BILL ANALYSIS AB 2218 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 20, 2010 Counsel: Meghan Masera ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Tom Ammiano, Chair AB 2218 (Fuentes) - As Introduced: February 18, 2010 As Proposed to be Amended in Committee SUMMARY : Provides that inmates who commit crimes involving a direct victim shall receive priority placement in restitution centers and expands the eligibility criteria for the placement of an inmate into a restitution center. Creates credit reductions for an inmate in a county jail, city jail, industrial farm, or road camp who participates in recidivism reduction earned credit programming prior to sentencing. Specifically, this bill : 1)Declares legislative intent to fight recidivism by using a restitution center concept where inmates serving time for non-violent, non-serious offenses can fulfill obligations to pay restitution and other court related fines and fees in addition to obtaining and maintaining employment. 2)Provides that the purpose of a restitution center is to provide a means for inmates to be able to pay their victims' financial restitution, which includes direct restitution to victims as well as other restitution fines and fees, as ordered by the sentencing court; or as agreed upon by the defendant and his or her victims. 3)Stipulates that inmates who commit crimes involving a direct victim shall receive priority placement in restitution centers. 4)Provides that a defendant is eligible for placement in a restitution center if the defendant does not have a criminal history of a conviction for the sale of drugs within the last five years or for an offense requiring registration as a sex offender, or a serious felony, or a violent felony, and the defendant did not receive a sentence of more than 60 months for the current offense(s). In addition, the defendant must pose no unacceptable risk to the community and must be AB 2218 Page 2 employable. 5)Expands credit reductions to apply to prisoners in a county jail, city jail, industrial farm, or road camp, for in-custody participation in recidivism reduction earned credit programming prior to sentencing. 6)Expands the maximum length of time a term of imprisonment can be reduced by credits earned by a prisoner participating in approved rehabilitative programming in a state prison from six weeks during any 12-month period of continuous confinement, to 12 weeks during any 12-month period of continuous confinement. 7)Allows a county sheriff or city chief of police to award additional program credit reductions for in-custody program participation. 8)States that recidivism reduction earned credits will apply to participation in both pre-conviction and post-custody recidivism jail programs, and apply to inmates who successfully complete specific program performance objectives. The credit reductions for approved rehabilitative programming shall range from not less than one week to not more than 16 weeks within a 12-month period of continuous confinement for each performance milestone. 9)Defines "recidivism reduction earned credit programming" to include academic programs, vocational programs, vocational training, financial training, and core programs such as anger management and social life skills, family and marital relationships, and substance abuse programs. EXISTING LAW : 1)The purpose of restitution centers is to provide a means for those sentenced to prison to be able to pay their victims financial restitution as ordered by the sentencing court, or as agreed upon by the defendant and his or her victims. (Penal Code Section 6221.) 2)The location for a restitution center or centers shall be determined by the Director of Corrections with approval from the county board of supervisors or city council in whose jurisdiction the center will be located. (Penal Code Section 6222.) AB 2218 Page 3 3)Restitution centers shall be located in areas which will maximize the employment opportunities of persons sentenced to the centers. (Penal Code Section 6223.) 4)The court may order the Department of Corrections to place an eligible defendant in a restitution center if the court makes a restitution order, or if a restitution agreement is entered into by the victims and the defendant. The Department of Corrections may send a defendant to a reception center for classification prior to placing the defendant in the restitution center. (Penal Code Section 6227.) 5)A defendant is eligible for placement in a restitution center if he or she has not served a prison term within the five years prior to the present conviction, the defendant does not have a criminal history of a conviction for the sale of drugs or for a crime involving violence or sex, the defendant did not receive a sentence of more than 36 months, the defendant presents no unacceptable risk to the community, and the defendant is employable. (Penal Code Section 6228.) 6)Provides that offenders shall perform all the labor necessary to maintain the restitution center and meet the offenders' needs unless the director finds that a particular task can be better performed by other persons. The Director may employ and pay compensation to offenders to perform work at a center. [Penal Code Section 6230(a) to (b).] 7)Provides that [Penal Code Section 6231(a) to (b)(3)]: a) The offender's wages earned shall be paid directly to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), less any tax deductions. b) Wages received by the CDCR shall be used to reimburse the offender for direct employment costs, such as transportation, tools, clothing, meals, union dues, and other employee-mandated costs. Of the remaining wages: i) One-third is paid to the CDCR for the costs of the restitution center; ii) One-third first is paid to court-ordered or agreed upon restitution, and then the moneys are paid to the AB 2218 Page 4 prosecuting jurisdiction to defray court costs and attorney fees incurred in prosecution, and then the moneys are paid to the local jurisdiction for crime prevention; and, iii) One-third is deposited into a savings account for the offender, which can be used to provide support for the offender's immediate family, purchase items necessary for employment, or given to the offender to purchase personal accessories. Upon release, the remaining money in the savings account is paid to the offender. 