BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2218
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 20, 2010
Counsel: Meghan Masera
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Tom Ammiano, Chair
AB 2218 (Fuentes) - As Introduced: February 18, 2010
As Proposed to be Amended in Committee
SUMMARY : Provides that inmates who commit crimes involving a
direct victim shall receive priority placement in restitution
centers and expands the eligibility criteria for the placement
of an inmate into a restitution center. Creates credit
reductions for an inmate in a county jail, city jail, industrial
farm, or road camp who participates in recidivism reduction
earned credit programming prior to sentencing. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Declares legislative intent to fight recidivism by using a
restitution center concept where inmates serving time for
non-violent, non-serious offenses can fulfill obligations to
pay restitution and other court related fines and fees in
addition to obtaining and maintaining employment.
2)Provides that the purpose of a restitution center is to
provide a means for inmates to be able to pay their victims'
financial restitution, which includes direct restitution to
victims as well as other restitution fines and fees, as
ordered by the sentencing court; or as agreed upon by the
defendant and his or her victims.
3)Stipulates that inmates who commit crimes involving a direct
victim shall receive priority placement in restitution
centers.
4)Provides that a defendant is eligible for placement in a
restitution center if the defendant does not have a criminal
history of a conviction for the sale of drugs within the last
five years or for an offense requiring registration as a sex
offender, or a serious felony, or a violent felony, and the
defendant did not receive a sentence of more than 60 months
for the current offense(s). In addition, the defendant must
pose no unacceptable risk to the community and must be
AB 2218
Page 2
employable.
5)Expands credit reductions to apply to prisoners in a county
jail, city jail, industrial farm, or road camp, for in-custody
participation in recidivism reduction earned credit
programming prior to sentencing.
6)Expands the maximum length of time a term of imprisonment can
be reduced by credits earned by a prisoner participating in
approved rehabilitative programming in a state prison from six
weeks during any 12-month period of continuous confinement, to
12 weeks during any 12-month period of continuous confinement.
7)Allows a county sheriff or city chief of police to award
additional program credit reductions for in-custody program
participation.
8)States that recidivism reduction earned credits will apply to
participation in both pre-conviction and post-custody
recidivism jail programs, and apply to inmates who
successfully complete specific program performance objectives.
The credit reductions for approved rehabilitative programming
shall range from not less than one week to not more than 16
weeks within a 12-month period of continuous confinement for
each performance milestone.
9)Defines "recidivism reduction earned credit programming" to
include academic programs, vocational programs, vocational
training, financial training, and core programs such as anger
management and social life skills, family and marital
relationships, and substance abuse programs.
EXISTING LAW :
1)The purpose of restitution centers is to provide a means for
those sentenced to prison to be able to pay their victims
financial restitution as ordered by the sentencing court, or
as agreed upon by the defendant and his or her victims.
(Penal Code Section 6221.)
2)The location for a restitution center or centers shall be
determined by the Director of Corrections with approval from
the county board of supervisors or city council in whose
jurisdiction the center will be located. (Penal Code Section
6222.)
AB 2218
Page 3
3)Restitution centers shall be located in areas which will
maximize the employment opportunities of persons sentenced to
the centers. (Penal Code Section 6223.)
4)The court may order the Department of Corrections to place an
eligible defendant in a restitution center if the court makes
a restitution order, or if a restitution agreement is entered
into by the victims and the defendant. The Department of
Corrections may send a defendant to a reception center for
classification prior to placing the defendant in the
restitution center. (Penal Code Section 6227.)
5)A defendant is eligible for placement in a restitution center
if he or she has not served a prison term within the five
years prior to the present conviction, the defendant does not
have a criminal history of a conviction for the sale of drugs
or for a crime involving violence or sex, the defendant did
not receive a sentence of more than 36 months, the defendant
presents no unacceptable risk to the community, and the
defendant is employable. (Penal Code Section 6228.)
