Existing law establishes the Board of State and Community Corrections, which, among other things, is responsible for providing statewide leadership, coordination, and technical assistance to promote effective state and local efforts and partnerships in Californias adult and juvenile criminal justice system.

Existing law provides for the confinement of persons in county jails sentenced to imprisonment therein. Existing law authorizes a sheriff or other official in charge of a county correctional facility to provide for the vocational training and rehabilitation of inmates, as specified.

This bill would, on or before January 1, 2025, require the sheriff in each county to compile and submit specified data to the Board of State and Community Corrections on their educational opportunities, rehabilitative opportunities, exercise opportunities, the number of participants and the cost of administering those programs, and success rates in reducing recidivism, as defined. The bill would require the board to compile a report based upon those findings and submit the report to the Legislature by a specified date.

By imposing new duties on local entities, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 862 (Bauer-Kahan) - County jails: recidivism: reports

Bill Summary:

AB 862 would require county sheriffs to compile and submit data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) on rehabilitative opportunities for incarcerated individuals and recidivism rates, as specified.

Fiscal Impact:

• One-time and ongoing costs in the hundreds of thousands to the BSCC (General Fund). The BSCC estimates initial one-time costs of approximately $200,000 to develop information technology data collection and management processes. The BSCC also estimates additional ongoing costs of approximately $236,000 for staff to manage, collect, and summarize the reports provided by county Sheriffs.
  
• Unknown, potentially reimbursable costs to county sheriffs to compile and submit data on educational opportunities, rehabilitative opportunities, exercise opportunities, the number of participants and the cost of administering those programs, and success rates in reducing recidivism, as specified (local funds, General Fund). General Fund costs will depend on whether this measure constitutes a reimbursable state mandate as determined by the Commission on State Mandates.

Background:

In 2011, AB 109 (Realignment) was enacted and shifted the management of lower-level felony offenders from state prison and the parole system to county jail and probation systems. Since that time, much attention has been paid to the recidivism rates of both individuals who served their felony sentence in county jail and those who served their felony sentences in the state’s prisons. Although there are different ways to measure recidivism, the state has adopted reconviction as its primary recidivism measure.

This bill requires every county sheriff to report the overall recidivism rates for each county jail, and defines recidivism as “an individual received a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their previous criminal conviction.” This bill additionally requires each sheriff to report to the BSCC a list of all of the educational, rehabilitative, and recreational opportunities provided in each county jail as well as the number of participants and the cost of administering each of the programs.

Proposed Law:

• Requires the sheriff in each county to compile and submit the following data to the BSCC:
  • A list of all the educational opportunities provided in each county jail;
  • A list of all of the rehabilitative opportunities provided in each county jail;
  • A list of all the exercise opportunities in each county jail;
  • The number of participants and the cost of administering these programs; and,
  • The overall recidivism rates for each county jail.
• Defines “recidivism” means that an individual received a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their previous criminal conviction. Provides that for statistical purposes, any individual who is released from custody and reoffends be counted as part of the data.
• Requires the BSCC to provide a report to the Legislature based upon the findings of the data collected on or before July 1, 2025.
• Sunsets these provisions on July 1, 2029 and repeals them on January 1, 2030.

Related Legislation:

AB 731 (Bauer-Kahan) of the 2021-2022 legislative session was substantially similar to this bill. AB 731 was vetoed by the Governor, who cited fiscal concerns in his veto message.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Aisha Wahab, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: AB 862 Hearing Date: July 11, 2023

Subject: County jails: recidivism: reports

HISTORY

Source: Author

Prior Legislation: AB 731 (Bauer-Kahan), vetoed in 2022

AB 2483 (Bauer-Kahan), vetoed in 2020

AB 152 (Gallagher), held in Assembly Appropriations in

AB 2521 (Hagman), held in Senate Appropriations in 2014

AB 1050 (Dickinson), Ch. 270, Stats. 2013

Support: California Public Defenders Association; Ella Baker Center for Human Rights; Initiate Justice

Opposition: California State Sheriffs’ Association

Assembly Floor Vote: 67 - 0

PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to require county sheriffs to compile and submit data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) on rehabilitative opportunities for incarcerated individuals.

Existing law establishes the BSCC to provide statewide leadership, coordination, and technical assistance to promote effective state and local efforts and partnerships in California’s adult and juvenile criminal justice system, including addressing gang problems. (Pen. Code, § 6024, subds. (a) & (b).)

