cengage Solution. (pg. 14,15, 29-33.)
By Larry Bolinger
A reflection of the meeting concerning diversion programs between Bolinger and the Box Butte County Commissioners, County Attorney, and County Clerk.
Bolinger: I have run for public office several times and over the past couple of campaigns I have argued to create change in how our government handles Juvenile Delinquency. I do have a background in working in a correctional facility. I also have a Bachelor of Science degree, majored in Political Science, and minored in Criminology, wrote 3 books on politics. I also have a Master of Public Administration degree. So, when I advocate for change, it is usually done based on facts that I put together through research analysis utilizing credible sources.
I had passed along information about a need to change since roughly 2018 to both city and county officials. The police department has shown to have been working on some diversion programs. But there is a lack of effort when talking to the City Council and County Officials. To have a successful diversion program you have to have a working relationship between the city and county. To create a diversified diversion program you utilize the city's assets. Statistics on diversion programs show a reduction in recidivism rates and a decrease in expenses. But, a primary excuse I get is it is “not my job.” A good politician can influence change whether it is in their specific job responsibility or not. Someone in office has a greater chance of creating change than a person out of office. In the meeting, nobody took notes, and nobody showed an interest in looking at my research. A couple of Commissioners flipped through the handout that I got from the “Voice for Children” group, but they only had time to look at the pictures rather than read the information. The County officials went on the defense and created plenty of excuses and finger-pointing. In my 20 years of experience in politics, the refusal to accept facts and create excuses and finger-pointing and refusal to be accountable usually leads to nothing being done. The argument got loud when Commissioner Steve Burke asked me if I thought if the commissioners could tell the County Attorney what to do, then he asked the County Tourney if he could tell her what to do and she said no. He was obviously being a smartass and trying to insult my intelligence on government affairs. However, I was the only person in the room with an education in government affairs. My statement is that the County Commissioner position is the highest government body for the County and they can influence change or choose to do nothing. What they have been doing is choosing to do nothing.
Burke kept on yelling about where the information came from and I told him several times that the researched information that I gave had cited information. But he kept asking. So I explained to him that in a “Research Analysis,” they put the cited information at the end of the research. That information was in front of him but he refused to look. So he kept on asking again and again. I did have doubts that Burke knew what cited information meant. But for the record, the cited information was from state websites, books on Criminology and Sociology that were taught at the University of Nebraska, and article reviews of several legal briefs. After I left the meeting, it dawned on me that Burke did not know what “Cited information” meant.”
If the people at the meeting had taken an interest in this subject matter, they would have reviewed my research and known the information I provided was factual. They would have been more focused on improving the system rather than defending a system that is obviously failing. They would have had the time to review the cited source of information and fact-check every statement. A responsible elected official would have done that if they had the education.
My request to be on the Count Commissioner agenda:
“I am inquiring about what the county has put together in the form of diversion programs to decrease the recidivism rates of juvenile delinquency.
I have sent the county information several times over the past 4 years. I have an extensive education in criminology from the University of Nebraska.
The study that I sent in showed that diversion programs have reduced recidivism rates by as much as 60% in adults and 40% in children. The study showed that making kids part of the system and having them go through the juvenile court system has increased criminal activities while diversion programs decrease criminal activities.
A recent study in 2023, showed that 95% of Nebraska is utilizing diversion programs in one form or another and we are seeing a reduction in recidivism rates. Box Butte County is part of the 5% that shows that we have done absolutely nothing and we have one of the highest recidivism rates in the state. It also shows that Box Butte County has one of the highest penalties for juveniles in the entire state.
The past two City Police chiefs have worked on diversion programs. The brick wall in utilizing diversion programs comes from the County Attorney, Sheriff, and Judge.
As a politician, I pushed this issue when I ran for Attorney General and Legislature. That is 4 years of pushing for a change where the county has failed. I also talked about this through 2 interviews for County Commissioner. I am shocked that Box Butte County is showing zero participation in diversion programs in a state-wide research analysis.
