BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1589
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1589 (Romero)
As Amended August 24, 2006
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :21-14
PUBLIC SAFETY 4-2 APPROPRIATIONS 13-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Leno, Dymally, Goldberg, |Ayes:|Chu, Bass, Berg, |
| |Lieber | |Calderon, |
| | | |De La Torre, Karnette, |
| | | |Klehs, Leno, Nation, |
| | | |Oropeza, Ridley-Thomas, |
| | | |Saldana, Yee |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|La Suer, Spitzer |Nays:|Sharon Runner, Emmerson, |
| | | |Haynes, Nakanishi, |
| | | |Walters |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) to
explore options to provide specialized programming outside of
DJJ facilities for high-risk or high-need offenders and requires
DJJ to explore options regarding the placement of female wards
outside of DJJ facilities. Specifically, this bill :
1)Provides that DJJ shall explore options to provide specialized
programs outside of DJJ facilities for female offenders if
programming is available and consistent with the protection of
the public. 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.
2)Provides that DJJ may also consider changes with respect to
eligibility, age, jurisdiction, or length of confinement in
order to ensure quality programming within DJJ facilities.
3)Provides that given the small number of female offenders and
their specialized needs, DJJ shall explore options to provide
programming for female offenders outside of DJJ facilities.
SB 1589
Page 2
4)Provides that DJJ shall transfer female offenders out of DJJ
facilities as expediently as possible.
5)Provides that if DJJ contracts with outside entities to
provide services to female wards, DJJ shall ensure that those
contracting entities will meet the requirements of DJJ's
Safety and Welfare Remedial Plan dated July 10, 2006, or any
subsequently agreed to remedial plan, or any plan subsequently
authorized by the Legislature.
6)Provides that if DJJ wishes to transfer control of the Ventura
Youth Correctional Facility to the Division of Adult
Institutions, DJJ shall seek the approval of the Legislature.
7)Make Legislative findings and declarations.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee analysis:
1)Absorbable costs to the California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to "explore options" for outside
programming. Presumably DJJ reviews all options in the course
of doing business; particularly in light of recent court
orders and settlements relating to ineffective ward housing,
management and programming. To the extent outside programming
is more effective and reduces recidivism, out-year DJJJ costs
could decline.
2)To the extent DJJ is successful in placing the female ward
population in non-DJJ settings, net costs to the state could
well decrease, as it is unlikely that local government or
private placements would exceed the $150,000 per year the
state currently provides for the 130 young women at Ventura.
3)In addition, to the extent Ventura is made available for use
for DJJ males or CDCR adult inmates, potential ward/inmate
housing construction costs could be reduced or avoided.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "DJJ 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 $31 million. The
budgeted cost per female wards is among the highest in DJJ.
SB 1589
Page 3
"Yet, despite the enormous amount of money expended to service
the female juvenile offender population, problems that are
endemic to other DJJ facilities also exist at the Ventura Youth
Correctional Facility. In the recent Accountability Audit of
2005, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) 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, CDCR
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 from the Commission.
"However, in January 2006, DJJ 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 2006, as part of the Farrell lawsuit, DJJ
convened a panel of experts to examine some of the more
pervasive problems in the system, including the over-expenditure
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.
"The DJJ currently suffers from a recidivism rate between 70%
and 90%. Recidivism in California is not only about taxpayer
monies, it also about the public safety. Studies show that the
most effective rehabilitative programs for youthful offenders
are local programs that are close to families and conducted in
familiar environments. Given these findings, it behooves the
State to find local alternatives not only for juvenile
SB 1589
Page 4
offenders, but for other high-risk, high-need populations who
require specialized treatment and effective programming. This
bill will begin the exploration into viable alternatives for
more cost-efficient and rehabilitative treatment for youthful
offenders across California."
Please see the policy committee analysis for full discussion of
this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Heather Hopkins / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744
FN: 0016947