Dispute erupts between Alameda County judges, probation officers over assistance program

Alameda County probation leaders plan to scrap a 7-month-old program aimed at helping low-income criminal defendants get housing and job assistance in favor of their own model — prompting backlash from the county’s top judge, who has called the gambit “the very definition of bureaucratic insanity.”

The dispute stems from a decision earlier this month by Alameda County’s probation chief, Brian K. Ford, to do away with the still-nascent Pretrial Expansion Program and instead implement his own, yet-to-be-finalized initiative. Few details have been made public about the replacement proposal, including how much it would cost and how the county planned to ensure criminal defendants receive the same level of services.

The maneuver has riled Alameda County Superior Court Presiding Judge Michael Markman, who questioned the logic of doing away with a new program so quickly. He pointed to early data suggesting the original program — which pairs case managers with defendants to help them receive housing, employment and mental health services — is working well, with hundreds of people receiving public benefits, substance abuse help and even Uber rides to their court hearings.

In an unusual move, Markman sent letters to each of the county’s supervisors urging them to approve one more year of funding and allow the original pretrial program to continue through the end of 2027. He stressed that fewer people have committed crimes while awaiting trial as a result of the program, and a funding extension would allow the court to gather even more data on that front.

“Why are we creating a crisis?” said the judge, while advocating for the county to “slow down.”

When asked for comment from Ford, the probation department instead offered an unsigned statement, saying its replacement plan “remains under discussion,” and that court leaders have been invited to “meet and discuss the model and all operational considerations.”

“Our goal is to continue planning collaboratively and determine how county resources can best support public safety, promote effective service connections and complement the State’s pretrial responsibilities,” the statement said.

The dispute comes at a time when counties are encountering a growing number of defendants who qualify for release on their own recognizance — meaning without having to post any bail — while awaiting trial.

A California Supreme Court ruling five years ago affirmed that judges could not keep defendants in custody simply because they can’t afford bail, dealing a blow to the state’s cash bail system. A subsequent state supreme court decision this year doubled down on that earlier ruling, finding that judges cannot use “artificially high or objectively unattainable bail” to keep people in custody, and further opening the door for defendants to wait for trial at home.

In a nod to that shifting judicial landscape, the Alameda County Superior Court system spent the past few years expanding its array of services for people awaiting trial — most notably by opening resource centers at multiple courthouses in April 2025.

The biggest change came in February with the Pretrial Expansion Program, as the court system used $3 million in state funding from the 2011 Public Safety Realignment Act to for a wealth of new services. A dozen employees were brought in through the Berkeley nonprofit Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency, including a cadre of case managers and intake coordinators tasked with helping people navigate the East Bay’s maze of social services.

The money paid for food gift cards, cell phones and Clipper cards to attend court hearings, said Cory Jacobs, a Pretrial Services program manager. The initiative pays for dozens of Uber rides a day to Alameda County courthouses, ensuring that defendants don’t miss their hearings. About 10 people a week get rides from Santa Rita Jail to housing providers, ensuring they don’t end up sleeping on the streets.

All of those new services that began in February — including rent payments for about 100 people who would otherwise be homeless — would disappear on Dec. 31 under the county probation department’s proposal, Jacobs warned.

“We’re very scrappy — we’re doing a lot with a little bit of money here,” Jacobs said. “It impacts a lot of people.”

County supervisors have offered a range of opinions on the dispute.

While not explicitly endorsing one approach over the other, Supervisor Lena Tam said the probation department’s proposal “reflects collaboration” among a host of agencies, including the sheriff’s office and the county’s Social Services Agency, adding that “by coordinating supervision with meaningful services and supports, Alameda County can better promote stability, accountability, and successful engagement with the court process.”

Supervisor Elisa Márquez declined to say which proposal she supported, saying only that said she was “committed to finding a path forward,” and “seeing people in our community continue to get services and be connected.” She also stressed that the original $3 million funding allocation for the original Pretrial Expansion Program was only ever intended to last one year, and she had yet to see a formal program evaluation — beyond the regular updates already provided to the board — as initially requested.

Supervisor Nate Miley said he came away impressed with the current program while attending a tour of the East County Hall of Justice in Dublin, where one of two main case worker offices exist.

He voiced reluctance in making a final decision on the program’s fate before meeting with representatives from the county, the probation department and the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office. Still, his preliminary impressions of the original program were positive.

“I’m inclined to want to support the need to provide funding for pretrial services,” Miley said. “I see it as a mechanism for violence prevention.”

Jakob Rodgers is a senior breaking news reporter. Call, text or send him an encrypted message via Signal at 510-390-2351, or email him at [email protected].