BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



          SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                             Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
                                2015 - 2016  Regular 

          Bill No:    AB 2177       Hearing Date:    June 28, 2016    
          
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Author:    |Maienschein                                          |
          |-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
          |Version:   |April 14, 2016                                       |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Urgency:   |No                     |Fiscal:    |Yes              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Consultant:|AA                                                   |
          |           |                                                     |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


              Subject:  Victims of Crime Act Funding Advisory Committee



          HISTORY

          Source:   Californians for Safety and Justice

          Prior Legislation:None

          Support:  California Catholic Conference

          Opposition:None Known

          Assembly Floor Vote:                 80 - 0


          PURPOSE

          The purpose of this bill is to establish within the Office of  
          Emergency Services a Victims of Crime Act Funding Advisory  
          Committee regarding the distribution of funds received by the  
          state pursuant to the federal Victims of Crime Act, as  
          specified.

          Current law establishes the Office of Emergency Services (OES).   
          (Gov. Code, § 8585, subd. (a)(1).)

          Current law transferred the responsibilities of the now-defunct  
          Office of Criminal Justice Planning to the OES.  (Pen. Code, §  






          AB 2177  (Maienschein )                                    Page  
          2 of ?
          
          
          13820, subd. (a)(1).)

          Current law authorizes OES to expend funds for local domestic  
          violence programs, subject to availability.  (Pen. Code, §  
          13823.3.)  

          Current law establishes a Comprehensive Statewide Domestic  
          Violence Program administered by the OES in order to provide  
          financial and technical assistance to local domestic violence  
          service providers.  (Pen. Code, § 13823.15, subd. (b).)

          Current law requires OES to consult with an advisory council in  
          implementing the program.  (Pen. Code, § 13823.15, subd. (c).)

          Current law establishes an appointed Domestic Violence Advisory  
          Council consisting of "experts in the provision of either direct  
          or intervention services to victims of domestic violence and  
          their children."  (Pen. Code § 13823.16, subd. (a).)

          Current law includes in the council's membership:   
          domestic-violence victims' advocates; battered-women service  
          providers; representatives of women's organizations; law  
          enforcement; at least one representative serving the lesbian,  
          gay, bisexual, and transgender communities; and other groups  
          involved with domestic violence.  (Pen. Code § 13823.16, subd.  
          (b).)

          Current law requires the council and the OES to closely  
          collaborate in developing funding priorities, framing the  
          request for proposals, and soliciting proposals for domestic  
          violence and sexual assault/rape crisis grant programs. (Pen.  
          Code § 13823.16, subd. (c).)

          This bill would enact a new law to require OES to seek the  
          recommendation of the 
          Victims of Crime Act Funding Advisory Committee . . . regarding  
          the distribution of funds received by the state pursuant to the  
          federal Victims of Crime Act, also known as VOCA, before making  
          a distribution, of any kind, of those funds.

          This bill would provide that the "Victims of Crime Act Funding  
          Advisory Committee is hereby established within the Office of  
          Emergency Services and shall be composed of the following 17  
          members:








          AB 2177  (Maienschein )                                    Page  
          3 of ?
          
          
              (1)   One member who represents law enforcement. The  
                Governor shall appoint this member.
              (2)   Eight members who have been a victim of a crime. The  
                Governor shall appoint four of these members, and the  
                President pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the  
                Assembly shall each appoint two members.
              (3)   Eight members who represent the interests of  
                organizations that specialize in providing services to the  
                victims of crime. The Governor shall appoint four of these  
                members, and the President pro Tempore of the Senate and  
                the Speaker of the Assembly shall each appoint two  
                members."

          This bill would provide that the initial terms of membership on  
          the committee shall be two years. Members are eligible to be  
          reappointed twice after an initial term.

          This bill would require the committee to elect a chairperson  
          from its membership.

          This bill would require that the members serve without  
          compensation and would get per diem.  

          This bill would require that the committee meet twice a year. 

          This bill would require that the committee "make a  
          recommendation on the distribution of funds at one meeting and  
          shall provide input on the efficacy of programs that have been  
          funded at the other meeting."

          This bill would require that the committee shall comply with the  
          Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.