Existing law requires the BSCC’s mission to reflect the principle of aligning fiscal policy and correctional practices, including, but not limited to prevention, intervention, suppression, supervision, and incapacitation, to promote a justice investment strategy that fits each county and is consistent with the integrated statewide goal of improved public safety through cost-effective, promising, and evidence-based strategies for managing criminal justice populations. (Pen. Code, § 6024, subd. (b).)

Existing law provides that it is the duty of the BSCC to collect and maintain available information and data about state and community corrections policies, practices, capacities, and needs. (Pen. Code, § 6027, subd. (a).)

Existing law authorizes BSCC to do either of the following:

• Collect, evaluate, publish, and disseminate statistics and other information on the condition and progress of criminal justice in the state; or,
• Perform other functions and duties as required by federal acts, rules, regulations, or guidelines in acting as the administrative office of the state planning agency for distribution of federal grants.

(Pen. Code, § 6027, subd. (c).)

This bill requires the sheriff in each county to compile and submit the following data to the BSCC:

• A list of all the educational opportunities provided in each county jail;
• A list of all of the rehabilitative opportunities provided in each county jail;
• A list of all the exercise opportunities in each county jail;
• The number of participants and the cost of administering these programs; and,
• The overall recidivism rates for each county jail.

This bill defines “recidivism” means that an individual received a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their previous criminal conviction. Provides that for statistical purposes, any individual who is released from custody and reoffends be counted as part of the data.

This bill requires the BSCC to provide a report to the Legislature based upon the findings of the data collected on or before July 1, 2025.

This bill provides that its provisions will become inoperative on July 1, 2029 and repealed on January 1, 2030.

COMMENTS

1. Need For This Bill

According to the author:

AB 862 requires county jail data collection aimed at understanding the spending and effectiveness of the county's rehabilitation programs. Counties have an outsized role in the criminal justice system, and understanding their rehabilitation programming, especially after realignment, should be a priority. This information provides an opportunity for the legislature to make fully informed decisions on the best use of scarce funding, aimed at programs that show proven rates of reducing recidivism.

1. Recidivism Data

In 2011, AB 109 (Realignment) was enacted and shifted the management of lower-level felony offenders from state prison and the parole system to county jail and probation systems. Since that

time, much attention has been paid to the recidivism rates of both individuals who served their felony sentence in county jail and those who served their felony sentences in the state’s prisons. Although there are different ways to measure recidivism, the state has adopted reconviction as its primary recidivism measure. (Public Policy Institute of California, Realignment and Recidivism in California (Dec. 2017), p. 9 available at <https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/r_1217mbr.pdf>.)

This bill requires every county sheriff to report the overall recidivism rates for each county jail, and defines recidivism as “an individual received a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their previous criminal conviction.” This definition is consistent with the BSCC’s definition of recidivism. (BSCC, Definitions of Key Terms, p. 2 available at <https://www.bscc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/AB-1050-Key-Term-Definitions.pdf>.) This bill also specifies that any individual who is released from custody and reoffends may be counted as part of the recidivism data for statistical purposes. This appears to be consistent with the BSCC’s definition of recidivism which provides that its definition “does not preclude other measures of offender outcomes… [which] may include new arrest, return to custody, criminal filing, violation of supervision, and level of offense (felony or misdemeanor).” (Ibid.)

This bill additionally requires each sheriff to report to the BSCC a list of all of the educational, rehabilitative, and recreational opportunities provided in each county jail as well as the number of participants and the cost of administering each of the programs.

1. AB 731

Apart from the timelines provided in the bill, this bill is identical to AB 731 (Bauer-Kahan) of the 2021-2022 legislative session which was vetoed. In vetoing the bill, Governor Newsom wrote:

This bill requires the sheriff in each county to compile and send extensive data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (Board) about educational and rehabilitative programs in county jail and their success rates in reducing recidivism. It further requires the Board to report to the legislature.

While I agree that data relating to the efficacy of local programs is important, this bill is overly broad and creates a large mandate, potentially costing the state millions of dollars. With our state facing lower-than-expected revenues over the first few months of this fiscal year, it is important to remain disciplined when it comes to spending, particularly spending that is ongoing. We must prioritize existing obligations and priorities, including education, health care, public safety and safety-net programs.

The Legislature sent measures with potential costs of well over $20 billion in one-time spending commitments and more than $10 billion in ongoing commitments not accounted for in the state budget. Bills with significant fiscal impact, such as this measure, should be considered and accounted for as part of the annual budget process. For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

1. Argument in Support

The California Public Defender’s Association writes:

AB 862 will require County Sheriffs to report the nature of their anti-recidivism programs, and those programs’ success rates in reducing recidivism. Recidivism can be reduced through rehabilitation by addressing the criminogenic needs of individuals within the criminal justice system. Local Sheriffs are responsible for providing the services that address these individuals’ needs. Looking at success rates will afford local and State decision makers with the knowledge necessary to efficiently allocate limited resources to those programs that best reduce recidivism and encourage rehabilitation.

