BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Carole Migden, Chair S
2005-2006 Regular Session B
1
5
8
SB 1589 (Romero) 9
As Introduced February 24, 2006
Hearing date: April 25, 2006
Welfare and Institutions Code
AA:mc
JUVENILE JUSTICE:
DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation: None
Support: California National Organization for Women
Opposition:California Correctional Peace Officers Association;
California District Attorneys Association
KEY ISSUES
SHOULD THE DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE BE REQUIRED TO EXPLORE
OPTIONS REGARDING SPECIALIZED PROGRAMMING OUTSIDE OF ITS
INSTITUTIONS, AS SPECIFIED?
SHOULD DJJ BE AUTHORIZED TO CONSIDER CERTAIN CHANGES CONCERNING ITS
COMPOSITION, AS SPECIFIED?
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 2
SHOULD DJJ BE REQUIRED TO TRANSFER FEMALE WARDS OUT OF ITS
FACILITIES BY JANUARY 1 OF 2008?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to 1) require the Division of
Juvenile Justice to "explore options" for specialized
programming for high risk or high needs wards outside of DJJ, as
specified; 2) authorize DJJ to consider certain changes
pertaining to its composition, as specified; and 3) require DJJ
to transfer female wards out of its institutions by January 1,
2008.
Current law provides that the Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice ("DJJ"), has
jurisdiction over all educational training and treatment
institutions now or hereafter established and maintained in the
state as correctional schools for the reception of wards of the
juvenile court and other persons committed to the department.
(WIC 1000.)
Current law provides that DJJ "may do all lawful acts which it
deems necessary to effectuate the purposes for which such
schools are established, and to promote the well-being,
education and reformation of the inmates thereof; but the
authority shall not incur any indebtedness in excess of the
moneys appropriated or otherwise made available for the use of
such schools." (WIC 1002.)
Current law authorizes DJJ, in "order to provide counties with
alternative placement options, . . . to establish, maintain, or
facilitate the development of regional centers, which may be
available on a contract basis to counties for the placement of
wards. The regional centers, depending on the services needed,
may provide, but are not limited to, the following: mental
health programs, short-term incarceration and treatment
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 3
services, and boot camp programs. This section shall not be
interpreted to prohibit counties from jointly developing
regional centers." (WIC 1000.1.)
This bill would require DJJ to "explore options to provide
specialized programming outside of division facilities for high
risk or high need offenders, if programming is available.
Specialized programs for these offenders shall take into account
commitment offenses, delinquency history, age, gender, medical
and mental health condition, risk levels, and any other
commitment criteria."
This bill further would authorize DJJ to "also consider changes
with respect to eligibility, age, jurisdiction, or length of
confinement in order to ensure quality programming within
division facilities."
This bill would require DJJ, "(g)iven the small number of female
offenders and their specialized needs, . . . (to) explore
options to provide programming for female offenders outside of
division facilities."
This bill would require DJJ, on or before January 1, 2008, to
"transfer all female offenders out of division facilities."
COMMENTS
1. Stated Need for This Bill
The author states in part:
The Division of Juvenile Justice currently houses
approximately 130 female wards, which is less than
5% of the total juvenile offender population in
state custody. Yet, the Ventura Youth
Correctional facility, in which the female wards
are housed, currently costs the state over
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 4
$31,000,000. . . .
. . . In the recent Accountability Audit of 2005,
the Office of the Inspector General found that 30%
of classes were being cancelled due to an
unavailability of teachers. Although the OIG
found significant improvement from a 2002 audit
conducted when Ventura was still a co-educational
facility, the OIG also found that improvements
could be made in the provision of health, mental
health, education, and in staff training and
safety. The OIG also recommended the
implementation of better fiscal controls to
mitigate the bloated Ventura budget.
Other problems relating to the gender-specific
needs of the population also continue to
exist-such as a lack of comprehensive policies and
procedures governing the medical care of the
female wards. As part of the reorganization, the
California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation convened the Gender Responsive
Strategies Commission to come up with policies and
procedures that would efficiently meet the
gender-specific needs of the female population in
corrections. Official recommendations have yet to
emerge in the report.
. . . (I)n January of 2006, the Division of
Juvenile Justice did submit an intent to solicit
interest among local providers for safe and
efficient programming for female offenders, within
state custody, but outside of state-operated
facilities. That proposal is currently in its
preliminary stages.
Also in January of 2005, as part of the Farrell
lawsuit, the Division of Juvenile Justice convened
a panel of experts to examine some of the more
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 5
pervasive problems in the system, including the
overexpenditure of state monies for inefficient
treatment of the female population. The panel of
experts supported the DJJ proposal to find local
providers to move girls into local facilities and
programs.
For the above stated reasons, SB 1589 would
require that the DJJ explore specialized,
efficient programming for female wards outside of
division facilities by January of 2008.
The DJJ currently suffers from a recidivism rate
between 70% and 90%. . . . Studies show that the
most effective rehabilitative programs for
youthful offenders are local programs that are
close to families and conducted in familiar
environments. . . . SB 1589 will begin the
exploration into viable alternatives for more
cost-efficient and rehabilitative treatment for
youthful offenders across the state.