Our leading Colleges provide information about diversion programs in both sociology and criminology classes.
I am requesting this to be on the agenda for discussion with the commissioners and the people who are directly involved in this system. I would like to know what they are doing to bring our diversion programs system up to date.
- Is there a plan in place?
- What is the plan?
- Is the plan being implemented now?
- What is the date that the plan will start?
- With all the information that has been provided, why is the state showing nothing is being done in Box Butte County?”
One of the main things that is pushed in diversion programs is utilizing drug courts. It is very tough to fight drug addiction if you don’t have a drug court and a proper rehab program. For Box Butte County, there is no Drug Court system and the closest dry out clinic is 300 miles away. The excuse why our county won’t start a Drug Court System is that it would take a lot of work to get it started. The County Attorney said she reviewed drug counts with Scottsbluff County and looked over all the things that would need to be done and it would be a lot of work. Our County representatives get paid to work, but won’t implement a program because it would mean they would have to work. It is something that would save lives, but it would mean that people who are paid to work, would have to work. The information I provided was several months of voluntary time. I wasn’t paid for anything, but I did the work. Then we have someone who is paid to do the work, they simply do not want to.
In part of the discussion, I brought up the issue of truancy and running kids through the court system and running the parents of those kids through the court system. Kids go to juvenile court and get a penalty, and then the parents of those kids are charged with misdemeanor charges. A misdemeanor charge for the parents goes on their permanent records. They are labeled criminals forever. A couple of the commissioners did not understand that. One of them argued that kids are not charged with misdemeanor charges. So I had to explain again that the kids are penalized in a Juvenile Court, and then the court system charges their parents with misdemeanor charges. The parents did not break the law but are being penalized for their kid's actions. Anybody with an education in Constitutional Law could argue that as being a violation of the 8th Amendment. As it is an adjust penalty for a crime that was not committed by the person being charged. One of the Commissioners asked me what should be done. I said, “Quit Doing IT.” It should have been obvious that if our system is failing, you change the system. When Box Butte County has one of the highest recidivism rates in Nebraska, it shouldn’t be under my scrutiny, it should be under the state's scrutiny as to why this small community has a failing system. The County Attorney stated that she had one person who successfully past a diversion program. Roughly 2007, there were significant changes in how our government handles truancy and juvenile delinquencies. The change in procedure took part of that job that was done through Human Services and put more focus on pushing the authority to the County Attorney with a focus on “tough on crime”. With that initiative, the focus was forcing kids and parents of those kids into court. For BoxButte County, that resulted in one child being helped by utilizing a diversion program over the past 20 years. Then the County Attorney and County Commissioners argue the research that was done that showed Box Butte County doing nothing or next to nothing on diversion programs. They denied the research because they have a diversion program that helped ONE child. The research showed that Box Butte County has one of the highest recidivism rates and a continued increase in the recidivism rate is a failing system. If the meeting had been handled in a professional and responsible manner, they would have accepted the facts presented by the in-depth research analysis where information was gathered from leading education authorities in the State. Take that information and simply put together a plan to improve policies and procedures concerning Juveniles.
If the meeting was something that would have been useful, we would have reviewed what could be done in way of diversion programs and set up goals to achieve them, but most of the meeting was denial, finger-pointing, and giving themselves a pat on the back for helping one kid over the past 20 years. Diversion programs are utilizing the town's assets. Those programs would be such things as:
- Teen/youth courts
- Mental health courts
- Drug courts
- Mentoring programs
- Pre-police encounter diversion
- Juvenile summer program with tutoring and field trips
- Workforce training
- Community work
- Probation transition program
- Intense supervision
- Day reporting.
Larry Bolinger
Author and Political Activist
www.scottbolinger.website
Research Analysis
Ch. 25 of "Politics: Last of Defiance" by Scott Bolinger
Truancy
Juvenile Court vs. Social Service Mediation
Introduction
Truancy and Juvenile Delinquency have been a concern for many years. However, it is the responsibility of the judicial system to weigh the impact on the child as well as the impact on the community and choose the best course of action. A proper research analysis can provide the necessary information to allow an educated response which can lead to an improved process.
