BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 2520
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 2520 (Maienschein)
          As Amended  April 1, 2014
          Majority vote 

           PUBLIC SAFETY       7-0         APPROPRIATIONS      17-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Ammiano, Melendez,        |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow,           |
          |     |Jones-Sawyer, Quirk,      |     |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian  |
          |     |Skinner, Stone, Waldron   |     |Calderon, Campos,         |
          |     |                          |     |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez,  |
          |     |                          |     |Holden, Jones, Linder,    |
          |     |                          |     |Pan, Quirk,               |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner,    |
          |     |                          |     |Weber                     |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Requires an independent professional or the Board of  
          Parole Hearings (BPH), as applicable, to, at the request of a  
          prisoner who is found to be a mentally disordered offender (MDO)  
          or is serving an indeterminate sentence with the possibility of  
          parole, as specified, consult with the prisoner's primary mental  
          clinician before making a recommendation concerning that  
          prisoner or for purposes of determining parole suitability, as  
          applicable.  Specifically,  this bill  :

          1)Requires an independent professional appointed by BPH for  
            purposes of determining parole suitability of a MDO, at the  
            request of the prisoner, to consult with a prisoner's primary  
            mental clinician, if any, before making a recommendation  
            concerning that prisoner to BPH.  Defines "primary mental  
            clinician," for purposes of this provision, to mean a licensed  
            psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker who  
            regularly treats the prisoner, including, but not limited to,  
            an employee of the State Department of State Hospitals or a  
            privately-hired person.

          2)Requires BPH, at any hearing where BPH considers a  
            Psychological Risk Assessment, as specified, as part of its  
            determination of whether to set, postpone, or rescind a parole  
            release date of a prisoner under a life sentence, at the  
            request of the prisoner under a life sentence, also consult  








                                                                  AB 2520
                                                                  Page  2


            with the prisoner's primary mental clinician if that person  
            exists.  Defines "primary mental clinician," for purposes of  
            this provision, to mean a licensed psychiatrist, psychologist,  
            or clinical social worker who regularly treats the prisoner,  
            including, but not limited to, a state employee or a  
            privately-hired person.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:

          1)Potentially significant ongoing General Fund (GF) costs, in  
            the range of $400,000, for MDO consults.  Based on about 1,350  
            MDO hearings per year, if half of the inmates request a  
            consult with their primary mental health clinician, and the  
            consults average about two hours, including scheduling,  
            conferencing, travel and report preparation, the annual cost  
            would be in the range of $400,000.

          2)Potentially minor ongoing GF costs, in the range of $75,000.  
            Based on about 240 lifer hearings per year, if half request a  
            consult, and the consults average about two hours, including  
            scheduling, conferencing, travel and report preparation, the  
            annual cost would be in the range of $75,000.

          3)Unknown potential savings/costs to the extent additional  
            consults result in additional or fewer MDO commitments, and  
            additional or fewer parole dates for lifers.

          4)Development of regulations for the proposed changes would  
            likely be in the range of $100,000.  

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "Existing law allows a  
          prisoner to request a hearing from the Board of Parole Hearings  
          to make the case of why they should be given parole. The law  
          requires that a prisoner who is being considered for parole  
          within the California Department of Corrections and  
          Rehabilitation (CDCR), be evaluated by a certified clinician  
          prior to a parole hearing.

          "If it is determined that the prisoner should receive a parole  
          hearing, existing law requires that the clinician in charge of  
          treating the prisoner and an independent evaluator from within  
          the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation  
          (CDCR), evaluate the prisoner. The law also requires the Board  








                                                                  AB 2520
                                                                  Page  3


          of Parole Hearings to appoint two independent professionals to  
          conduct an additional review in certain circumstances.

          "However, these independent evaluators are not required to  
          consult with a prisoner's primary clinician before making a  
          recommendation to the board. The findings of these evaluators  
          may be incomplete or lack context since they may not know the  
          unique circumstances facing the prisoner.

          "My bill would require the independent evaluator from CDCR to  
          consult with the prisoner's primary clinician before making a  
          recommendation to the Board of Parole Hearings. This would help  
          ensure public safety and the well-being of the prisoner by  
          improving communication between the prisoner's health team and  
          independent evaluators."
           
           Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion  
          of this bill.
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Shaun Naidu / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 


                                                                FN: 0003655