6)Provides that offenders shall perform all the labor necessary
to maintain the restitution center and meet the offenders'
needs unless the director finds that a particular task can be
better performed by other persons. The Director may employ
and pay compensation to offenders to perform work at a center.
[Penal Code Section 6230(a) to (b).]
7)Provides that [Penal Code Section 6231(a) to (b)(3)]:
a) The offender's wages earned shall be paid directly to
the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
(CDCR), less any tax deductions.
b) Wages received by the CDCR shall be used to reimburse
the offender for direct employment costs, such as
transportation, tools, clothing, meals, union dues, and
other employee-mandated costs. Of the remaining wages:
i) One-third is paid to the CDCR for the costs of the
restitution center;
ii) One-third first is paid to court-ordered or agreed
upon restitution, and then the moneys are paid to the
AB 2218
Page 4
prosecuting jurisdiction to defray court costs and
attorney fees incurred in prosecution, and then the
moneys are paid to the local jurisdiction for crime
prevention; and,
iii) One-third is deposited into a savings account for
the offender, which can be used to provide support for
the offender's immediate family, purchase items necessary
for employment, or given to the offender to purchase
personal accessories. Upon release, the remaining money
in the savings account is paid to the offender.
8)Provides that an offender shall not leave a restitution center
except to go to work or when specifically authorized and shall
return to the restitution center immediately after work or
when required by the person in charge of the restitution
center. An offender who violates this section is guilty of
escape. [Penal Code Section 6233(a) to (b).]
9)States that legislative intent that persons convicted of a
crime and sentenced to state prison serve the entire sentence
imposed by the court, except for a reduction in the time
served pursuant to current law. [Penal Code Section 2933(a).]
10) Provides that for every six months of continuous
incarceration, a prisoner shall be awarded credit reductions
from his or her term of confinement of six months. A lesser
amount of credit based on this ratio shall be awarded for any
lesser period of continuous incarceration. Under no
circumstance shall any prisoner receive more than six months'
credit reduction for any six-month period. [Penal Code
Section 2933(b).] Credit is a privilege, not a right and must
be earned and may be forfeited pursuant to current law.
However, every eligible prisoner shall have a reasonable
opportunity to participate. [Penal Code Section 2933(c).]
11) Requires the CDCR to promulgate regulations that state
that credit which has been previously forfeited may be
restored by the CDCR Secretary with proof that the inmate has
served not more than one year free of disciplinary
infractions. The regulations shall provide for separate
classifications of serious disciplinary infractions as they
relate to restoration of credits, the time period required
before forfeited credits or a portion thereof may be restored,
and the percentage of forfeited credits that may be restored
AB 2218
Page 5
for these time periods. No credits may be restored if they
were forfeited for a serious disciplinary infraction in which
the victim died or was permanently disabled. Upon application
of the prisoner and following completion of the required time
period free of disciplinary offenses, forfeited credits
eligible for restoration under the regulations for
disciplinary offenses other than serious disciplinary
infractions shall be restored unless, at a hearing, it is
found that the prisoner refused to accept or failed to perform
in a credit qualifying assignment, or extraordinary
circumstances are present that require that credits not be
restored. [Penal Code Section 2933(d).]
12) Provides that a prisoner sentenced to the state prison
shall receive one day of credit for every day served in a
county jail, city jail, industrial farm, or road camp after
the date he or she was sentenced to the state prison. [Penal
Code Section 2933(e).]
13) Authorizes the CDCR to award program credit reductions to
inmates who successfully complete specific program performance
objectives for approved rehabilitative programming ranging
from credit reduction of not less than one week to credit
reduction of no more than six weeks for each performance
milestone. However, a prisoner may not have his or her term
of imprisonment reduced more than six weeks for credits
awarded pursuant to this section during any 12-month period of
continuous confinement. [Penal Code Section 2933.05(a).]