I do remember years ago when Governor Heineman of Nebraska reduced grants for youth correctional facilities to put more focus on “at-home responsibility” rather than sending kids away to a correction facility. Putting a kid through a Juvenile Court system because he/she skipped a class does not fix the issue at home. “In May 2013, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman signed into law Legislative Bill 561, a major reform bill aimed at improving the juvenile justice system in the state. The law shifts the supervision of all juvenile offenders in the community from the Department of Health and Human Services to the Office of Probation Administration in the Nebraska Supreme Court, which places a renewed emphasis on a diversion through community-based programs focused on the rehabilitation of youth involved with the criminal justice system.” (The Justice Center, The Council of State Governments). This was a little misguided. What happened is it changed from having mediation through the DHHS to making a push to have more kids go through juvenile courts and fining parents with misdemeanor charges by utilizing the Office of Probation Administration. This was a tough-on-crime tactic that put the fate of the children in the hands of the County Attorney.
The Truancy in Alliance, NE. was a topic of discussion for the BoxButte County Commission and School Board in their agendas in December of 2020. There was a write-up in the Times-Herald in December of 2020 titled “Commissioners Kill Virtual Learning At Slagle Building” written by Kathryn Kellar that goes over what was discussed in the Commissioners meeting. In the article, Box Butte County Attorney Curtis wanted to utilize the Slagle building to run classes on Zoom to help the kids meet educational goals. But, trying to force kids to use the Slagle building might not meet the needs of the entire community as it might not be easily accessible. To actually support equal rights you have to meet the needs of the entire community.
The County Attorney’s options to try and fix the truancy problems were to force the kids to utilize the Slagle building or put the child that skipped classes in a juvenile court system and file charges against the parents giving those parents misdemeanor charges that would go on their permanent records. If those are the only options that were considered, our government has failed the people it’s supposed to serve. With the issues of the pandemic and the risk factors to the children, parents should have the choice to allow their kids to go to a public school or use online or homeschooling. That should not be the County Attorney's decision.
Studies in Sociology and Criminology have shown that rehab programs have decreased recidivism by more than 40%. A Juvenile Justice system based on penalties is not a rehab program. Social Services, schools, PSR officers, and parents working together is in my opinion a better choice for a better community-based program. By working together you take away the damage that a court system can do to the social development of the child.
Paul Hammel wrote an article in the Omaha-World-Herald on 10 March 2021 titled “Nebraska Legislature narrowly advances bill to provide diversion programs for truant kids.” The article covers the LB568 bill that is on the state Legislative agenda. The bill would focus on counseling rather than a court for kids who skip school. This bill was introduced by Senator Patty Brook. This bill would remove truancy as a status offense that would require a juvenile court hearing. This would eliminate a juvenile court hearing for truancy and replace it with a concentration on the root causes of absenteeism. Brooks states that the current system contributes to the “school-to-prison” pipeline. She states that 70% of kids who end up in juvenile court will end up in adult court. (Hammel, 2021)
Questions:
- What is the average truancy over the past 10 years?
- What is the recidivism rate of a child that goes through a Juvenile court compared to social services mediation?
- Are homeschooling and Zoom school considered different? Or should they be considered the same?
- What is the stress factor on a child when put through a juvenile court system?
- Is the percentage of children going through a juvenile court system more likely to be a cause that leads to continuing breaking the law compared to a child that received help from social service mediation?
- Research has shown that early education improves social skills and that education and higher education reduce criminal activities. Would putting a child in a juvenile court system deter that child from attending school? What is the percentage of dropouts from kids going through a juvenile court or any court system compared to social service mediation?
