Matching Items (3)

Filtering by

Clear all filters

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Pima County's Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison Program

Description

The Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) Program enables drug addicted criminal defendants to plead guilty to an offense and then enter a residential, therapeutic community treatment system for three years as an alternative to a prison sentence. The Program

The Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) Program enables drug addicted criminal defendants to plead guilty to an offense and then enter a residential, therapeutic community treatment system for three years as an alternative to a prison sentence. The Program begins with three months of in-patient, residential drug treatment followed by wraparound recovery support services managed by a resources specialist, including transitional housing, literacy services, higher education, job training and placement services, and counseling, accompanied by drug testing, probation monitoring, and regular court hearings.

Contributors

Created

Date Created
2012 to 2013

42742-Thumbnail Image.png

Preserving Ranch Lands in Pima County: Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan

Description

A companion to the Preliminary Ranch Conservation Element, this report brings together leaders in the area of ranch conservation and compiles their expert writings on ecological and economic sustainability in ranching.

Contributors

Created

Date Created
2000-09

42699-Thumbnail Image.jpg

Endangered Species Act and the Constitution

Description

When we talk about Constitutional issues in relation to the Act, we are really asking is there a likelihood that it is unconstitutional in part or as applied to particular situations? The first risk is that some parts of it

When we talk about Constitutional issues in relation to the Act, we are really asking is there a likelihood that it is unconstitutional in part or as applied to particular situations? The first risk is that some parts of it will be held to have been beyond the power of Congress to enact because they are not permissible exercises of the Interstate Commerce power. The second issue is the application of the Act to certain tracts of private property in a manner that would deprive that property of all beneficial use and constitute a taking of property. The third is that the mitigation demanded by the government as a condition for being allowed to take endangered species will exceed the power of government to demand because of a lack of a nexus in rough proportionality-- two tests that the Supreme Court has come up with in recent years.

Contributors

Created

Date Created
1999