BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1004| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SB 1004 Author: Hill (D) Amended: 5/31/16 Vote: 21 SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-1, 4/12/16 AYES: Hancock, Glazer, Leno, Liu, Monning NOES: Stone NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-1, 5/27/16 AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza NOES: Nielsen NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates SUBJECT: Transitional youth diversion program SOURCE: Author DIGEST: This bill authorizes five specified counties to establish a three-year deferred entry of judgment pilot program under which young adults (18-20) convicted of non-violent, non-serious and non-sex felonies and who are otherwise suitable would serve their custodial time in a juvenile hall instead of a jail, as specified. ANALYSIS: Existing law: SB 1004 Page 2 1) Includes various diversion and deferred entry of judgment programs under which a person arrested for and charged with a crime is diverted from the prosecution system and placed in a program of rehabilitation or restorative justice. Upon successful completion of the program, the charges and underling arrest are deemed to not have occurred, with specified exceptions. 2) Provides that when any person under 18 years of age is detained in or sentenced to any institution in which adults are confined, it shall be unlawful to permit such person to come or remain in contact with such adults. 3) Provides that in any case in which a minor who is detained in or committed to a county juvenile institution attains 18 years of age prior to or during the period of detention or confinement he or she may be allowed to come or remain in contact with those juveniles until 19 years of age, at which time he or she, upon the recommendation of the probation officer, shall be delivered to the custody of the sheriff for the remainder of the time he or she remains in custody, unless the juvenile court orders continued detention in a juvenile facility. If continued detention is ordered for a ward under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court who is 19 years of age or older but under 21 years of age, the detained person may be allowed to come into or remain in contact with any other person detained in the institution, as specified and limited. The person shall be advised of his or her ability to petition the court for continued detention in a juvenile facility at the time of his or her attainment of 19 years of age. The sheriff may allow the person to come into and remain in contact with other adults in the county jail or in any other county correctional facility in which he or she is housed. 4) Provides that a county is required to apply to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) for approval of a county institution established for the purpose of housing juveniles as a suitable place for confinement before the institution is used for the detention or commitment of an SB 1004 Page 3 individual under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court who is 19 years of age or older but under 21 years of age where the detained person will come into or remain in contact with persons under 18 years of age who are detained in the institution, as specified. (WIC § 208.5.) This bill: 1) Authorizes the counties of Alameda, Butte, Napa, Nevada and Santa Clara to establish a pilot juvenile hall program entitled the "Transitional Youth Diversion Program" (program), as specified. 2) Provides that the program applies to persons charged with committing a felony, other than the offenses listed (below), who plead guilty to the charge or charges, and the probation department determines that the person meets all of the following requirements: a) Is 18 years of age or older, but under 21 years of age on the date the offense was committed. b) Is suitable for the program after evaluation using a risk assessment tool, as specified. c) Shows the ability to benefit from services generally reserved for delinquents, including, but not limited to, cognitive behavioral therapy, other mental health services, and age-appropriate educational, vocational, and supervision services, that are currently deployed under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. d) Meets the rules of the juvenile hall. e) Does not have a prior or current serious or violent offense conviction, as specified. SB 1004 Page 4 f) Is not required to register as a sex offender. 3) Requires an evaluation process using a risk assessment tool to determine eligibility for the program, as specified. 4) Excludes non-felonies, serious and violent felonies, and sex crimes from the program, as specified. 5) Provides that the program would apply to a defendant who would otherwise serve time in custody in a county jail, and would not be authorized as an alternative to a sentence involving community supervision. 6) Provides that a defendant shall serve no longer than one year in custody within a county's juvenile hall pursuant to the program. 7) Requires a county to apply to the BSCC for approval of a county institution as a suitable place for confinement for the purpose of the pilot program prior to establishing the program, as specified. 8) Requires that a defendant participating in the program "shall not come into contact with minors within the juvenile hall for any purpose, including, but not limited to, housing, recreation, or education." 9) Requires that a county that establishes this program to work with the BSCC to ensure compliance with requirements of the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act relating to "sight and sound" separation between juveniles and adult inmates. 10)Provides for dismissal of the criminal charges of the SB 1004 Page 5 defendant performs satisfactorily during the program, and for entry of judgment if and when the defendant performs unsatisfactorily, as specified. 11)Requires probation to develop a plan for reentry services, as specified. 12)Requires probation to submit data relating to the effectiveness of the program to the Division of Recidivism Reduction and Re-Entry, within the Department of Justice, as specified. 13)Require participating counties to establish a multidisciplinary team with specified members, which meets periodically to review and discuss the implementation, practices, and impact of the program. 14)Requires participating counties to conduct an evaluation of its impact and effectiveness, as specified. 15)Sunsets this program on January 1, 2020. 