Hypothesis: I hypothesize that kids have a higher dropout rate when pressured through a Juvenile Court system compared to utilizing Social Service Mediation. Research analysis does prove that decreased education increases crime. I also hypothesize that kids who have gone through a Juvenile Court system have a higher percentage of continuing criminal activities into adulthood compared to kids who went through Social Service Mediation. To help give insight and prove the hypothesis I have researched several literature reviews, law reviews, and case reviews and put together a logit regression. I believe the research is important because it can show the impact our current system has had and could give reason for a need to change.
Literature Review
“Truancy is defined as the habitual engagement in unexcused absence from school.” (Zang, Willson) A survey conducted by Zang and Willson from Texas A & M University in 2003 consisted of 230 middle school kids. This survey showed that 30% of the kids deliberately missed school and 10% were often truant. The study showed that parents who spent more time with their children helped improve their cognitive development. Parents who manage their kid's academic achievements are more likely to stay in school. Students in a disorganized, unsafe, or unsupportive environment are at high risk for absenteeism and truancy. (Zang, Willam, 2010)
The study conducted in South Carolina from 1986 – 2006 on Juveniles being referred to the system showed that the average was 14.47 years old, 55% were referred once, 19.0% were referred twice, and 26.1% had three or more referrals.
A cross-tabulation showed that low-income families have a 60% higher likelihood of committing truancy. The study also showed that truancy offenders were referred to the system more often than other offenders and had more probations than other offenders and were significantly younger than the “other” offenders. 7,195 children incurred a second offense, 1,243 led to second truancy, and 5,952 conducted other offenses. Studies show that the younger a child was at first referral was more likely to have a second referral. Those with a second referral at an increased age had a greater chance of other offenses. Minority children were at a greater risk for a second truancy compared to other offenses than majority children. The 2007 study showed that truancy offenders had more incarcerations and more probation than other offenders. The numbers suggest the need for effective intervention. A major reason for truancy is due to difficulties with school. So kids may use truancy to distance themselves from an environment that they feel threatened by. (Zang, Willam, 2010)
A book written by Paul Sharp and Barry Hancock (1995) called “Juvenile Delinquency Historical, Theoretical and Societal Reactions to Youth” researched the effects of restitution. Restitution has been shown to have some positive impacts on recidivism. None had high recidivism rates that participated in restitution like those that received probation or detention conditions. The effects on recidivism, restitution had 10% fewer crimes but did not receive statistical significance at the .05 level. (Sharp, Hancock, 1995)
A book written by Larry Siegel and Brandon Welsh (2018) called “Juvenile Delinquency. Theory, Practice, and Law” was used in a Juvenile Delinquency class at UNO. Larry Siegal has an MA and Ph.D. from the State University of NY at Albany and was a teacher at Northeastern University, the University of Nebraska at Omaha, Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire, and the University of Massachusetts – Lowell. Brandon Welsh is a professor of criminology at Northeastern University and received his Ph.D. from Cambridge University. In their book, they state that 750,000 youths are arrested each year and those charges range from loitering to murder. Chronic delinquent offenders are recognized as a serious social problem. Looking at social problems you look at the contributing factors to those behaviors which could include abuse, substance abuse, neglect, education, or peer relations. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention was created to identify the needs of youths and to find policy initiatives. Their goal is to remove status offenders (which would include truancy) from secured lockups, detention centers, and post-disposition treatment facilities. In the progress that was made to restructure status offenders, the Juvenile Courts worked against that progress by relabeling “status offenders” as “delinquent offenders” to keep them in the system to be able to have control over them. Studies have found that “the effects of the formal processing on status offenders can increase the likelihood that they will get involved in subsequent delinquency.” (Siegal, Welsh, 2018) This is a clear cause for reform. Many states have changed from a juvenile court system to a community-based system utilizing community resources and family support centers. Studies show that many status offenders have serious emotional problems and may engage in self-destructive behaviors. (Siegal, Welsh, 2018)
Case Review
State V. Rice. 204 Neb.732,285 N.W.2d 223 (1979) concluded that a violation of the law is not in itself, evidence of neglect under section 43-202 (2)©, R.R.S. 1943. In this case, the State of Nebraska challenged the district court’s decision and held that the appellee ( Leslie Rice), was not a dependent child and that her parents had not violated Nebraska law in educating their child in a non-accredited, home school, religious-based program. The parents created a non-accredited religious homeschooling program for their child and were modeled and assisted by an accredited private religious school. The court found that the child’s academic needs were being met even though the parents were not certified teachers. The state argued that in not attending a state-certified program, the parents and child were violating the mandatory attendance laws and thus were necessarily in violation of the dependency statute by not providing a state-approved education. The court held that the statute relating to compulsory school attendance and the statute regarding the neglect of children did not pertain to the same subject matter and could not be construed in pari materia. The court held that dependency required a showing of severe parental misconduct that jeopardized the child's well-being, not the mere technical violation of a statute. The court held that the child and the parents were not in violation of the state laws regarding neglected and abused children. It was argued that Neb. Stat.ch.79 does not equate nonattendance with neglect under Neb.Rev.Stat. & 43-202 (2)© and that if it did, it would have said so.