                    RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION

          For the past several years this Committee has scrutinized  
          legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential  
          impact on prison overcrowding.  Mindful of the United States  
          Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the  
          state's ability to provide a constitutional level of health care  
          to its inmate population and the related issue of prison  
          overcrowding, this Committee has applied its "ROCA" policy as a  
          content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that  
          the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison  
          overcrowding.   







          AB 2177  (Maienschein )                                    Page  
          4 of ?
          
          

          On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to  
          reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of  
          design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:   

                   143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
                   141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015;  
                and,
                   137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016. 

          In December of 2015 the administration reported that as "of  
          December 9, 2015, 112,510 inmates were housed in the State's 34  
          adult institutions, which amounts to 136.0% of design bed  
          capacity, and 5,264 inmates were housed in out-of-state  
          facilities.  The current population is 1,212 inmates below the  
          final court-ordered population benchmark of 137.5% of design bed  
          capacity, and has been under that benchmark since February  
          2015."  (Defendants' December 2015 Status Report in Response to  
          February 10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge  
          Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).)  One  
          year ago, 115,826 inmates were housed in the State's 34 adult  
          institutions, which amounted to 140.0% of design bed capacity,  
          and 8,864 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities.   
          (Defendants' December 2014 Status Report in Response to February  
          10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman  
          v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).)  
           
          While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison  
          population, the state must stabilize these advances and  
          demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place  
          the "durable solution" to prison overcrowding "consistently  
          demanded" by the court.  (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and  
          Denying in Part Defendants' Request For Extension of December  
          31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court,  
          Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14).  The Committee's  
          consideration of bills that may impact the prison population  
          therefore will be informed by the following questions:

              Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed  
               to reducing the prison population;
              Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety  
               or criminal activity for which there is no other  
               reasonable, appropriate remedy;
              Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly  
               dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there  







          AB 2177  (Maienschein )                                    Page  
          5 of ?
          
          
               is no other reasonably appropriate sanction; 
              Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or  
               legislative drafting error; and
              Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are  
               proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other  
               reasonably appropriate remedy.


          COMMENTS

          1.Stated Need for This Bill

          The author states:

               The Office of Emergency Services (OES) administers  
               federal Victim of Crime Act (VOCA) funds through a  
               grant process to fund victim services. OES convenes a  
               steering committee to advise it on management of their  
               VOCA grant program. Currently, this committee is  
               comprised of representatives from a variety of service  
               areas that include domestic violence victims, LGBT  
               victims, children's victims, and sexual assault  
               victims, among others. The list of members to this  
               steering committee is not readily accessible to the  
               public. Almost all of the representatives are  
               Directors of organizations that provide services or  
               work with organizations that provide services to  
               victims. This committee meets in private and makes  
               recommendations to OES about the drafting of the  
               Request for Proposals (RFP) to apply for funds as well  
               as the awarding of funds. Because of the lack of  
               public meetings, many victims services groups were not  
               even aware of the issuance of the RFP, which was timed  
               to coincide with the Christmas and New Year's holiday  
               this past year.

               This bill would require OES to engage the public and  
               more importantly, victims themselves. Victims of  
               crimes served by VOCA funds who do not represent any  
               organizational interests should be included in the RFP  
               drafting process, the application review process and  
               discussions surrounding the current gaps and duplicity  
               in services around the state. Victims also offer  
               important insight on the efficacy of programs and  
               services that can be funded by VOCA funds. Requiring  







          AB 2177  (Maienschein )                                    Page  
          6 of ?
          
          
               the committee to meet publicly will provide the  
               broader community with the opportunity to provide  
               important feedback that OES does not currently receive  
               through its steering committee. Requiring the  
               committee to review and make recommendations before  
               funds are disbursed will inform OES prior to the  
               making of final decisions.

          2.Background - OES; Federal VOCA Funding

          "OES is primarily responsible for assuring the state's  
          readiness to respond to and recover from natural and  
          man-made emergencies. In addition, OES administers certain  
          grant programs, including most of the state's victim grant  
          programs.

          "The OES received responsibility for these programs in  
          2004-05, which were previously under the jurisdiction of  
          the Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP). When OCJP  
          was eliminated, most of its programs (including the various  
          victim programs below) were transferred to OES even though  
          OES did not have expertise in these program areas."  (See  
          The 2015-16 Budget: Improving the State Programs for Crime  
          Victims, Legislative Analyst's Office, March 18, 2015, pp.  
          9-10,