BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 459|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 445-6614 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 459
Author: Burton (D)
Amended: 4/3/03
Vote: 27 - Urgency
WITHOUT REFERENCE TO FILE
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 3/13/03
AYES: McPherson, Burton, Margett, Romero, Sher
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 11-0, 3/17/03
AYES: Alpert, Battin, Aanestad, Ashburn, Burton, Escutia,
Johnson, Karnette, Machado, Poochigian
SENATE FLOOR : 38-0, 3/17/03
AYES: Aanestad, Ackerman, Alarcon, Alpert, Ashburn,
Battin, Bowen, Burton, Cedillo, Chesbro, Denham, Ducheny,
Dunn, Escutia, Figueroa, Florez, Hollingsworth, Johnson,
Karnette, Knight, Kuehl, Machado, Margett, McClintock,
McPherson, Morrow, Murray, Oller, Ortiz, Perata,
Poochigian, Romero, Scott, Sher, Soto, Speier, Torlakson,
Vincent
SUBJECT : Youthful Offender Parole Board: consolidation
into CYA
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill consolidates the operations of the
Youthful Offender Parole Board under the State Department
of the Youth Authority and makes related changes to the
CONTINUED
SB 459
Page
2
juvenile law, as specified.
Assembly amendments allow the Youth Authority Board to
request the Director of the Youth Authority to review any
case when the State Department of Youth Authority has not
made a request to the prosecuting attorney pursuant to the
law concerning petitioning for order for further detention
and the board finds that the ward would be physically
dangerous to the public because of the ward's mental or
physical deficiency, disorder or abnormality. Sets up
procedures concerning the review of the case including,
upon the board's request, a mental health professional
designated by the director to review the case and
thereafter may affirm the finding or order additional
assessment of the work.
ANALYSIS : Current law generally authorizes juvenile
courts to commit juvenile offenders to the State Department
of the Youth Authority.
Current law requires counties to pay the state a monthly
fee for persons who have been committed to the Youth
Authority, generally ranging from $150 per ward to 100
percent of the per capita institutional cost of the Youth
Authority, as specified, depending upon the nature of the
offense upon which the commitment is based.
Current law establishes the seven-member state Youthful
Offender Parole Board ("YOPB"), comprised of gubernatorial
appointees confirmed by the Senate, which generally is
responsible with overseeing a number of decisions regarding
Youth Authority wards, including length of stay and
readiness to parole, handling certain disciplinary matters,
revoking parole, and required programming.
Structural Consolidation: YOPB into CYA
This bill would recast, effective January 1, 2004, the
powers and duties of the YOPB, and consolidate some of its
functions into the CYA with the following changes:
1. Places YOPB under CYA.
2. Reduces board from seven to five appointees, plus
SB 459
Page
3
chair.
3. Grandfathers-in existing board members, with one term
expiring March 2004, one expiring in March 2005 and one
expiring in March 2006.
4. Provides for transfer of YOPB staff to CYA depending
upon workforce needs.
5. Adds to board qualifications background in care and
rehabilitation of juvenile offenders in a treatment
setting.
6. Adds mandatory training for board members and their
designees.
7. Makes CYA director ex officio nonvoting chair.
8. Distills board's powers to three: releases
(discharges and parole), parole revocations and
disciplinary appeals.
9. Authorizes board to use designees who serve at the
pleasure of the director, have specified ward and staff
supervision experience, and are subject to the same
training as board members.
10.Gives wards a right to appeal time adds to a panel of
at least two board members.
11.Restores old name, "Youth Authority Board" (changed to
YOPB in 1980).
In addition, this bill would enact the following changes
pertaining to CYA powers and duties effective January 1,
2004:
1.Gives CYA some of YOPB's powers and duties (return of
persons to the court of commitment for redisposition by
the court, determination of offense category, setting of
parole consideration dates using existing guidelines,
conducting annual reviews, treatment program orders,
institution placements, furlough placements, return of
nonresident persons to the jurisdiction of the state of
SB 459
Page
4
legal residence, disciplinary decision making, and
referrals pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code
Section 1800).
2.Requires CYA to promulgate regulations for disciplinary
system, including time adjustments.