In re Interest of Rice, 204 Neb. 732, 733, 285 N.W.2d 223, 224, 1979 Neb. LEXIS 1180, *1 (Neb. November 13, 1979)
Law review:
“The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preventions Act (1974) (JJDPA) is based on a broad consensus that children, youth, and families involved with the juvenile and criminal courts should be guarded by federal standards for care and custody, while also upholding the interests of community safety and the prevention of victimization.” (juvjustice.org) The JJDPA provides for a juvenile justice plan with federal funding to improve programs and operations. One of the core requirements is to work on the deinstitutionalization of status offenders and focus on alternatives to placing juveniles into detention facilities and work on removing any racial or ethnic disparities that are in the juvenile justice system. From the branching of the JJDPA created the “Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,” which creates effective education, training, research, prevention diversion, treatment, and rehabilitation for juveniles. (Juvjustice.org) Which also led to such programs as the “Runaway Youth Program” and the “National Institute for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.”
The Nebraska truancy law requires school districts to refer students to their county attorney when the child has been absent for at least 20 days within a school year. This would include kids ages six to eighteen or who have reached the age of sixteen and have withdrawn from school under section 79-202 of the state statute. Nebraska statutes on truancy state that a violation of the law is not, in itself, evidence of neglect under state statute 43-202(2)©, R.R.S. 1943. But Subdivision (3)(a) of sections 43-247 and 79-210 makes a minor child’s parents or guardians culpable for the child’s truancy. (Nebraska Legislature.gov)
Methods:
I researched the data from the ADA at Berkeley post-election. I ran a “Logit Regression” tabulation between the dependent variable “has ever been stopped and quested by police (v162297,” and the independent variables age (v161267), Native (v161310c), Latino v161309), white (v161310a), black (v161310b), and income (v161361x). The logit regression tabulation is done to show if there are increased policing activities based on age, race, or income.
To add additional information to the research I would need to:
- obtain “View Waver” from a judge to get the actual numbers of kids that went to juvenile court and how many returned and second time or more than twice. How many of those kids improved and graduated? How many dropped out of school? How many went to jail as an adult?
- Would need a list of kids that were referred to a social service outlet to mediate truancy between child, parent, and schools. How many improved and graduated? How many dropped out of school? How many went to jail as an adult?
The value of the constant term is .701. There is no zero code in the independent variables so we cannot interpret the constant term. The age variable has the strongest T-statistic (closest relationship) to the dependent variable at 6.413. The highest regression coefficient is for people that are Native which is at .-533 and Black with a coefficient of -.481. One unit change in identifying as a Native creates a change in being stopped by policy by -.533. Blacks would be at per -.481. Both Native and Black are statistically significant as the probability for Natives is .010, Black is at .004, and age is .000 which is p<.05, two-tailed test. That suggests that there is a high probability that you would be stopped by law enforcement if you are Native, Black, or of a specific age. This would be interpreted as rejecting the null hypothesis as people who stopped and were questioned by police may be influenced by the many variables (age, race, income). Based on the Native coefficient of -.533, p< .01, two-tailed test.