16)Contains legislative findings authorizing the specification of certain counties in the bill. Background This bill authorizes five counties - Alameda, Butte, Napa, Nevada, and Santa Clara - to operative a pilot program where certain young adult offenders would serve their time in a juvenile hall instead of a jail. The young adults must be under the age of 21, and not convicted of a serious, violent or sex crime. They also would have to be assessed and found suitable for the program. SB 1004 Page 6 As structured by this bill, this would be a deferred entry of judgment program - which means while participants would have to plead guilty to be eligible for the program, if they succeed in the program the criminal charges would be dismissed. Probation would be required to develop a plan for reentry services, including, but not limited to, housing, employment, and education services, as a component of the program. This bill has a three-year sunset. As discussed by the Senate Public Safetly Committee in many hearings on juvenile law and sentencing youthful offenders over the past several years, the science of adolescent brain development has become very relevant in crafting state and national law and policy. A 2014 policy paper quoted in the policy analysis of this bill noted in part, "There is now incontrovertible evidence that adolescence is a period of significant changes in brain structure and function. Although most of this work has appeared just in the past 15 years, there is already strong consensus among developmental neuroscientists about the nature of these changes. And the most important conclusion to emerge from recent research is that important changes in brain anatomy and activity take place far longer into development than had been previously thought. . . . These structural and functional changes do not all take place along one uniform timetable, and the differences in their timing raise two important points relevant to the use of neuroscience in public policy. First, there is no simple answer to the question of when an adolescent brain becomes an adult brain. Brain systems implicated in basic cognitive processes reach adult levels of maturity by mid-adolescence, whereas those that are active in self-regulation do not fully mature until late adolescence or even early adulthood. In other words, adolescents mature intellectually before they mature socially or emotionally, a fact that helps explain why teenagers who are so smart in some respects sometimes do surprisingly dumb things." FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: No SB 1004 Page 7 According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: County probation: Major increase in custodial and operational costs to county probation departments, potentially in the millions of dollars (Local Funds/General Fund*/General Fund**) each year of the pilot for young adults (non-minors) to spend custodial time in juvenile halls (ranging from $26/day in Lake County to over $500/day in Santa Clara County) in lieu of county jail. Costs would be dependent on the number of counties electing to participate in the pilot and the number of young adults eligible and participating in the program. Pilot counties would incur costs to develop an evaluation process in consultation with specified agencies, arrange for treatment and other services, and provide case management activities. Local jails: Major local cost savings (Local Funds) resulting from reduced incarceration of non-minors in county jail facilities. BSCC: Minor costs (General Fund) to review and approve applications from five counties for suitability of county facilities for confinement of program participants. Department of Justice: Minor ongoing workload to accept program data submitted by probation departments of the pilot counties. Proposition 30*: Exempts the state from mandate reimbursement for realigned responsibilities for "public safety services" including the provision of treatment and services for juvenile and adult offenders, however, legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for public safety services apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increase. The provisions of Proposition 30 have not been interpreted through the formal court process to date, however, to the extent the SB 1004 Page 8 local agency costs resulting from this measure are determined to be applicable under the provisions of Proposition 30, could result in additional costs to the state. Proposition 47**: Appropriations Committee staff notes the funds to be disbursed to the BSCC under the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (65 percent of calculated savings) for mental health services and substance abuse treatment for people in the criminal justice system, with emphasis on programs that reduce recidivism of people convicted of less serious crimes could potentially be used for the purposes specified in this measure. **Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund (annual transfer from the General Fund) SUPPORT: (Verified5/31/16) Alameda County Board of Supervisors Butte County Board of Supervisors California Police Chiefs Association California Public Defenders Association Chief Probation Officers of California California Youth Empowerment Network Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors OPPOSITION: (Verified5/31/16) Commonweal The Juvenile Justice Program Pacific Juvenile Defender Center ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The author states in part: Under current law, young adult offenders convicted of specified crimes serve their sentence locally in county jails. But while legally they are adults, young offenders age 18-21 SB 1004 Page 9 are still undergoing significant brain development and it's becoming clear that this age group may be better served by the juvenile justice system with corresponding age appropriate intensive services. Research shows that people do not develop adult-quality decision-making skills until their early 20's. This can be referred to as the "maturity gap." Because of this, young adults are more likely to engage in risk-seeking behavior which may be cultivated in adult county jails where the young adults are surrounded by older, more hardened criminals. As such, in order to address the criminogenic and behavioral needs of young adults, it is important that age appropriate services are provided, services they may not get in adult county jails. Juvenile detention facilities have such services available for young adults including, but not limited to, cognitive behavioral therapy, mental health treatment, vocational training, and education, among others. ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The Pacific Juvenile Defender Center states in part: Though we strongly support efforts to allow transitional age youth to access rehabilitative services, the approach taken by SB 1004 runs counter to the research that shows that incarceration and detention of youth may increase recidivism and impede successful life outcomes. The program outlined in SB 1004 is troubling primarily because the program is based in a custodial setting and appears to be intended for those charged with misdemeanor offenses. Such individuals would be better served by a community-based, out-of-custody rehabilitation setting than an in-custody program provided by probation. Studies have shown that incarcerating youth can increase recidivism. Researchers have reported higher levels of substance abuse, school difficulties, delinquency, violence and adjustment difficulties in adulthood for those who have been treated in settings where deviant/delinquent youth are brought together for treatment. SB 1004 Page 10 . . . (T)his bill is troubling because this program could very well have a greater impact on communities of color. As it stands, African Americans and Latinos make up a disproportionate percentage of drug arrests and jail and prison populations. Without any purposeful measures to ensure against such overrepresentation by African American and Latino defendants, these diversion programs could he yet another reflection of that disproportionate impact. Prepared by:Alison Anderson / PUB. S. / 5/31/16 21:31:44 **** END ****