1. Argument in Opposition

According to the California State Sheriffs’ Association:

Sheriffs across the state provide meaningful rehabilitative programming to jail inmates with the desire to enhance formerly incarcerated persons’ re-entry into society and reduce the likelihood that people re-offend. Unfortunately, the bill is ambiguous and creates unreasonable expectations about what data individual jails possess about recidivism that may take place in other jurisdictions. As a result, the bill would likely be interpreted as requiring county jails to ascertain from courts, other jails, or state prisons, potentially including such entities in other states, information regarding subsequent convictions. Requiring such would be very expensive and exceedingly time consuming; a problem exacerbated by the fact that the bill provides no funding for its requirements.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 862

Author:(Bauer-Kahan)

As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2023

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires county sheriffs to compile and submit data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) on rehabilitative opportunities for incarcerated individuals.

Major Provisions

1. Requires the sheriff in each county to compile and submit the following data to the BSCC:
   1. A list of all the educational opportunities provided in each county jail;
   2. A list of all of the rehabilitative opportunities provided in each county jail;
   3. A list of all the exercise opportunities in each county jail;
   4. The number of participants and the cost of administering these programs; and,
   5. The overall recidivism rates for each county jail.
2. Defines "recidivism" means that an individual received a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their previous criminal conviction; and provides that for statistical purposes, any individual who is released from custody and reoffends shall be counted as part of the data.
3. Provides that on or before July 1, 2025, the BSCC must provide a report to the Legislature based upon the findings of the data collected.
4. States that these provisions will become inoperative on July 1, 2029 and is repealed on Janaury 1, 2030.

COMMENTS

According to the Author

"AB 862 requires county jail data collection aimed at understanding the spending and effectiveness of the county's rehabilitation programs. Counties have an outsized role in the criminal justice system, and understanding their rehabilitation programming, especially after realignment, should be a priority. This information provides an opportunity for the legislature to make fully informed decisions on the best use of scarce funding, aimed at programs that show proven rates of reducing recidivism."

Arguments in Support

According to The California Public Defender's Association, "AB 862 will require County Sheriffs to report the nature of their anti-recidivism programs, and those programs' success rates in reducing recidivism. Recidivism can be reduced through rehabilitation by addressing the criminogenic needs of individuals within the criminal justice system. Local Sheriffs are responsible for providing the services that address these individuals' needs. Looking at success rates will afford local and State decision makers with the knowledge necessary to efficiently allocate limited resources to those programs that best reduce recidivism and encourage rehabilitation."

Arguments in Opposition

According to The California State Sheriffs' Association, "Sheriffs across the state provide meaningful rehabilitative programming to jail inmates with the desire to enhance formerly incarcerated persons' re-entry into society and reduce the likelihood that people re-offend. Unfortunately, the bill is ambiguous and creates unreasonable expectations about what data individual jails possess about recidivism that may take place in other jurisdictions. As a result, the bill would likely be interpreted as requiring county jails to ascertain from courts, other jails, or state prisons, potentially including such entities in other states, information regarding subsequent convictions. Requiring such would be very expensive and exceedingly time consuming; a problem exacerbated by the fact that the bill provides no funding for its requirements."

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly/Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. Likely reimbursable costs (General Fund) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for the sheriffs' departments to collect and report data to the BSCC. If it costs each sheriff's department about $10,000 to gather the specified data, this bill would result in approximately $580,000 in local, potentially reimbursable costs. The extent of potential reimbursement would be determined by the Commission on State Mandates.
2. Costs to BSCC (General Fund) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The BSCC estimates costs of approximately $200,000 to develop information technology data collection and management processes, plus additional costs of approximately $236,000 for staff to manage, collect, and summarize the data reported by the sheriffs.

