BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de León, Chair
SB 466 (DeSaulnier) - California Institute for Criminal Justice
Policy.
Amended: As Introduced Policy Vote: Public Safety 6-1
Urgency: No Mandate: No
Hearing Date: May 23, 2013 Consultant: Jolie Onodera
SUSPENSE FILE. AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED.
Bill Summary: SB 466 would create the California Institute for
Criminal Justice Policy, as specified.
Fiscal Impact: Potentially significant one-time start-up costs
to the University of California (UC) to establish the institute.
Ongoing costs potentially in excess of $2 million
(non-Proposition 98 General Fund) for staffing, actuarial
services, faculty contributors and reviewers, and overhead
costs. The annual costs assume the UC is able to provide
facility space for institute staff as an in-kind contribution.
Background: In September 2011, the Little Hoover Commission
addressed the imminent implementation of criminal justice
realignment in California in a letter to the Governor and
Legislature. The Commission expressed the importance of the
state's leadership role to set policy goals and create
conditions for success at the local level. "The state must
provide oversight by developing performance measures - with
input from the locals - rooted in evidence-based practices. The
state must then collect data on outcomes and use it to drive
policy. It should inventory best practices and develop
structural and fiscal incentives for counties to improve
performance. Without this kind of oversight, California's
realignment could produce 58 independent systems of justice,
creating the potential for counties to repeat the mistakes made
by the state that led to overcrowding and court injunctions."
In light of the significant reforms to the state's criminal
justice system and the continuing overcrowding issues persistent
in the state prisons, research-based models for effective, both
from a public safety and fiscal perspective, criminal justice
systems are needed.
SB 466 (DeSaulnier)
Page 1
The Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP),
created in 1983, suggests a model for the provisions of this
bill. On its website, the WSIPP states its mission is to, "carry
out practical, non-partisan research - at legislative direction
- on issues of importance to Washington State. The Institute
conducts research using its own policy analysts and economists,
specialists from universities, and consultants. Institute staff
work closely with legislators, legislative, and state agency
staff, and experts in the field to ensure the studies answer
relevant policy questions."
The WSIPP website notes that its "current areas of staff
expertise include: education, criminal justice, welfare,
children and adult services, health, utilities, and general
government. The Institute also collaborates with faculty in
public and private universities and contracts with other experts
to extend our capacity for studies on diverse topics. For
several projects, we have successfully merged administrative
data from two or more agencies, significantly reducing the cost
of outcome research."
Proposed Law: This bill would establish the California Institute
for Criminal Justice Policy (CICJP) in state government.
Specifically, this bill:
States the request of the Legislature that the UC house
the CICJP to facilitate independent and nonpartisan
research on issues related to criminal justice and public
safety by experts in the UC system and beyond.
Provides that the purposes of the institute shall
include the facilitation of a comprehensive and coordinated
approach to delineate effective public safety and justice
systems through the use of evidence-based practices, the
promulgation of cost benefit analyses of criminal justice
legislation to promulgate a statewide plan for public
safety, and the development of strategies based on data and
science that reduce recidivism and hold offenders
accountable.
Requires the CICJP to conduct a cost-benefit analysis
for each pending legislative measure relating to criminal
justice to be provided to the appropriate legislative
policy and fiscal committees not later than 60 days after
receiving the request.
SB 466 (DeSaulnier)
Page 2
Requires the CICJP to include in an analysis a
determination of the potential effectiveness of the policy
based on evidence in the field of criminal justice.
Includes codified legislative findings and declarations
concerning California's ongoing problems relating to its
criminal justice system and the need for an independent
data-driven institution to promulgate best practices.
Staff Comments: To the extent the UC houses the institute, the
UC would incur likely significant one-time start-up costs that
are as yet undetermined and substantial ongoing costs to operate
the institute. Assuming costs and the framework of the CICJP are
similar to those incurred for the California Health Benefits
Review Program (CHBRP), annual ongoing costs are estimated in
the range of $2 million (General Fund) for staff salaries and
benefits, faculty contributors and reviewers, actuarial
services, advisory council activities, and overhead costs. This
estimate assumes the UC is able to provide facility space for
institute staff as an in-kind contribution.
Established pursuant to AB 1996 (Thomson) Chapter 795/2002
(reauthorized with a current sunset date of June 2015), the
CHBRP responds to requests from the Legislature to provide
independent analysis of the medical, financial, and public
health impacts of proposed health insurance benefit mandates and
repeals. A small analytic UC staff works with a task force of
faculty from several campuses of the UC and other universities,
as well as actuarial consultants to complete each analysis
during a 60-day period, usually before the Legislature begins
formal consideration of a mandate bill. Each report summarizes
scientific evidence relevant to the proposed mandate but does
not make recommendations, deferring policy decision-making to
the Legislature. The state funds this work through a small
annual assessment of health plans and insurers in California.
It is unknown at this time how the CICJP might complement or
overlap with the responsibilities of the recently established
Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). To the extent
the UC could coordinate or enter into an interagency agreement
with the BSCC to secure potential federal grant funding sources
available through the BSCC could serve to support the goals of
the institute and potentially reduce ongoing General Fund costs.
SB 466 (DeSaulnier)
Page 3
To the extent the institute is successfully able to provide the
Legislature with informed, research-driven cost benefit analyses
of criminal justice legislation, substantial future cost savings
in the criminal justice system and overall improvements to
public safety could result.
Author amendments require the provisions of the bill to be
contingent upon an appropriation in the annual Budget Act.