BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                           Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

                                           704 (Denham)
          
          Hearing Date:  04/27/2009           Amended: 04/02/2009
          Consultant:  Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: None
          
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____
          BILL SUMMARY:   SB 704 eliminates specific appropriations from  
          the Budget Act of 2003 and the Budget Act of 2008, to the extent  
          these funds have not yet been spent.
          
          This bill eliminates Item 5240-301-0660 of Section 2.00 of the  
          Budget Act of 2003 (Chapter 157 of the Statutes of 2003). It  
          also eliminates Item 5225-301-0660 and 5225-491 of Section 2.00  
          of the Budget Act of 2008 (Chapters 268 and 269 of the Statutes  
          of 2008) relating to the state budget. These statues authorize  
          funding for the planning and construction of a new Condemned  
          Inmate Complex (CIC) at San Quentin State Prison.
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____
                            Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions         2009-10      2010-11       2011-12     Fund
                                                        
          Repay interim financing            $18,360                        
                                             General

          Delete appropriations               Possible cost avoidance of  
          up to $300,000*   General**
          detailed above

          *Cost avoidance depends upon whether a new condemned inmate  
          facility must be built, even if this specific appropriation is  
          deleted.   
          **Issuance of lease-revenue bonds to be repaid from the General  
          Fund.
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____

          STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the  
          Suspense File.
          
          The Budget Act of 2003 appropriated $220,000,000 in  










          lease-revenue bond authority to plan and build a new CIC at San  
          Quentin State Prison. The Budget Acts of 2004 and 2005  
          re-appropriated the funds, the Budget Act of 2006 appropriated  
          $172,000,000, and in late 2006 the project was stopped  
          temporarily after the plans were completed, and there was no  
          appropriation in 2007. After completing the initial plans,  
          funded by an interim financing loan from the Pooled Money  
          Investment Account (PMIA), CDCR determined that the project  
          would require an additional $136,000,000 to complete. This sum  
          was later appropriated in the Budget Act of 2008.

          This bill specifically halts two different appropriations that,  
          under current law, are authorized to construct a new CIC at San  
          Quentin State Prison. This bill would rescind the authority to  
          sell lease-revenue bonds, totaling up to $336,000,000. Deleting  
          the appropriations avoids future debt, but does not transfer  
          fund to the GF, as the appropriation was not made from the GF  
          nor were actual funds ever transferred for this project. 


          Page 2 
          SB 704 (Denham)

          The exact amount of potential cost avoidance is unknown because  
          it depends upon:

             1)   Whether a new CIC should be built at another location.
             2)   Whether, if construction is stopped now and must be  
               started at a later time, having to build a new CIC in the  
               future might be even more expensive. 
             3)   The debt-service cost of the lease-revenue bonds that  
               would be issued under current law.
             4)   The anticipated construction schedule.

          The State Treasurer's Office notes that the initial borrowing  
          from the PMIA must be repaid and would be repaid by lease  
          revenue bonds over the life of the project. Halting the project  
          would make that bridge loan due in 2009-10. This bill would halt  
          the project, and CDCR would have to repay the $18,360,000 PMIA  
          loan in 2009-10. 

          The CIC construction project was intended to alleviate Death Row  
          crowding issues, as it is current practice to separate condemned  
          inmates from the general population. CDCR has also raised  
          concerns about the safety and security of the San Quentin  
          facility, including Death Row. There is, however, no specific  










          court order to build a new CIC. DOF notes that there are medical  
          beds associated with this construction, which were counted  
          toward the number required by the Federal Receiver, and that  
          failing to build a new CIC further exacerbates prison  
          overcrowding. DOF contends that this construction is also  
          necessary to complete CDCR's mental health plan as approved by  
          the Coleman Court.

          Nonetheless, this specific new construction has been  
          controversial. The LAO advised against building a new CIC at San  
          Quentin in both its 2003 and 2008 budget analyses, and  
          encouraged exploration of other sites. The 2003 analysis calls  
          for an audit by the Bureau of State Audits, which was later  
          completed, and found that CDCR did not conduct sufficient  
          research into all possible locations for the new CIC that might  
          be less expensive to build and maintain. 

          In the LAO 2008 budget analysis, the Analyst specifically calls  
          into question the additional appropriation of $136,000,000,  
          citing that it finds no evidence that construction costs have  
          risen so substantially as to justify this additional expense.