VOTES

ASM PUBLIC SAFETY: 8-0-0

YES: Jones-Sawyer, Alanis, Bonta, Bryan, Lackey, Ortega, Santiago, Zbur

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-5

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Weber, Ortega

ABS, ABST OR NV: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Robert Rivas, Sanchez

UPDATED

VERSION: February 14, 2023

CONSULTANT: Elizabeth Potter / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 FN: 0000704

Date of Hearing: April 19, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Chris Holden, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 862

Author:(Bauer-Kahan) – As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2023

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes

SUMMARY:

This bill requires the sheriff in each county to compile and submit specified data related to rehabilitative programs and recidivism to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) by January 1, 2025. The bill also requires the BSCC to compile a report based on the county data and submit it to the Legislature by July 1, 2025.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Likely reimbursable costs (General Fund) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for the sheriffs’ departments to collect and report data to the BSCC. If it costs each sheriff’s department about $10,000 to gather the specified data, this bill would result in approximately $580,000 in local, potentially reimbursable costs. The extent of potential reimbursement would be determined by the Commission on State Mandates.
2. Costs to BSCC (General Fund) in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The BSCC estimates costs of approximately $200,000 to develop information technology data collection and management processes, plus additional costs of approximately $236,000 for staff to manage, collect, and summarize the data reported by the sheriffs.

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s Statement. According to the author:

AB 862 requires county jail data collection aimed at understanding the spending and effectiveness of the county's rehabilitation programs. Counties have an outsized role in the criminal justice system, and understanding their rehabilitation programming, especially after realignment, should be a priority. This information provides an opportunity for the legislature to make fully informed decisions on the best use of scarce funding, aimed at programs that show proven rates of reducing recidivism.

1. Data Reporting. This bill requires each county sheriff’s department to compile information about educational, rehabilitative, and exercise opportunities provided in each county jail. The bill also requires each county sheriff’s department to compile information about recidivism rates, where recidivism is defined to mean instances when an individual receives a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their prior criminal conviction. It is unclear whether sheriff’s departments currently track this type of recidivism information, or whether they have the capability to track instances of recidivism that occur in other jurisdictions. Additionally, the bill does not clearly define what types of educational, rehabilitative, and exercise opportunities must be reported to BSCC. As a result, data reported to BSCC from the county sheriffs may be inconsistent, and may not provide a comprehensive picture of rehabilitative programs across the counties or recidivism rates for individuals formerly incarcerated in county jails.
2. Prior Legislation. AB 731 (Bauer-Kahan), of the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, was substantially similar to this bill and was vetoed. The Governor’s veto message stated:

While I agree that data relating to the efficacy of local programs is important, this bill is overly broad and creates a large mandate, potentially costing the state millions of dollars…Bills with significant fiscal impact, such as this measure, should be considered and accounted for as part of the annual budget process.

AB 2483 (Bauer-Kahan), of the 2019-2020 Legislative Session, was also substantially similar to this bill and AB 731, and was also vetoed by the Governor.

AB 152 (Gallagher), of the 2017-2018 Legislative Session, would have required the BSCC to collect and analyze specified recidivism data. AB 152 was held on suspense in this committee.

Analysis Prepared by: Annika Carlson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: March 21, 2023

Consultant: Elizabeth Potter

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON

Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:

Author:() – As Ver:

SUMMARY:

Requires county sheriffs to compile and submit data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) on rehabilitative opportunities for incarcerated individuals. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the sheriff in each county to compile and submit the following data to the BSCC:
   
   1. A list of all the educational opportunities provided in each county jail;
      
   2. A list of all of the rehabilitative opportunities provided in each county jail;
      
   3. A list of all the exercise opportunities in each county jail;
      
   4. The number of participants and the cost of administering these programs; and,
      
   5. The overall recidivism rates for each county jail.
      
2. Defines “recidivism” means that an individual received a new felony or misdemeanor conviction or probation violation within three years of their previous criminal conviction; and provides that for statistical purposes, any individual who is released from custody and reoffends shall be counted as part of the data.
   
3. Provides that on or before July 1, 2025, the BSCC must provide a report to the Legislature based upon the findings of the data collected.
   
4. States that these provisions will become inoperative on July 1, 2029 and is repealed on Janaury 1, 2030.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the BSCC to provide statewide leadership, coordination, and technical assistance to promote effective state and local efforts and partnerships in California’s adult and juvenile criminal justice system, including addressing gang problems. (Pen. Code, § 6024, subds. (a) & (b).)
   
2. Provides that BSCC’s mission shall reflect the principle of aligning fiscal policy and correctional practices, including, but not limited to prevention, intervention, suppression, supervision, and incapacitation, to promote a justice investment strategy that fits each county and is consistent with the integrated statewide goal of improved public safety through cost-effective, promising, and evidence-based strategies for managing criminal justice populations. (Pen. Code, § 6024, subd. (b).)
   
3. States that it is the duty of the BSCC to collect and maintain available information and data about state and community corrections policies, practices, capacities, and needs. (Pen. Code, § 6027, subd. (a).)
   