8)Provides that an offender shall not leave a restitution center except to go to work or when specifically authorized and shall return to the restitution center immediately after work or when required by the person in charge of the restitution center. An offender who violates this section is guilty of escape. [Penal Code Section 6233(a) to (b).] 9)States that legislative intent that persons convicted of a crime and sentenced to state prison serve the entire sentence imposed by the court, except for a reduction in the time served pursuant to current law. [Penal Code Section 2933(a).] 10) Provides that for every six months of continuous incarceration, a prisoner shall be awarded credit reductions from his or her term of confinement of six months. A lesser amount of credit based on this ratio shall be awarded for any lesser period of continuous incarceration. Under no circumstance shall any prisoner receive more than six months' credit reduction for any six-month period. [Penal Code Section 2933(b).] Credit is a privilege, not a right and must be earned and may be forfeited pursuant to current law. However, every eligible prisoner shall have a reasonable opportunity to participate. [Penal Code Section 2933(c).] 11) Requires the CDCR to promulgate regulations that state that credit which has been previously forfeited may be restored by the CDCR Secretary with proof that the inmate has served not more than one year free of disciplinary infractions. The regulations shall provide for separate classifications of serious disciplinary infractions as they relate to restoration of credits, the time period required before forfeited credits or a portion thereof may be restored, and the percentage of forfeited credits that may be restored AB 2218 Page 5 for these time periods. No credits may be restored if they were forfeited for a serious disciplinary infraction in which the victim died or was permanently disabled. Upon application of the prisoner and following completion of the required time period free of disciplinary offenses, forfeited credits eligible for restoration under the regulations for disciplinary offenses other than serious disciplinary infractions shall be restored unless, at a hearing, it is found that the prisoner refused to accept or failed to perform in a credit qualifying assignment, or extraordinary circumstances are present that require that credits not be restored. [Penal Code Section 2933(d).] 12) Provides that a prisoner sentenced to the state prison shall receive one day of credit for every day served in a county jail, city jail, industrial farm, or road camp after the date he or she was sentenced to the state prison. [Penal Code Section 2933(e).] 13) Authorizes the CDCR to award program credit reductions to inmates who successfully complete specific program performance objectives for approved rehabilitative programming ranging from credit reduction of not less than one week to credit reduction of no more than six weeks for each performance milestone. However, a prisoner may not have his or her term of imprisonment reduced more than six weeks for credits awarded pursuant to this section during any 12-month period of continuous confinement. [Penal Code Section 2933.05(a).] 14) "Approved rehabilitation programming" includes academic programs, vocational programs, vocational training, and core programs such as anger management and social life skills, and substance abuse programs. [Penal Code Section 2933.05(c).] 15) Disqualifies the following prisoners from eligibility for program credits for approved rehabilitative programming [Penal Code Section 2933.05(e)]: a) Any person serving a term of imprisonment for a violent offense; b) Any person sentenced to state prison under the "Three Strikes" Law; c) Any person required to register as a sex offender; and, AB 2218 Page 6 d) Any person serving a term of imprisonment as a result of a violation of parole without a new term. 16) States that the maximum credit that may be earned against a period of confinement in, or commitment to, a county jail, industrial farm, or road camp, or a city jail, industrial farm, or road camp, following arrest and prior to placement in the custody of the Director of Corrections, shall not exceed 15% of the actual period of confinement for any person convicted of a violent felony. [Penal Code Section 2933.1(c).] 17) Provides that for each four-day period in which a prisoner is confined in or committed to a county or city jail, industrial farm, or road camp, one day shall be deducted from his or her period of confinement. This applies to [Penal Code Section 4019(a) to (c)]: a) All days of custody from the date of arrest to the date on which the serving of the sentence commences, under a judgment of imprisonment, or a fine and imprisonment until the fine is paid in a criminal action or proceeding; b) Confinement as a condition of probation after suspension of imposition of a sentence or suspension of execution of sentence, in a criminal action or proceeding; c) Confinement for a definite period of time for contempt pursuant to a proceeding, other than a criminal action or proceeding; and, d) Confinement following arrest and prior to the imposition of sentence for a felony conviction. 18) States that if a prisoner is required to register as a sex offender, was committed for a serious felony, or has a prior conviction for a serious felony, or a violent felony, for each six-day period in which the prisoner is confined in, or committed to, a county or city jail, industrial farm or road camp, one day shall be deducted from his or her period of confinement. [Penal Code Section 4019(b) and (c).] 