2. Female Wards
This bill would require DJJ to transfer all female offenders out
of its facilities by January 1, 2008. As noted by the author
there are less than 150 female wards in DJJ. Because this
population is so small, and presents programming requirements
that are unique from male wards, the idea of providing them with
residential correctional programming elsewhere is not new.
However, while this has been discussed informally for some time,
tangible steps towards implementing such a change appear to have
not yet transpired.
In their recent "Safety and Welfare Plan: Implementing Reform in
California," the Farrell experts recommended the following with
respect to girls in DJJ:
The Safety and Welfare Planning team supports
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 6
DJJ's proposal to solicit interest by local
providers to move girls into local facilities and
programs. The girls at Ventura use only a
fraction of the capacity of the institution,
currently occupying only five of 12 single-celled
housing units. . . .
CCPOA, which opposes this measure, argues that "DJJ has proposed
a reasonable plan for addressing the current program
deficiencies. To require the transfer of female offenders out
of DJJ facilities even before an appropriate alternative has
been identified seems premature to us. We would prefer that the
division's program enhancements be given a chance to work."
SHOULD FEMALE WARDS BE REQUIRED TO BE TRANSFERRED OUT OF DJJ BY
JANUARY 1, 2008?
EVEN IF PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS FOR GIRLS IN DJJ WERE AVAILABLE,
WOULD HOUSING THESE WARDS ELSEWHERE IMPROVE THE OVERALL ABILITY
OF DJJ TO BETTER USE ITS INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES?
IN LIGHT OF DJJ'S PENDING PLAN TO HIRE CONSULTANTS TO SOLICIT
INTEREST BY LOCAL PROVIDERS TO MOVE GIRLS FROM THE VENTURA
FACILITY TO LOCAL FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS OPERATED BY OTHERS, IS
THIS BILL NECESSARY? OR, IS A STATUTORY PROVISION NECESSARY TO
ENSURE THIS OCCURS?
3. Specialized Programming
This bill would require DJJ to "explore options" regarding
specialized programming resources outside of DJJ for high
risk/high needs offenders. For the past several years, DJJ has
been under intense scrutiny and criticism because of violence in
its institutions, ward suicides, and its wholesale failure to
provide mandated education and treatment to wards, most of whom
have significant mental health problems. The DJJ currently is
under a court-ordered consent decree to improve its conditions
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 7
pursuant to a class action lawsuit brought by the Prison Law
Office (Farrell v. Warner).
(More)
CCPOA argues that "the Administration has included significant
resources in its budget proposal to begin to address the serious
program deficiencies in DJJ operations. In our view it is
counter-productive to divert attention away from implementation
of these program enhancements to the study required by SB 1589.
We are also concerned that the study may consider options that
could be operated by the private sector for profit - an option
contrary to our views of the appropriate role for government in
the public safety arena."
In its Overview of the 2006-2007 Budget, the Senate Committee on
Budget and Fiscal Review includes the following information
about the Governor's proposed budget:
For the juvenile population (at CDCR - DJJ),
expenditures have increased while the population
has decreased. The juvenile population has
decreased from over 10,000 in 1996 to an estimated
2,680 by the end of the budget year. In recent
years, the average cost per ward has increased
significantly. In 2000-01 the estimated average
cost per ward was $51,000, while in the budget
year that average cost per ward is estimated to
increase to approximately $150,000. The cost per
ward will continue to increase as the population
declines and the costs of the Farrell Remedial
Plans roll out over the next several years.
. . .
Farrell Ward Safety Remedial Plan. The budget
proposes $5.1 million in the current year and
$47.5 million in 2006-07 to fund the Ward Safety
and Welfare Remedial Plan submitted to the court
in November 2005. The ongoing resources
associated with implementing this plan is expected
to be $93.8 million by 2009-10. In the budget
year, the funding will be used to target 20 living
(More)
SB 1589 (Romero)
Page 9
units, or 25 percent, of the Division of Juvenile
Justice's ward population to receive the enhanced
staffing and training to meet the requirements of
the Remedial Plan filed with the court. The
budget does not contain any proposals for broader
juvenile justice reform issues that are not a part
of the Farrell lawsuit.
Farrell Juvenile Healthcare Remedial Plan. The
budget proposes $7.5 million to implement the
Healthcare Remedial Plan submitted to the court in
September 2005. The proposal assumes a two-year
roll out for the reforms with an additional $1.5
million in 2007-08, with ongoing costs of $9.1
million.
ARE THE ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSALS WITH RESPECT TO DJJ
SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUES RAISED BY THIS BILL?
The author and/or Committee may wish to consider amending this
provision to provide more specificity with respect to what would
constitute "explore options" and how DJJ's investigation of
these options would be best conducted, documented and evaluated.
In addition, members may wish to consider requiring cost
analyses comparing DJJ programming to comparable programming
that may be available, or potentially subject to development,
outside of DJJ. Finally, members may wish to consider adding
timeframes and reporting requirements to this provision.
This bill also would authorize DJJ to consider certain changes
to its composition, such as eligibility, age, jurisdiction, et
cetera. Nothing in current law prevents DJJ from considering
these changes now; members may wish to discuss the need for this
provision.
***************