COMMONWEAL

1

• JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM
• AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION POLICY IN CALIFORNIA
• TCWF Violence Prevention Conference
• November 15, 2007 San Francisco
• A Summary of SB 81 Juvenile Justice Realignment
• Provisions and Implementation Issues
• Plus FY 07-08 State Budget Results for Violence
  Prevention Programs
• Presented by David Steinhart
• Director, Commonweal Juvenile Justice Program

2
SB 81 Juvenile Justice Realignment OVERVIEW

• DJJ Population will be downsized to about
  one half its current level
• Expect 1,500 DJJ wards in 2 years (from 2,500
  now)
• Non-violent juvenile offenders will stay in
  county programs and facilities No DJJ
• State will pay counties for new juvenile
  disposition and aftercare programs
• DJJ will continue to accept serious- violent
  offenders committed by county courts

3
SB 81 Why did we need it?
4
SB 81 How did it happen?

• Earlier realignment proposals failed
• Governors would not budge united with
  CCPOA/victims groups against CYA reform
• Counties did not support not enough money
• What was different in 2007?
• Governor ready to deal COST DRIVEN DECISION
• Counties willing to play IF THE MONEY IS RIGHT
• Lawmakers ready to change DISCOURAGED ON DJJ
• Negotiations lead to SB 81 package (May 07)
• Counties, Administration, Legislature agree on
  details

5
California Division of Juvenile Justice (CYA to
2005)Institutional Cost Per Ward Per Year1996
2007
Farrell consent decree
Sources CA state budgets, CA Dept. of Finance,
CA CDCR-Div. of Juvenile Facilities
6
SB 81 What does it do?CASELOADS AFFECTED

• FUTURE COMMITMENTS
• NON 707 (B) JUVENILES CANNOT BE SENT TO DJJ
  after Sept. 1, 2007
• EXCEPTION for non 707 registerable sex
  offenders on the PC 290 (d) (3) list
• HOW MANY OFFENDERS MUST BE KEPT UNDER COUNTY
  CONTROL?
• Non 707s were about 40 of commitments to DJJ in
  2006
• ABOUT 300 WARDS/ YEAR WILL BE SB 81 NOT
  ELIGIBLE FOR DJJ
• ANOTHER 350 WARDS/YEAR WILL BE NON RETURNABLE
  FOR PAROLE VIOLATIONS
• CURRENTLY INSTITUTIONALIZED WARDS
• MAY BE INDIVIDUALLY RECALLED BY COUNTIES (Non
  707s)
• IF NOT RECALLED, WILL BE RELEASED IN DUE TIME BY
  THE PAROLE BOARD
• HOW MANY are there? As of 9/07, DJJ pop. included
  about 700 non 707s
• CURRENT PAROLEES
• NOT A FULL SHIFT TO COUNTIES
• UPON VIOLATION (per AB 191) WARD MOVES TO COUNTY
  SUPERVISION
• LOCAL COURT HOLDS RE-ENTRY HEARING TO SET
  PROBATION CONDITIONS
• HOW MANY? About 575 non 707 wards are on the DJJ
  parole caseload (9-07)

7
SB 81 What does it do? PAYMENTS TO COUNTIES

• YOUTHFUL OFFENDER BLOCK GRANT FUND
• Based on 117,000/ year for banned commits
  returns
• Relief from sliding scale fees adds value to
  this payout
• 15,000 per year for parole supervision of
  released wards
• Total statewide fund 24 mil.1st year 92
  mil. 3rd year
• Distribution formula
• 50 share of youth pop (10-17), 50 juv. felony
  adjudication rate
• Min. small county grant 58,500 (1st year),
  then 117,000
• Payout State Controller deposits in county fund.
  CSA role.
• Contingency fund 5 of total counties apply to
  CSA
• Individual payouts 117,000/year for recalls
  (pro rated)
• Renewals Deal includes funding in perpetuity
  w/ COLA

8
SB 81 What does it do? COUNTY ALLOCATIONS FY
07-08
Source CA Department of Finance
Note Allocations projected to grow by factor of
3.8 by 2010-11
9
SB 81 What does it do? COUNTY USES OF FUNDS