19) Declares the legislative intent that if all days are earned under this section, a term of four days will be deemed AB 2218 Page 7 to have been served for every two days spent in actual custody, except that a term of six days will be deemed to have been served for every four days spent in actual custody for persons required to register as a sex offender, committed for a serious felony, or having a prior conviction for a serious felony, or a violent felony. [Penal Code Section 4019(f).] FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : 1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "AB 2218 reinforces principles of individual accountability, public safety and long-term cost savings to the taxpayers of California by: (a) re-opening Restitution Centers, where eligible and suitable non-violent state prison inmates would be required to obtain and maintain employment while also paying direct victim restitution and other restitution fines and fees owed; and (b) authorizing the creation of jail based pre-conviction programming credits for counties offering in-custody recidivism reduction programs. "AB 2218 is an example of being smart on crime because offenders who gain tangible life skills which include vocational training and actual employment are much more likely to successfully reintegrate into communities and contribute to society instead of being a drain to taxpayers. Restitution Center participants often maintain the same employment upon being released from state custody, thus providing a more seamless transition." 2)Prior Restitution Centers : In November 2008, CDCR closed the two restitution centers, both in Los Angeles. The purpose of restitution centers is for non-serious, non-drug related offenders to save the state money by being housed in group homes instead of prison. Offenders have jobs to pay rent and restitution to their victims. When the CDCR was ordered to cut its budget by $800 million in 2008, CDCR announced that it could no longer afford the restitution center program. The CDCR "pointed out that the centers had about three dozen empty beds, and said the state could not afford to carry a program not operating at full capacity. The state could not find enough eligible volunteers to fill all 110 beds. Closing the centers eliminated $500,000 in contract costs for the AB 2218 Page 8 state." [McGreevy, State Closes Restitution Centers for White Collar Prisoners, Los Angeles Times (January 13, 2009).] To be eligible for admission into a restitution center, inmates had to owe restitution to their victims and have sentences of three years or less for nonviolent and nonsexual offenses. One-third of an offender's earnings is paid to the State for the offender's upkeep, one-third is paid to victims, and the final one-third is deposited into an account to pay for job-related costs such as transportation. Crime victims' advocates argued that a group home costs the state $50 per inmate per day whereas those same inmates are now costing the state at least $97 per day in prison (according to prison officials). Based on the number of inmates, the difference of having inmates placed in group homes versus prison is about $1.2 million per year. [McGreevy, State Closes Restitution Centers for White Collar Prisoners, Los Angeles Times (January 13, 2009).] 3)Little Hoover Commission Recommendations Relating to Restitution Centers : In its report, "Solving California's Corrections Crisis: Time is Running Out," (Jan. 2007) the Little Hoover Commission recommended that the Governor and the Legislature enact legislation to promote the utilization of intermediate or community based sanctions, like restitution centers in order to reduce prison costs. [Little Hoover Commission, Solving California's Corrections Crisis: Time is Running Out (Jan. 2007) p. 31.] This reiterated recommendations made by the Little Hoover Commission in 1998. In 1998, the Little Hoover Commission stated, "Researchers have estimated that diverting low-level offenders from state prison to community-based alternative sanctions could save a significant portion of the State's current prison costs. University of California criminologists calculate that diverting offenders convicted of using or possessing drugs to community-based programs would cut state prison costs by 17 percent. Including all of those convicted of drug crimes would boost the savings to 26 percent. And diverting offenders serving sentences shorter than nine months - which takes in 44 percent of all prison inmates - would also lower prison costs by about 25 percent. [Little Hoover Commission, Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower Prison Costs and Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 50.] AB 2218 Page 9 "The Legislative Analyst's Office also has identified potential savings. In 1997, the LAO estimated that the demand for additional prisons over the next decade could be reduced by 30,000 beds if certain categories of offenders received state-funded and locally administered intermediate sanctions. The proposal estimated an annual state savings of $670 million plus $1.36 billion in one-time capital outlay savings. [Little Hoover Commission, Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower Prison Costs and Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 50.] "While the potential for direct savings is compelling, the issue is controversial because of the difficulties in estimating the indirect costs. Some correctional officials assert that many offenders sentenced for nonviolent crimes are violent people, and that the most effective way to combat crime is incapacitation. Others argue that locking criminals up is 'the only way to make them pay' for crimes and to express public condemnation of criminal acts. And because intermediate sanctions divert offenders into non-incarcerating programs, critics say public safety is compromised. [Little Hoover Commission, Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower Prison Costs and Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 50.] "Despite these concerns from opponents, the Little Hoover Commission recommended that the Governor and the Legislature enact legislation funding community-based punishments like restitution center programs that improve public safety over the long term by reducing recidivism and that minimize the short-term added risks to the public when compared with incarceration in state prison." [Little Hoover Commission, Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower Prison Costs and Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 56.] 