SAN FRANCISCO — Advocates and criminal justice reform supporters are mobilizing against a proposal they say could dismantle one of California’s most prominent community-based pretrial programs, warning the move would eliminate decades of institutional knowledge and weaken support systems for thousands of people navigating the court process.
The campaign, “Don’t Dismantle SF Pretrial,” seeks to stop San Francisco officials from transferring pretrial services from the nonprofit San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project to the city’s Adult Probation Department.
According to David Mauroff, CEO of the San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project, the issue escalated after the Adult Probation Department submitted a $12.7 million budget request to establish a new pretrial services division staffed by 27 employees.
“And it’s 12.7 million for 27 staff. In comparison, we’re a $15.5 million agency with 105 staff,” Mauroff said. “So it’s not really comparable in its scope.”
Mauroff said San Francisco Pretrial currently supervises approximately 1,800 people who are out of custody while also operating 24-hour pretrial assessment and release operations.
“So they’re essentially moving ahead with what would eventually be dissolving, eliminating our organization and all the work we do and putting that work into our adult probation department,” Mauroff said.
The San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project has operated for nearly five decades and describes itself as a community-based organization focused on helping system-impacted individuals navigate court processes, avoid future arrests and remain free from further system involvement.
The organization’s 2024 impact report states that it served 5,878 clients across release services, diversion programs and reentry initiatives. The report also describes the agency as “a pillar in the community with industry-leading safety rates.”
“For nearly five decades, San Francisco Pretrial has transformed public safety by providing second chances,” the report states. “Our innovative approach doesn’t just reduce reoffense rates—it rebuilds lives while keeping our communities safer and stronger.”
According to the report, the organization’s programs include release supervision, diversion services, housing support, clinical services, enhanced care management and peer navigation.
Mauroff argued that moving those services into probation would fundamentally alter the nature of the work because pretrial clients are presumed innocent while awaiting trial.
“A majority of our staff have lived experience. They understand the community, they understand the resources,” Mauroff said. “We’ve built over 150 partnerships with various community-based organizations to help provide support for our clients.”
“It’s just that basic principle of a community-based organization serving people that are presumed innocent versus a law enforcement agency,” he added.
The nonprofit’s annual report states that many staff members have lived experience within the criminal legal system and the communities they serve. It also notes that approximately 35 to 40 percent of clients are unhoused and often face barriers such as transportation difficulties, housing instability and employment conflicts that can interfere with court appearances.
To address those barriers, the organization says it conducts proactive outreach, provides court escort services, helps resolve warrants before arrests occur and performs community-based intervention when clients lose contact with the court system.
Mauroff said the organization’s nonprofit structure allows staff to operate with greater flexibility than a traditional law enforcement agency.
“We’re just as a nonprofit, much more nimble,” Mauroff said. “So we can do things like, for example, we have a relationship with a hotel across the street where we can put people up for a night or two just to help stabilize their conditions.”
He also noted the organization’s around-the-clock operations.
“We operate twenty-four seven, 365 every day of the year intentionally to limit the impact of incarceration,” Mauroff said. “Adult probation currently doesn’t have that type of operating scope.”
The organization’s impact report similarly highlights its own recognizance team, which works “24/7/365 to facilitate as many safe releases as possible” and conducts intake and risk assessments for every person booked into the San Francisco County Jail.
Mauroff warned that the proposed restructuring could also jeopardize outside grants and funding streams that depend on the nonprofit’s existing role in the justice system.
“That money would all go away,” Mauroff said when discussing grants tied to the organization’s pretrial work. “Any of the money we receive, it’s based on our role in the system and getting 70% of the referrals of the releases from the county jail.”
He added that the organization would likely have to terminate contracts if it could no longer meet required outcomes.
“We’re not going to sit on contracts where we can’t deliver our outcomes,” Mauroff said.
The report states that SF Pretrial recently expanded its Justice, Equity & Healing Center, described as a centralized resource hub where clients can access in-house services and partner resources from community organizations and city agencies.
The organization also points to national recognition for its work. Its report states that SF Pretrial partnered with AJW Inc. to develop “OpenJustice,” a data and case management system now marketed to other pretrial agencies seeking to replicate San Francisco’s model.
In addition, the report notes the organization was selected for technical assistance from Harvard Kennedy School’s Government Performance Lab to help develop public-facing data dashboards aimed at increasing transparency.
Mauroff said probation departments from around California have routinely contacted SF Pretrial for guidance and training.
“We’re seen as a model across the country,” Mauroff said. “Particularly ever since this transition through the SB-129 budget bill to provide departments across the state taking over pretrial services, we’ve consistently received calls from probation departments across the state.”
“But the court has decided that they feel like San Francisco should operate like the other counties and so we’re going to be moving backwards,” he added.
According to Mauroff, the immediate fight centers on securing approval of the nonprofit’s renewed contract while convincing city officials to reject the probation department’s proposal.
“We’re trying to educate the mayor and help him understand,” Mauroff said.
He said the Board of Supervisors could also influence the process by removing the probation department’s request from the budget.
Mauroff additionally criticized what he described as a lack of collaboration from court leadership during the process.
“As soon as this round happened, our board of directors wrote a letter to the courts and asked them, ‘Can we just revisit the collaboration and talk about this?’” Mauroff said. “And they haven’t been willing to discuss it with us.”
He said the organization believes the current proposal prioritizes bureaucratic alignment over public safety outcomes.
“The discussion hasn’t really been about what’s best for public safety and the people we supervise,” Mauroff said. “It’s more about the process and aligning with the rest of California.”
Mauroff said advocates are encouraging residents to visit the campaign website, contact city officials and support efforts to preserve the nonprofit’s existing role.
The public can learn more about the project as well as provide feedback at the Don’t Dismantle website.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