14) "Approved rehabilitation programming" includes academic
programs, vocational programs, vocational training, and core
programs such as anger management and social life skills, and
substance abuse programs. [Penal Code Section 2933.05(c).]
15) Disqualifies the following prisoners from eligibility for
program credits for approved rehabilitative programming [Penal
Code Section 2933.05(e)]:
a) Any person serving a term of imprisonment for a violent
offense;
b) Any person sentenced to state prison under the "Three
Strikes" Law;
c) Any person required to register as a sex offender; and,
AB 2218
Page 6
d) Any person serving a term of imprisonment as a result of
a violation of parole without a new term.
16) States that the maximum credit that may be earned against
a period of confinement in, or commitment to, a county jail,
industrial farm, or road camp, or a city jail, industrial
farm, or road camp, following arrest and prior to placement in
the custody of the Director of Corrections, shall not exceed
15% of the actual period of confinement for any person
convicted of a violent felony. [Penal Code Section
2933.1(c).]
17) Provides that for each four-day period in which a
prisoner is confined in or committed to a county or city jail,
industrial farm, or road camp, one day shall be deducted from
his or her period of confinement. This applies to [Penal Code
Section 4019(a) to (c)]:
a) All days of custody from the date of arrest to the date
on which the serving of the sentence commences, under a
judgment of imprisonment, or a fine and imprisonment until
the fine is paid in a criminal action or proceeding;
b) Confinement as a condition of probation after suspension
of imposition of a sentence or suspension of execution of
sentence, in a criminal action or proceeding;
c) Confinement for a definite period of time for contempt
pursuant to a proceeding, other than a criminal action or
proceeding; and,
d) Confinement following arrest and prior to the imposition
of sentence for a felony conviction.
18) States that if a prisoner is required to register as a
sex offender, was committed for a serious felony, or has a
prior conviction for a serious felony, or a violent felony,
for each six-day period in which the prisoner is confined in,
or committed to, a county or city jail, industrial farm or
road camp, one day shall be deducted from his or her period of
confinement. [Penal Code Section 4019(b) and (c).]
19) Declares the legislative intent that if all days are
earned under this section, a term of four days will be deemed
AB 2218
Page 7
to have been served for every two days spent in actual
custody, except that a term of six days will be deemed to have
been served for every four days spent in actual custody for
persons required to register as a sex offender, committed for
a serious felony, or having a prior conviction for a serious
felony, or a violent felony. [Penal Code Section 4019(f).]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "AB 2218
reinforces principles of individual accountability, public
safety and long-term cost savings to the taxpayers of
California by: (a) re-opening Restitution Centers, where
eligible and suitable non-violent state prison inmates would
be required to obtain and maintain employment while also
paying direct victim restitution and other restitution fines
and fees owed; and (b) authorizing the creation of jail based
pre-conviction programming credits for counties offering
in-custody recidivism reduction programs.
"AB 2218 is an example of being smart on crime because offenders
who gain tangible life skills which include vocational
training and actual employment are much more likely to
successfully reintegrate into communities and contribute to
society instead of being a drain to taxpayers. Restitution
Center participants often maintain the same employment upon
being released from state custody, thus providing a more
seamless transition."
2)Prior Restitution Centers : In November 2008, CDCR closed the
two restitution centers, both in Los Angeles. The purpose of
restitution centers is for non-serious, non-drug related
offenders to save the state money by being housed in group
homes instead of prison. Offenders have jobs to pay rent and
restitution to their victims. When the CDCR was ordered to
cut its budget by $800 million in 2008, CDCR announced that it
could no longer afford the restitution center program.
The CDCR "pointed out that the centers had about three dozen
empty beds, and said the state could not afford to carry a
program not operating at full capacity. The state could not
find enough eligible volunteers to fill all 110 beds. Closing
the centers eliminated $500,000 in contract costs for the
AB 2218
Page 8
state." [McGreevy, State Closes Restitution Centers for White
Collar Prisoners, Los Angeles Times (January 13, 2009).]