4)LAO: SBx3 18 (Ducheny), Chapter 28, Statutes of 2009) Makes Smaller Impact than Expected : In its recent analysis of the Governor's proposed 2010-11 budget, the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) stated, "The 2009-10 budget assumed about $1.2 billion in savings in the budget of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). These were to result from various administrative and programmatic changes (such as reductions to inmate and parolee rehabilitation programs), as well as from various policy changes to reduce the inmate and parole populations (as specified in Chapter 28, Statutes of 2009 [SBX3 18, Ducheny]). Some of these changes AB 2218 Page 10 include: (1) commuting the sentences of and deporting certain undocumented inmates currently incarcerated in prison; (2) making ineligible for revocation to prison parole violations by certain parolees with no serious, violent, or sex offenses; (3) increasing the credits that inmates can earn to reduce their stay in prison; (4) increasing the dollar threshold for certain property crimes to be considered a felony, thus making fewer offenders eligible for prison; and (5) providing fiscal incentives to counties to reduce the number of revocations of persons on probation to state prison. The budget plan assumed that the various changes would reduce the inmate population by roughly 18,500 inmates in 2009-10 and 25,000 inmates in 2010-11 from a base of about 168,000 inmates. "However, the actual reduction in the inmate population from the above policy changes is now estimated to be significantly less than initially planned-about 1,600 inmates in 2009-10 and 11,800 inmates in 2010-11. This is primarily due to delays and changes in the implementation of the new policies. For example, the Governor's budget assumes only 200 sentence commutations in 2009-10, which is significantly less than the 8,500 assumed in the enacted 2009-10 budget." This bill helps decrease the prison population by expanding sentence reduction credits to inmates who participate in recidivism reduction programs in county jails prior to being sentenced to state prison. 5)Arguments in Support : According to the California Public Defenders Association (the sponsor of this bill), "Instead of serving their sentences in state prison, eligible and suitable prisoners would serve their time at the Restitution Centers, where CDCR staff was present. The Restitution Centers provide an avenue for inmates to be housed in a less costly community setting while fulfilling their obligations to pay restitution. The cost per day of housing a CDCR inmate in a restitution center would be approximately $50 per day compared to $131 per day to house in state prison, saving approximately $29,000 per inmate per year in addition to the savings generated by the percentage of wages allocated toward operating expenses." In addition, "Pre-conviction earned program credit in jail will provide an incentive for participation that will enhance public safety. The CDCR Expert Panel in 2007 emphasized the importance, through legislation, of expanding its system of AB 2218 Page 11 positive reinforcements for offenders who successfully complete their rehabilitation program requirements. The Expert Panel recommended awarding earned credits to offenders who complete any rehabilitation program in prison and on parole." 6)Related Legislation : AB 807 (Fuentes) would have revised the criteria for placement of inmates in restitution centers by the CDCR. AB 807 was vetoed by the Governor for interfering with CDCR operations and because of uncertainty surrounding the prison reform measures that are currently being litigated. 7)Prior Legislation : a) SBx3 18 (Ducheny), Chapter 28, Statutes of 2009, provided that certain prisoners shall earn one day of credit for every one day served either in the state prison or in a local facility prior to delivery to the state prison. SBx3 18 provides for up to six weeks of additional credit for the successful completion of certain programs offered by the department, as specified. SBx3 18 also expands an existing program for extra time credits for inmates assigned to conservation camps to apply to inmates who are assigned to correctional institutions as inmate firefighters and to inmates who have completed the training for either of those assignments, as specified. SBx3 18 also revises the time credits for certain prisoners confined or committed to a county jail or other specified facilities, as provided. b) AB 543 (Houston), of the 2005-06 Legislative Session, would have established a pilot program in Contra Costa County whereby inmates in the county jail shall have their sentences reduced for successfully participating in basic education and vocational training programs. AB 543 was held at the Senate Desk. c) AB 2586 (Houston), of the 2003-04 Legislative Session, would have established a pilot program in Contra Costa County whereby inmates in the county jail shall have their sentences reduced for successfully participating in basic education and vocational training programs. AB 2586 died on the Senate Inactive File. AB 2218 Page 12 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California Public Defenders Association (Sponsor) California Attorneys for Criminal Justice Opposition None Analysis Prepared by : Meghan Masera / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744