3.Requires CYA to provide specified ward treatment
information to county probation and courts.
4.Requires CYA to collect and make public specified
aggregate data concerning its population.
Additional Related Reforms (effective January 1, 2004)
1.Clarifies court's authority to remove a ward from CYA.
2.Authorizes the court to set a maximum term of confinement
that is not necessarily the adult term maximum.
Juvenile Law Changes
Current law provides that "(a) minor committed to the
Department of the Youth Authority may not be held in
physical confinement for a period of time in excess of the
maximum period of imprisonment which could be imposed upon
an adult convicted of the offense or offenses which brought
or continued the minor under the jurisdiction of the
juvenile court."
This bill would additionally provide that a "minor
committed to the Department of the Youth Authority also may
not be held in physical confinement for a period of time in
excess of the maximum term of physical confinement set by
the court based upon the facts and circumstances of the
matter or matters which brought or continued the minor
under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may not
exceed the maximum period of adult confinement as
determined pursuant to this section."
Current law provides that "(t)he court committing a ward to
the Youth Authority may thereafter change, modify, or set
aside the order of commitment . . . In changing,
modifying, or setting aside such order of commitment, the
SB 459
Page
5
court shall give due consideration to the effect thereof
upon the discipline and parole system of the Youth
Authority or of the correctional school in which the ward
may have been placed by the Youth Authority. Except as in
this section provided, nothing in this chapter shall be
deemed to interfere with the system of parole and discharge
now or hereafter established by law, or by rule of the
Youth Authority, for the parole and discharge of wards of
the juvenile court committed to the Youth Authority, or
with the management of any school, institution, or facility
under the jurisdiction of the Youth Authority."
This bill would clarify that this "section does not limit
the authority of the court to change, modify, or set aside
an order of commitment after a noticed hearing and upon a
showing of good cause that the Youth Authority is unable
to, or failing to, provide treatment consistent with
Section 734 of the Welfare and Institutions Code."
Appropriation
Under current law, "(t)he Youthful Offender Parole Board is
limited in its expenditures to funds specifically made
available for its use." The 2002-2003 budget bill (AB 425
(Oropeza), Chapter 379, Statutes 2002, contained only half
($1,644,000) of the YOPB's budget for fiscal year
2002-2003; the other half was in SB 1793 (Burton), which
was vetoed by the Governor on September 30, 2002. As a
result, the YOPB is without funding to conduct its
operations for the entire 2002-2003 budget year.
This bill would make an immediate appropriation for the
usual current expenses of the YOPB for the current year
budget in the amount of $1.55 million to supplement funding
provided in Item 5450-001-0001 of the Budget Act of 2002.
Background
CYA Population; California's Juvenile Justice System;
Juvenile Arrest Rates
CYA houses about 5,300 youthful offenders, and provides
them with education, training and treatment services.
CYA's institutional population has dropped by over 46
SB 459
Page
6
percent since 1996. Although wards are committed to CYA by
local courts, decisions relating to length of stay and
parole are made by YOPB.
County probation departments now supervise approximately 97
percent of all juvenile offenders; the remaining three
percent are committed to CYA. State policies have
increasingly recognized the need to strengthen the local
juvenile justice system and its array of alternatives and
graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders. For example:
1.CYA Sliding Scale Fee Legislation . In 1996, a new fee
structure was imposed to provide incentives for counties
to treat less serious offenders in county-level
placements. Counties are required to pay 100 percent of
the average cost for "category 7" wards, 75 percent for
"category 6" wards and 50 percent for "category 5" wards.
Counties now pay over $50 million annually for their
commitments to CYA.
2.Crime Prevention Act . Over the past two years, the state
has provided counties with $237.6 million to develop and
implement comprehensive juvenile justice strategies. An
additional $116.3 million is proposed in the Governor's
2002-03 budget.
3.Juvenile Facility Construction Funds . Since 1997-98, a
total of $464.1 million in state and federal funds have
been dedicated to assist counties remodel and construct
local juvenile facilities.
4.Juvenile Justice Challenge Grants . Since 1996, a total
of $131 million has been allocated to counties for grants
to develop innovative approaches to juvenile crime.
