Sawyer County CJCC discusses forming executive committee and shorter-term work groups
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Council members reviewed a proposal to form a 5–7 member executive committee and time-limited work groups to share CJCC workload, and agreed to place the item on next month’s agenda for formal action and board notification.
Members of the Sawyer County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council reviewed a proposal to create an executive steering committee and a set of time-limited work groups to distribute the CJCC’s workload and improve data-driven oversight.
The proposal, presented by Andy Alvarado, said an executive committee of about five to seven members — including the chair and vice chair, the county administrator, the sheriff and one or two judges — would meet more frequently than the full CJCC to develop agendas, recommend work groups and report priorities to the full council and the county board. “I think an executive committee of 5 to 7 members would be about right,” Alvarado said.
Council members were asked to start brainstorming possible work-group topics so the executive committee could recommend specific groups and chairs. The handout reviewed at the meeting drew from national CJCC guidance and described a separate data work group to gather and analyze justice system performance metrics, and suggested committees on communication/engagement, juvenile justice and operational coordination among law enforcement, courts and the district attorney’s office.
Members emphasized the value of involving non‑CJCC subject-matter experts on data and temporary work groups. One member noted data will be essential to make a future case for county funding if grant sources decline: “You gotta put it into some quantitative data so that there’s…dollars and cents as well,” a member said. The council also discussed routing creation of the executive committee through the county’s public safety committee and notifying the full county board because of the executive committee’s broader responsibilities.
No final vote was taken at this meeting; members agreed to put the executive-committee proposal back on the agenda next month for formal action and to continue developing recommended work-group ideas in the interim. The agenda item for the CJCC’s memorandum of understanding (MOU) was also deferred pending additional updates.
The meeting record shows one procedural action earlier in the session: approval of the previous meeting minutes by voice vote. That procedural approval was recorded without an individual roll-call tally.