To be eligible for admission into a restitution center, inmates
had to owe restitution to their victims and have sentences of
three years or less for nonviolent and nonsexual offenses.
One-third of an offender's earnings is paid to the State for
the offender's upkeep, one-third is paid to victims, and the
final one-third is deposited into an account to pay for
job-related costs such as transportation.
Crime victims' advocates argued that a group home costs the
state $50 per inmate per day whereas those same inmates are
now costing the state at least $97 per day in prison
(according to prison officials). Based on the number of
inmates, the difference of having inmates placed in group
homes versus prison is about $1.2 million per year.
[McGreevy, State Closes Restitution Centers for White Collar
Prisoners, Los Angeles Times (January 13, 2009).]
3)Little Hoover Commission Recommendations Relating to
Restitution Centers : In its report, "Solving California's
Corrections Crisis: Time is Running Out," (Jan. 2007) the
Little Hoover Commission recommended that the Governor and the
Legislature enact legislation to promote the utilization of
intermediate or community based sanctions, like restitution
centers in order to reduce prison costs. [Little Hoover
Commission, Solving California's Corrections Crisis: Time is
Running Out (Jan. 2007) p. 31.] This reiterated
recommendations made by the Little Hoover Commission in 1998.
In 1998, the Little Hoover Commission stated, "Researchers have
estimated that diverting low-level offenders from state prison
to community-based alternative sanctions could save a
significant portion of the State's current prison costs.
University of California criminologists calculate that
diverting offenders convicted of using or possessing drugs to
community-based programs would cut state prison costs by 17
percent. Including all of those convicted of drug crimes
would boost the savings to 26 percent. And diverting
offenders serving sentences shorter than nine months - which
takes in 44 percent of all prison inmates - would also lower
prison costs by about 25 percent. [Little Hoover Commission,
Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower Prison Costs and
Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 50.]
AB 2218
Page 9
"The Legislative Analyst's Office also has identified potential
savings. In 1997, the LAO estimated that the demand for
additional prisons over the next decade could be reduced by
30,000 beds if certain categories of offenders received
state-funded and locally administered intermediate sanctions.
The proposal estimated an annual state savings of $670 million
plus $1.36 billion in one-time capital outlay savings.
[Little Hoover Commission, Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms
to Lower Prison Costs and Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 50.]
"While the potential for direct savings is compelling, the issue
is controversial because of the difficulties in estimating the
indirect costs. Some correctional officials assert that many
offenders sentenced for nonviolent crimes are violent people,
and that the most effective way to combat crime is
incapacitation. Others argue that locking criminals up is
'the only way to make them pay' for crimes and to express
public condemnation of criminal acts. And because
intermediate sanctions divert offenders into non-incarcerating
programs, critics say public safety is compromised. [Little
Hoover Commission, Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower
Prison Costs and Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 50.]
"Despite these concerns from opponents, the Little Hoover
Commission recommended that the Governor and the Legislature
enact legislation funding community-based punishments like
restitution center programs that improve public safety over
the long term by reducing recidivism and that minimize the
short-term added risks to the public when compared with
incarceration in state prison." [Little Hoover Commission,
Behind Bars: Correctional Reforms to Lower Prison Costs and
Reduce Crime (Jan. 1998) p. 56.]
