BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
750 (Bass)
Hearing Date: 07/23/2009 Amended: As introduced
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote:
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 750 allows a superior court to develop and
operate a deferred entry of judgment (DEJ) reentry program
targeted at preventing recidivism among non-violent low-level
drug sales offenders. This bill specifies numerous mandatory
characteristics for the allowed DEJs, and outlines the authority
and responsibilities of participating parties. This bill
provides that counties that opt to create a deferred entry of
judgment program shall not seek reimbursement for costs
associated with the implementation, development, or operation of
the program. This bill, however, provides that local law
enforcement agencies and counties administering the program may
seek state, federal or private funding for the purpose of
implementing the provisions of this chapter. This bill makes
additional legislative findings and declarations.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
Fund
New, optional court program Potentially substantial cost
pressure, if adopted Potentially
substantial savings, if successful General*
Law enforcement authorized Potentially substantial cost
pressure General
to seek state funds to implement
*Trial Courts Trust Fund
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Superior courts have the authority to implement the described
(or their own alternative) DEJ without this bill. San Francisco
currently operates a similar program now, and did not require
additional statutory authority to do so. By creating what is
functionally a statutory suggestion, with a framework for
elective implementation, this bill creates cost pressure on the
state insofar as it both supports Superior Courts and is cited
as a potential funding source for the law enforcement component
of this program.
Even though the reentry program authorized by this bill is
optional for superior courts that choose to implement the
program, courts that elect to do so will incur additional costs
for enhanced oversight and case coordination creating cost
pressures on the General Fund. This bill would result in unknown
local costs dependent on the number of participants, local
procedures, staffing, and the availability and cost of local
treatment and service providers, in particular, because of its
specificity of requirements for DEJs. San Francisco currently
operates a similar program to the DEJs described which estimates
costs of approximately $5,000 per participant. To the extent
that the program does reduce recidivism, there could be
substantial incarceration savings to both state
Page 2
AB 750 (Bass)
and local entities. It is unclear how many, is any, courts will
seek to establish a new, expensive program, considering the
current court backlogs and underfunding.
This bill specifically authorizes local law enforcement agencies
and counties administering the program to seek state (in
addition to federal and private) funding, creating a direct cost
pressure. The degree to which local law enforcement will seek
state funds for an optional program (if the county chooses to
participate) is unknown, but is increasingly likely in the
current budget situation, in which county subventions are
already being cut.