Administration of Justice update 3/28/2014
Not too late to Register! Joint Training Partnership April Seminar
Spaces are still available for the Joint Training Partnership’s “Facility Construction and Liability in a Post Realignment World” training opportunity.
This seminar will provide criminal justice system stakeholders with specific strategies to minimize liability and guide the construction of criminal justice facilities within their jurisdictions. As you know, with the pressures on local jails that accompany the continued implementation of AB 109, an understanding of the risks and opportunities for expanding capacity needs in our communities is now more critical than ever before. That’s why we are so excited to host a dynamic mix of speakers and panels which are sure to assist with examining these risks and needs.
County stakeholders are encouraged to attend as teams, particularly those considering construction or renovating jails, day reporting centers, or community corrections centers. This one-day session will offer diverse county perspectives that focus on four main areas:
- The impact of realignment on facility construction;
- Determining county needs;
- Getting shovels in the ground: A 360º perspective; and
- Tips for managing the construction process from key authorities.
When: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 (8:30 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.)
Where: Hyatt Regency, Sacramento
Cost: $100/ individual, includes course materials and lunch.
To Register, Please click here!
To take advantage of the special room rate, please book your accommodation by clicking here!
Save the Date for the California Black/Brown Summit on Re-entry and Recidvism
The Black-Brown Summit Committee is convening a cross section of local and state leaders to educate stakeholders regarding the impact of AB 109 and its challenges. The Summit will be an exciting opportunity to share empirical data, identify best practices and model programs within the state in order to enhance public safety as it pertains to communities of color. It’s coming up May 21-23, 2014 in San Diego. For more information on the California Black-Brown Summit please visit www.bbsummit.org or call (209) 957-2720.
Legislative Update
AB 579 (Melendez) – Mandatory Supervision
As amended January, 15, 2014 SUPPORT
CSAC supports AB 579 by Assembly Member Melissa Melendez which would correct an unforeseen chaptering out issue created by earlier legislation, SB 463 (Chapter 508, Statutes of 2013) By Senator Fran Pavley.
This bill is an urgency measure which seeks to clarify in state law that the period of mandatory supervision period begins immediately upon release from custody for individuals who have been given a split sentence under Penal Code Section 1170 (h) as a result of Realignment.
This is not a new policy, but rather clean-up language necessary to correct a chaptering out issue created by 2013 legislation which amended the same code section and inadvertently removed the mandatory supervision language.
CSAC supports this measure as it will ensure that county probation departments are – once again – able to initiate their mandatory supervision duties as originally intended.
AB 579 is co-sponsored by the California State Sheriffs’ Association and the Chief Probation Officers of California.
Given that the bill is an urgency measure, it requires passage by a 2/3 vote in both the Assembly and Senate. It has received unanimous support to date and will be up for a vote on the Senate Floor in the coming days.
AB 2085 (Fox) – Misdemeanor Violations / Amnesty Program
As amended March 19, 2014 CONCERNS
Last week, we brought your attention to AB 2085 authored by Assemblyman Fox, which revises existing law related to amnesty programs and debt collection. While CSAC acknowledges and appreciates recent amendments to clarify that the execution of the amnesty program would be permitted only when both the local court and county agree on implementation, from a statewide perspective, however, CSAC continues to have a number of concerns.
First, an amnesty program that concluded 18 months ago was evaluated as specified in statute and the Judicial Council’s report on that effort revealed that approximately $15 million in delinquent debt was cleared through this effort, with qualified individuals paying 50 cents on every dollar owed. That collection level reflects less than 1 percent of what had been estimated to be potentially collectible.
Second, we question the efficacy of jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction decisions and wonder if a more appropriate model would be one undertaken statewide.
Finally, a more significant structural concern is one of timing. While CSAC does not have a recommended standard for the interval between amnesty programs, our general sense is that it may be too soon to offer a discount on delinquent court-ordered debt. When the jointly sponsored court-county effort to authorize the 2012 amnesty program was enacted in 2010, the previous amnesty program had run in 1996 – some 16 years earlier. To enact a measure now authorizing a program beginning in 2016 effectively signals to the public the notion that it “pays” to ignore court-ordered obligations, because an opportunity to settle the debt at 50 cents on the dollar is just two years away. CSAC believes this timing aspect will further diminish already declining collection receipts.