Responding to these state initiatives, local leaders have
established innovative strategies emphasizing collaborative
and interdisciplinary responses to juvenile crime. Judges,
probation departments, local law enforcement agencies,
district attorneys and public defenders, health and human
services agencies, and community based organizations have
come together to plan, identify gaps in services, and
coordinate resources and interventions.
SB 459
Page
7
The juvenile arrest rate in California has declined
dramatically over the last several years. From 1995 -
2000, for example, the felony arrest rate for juveniles
dropped over 34 percent; from 1980 - 2000, the felony
juvenile arrest rate declined 50 percent. During the same
20-year period, the total juvenile arrest rate dropped over
38 percent.
The author states, "this bill consolidates the work of the
Youthful Offender Parole Board under the Department of the
Youth Authority in a manner that makes both fiscal and
policy sense. Up until 1980, the YOPB was part of CYA.
Returning to this general framework will greatly improve
the link between board members and the CYA, which will
result in a more effective and efficient Youth Authority.
This bill also contains important checks and balances that
will enhance the relationship between CYA and the counties,
which will improve CYA correctional services.
"In addition, this bill ensures that the Youthful Offender
Parole Board is adequately funded to perform its duties
mandated by law for the remainder of the 2002-2003 budget
year."
Prior legislation
Last year, SB 1793 (Burton) proposed to eliminate YOPB and
shift its functions to local probation and the juvenile
courts. SB 1793, which passed the Senate Public Safety
Committee, 4-0, and the Senate Floor on 8/30/02, 29-5,
(NOES: Ackerman, Battin, Brulte, McClintock, Oller) was
vetoed by the Governor on September 30, 2002.
In his veto message the Governor stated that:
"While I welcome the author's goal to improve our
juvenile system, I believe this bill misses the mark.
"Under my direction, the Department of the Youth
Authority and the Youthful Offender Parole Board are
making systemwide improvements including the
establishment of a workgroup to: (1) Develop a
standardized screening, assessment and classification
process to accurately identify ward treatment needs
SB 459
Page
8
and the appropriate level of care; (2) Develop an
individualized treatment plan format to assist with
providing accurate and timely information for YOPB
review; (3) Review existing Youth Authority treatment
services to determine the most effective treatment
strategies and eliminate duplicative or less effective
programs; (4) Develop outcome and performance measures
for treatment services and (5) Develop compliance and
monitoring tools. The workgroup will provide a first
draft of recommendations to the Youth Authority in
October.
"I believe these improvements will accomplish many of
the objectives sought by the author and other
stakeholders in the juvenile justice system."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2002-03 2003-04 2005-05 Fund
YOPB-Administration
Costs $1,550* $1,550 -- General
Savings ($1,550) ($3,100) General
YAB ---Unknown, major---General
CYA ---Unknown, major---General
*Appropriated in the bill
In addition to the appropriation in this bill, the transfer
of activities will result in unknown costs in future years
to the renamed YAB and the CYA. This bill imposes
additional requirements for board and staff training and
for CYA regulations, data collection and reporting.
Additional costs associated with these provisions are
unknown. Savings from reduced hearings and smaller board
size potentially would offset these costs.
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/4/03)
SB 459
Page
9
California Catholic Conference
California League of Women Voters
OPPOSITION : (Verified 4/4/03)
Crime Victims United of California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters state, by realigning
this authority, the system will achieve greater local
control, enhance accountability at CYA and provide better
outcomes for youth resulting in improved public safety.
League of Women Voters state, they support the proposal to
involve the county juvenile justice systems in determining
the treatment programs and length of stay of the young
people they commit to CYA. The juvenile court judges and
probation officers know the wards and understand what
rehabilitation efforts are needed before the young
offenders can return to their communities.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents state, counties who
are financially strapped put pressure on CYA to release
wards back into the community regardless of whether or not
they have completed rehabilitative programs. The Youth
Authority Parole Board serves a valuable public safety
function by providing checks and balances and independent
oversight of CYA's parole release recommendations. Crime
Victims United strongly believes that parole release
decisions should not be based on fiscal concerns, but
rather on public safety concerns.
RJG:nl 04/4/03 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****