BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Mark Leno, Chair A
2009-2010 Regular Session B
8
4
5
AB 845 (Bass)
As Amended June 25, 2009
Hearing date: July 7, 2009
Penal Code
AA:mc
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION:
REENTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation: AB 3064 (Assembly Committee on Public Safety)
- Ch. 782, Stats. 2006
Support: California Public Defenders Association
Opposition:None known
Assembly Floor Vote: Ayes 79 - Noes 0
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD SPECIFIED CHANGES BE MADE TO THE "REENTRY ADVISORY COMMITTEE"
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION?
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageB
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to make a number of changes to the
existing "Reentry Advisory Committee" in the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation, as specified.
Current law creates in state government the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"), headed by
a secretary who is appointed by the Governor, subject to Senate
confirmation, and serves at the pleasure of the Governor. CDCR
consists of Adult Operations, Adult Programs, Juvenile Justice,
the Corrections Standards Authority, the Board of Parole
Hearings, the State Commission on Juvenile Justice, the Prison
Industry Authority, and the Prison Industry Board. (Government
Code 12838 (a).)
Current law requires the Secretary of CDCR to establish a
Reentry Advisory Committee, as specified. (Penal Code
5056.5.)
This bill would make changes to the Reentry Advisory Committee,
as specified below.
Membership
Under current law , the advisory committee is required to be
comprised of the following members, appointed by the secretary:
(1) A representative of the California League of Cities.
(2) A representative of the California State Association of
Counties.
(3) A representative of the California State Sheriffs'
Association.
(4) A representative of the California Police Chiefs'
Association.
(5) A representative of the Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation Adult Parole Operations.
(6) A representative of the Department of Mental Health.
(7) A representative of the Department of Social Services.
(8) A representative of the Department of Health Services.
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageC
(9) A representative of the Labor and Workforce Development
Agency.
(10) A representative of the County Alcohol and Drug Program
Administrators Association.
(11) A representative of the California Association of Alcohol
and Drug Program Executives.
(12) An individual with experience in providing housing for
low-income individuals.
(13) A recognized expert in restorative justice programs.
(14) An individual with experience in providing education and
vocational training services.
(15) An independent consultant with expertise in community
corrections and reentry services.
This bill would add the following persons to this advisory
committee:
A public defender or private defense attorney.
A representative of a community-based organization who
is familiar with the reentry needs of former offenders and
who has experience advocating for former offenders and with
providing reentry services in southern California.
A representative of a faith-based organization who is
familiar with the reentry needs of former offenders and who
has experience advocating for former offenders and
providing reentry services in northern California.
Under current law , the advisory committee is required to "meet
at least quarterly at a time and place determined by the
secretary. Committee members shall receive compensation for
travel expenses pursuant to existing regulations, but no other
compensation."
This bill would change this provision to require instead that
the advisory committee meet not less frequently than each
quarter; also meet at the call of the secretary; hold its
meetings at a time and location convenient to the public;
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageD
require that all meetings be open to the public; and provide
that members shall serve without compensation.
Reporting Requirements
Under current law , the advisory committee is required to "advise
the secretary on all matters related to the successful statewide
planning, implementation, and outcomes of all reentry programs
and services provided by the department, with the goal of
reducing recidivism of
all persons under the jurisdiction of the department. The
committee shall consider and advise the secretary on the
following issues:
(1) Encouraging collaboration among key stakeholders at the
state and local levels.
(2) Developing a knowledge base of what people need to
successfully return to their communities from prison and what
resources communities need to successfully provide for these
needs.
(3) Incorporating reentry outcomes into department
organizational missions and work plans as priorities.
(4) Funding of reentry programs.
(5) Promoting systems of integration and coordination.
(6) Measuring outcomes and evaluating the impact of reentry
programs.
(7) Educating the public about reentry programs and their role
in public safety. (Penal Code 5056.5(c).)