• ALLOCATIONS SHALL BE USED TO.
• Enhance the capacity of local agencies to
  provide rehabilitation and supervision services
  to the shifted DJJ caseload, including all
  necessary custody and parole services --- FROM
  NEW WIC SEC. 1951 (B)
• INTENT LANGUAGE LISTS PREFERRED USES INCLUDING
• Assessment tools, day/ evening reporting, elec.
  monitoring, specialized placements, re-entry
  services, professional training and regional
  networks
• COUNTY JUVENILE JUSTICE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
• Due at Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) by
  1/1/08
• Plan must describe uses of funds, any regional
  agreements and coordination with spending under
  JJCPA
• LOCAL FUNDING DECISIONS ARE UP TO THE COUNTY AS A
  WHOLE
• No single agency or group is designated by SB 81
  to allocate funds
• 15 MILLION IN COUNTY PLANNING GRANTS FOR
  REALIGNMENT CUT BY GOVERNOR FROM THE BUDGET
• RUNNER INITIATIVE would amend SB 81 to eliminate
  allocations to mental health, drug/alcohol, other
  county agencies for realignment services,
  essentially earmarking funds for county probation
  .

10
SB 81 What does it do? FACILITY CONSTRUCTION
GRANTS

• SB 81 authorizes 100 million in revenue bonds
  for local youthful offender rehabilitative
  facilities
• Funds can be used to Acquire, design, renovate
  or build
• CSA to approve const. grants on a competitive
  basis
• Applications must include staffing and operating
  cost plans
• Counties to provide 25 matching funds
• SB 81 is silent as to the types of facilities or
  the specific offender populations they would serve

11
SB 81 What does it do?NEW STATE JJ COMMISSION

• PURPOSE Comprehensive planning, oversight
  coordination of state/local juvenile. justice
  partnership and performance
• DELIVERABLE Must produce a statewide Juvenile
  Justice Operational Master Plan by 1/1/09 to
  include
• Risk/needs assessment tools for program
  security classification
• Common juvenile justice data collection elements
• Plan to promote a continuum of evidence-based
  responses
• MAKEUP
• 12 Stakeholder Reps appointed by Gov, Senate,
  Assembly, Others
• Tri-chaired by the DJJ Chief, CPOC and CSAC
• STAFFING By DJJ with a 600,000 appropriation
• SUNSET Commission self-extinguishes 1-1-09
  unless re-enacted

12
SB 81 What happens now?IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES

• Are counties ready and able to handle the shifted
  caseload?
• Where will counties with no secure facility put
  these youth?
• Where will special needs youth go e.g. mentally
  ill offenders?
• What regional networking and placement alliances
  should smaller and rural counties form?
• Will counties use the SB 81 option to recall
  their DJJ wards?
• How will counties address new re-entry and
  aftercare needs?
• What sanctions are available for wards over 18
  who cant go into foster care or be confined with
  younger juveniles?
• Will prosecutors file more 707s or adult court
  cases?
• Will state funds be sufficient? Will the state
  honor its commitment to SB 81 funding in future
  years?
• Are state agencies (CSA, DJJ) prepared to achieve
  the shift?
• What facilities should or will be built with
  construction funds?

13
RUNNER INITIATIVE PUSHES STATE GANG POLICY INTO
FULL SUPPRESSION MODE CUTS OUT CBOs

• SPONSORS George Sharon Runner, Mike Reynolds
  (3 strikes sponsor)
• STATUS Filed with AG for title summary.
  Circulating for Nov 08 ballot
• HIGHLIGHTS
• Increases penalties (criminal civil) for gang
  related offenses across board
• Creates new gang registration requirements and
  penalties
• Adds pro-prosecution law changes examples
• No bail for undocumented persons arrested for
  gang offenses
• Evidence law changed to relax hearsay rules on
  unavailable witnesses
• Due process rights capped and trimmed in parole
  violation proceedings
• No good time credits for any prisoner with an up
  to life sentence
• Trying juveniles as adults kids with gang
  offenses presumed unfit for juvenile court
• BALLOT BOX BUDGETING
• Earmarks 500 million/year for law enforcement,
  victim projects
• Earmarks current funding or higher in perpetuity
  for listed law enforcement operations
• YOUTH CRIME PREVENTION
• States this as objective but funds only police
  recreation, probation supervision programs
• REMOVES CBOs, nonprofits from local Schiff
  Cardenas Coordinating Councils
• MARKETING AND PROSPECTS
• Safe Neighborhood Act