Conclusion:
The research showed that white children were in the system for truancy more often compared to black children. But more black children were in the system for other offenses. That could bring into question if white children receive a lesser penalty on average than black children. In the logit regression, it showed that more children that were Natives or Black were stopped by police and questioned than the other variables.
Senator Brooks's assessment said that 70% of kids that are put into the system as a child will repeat criminal activities as an adult, citing there is a much greater decrease in recidivism when we utilize more focus on root causes and counseling.
The impact of social skills starts at a young age. The largest impact on developing social skills comes from the parent. Early childhood development and our school system play an additional role in developing social skills. When a child is taken away from parents and a regular school system and ran through a Juvenile Court and placed into the system it takes away those fundamental social skill development. That leads to increased recidivism. When children repeat those offensives, they receive more incarceration rather than pinpointing the specific cause of the problem. By not addressing the issue in many cases leads toward continued criminal activities into adulthood. The conclusion to this research is to look at community programs such as utilizing community resources and family support centers. As many status offenders have serious emotional problems and may engage in self-destructive behaviors and the effects of formal processing on status offenders can increase the likelihood that they will get involved in subsequent delinquency.”
References:
Kathryn Kellar, Alliance Times-Herald
Kellar, Kathryn. (2020). “Commissioners Kill Virtual Learning At Slagle Building.” Times-Herald. Commissioners Kill Virtual Learning at Slagle Building - Alliance Times-Herald
CSGJustice Center Staff. (2013). “Nebraska Emphasizes Community-Based Services and Comprehensive Reentry Programming for Youth.”
Nebraska Emphasizes Community-Based Services and Comprehensive Reentry Programming for Youth - CSG Justice Center - CSG Justice Center
Juvjustice.org. “History of the JJDPA.” Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act | CJJ (juvjustice.org)
Nebraska Legislature.gov. “Nebraska Revised Statute 79-201.” Nebraska Legislature
In re Interest of Rice, 204 Neb. 732, 285 N.W.2d 223, 1979 Neb. LEXIS 1180 (Supreme Court of Nebraska November 13, 1979, Filed ). https://advance-lexis-com.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RXP-6DP0-003D-B2YP-00000-00&context=1516831.
Zhang, Dalum. Willson, Victor. (May 2010). “Truancy Offenders in the Juvenile Justice System: A multicohort Study.” Texas A&M University.
https://www-jstor-org.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/stable/43153821?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=truancy&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dtruancy%26sd%3D2010%26ed%3D2021&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3Af14c142497a850d0acd55769541a3c11&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents%20%20%20
Sharp, Paul. Hancock, Barry. (1995). “Juvenile Delinquency Historical, Theoretical and Societal Reactions to Youth.” Prentice-Hall, Inc. (pg. 410-421)
Hammel, Paul. (10 March 2021). “Nebraska Legislature narrowly advances bill to provide diversion programs for truant kids.” Omaha World Herald. https://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/nebraska-legislature-narrowly-advances-bill-to-provide-diversion-programs-for-truant-kids/article_6f719235-48f6-55be-b292-37191b780a12.html?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_&fbclid=IwAR1aHmV9Jl5ZrUjCzrPOFx9UP4IqwxpG6l33MwXek8OZeBfNJCRT3pV8D5A%20%20%20
SDA. Berkeley.edu. ANES (2017)
https://sda.berkeley.edu/sdaweb/analysis/;jsessionid=B4DE8B0D1780BC5CC9EF7DD403CF0780?dataset=nes2016
Siegel, Larry. Welsh, Brandon. (2018). “Juvenile Delinquency. Theory, Practice, and Law.” Cengage Solution. (pg. 14,15, 29-33.)