This bill would revise and recast this subdivision to require
the advisory committee to issue advisory reports whenever it
deems appropriate, but not less frequently than annually issue a
report to the Governor and the Legislature; to make these
reports available to the public; and to require that a report of
the advisory committee at a minimum include recommendations on
all of the issues enumerated directly above.
Additional Duties
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageE
This bill would require the advisory committee to fulfill the
following additional duties:
". . . develop a comprehensive resource guide for
community-based organizations, faith-based organizations,
service providers, law enforcement agencies, and industry
and governmental entities working to address the issues of
reentry through programs, service delivery, or both
programs and service delivery. The guide shall also detail
the availability of private, city, county, city and county,
state, and federal resources for former offenders
attempting to successfully reintegrate into society. The
guide shall be made available to the public in order to
maximize the potential for collaboration."
" . . . immediately seek and apply for grant funding
available through the federal Second Chance Act of 2007:
Community Safety Through Recidivism Prevention (Public Law
110-199)."
"As required by the federal Second Chance Act of 2007:
Community Safety Through Recidivism Prevention, the Reentry
Advisory Committee shall develop a comprehensive strategic
reentry plan containing annual and five-year performance
goals. The comprehensive reentry plan shall seek to reduce
the rate of recidivism by 50 percent over a five-year
period for offenders released from prison, jail, or a
juvenile facility who are served with funds provided under
the federal Second Chance Act of 2007: Community Safety
Through Recidivism Prevention. The outcome measures for
the plan developed pursuant to this subdivision may
include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
(1) Reduction in crime.
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageF
(2) Increase in employment and educational
opportunities.
(3) Reduction in supervised release violations.
(4) Increase in child support obligation
compliance.
(5) Reduction in drug and alcohol abuse.
(6) Increase in participation in substance abuse
and mental health services.
(7) Other outcome measures that correlate
positively with the reentry success rate of offenders
who transition out of prisons, jails, or juvenile
facilities."
" . . . develop the comprehensive strategic reentry plan
in consultation with community members and stakeholders,
including persons in the fields of public safety, juvenile
and adult corrections, housing, health, education,
substance abuse, child and family services, victim
services, employment, and business, and members of
nonprofit organizations working on reentry policy or
providing reentry services."
" . . . examine ways to pool resources and funding
streams to promote lower recidivism rates among returning
offenders and to minimize the harmful effects of offender
incarceration on the families and communities of offenders
by collecting data and developing best practices on
offender reentry from demonstration grantees and other
organizations."
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageG
" . . . submit an annual report to the Legislature and
the United States Attorney General detailing the progress
of grantees towards achieving strategic performance
outcomes and describing other activities conducted by
grantees to increase the success rates of the reentry
population, such as programs that foster effective risk
management and treatment programming, offender
accountability, and community and victim participation."
Sunset
Under current law , the section authorizing the advisory
committee sunsets on January 1, 2011.
This bill would extend this sunset to January 1, 2016.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION IMPLICATIONS
California continues to face a severe prison overcrowding
crisis. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
currently has about 170,000 inmates under its jurisdiction. Due
to a lack of traditional housing space available, the department
houses roughly 15,000 inmates in gyms and dayrooms.
California's prison population has increased by 125 percent (an
average of 4 percent annually) over the past 20 years, growing
from 76,000 inmates to 171,000 inmates, far outpacing the
state's population growth rate for the age cohort with the
highest risk of incarceration.<1>
---------------------------
<1> "Between 1987 and 2007, California's population of ages 15
through 44-the age cohort with the highest risk for
incarceration-grew by an average of less than 1 percent
annually, which is a pace much slower than the growth in prison
admissions." (2009-2010 Budget Analysis Series, Judicial and
Criminal Justice, Legislative Analyst's Office (January 30,
2009).)