4)LAO: SBx3 18 (Ducheny), Chapter 28, Statutes of 2009) Makes
Smaller Impact than Expected : In its recent analysis of the
Governor's proposed 2010-11 budget, the Legislative Analyst's
Office (LAO) stated, "The 2009-10 budget assumed about $1.2
billion in savings in the budget of the California Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). These were to
result from various administrative and programmatic changes
(such as reductions to inmate and parolee rehabilitation
programs), as well as from various policy changes to reduce
the inmate and parole populations (as specified in Chapter 28,
Statutes of 2009 [SBX3 18, Ducheny]). Some of these changes
AB 2218
Page 10
include: (1) commuting the sentences of and deporting certain
undocumented inmates currently incarcerated in prison; (2)
making ineligible for revocation to prison parole violations
by certain parolees with no serious, violent, or sex offenses;
(3) increasing the credits that inmates can earn to reduce
their stay in prison; (4) increasing the dollar threshold for
certain property crimes to be considered a felony, thus making
fewer offenders eligible for prison; and (5) providing fiscal
incentives to counties to reduce the number of revocations of
persons on probation to state prison. The budget plan assumed
that the various changes would reduce the inmate population by
roughly 18,500 inmates in 2009-10 and 25,000 inmates in
2010-11 from a base of about 168,000 inmates.
"However, the actual reduction in the inmate population from the
above policy changes is now estimated to be significantly less
than initially planned-about 1,600 inmates in 2009-10 and
11,800 inmates in 2010-11. This is primarily due to delays
and changes in the implementation of the new policies. For
example, the Governor's budget assumes only 200 sentence
commutations in 2009-10, which is significantly less than the
8,500 assumed in the enacted 2009-10 budget."
This bill helps decrease the prison population by expanding
sentence reduction credits to inmates who participate in
recidivism reduction programs in county jails prior to being
sentenced to state prison.
5)Arguments in Support : According to the California Public
Defenders Association (the sponsor of this bill), "Instead of
serving their sentences in state prison, eligible and suitable
prisoners would serve their time at the Restitution Centers,
where CDCR staff was present. The Restitution Centers provide
an avenue for inmates to be housed in a less costly community
setting while fulfilling their obligations to pay restitution.
The cost per day of housing a CDCR inmate in a restitution
center would be approximately $50 per day compared to $131 per
day to house in state prison, saving approximately $29,000 per
inmate per year in addition to the savings generated by the
percentage of wages allocated toward operating expenses."
In addition, "Pre-conviction earned program credit in jail will
provide an incentive for participation that will enhance
public safety. The CDCR Expert Panel in 2007 emphasized the
importance, through legislation, of expanding its system of
AB 2218
Page 11
positive reinforcements for offenders who successfully
complete their rehabilitation program requirements. The
Expert Panel recommended awarding earned credits to offenders
who complete any rehabilitation program in prison and on
parole."
6)Related Legislation : AB 807 (Fuentes) would have revised the
criteria for placement of inmates in restitution centers by
the CDCR. AB 807 was vetoed by the Governor for interfering
with CDCR operations and because of uncertainty surrounding
the prison reform measures that are currently being litigated.
7)Prior Legislation :
a) SBx3 18 (Ducheny), Chapter 28, Statutes of 2009,
provided that certain prisoners shall earn one day of
credit for every one day served either in the state prison
or in a local facility prior to delivery to the state
prison. SBx3 18 provides for up to six weeks of additional
credit for the successful completion of certain programs
offered by the department, as specified. SBx3 18 also
expands an existing program for extra time credits for
inmates assigned to conservation camps to apply to inmates
who are assigned to correctional institutions as inmate
firefighters and to inmates who have completed the training
for either of those assignments, as specified. SBx3 18
also revises the time credits for certain prisoners
confined or committed to a county jail or other specified
facilities, as provided.
b) AB 543 (Houston), of the 2005-06 Legislative Session,
would have established a pilot program in Contra Costa
County whereby inmates in the county jail shall have their
sentences reduced for successfully participating in basic
education and vocational training programs. AB 543 was
held at the Senate Desk.
c) AB 2586 (Houston), of the 2003-04 Legislative Session,
would have established a pilot program in Contra Costa
County whereby inmates in the county jail shall have their
sentences reduced for successfully participating in basic
education and vocational training programs. AB 2586 died
on the Senate Inactive File.
AB 2218
Page 12
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Public Defenders Association (Sponsor)
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared by : Meghan Masera / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744