BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 320|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 320
Author: Solorio (D), et al
Amended: 7/23/09 in Senate
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 7/14/09
AYES: Leno, Benoit, Cedillo, Hancock, Huff, Steinberg,
Wright
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-1, 6/2/09 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Prison and Jail construction: reentry
facilities
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill gives counties that provide existing
county jail beds for use as state prison reentry beds the
same funding preference for jail financing under AB 900
(Solorio) as counties that assist the state in siting a
prison reentry facility.
ANALYSIS : Current law, as enacted in 2007 by AB 900
(Solorio, Statutes of 2007), generally authorizes $6.2
billion in lease-revenue bond financing for construction of
40,000 new state prison beds and $1.2 billion for an
estimated 13,000 new county jail beds, phased-in over time
and contingent upon a series of construction and
rehabilitation program implementation benchmarks.
(Government Code 15819.40 et seq.)
CONTINUED
AB 320
Page
2
Current law, as enacted in 2007 by AB 900, provides for the
construction, establishment and operation of reentry
facilities throughout the state, as specified. (Penal Code
6270 et seq.)
Current law, as enacted by AB 900, provides for the
financing of county jail facilities. The Corrections
Standards Authority (CSA) is required to approve or
disapprove jail facilities under these provisions, as
specified. (Government Code 15820.906; 15820.911.)
Current law specifies county matching funds required for
projects funded by these provisions, and expressly requires
that the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
(CDCR) and CSA shall give funding preference to counties
that assist the state in siting reentry facilities.
(Government Code 15820.917.)
This bill revises this preference to give "coequal"
preference to counties which either assist the state in
siting reentry facilities, as is required in current law,
or providing existing beds and program space in county
jails for use as reentry facilities for prison inmates.
This bill also provides that a county interested in
providing reentry services to state inmates shall be
required to enter into a long-term agreement with the CDCR
to provide those services and the CDCR shall certify that
the proposed reentry services meet their approval and the
requirements of this bill.
The bill specifies that if the following requirements are
met, a county shall be eligible for funding preference
pursuant to this subdivision for providing beds and program
space in county jails for use as reentry facilities for
prison inmates:
1.The beds and programs meet the reentry program facility
requirements.
2.The CDCR develops the collaborative partnership with
local government, local law enforcement, and community
service providers.
AB 320
Page
3
3.The minimum number of beds in county jails to be used as
reentry facilities for prison inmates shall be as
follows:
A. Any county with a general population at or
above 500,000 shall provide 500 jail beds to be
designated and used exclusively as a reentry
facility for prison inmates.
B. Any county with a general population below
500,000 shall provide at least as many jail beds to
be used as a reentry facility for prison inmates as
there are county jail beds funded under this chapter
to be used for county jail inmates.
4.Counties may meet the requirements of this paragraph with
existing jail beds, future jail beds to be constructed
with funding made available under this chapter, or a
combination thereof.
The CDCR shall give funding preference to counties that
assist the state in siting mental health day treatment and
crisis care, pursuant to Section 3073 of the Penal Code,
and to counties that provide a continuum of care so that
parolees with mental health and substance abuse needs can
continue to receive services at the conclusion of their
period of parole.
The bill states that this act is an urgency statute
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV
of the Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.
The facts constituting the necessity are:
As of July 2009, the prison inmate population totaled
nearly 170,000. A federal three-judge panel has ruled
that the California prison system must reduce
overcrowding by as many as 55,000 inmates within three
years to provide a constitutional level of medical and
mental health care. In order to provide the prison
capacity needed, it is necessary that this act take
effect immediately.
AB 320
Page
4
Background
As explained in the Assembly Appropriations Committee April
29, 2009 analysis of this bill:
AB 900 ? authorized $6.2 billion in lease-revenue bond
financing for construction of 40,000 new state prison
beds and $1.2 billion for an estimated 13,000 new
county jail beds, phased-in over time and contingent
upon a series of construction and rehabilitation
program implementation benchmarks.
AB 900 required CDCR to enhance existing programs to
reduce recidivism and implement new ones, including
substance abuse treatment, mental health care and
academic and vocational services. The two-pronged
approach was designed to provide new prison beds,
while establishing stronger rehabilitation and reentry
efforts.
AB 900 has stalled. No prison or jail beds have been
constructed.
? (N)umerous counties have been unable to offer sites
to CDCR for reentry facilities. $586 million in jail
construction awards is currently recommended by the
Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) for 11 counties
(for a 5,300 net gain in jail beds) who have been able
to offer reentry sites to the state ? Thirteen
additional counties requested awards, but were unable
to provide the state a suitable reentry site, often
due to community opposition: Orange, Monterey, L.A.,
San Mateo, Butte, Placer, Stanislaus, Merced, Kings,
Tuolumne, Shasta, El Dorado, and Sutter.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/10/09)
AFSCME
AFL-CIO
Orange County Board of Supervisors
Orange County Sheriff-Coroner
AB 320
Page
5
California Peace Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
Los Angeles County Sheriff
California State Sheriffs' Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to information provided
by the author's office:
This bill is a follow-up to the Public Safety and
Offender Rehabilitation Services Act of 2007 (AB
900)?.
Many counties in the state have been unable to receive
bond construction funding due to some of the
requirements or restrictions tied to the eligibility
process. As of January, 2009 eleven counties (San
Bernardino, San Joaquin, Kern, Santa Barbara, San
Diego, San Luis Obispo, Yolo, Madera, Calaveras,
Amador and San Benito) have been awarded bond money
for jail construction. However, there is still more
that $164 million in bond money that has not been
awarded because many counties were not able to comply
with all the eligibility requirements. The biggest
obstacle for many of these counties was that they were
not able to site a re-entry facility in their county
and, therefore, did not receive the preference points
needed to enhance their chances of receiving bond
money?.
AB 320 would create another incentive for counties
that apply or re-apply for AB 900 bond money by
granting co-equal preference to counties that provide
re-entry beds in their community by using existing
beds. Not only would AB 320 help more counties
receive AB 900 jail construction funding, but it will
help the state achieve its' goal of providing up to
6,000 new re-entry beds. It is important to note that
AB 320 is intended to be prospective and will not have
any impact on any existing awards for jail
construction bond financing prior to the enactment of
this Act.
AB 320
Page
6
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Tom
Berryhill, Blakeslee, Blumenfield, Brownley, Buchanan,
Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway,
Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Duvall,
Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes,
Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,
Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber,
Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Krekorian, Lieu, Logue,
Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Monning, Nava, Nestande,
Niello, John A. Perez, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Price, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth,
Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres,
Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, Bass
NOES: Nielsen
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bill Berryhill, Block, Miller
RJG:nl 9/10/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****