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageH
In December of 2006 plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against
CDCR sought a court-ordered limit on the prison population
pursuant to the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act. On
February 9, 2009, the three-judge federal court panel issued a
tentative ruling that included the following conclusions with
respect to overcrowding:
No party contests that California's prisons are
overcrowded, however measured, and whether considered
in comparison to prisons in other states or jails
within this state. There are simply too many prisoners
for the existing capacity. The Governor, the
principal defendant, declared a state of emergency in
2006 because of the "severe overcrowding" in
California's prisons, which has caused "substantial
risk to the health and safety of the men and women who
work inside these prisons and the inmates housed in
them." . . . A state appellate court upheld the
Governor's proclamation, holding that the evidence
supported the existence of conditions of "extreme
peril to the safety of persons and property."
(citation omitted) The Governor's declaration of the
state of emergency remains in effect to this day.
. . . the evidence is compelling that there is no
relief other than a prisoner release order that will
remedy the unconstitutional prison conditions.
. . .
Although the evidence may be less than perfectly
clear, it appears to the Court that in order to
alleviate the constitutional violations California's
inmate population must be reduced to at most 120% to
145% of design capacity, with some institutions or
clinical programs at or below 100%. We caution the
parties, however, that these are not firm figures and
that the Court reserves the right - until its final
ruling - to determine that a higher or lower figure is
appropriate in general or in particular types of
facilities.
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageI
. . .
Under the PLRA, any prisoner release order that we
issue will be narrowly drawn, extend no further than
necessary to correct the violation of constitutional
rights, and be the least intrusive means necessary to
correct the violation of those rights. For this
reason, it is our present intention to adopt an order
requiring the State to develop a plan to reduce the
prison population to 120% or 145% of the prison's
design capacity (or somewhere in between) within a
period of two or three years.<2>
The final outcome of the panel's tentative decision, as well as
any appeal that may be in response to the panel's final
decision, is unknown at the time of this writing.
This bill does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding
crisis outlined above.
COMMENTS
1. Stated Need for This Bill
The author states:
California's prison system is experiencing a crisis.
The issues of reentry and reducing recidivism have
received great national attention as the number of
people released from prison has increased 350 percent
over the last 20 years. In California, 70% of paroled
felons re-offend within 18 months of their release
date, representing the highest recidivism rate in the
nation. Often, failures within the system represent
----------------------
<2> Three Judge Court Tentative Ruling, Coleman v.
Schwarzenegger, Plata v. Schwarzenegger, in the United States
District Courts For The Eastern District of California And The
Northern District Of California United States District Court
Composed Of Three Judges Pursuant To Section 2284, Title 28
United States Code (Feb. 9, 2009).
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageJ
the beginning of a never-ending cycle in which a
person remains on probation, violates probation, and
then returns to county jail.
State law required the Secretary of the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation to establish a Reentry
Advisory Committee to advise the secretary on matters
related to the successful planning, implementation,
and outcomes of all reentry programs and services in
the department, with the goal of reducing recidivism
with a sunset date of January 1, 2011. My bill would
impose additional requirements on the committee,
including that the committee seek and apply for funds
available under the 2nd Chance Act of 2007, develop a
comprehensive strategic reentry plan seeking to reduce
the recidivism rate, and submit a report to the
Legislature, and extend the repeal date on these
provisions until January 1, 2014.
The Second Chance Act funds will go to the development
of adult and juvenile offender state and local reentry
demonstration projects. The funds will enable states
and communities to test evidence based approaches to
reducing recidivism and addressing the alarming
recidivism rates nationwide. The maximum grant award
is $750,000 per year for possibly three years,
depending upon the availability of funds. The federal
government will fund no more than 50% of a project,
for a maximum of a $1.5 million project. Grantees
need to come up with $750,000 (or more if the project
costs more than $1.5). Of that, at least $375,000
must be cash and $375,000 may be in-kind. The
availability of these resources will be immensely
helpful in the event we look to expand or create these
types of much needed programs.