For these reasons, CSAC feels compelled to raise concerns regarding AB 2085 and we are disappointed that the bill continues to move forward with this flawed language intact. The bill was approved in Assembly Public Safety Committee (5-2) on March 25, 2014 and will next be heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee on April 21, 2014.
AB 2199 (Muratsuchi) – Mandatory Supervision/ Costs
As introduced February 20, 2014 SUPPORT
Assembly Bill 2199, by Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi, would expand existing law that authorizes the court to direct specified defendants to pay all or a portion of the reasonable cost of probation-related services.
AB 2199 is a straightforward and narrowly crafted bill drafted as a necessary response to a recent appellate court decision (Peo. v. Fandinola) which found that current law does not permit charging probation fees to a person on mandatory supervision.
CSAC supports AB 2199 as a reasonable statutory correction allowing the court to order a defendant to contribute to their own supervision services.
AB 2199 (Muratsuchi) will be heard in Assembly Public Safety Committee on April 1, 2014.
AB 2314 (Hall) – Arming of Probation Officers
As introduced February 21, 2014 OPPOSE
Assembly Bill 2314, authored by Assembly Member Isadore Hall, would require that the Chief Probation Officer of a county train and arm all probation officers and deputy officers that have caseloads that may include offenders who are deemed to be high-risk.
As it stands now under current law, probation officers may be authorized by their employing agency to carry a firearm, but that decision remains at the discretion of the Chief Probation Officer of each jurisdiction. For good reason, the arming of probation officers has always been a local decision.
If AB 2314 were to become law, the bill would impose a blanket requirement doing away with local discretion and would, by default, require the arming of virtually every probation officer in the state given that post-realignment officers routinely supervise serious and violent offenders.
Counties currently have the authority and discretion to determine when arming is appropriate and therefor this bill is overly restrictive and unnecessary. CSAC has joined with the Urban Counties Caucus (UCC), The Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC), as well as the County of Los Angeles in opposition to the bill.
AB 2314 is set for a hearing in the Assembly Public Safety Committee on April 8, 2014.
AB 2373 (Hernandez) – Probation Officers/ Funding
As amended March 24, 2014 OPPOSE
CSAC is strongly opposed to Assembly Bill 2373 authored by Assemblyman Roger Hernandez. The bill sets a dangerous precedent that restricts local budgeting authority by requiring a county to provide probation departments with available discretionary resources or carry out a burdensome process to illustrate why funds cannot be provided.
Under existing law, the chief probation officer of a county may identify in writing to the superior court presiding judge and the board of supervisors when, in his or her opinion, there are insufficient resources to carry out statutory or court-ordered responsibilities. AB 2373 would expand this provision in a way that represents a significant incursion into the foundational responsibilities of county boards of supervisors. Not only would a county have to carry out an incredibly detailed process – including engaging with an outside auditor to perform a full financial accounting of available resources – but the objective of the process is for the county to turn over any identified discretionary funds to the probation department.
CSAC believes AB 2373 is an affront to the core responsibility of county boards of supervisors whose core responsibility is to responsibly identify budget priorities across dozens of county departments and hundreds of vital programs and services.
For these reasons, CSAC strongly opposes this measure. AB 2373 will be heard in Assembly Local Government Committee on April 9, 2014.
AB 2526 (Gonzalez) – Community Corrections Partnership CompositionAs amended February 7, 2014 OPPOSE
CSAC opposes yet another attempt to change the membership composition of the Community Corrections Partnerships (CCPs) which comes in the form of Assembly Bill 2526 by Assembly Member Lorena Gonzalez.
Under the bill, the structure of local CCPs and their executive committee would be forced to expand to accommodate two additional members: a rank-and-file deputy sheriff or police officer and a rank-and-file probation officer.
CSAC fears that allowing the passage of this bill would be just the beginning of additional legislation aimed at changing the composition of the CCP and its executive committee. CSAC, along with the Urban Counties Caucus (UCC) believes that successful implementation of realignment requires that these bodies do not become too large or unwieldy given their enormous public safety responsibilities under AB 109.
For these reasons, both CSAC and UCC oppose this measure. AB 2526 will be heard in Assembly Public Safety on April 8, 2014.