In 1990 California's Blue Ribbon Commission on Inmate
Population Management indicated that the prison system
compromises public safety by relying so heavily on
punishment and recommends drug treatment and work
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageK
programs for parolees. Decades later we continue to
employ the same ineffective practices. California
must combat the culture which dictates that
incarceration is for purposes of punishment as opposed
to rehabilitation. Reentry services and options as of
late have typically been provided sporadically solely
at the local level resulting in modest improvements in
our recidivism rates at best. The Second Chance Act
calls for collaboration between key stakeholders,
service providers, and community based organizations
affording California the opportunity for more
effective formal collaboration and a shift from
business as usual. The Act contains a number of
allowable uses of funds some of which include services
such as prerelease planning and coordination,
substance abuse and mental health treatment, housing,
and job training. These types of transitional
assistance are direly needed if we expect for former
offenders to be successfully reintegrated back into
our communities.
It is my belief that partnerships between
community-based organizations, law enforcement
agencies and service providers in collaboration with
CDCR will provide the necessary tools to combat
California's recidivism rates while increase the
communication between law enforcement, community
members, and ex-offenders.
Breaking the cycle of recidivism eases the burden on
California's taxpayers and increases the public safety
of its people. This bill addresses the need to end
this cycle and a means of doing so.
2.Background: The Importance of Reentry
(More)
The importance of effective reentry strategies for inmates
leaving prison has been underscored by many expert panels over
the years. In its January 2007 report, Solving California's
Corrections Crisis Time Is Running Out, The Little Hoover
Commission stated:
The State must immediately take action to improve its
management of
the correctional population and implement the
recommendations made
by this and other commissions, including expanding
in-prison programs,
improving prisoner reentry, and reallocating resources
to community based
alternatives. The State must use all of its human
resources, not just the personnel of the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation.
As explained in the expert panel report that forms the basis for
reforms now being pursued by CDCR:
Most people forget that (except for those serving life
without parole or death penalty sentences) all
offenders come from and will one day return to the
community. One needs to view corrections through the
lens of prisoner reentry to understand the importance
of rehabilitation programming. As Jeremy Travis
(2005) has reminded us, "they all come back." In
2006, the CDCR admitted nearly 142,000 persons to
prison and released nearly the same number - 134,000.
The average prison sentence served in California is 25
months. The
fact that the majority of prisoners go back to their
communities relatively quickly means that public
safety is the responsibility of all community members,
not just the correctional agency. When correctional
agencies deliver appropriate rehabilitation treatment
programs in prison and then follow those programs up
with aftercare programs and services in the community,
(More)
AB 845 (Bass)
PageM
they are more likely to reduce recidivism two to three
times more than when delivering prison-based programs
alone. Other research shows that correctional
agencies can enhance the effectiveness of their
rehabilitation programming by actively collaborating
with communities. Additionally, research . . . shows
that female offenders need the assistance of their
family members, friends, and community support
agencies (e.g., substance abuse, mental health,
housing, etc.) if they are to sustain the treatment
gains they achieved through participating in
rehabilitation programming in prison.
To become productive and contributing members of
society, ex-offenders must stay sober, find work, and
have safe places to live. An individual who is high,
out of work, and living on the streets is not likely
to succeed. California must make a financial
commitment to help previously incarcerated persons
obtain access to and pay for the services they need to
be clean, sober, and employable. Without this
investment in offenders' survival issues, investments
in prison and parole programming alone will not
produce the desired recidivism reduction outcomes.<3>
WOULD THIS BILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TOOLS AND STRATEGIES THAT
WOULD BE LIKELY TO PRODUCE IMPROVED OUTCOMES FOR PERSONS
RELEASED FROM PRISON?
HOW WOULD THE WORK OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AS CONTEMPLATED BY
THIS BILL INFORM AND COORDINATE WITH EXISTING CDCR INITIATIVES
REGARDING REENTRY PREPARATION AND SERVICES AND THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA REHABILITATION OVERSIGHT
BOARD?
***************
---------------------------
<3> Expert Panel on Adult Offender and Recidivism Reduction
Programming, Report to the California State Legislature (2007)
(see http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/News/ExpertPanel.html).
AB 845 (Bass)
PageN