4. Authorizes BSCC to do either of the following:
   
   1. Collect, evaluate, publish, and disseminate statistics and other information on the condition and progress of criminal justice in the state; or,
      
   2. Perform other functions and duties as required by federal acts, rules, regulations, or guidelines in acting as the administrative office of the state planning agency for distribution of federal grants. (Pen. Code, § 6027, subd. (c).)
      
5. Provides that any report required or requested by law to be submitted by a state or local agency to the Members of either house of the Legislature must be submitted as a printed copy to the Secretary of Senate, as an electronic copy to the Chief Clerk of the Assembly, and as an electronic or printed copy to the Legislative Counsel. Each report shall include a summary of its contents, not to exceed one page in length. If the report is submitted by a state agency, that agency shall also provide an electronic copy of the summary directly to each member of the appropriate house or houses of the Legislature. (Gov. Code, § 9795, subd (a)(1)(A).)
   

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Author's Statement: According to the author, “AB 862 requires county jail data collection aimed at understanding the spending and effectiveness of the county's rehabilitation programs. Counties have an outsized role in the criminal justice system, and understanding their rehabilitation programming, especially after realignment, should be a priority. This information provides an opportunity for the legislature to make fully informed decisions on the best use of scarce funding, aimed at programs that show proven rates of reducing recidivism.”
   
2. Collecting and Analyzing Data: The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) released a report in 2017 that took a closer look at recidivism rates throughout the state. This report examined the effect of AB 109 (Comm. on Budget), Chapter 15, Statutes of 2011, which created criminal justice realignment. AB 109 was enacted to place lower risk offenders into county jails due to overcrowding in state prisons. For this report the PPIC used data from BSCC, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and DOJ, among others. The PPIC stated “There are many ways of measuring recidivism.^[1] The state has adopted reconviction—often considered a more accurate measure of reoffending behavior, relative to rearrest—as its primary recidivism measure. Reconvictions also represent a substantial resource burden and thus may be of particular interest to correctional systems. However, when comparing the reconviction rates of individuals released before and after realignment, it is important to consider how realignment changed the likelihood that criminal justice systems would pursue formal convictions. Before realignment, individuals who violated the conditions of their parole or who were suspected of a new offense could be revoked to prison custody. Under realignment, most offenders can only be sent to prison following conviction on a new, prison-eligible offense—meaning that correctional systems may be shifting away from revocations and toward more formal rearrests and reconvictions”. (Realignment and Recidivism in California (ppic.org) (2017) at p.9)
   
   This bill would require every county sheriff to collect, analyze, and report recidivism data to the BSCC. In addition, this bill would require the BSCC to take the aforementioned data and compile a report to the Legislature.
   
   Currently, Penal Code section 6027 allows the BSCC to define recidivism. The BSCC considers the following terms when defining the adult definition of recidivism (https://www.bscc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/AB-1050-Key-Term-Definitions.pdf at p.2):
   

Recidivism is defined as conviction of a new felony or misdemeanor committed within three years of release from custody or committed within three years of placement on supervision for a previous criminal conviction. ^[2]

Supplemental Measures: This definition does not preclude other measures of offender outcomes. Such measures may include new arrest, return to custody, criminal filing, violation of supervision, and level of offense (felony or misdemeanor).

Recidivism Rates: While the definition adopts a three-year standard measurement period, rates may also be measured over other time intervals such as one, two, or five years.

This bill defines recidivism for purposes of reporting to BSCC in similar language as the BSCC defines recidivism.

1. Governor’s Veto: AB 731 (Bauer-Kahan), of the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, which was nearly identical to this bill, was vetoed by the Governor. In his veto message, the Governor said:
   
   “This bill requires the sheriff in each county to compile and send extensive data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (Board) about educational and rehabilitative programs in county jail and their success rates in reducing recidivism. It further requires the Board to report to the legislature.
   
   “While I agree that data relating to the efficacy of local programs is important, this bill is overly broad and creates a large mandate, potentially costing the state millions of dollars. With our state facing lower-than-expected revenues over the first few months of this fiscal year, it is important to remain disciplined when it comes to spending, particularly spending that is ongoing. We must prioritize existing obligations and priorities, including education, health care, public safety and safety-net programs.
   
   “The Legislature sent measures with potential costs of well over $20 billion in one-time spending commitments and more than $10 billion in ongoing commitments not accounted for in the state budget. Bills with significant fiscal impact, such as this measure, should be considered and accounted for as part of the annual budget process. For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.”
   
   This bill does not address the Governor’s veto message.
2. Argument in Support: According to The California Public Defender’s Association, “AB 862 will require County Sheriffs to report the nature of their anti-recidivism programs, and those programs’ success rates in reducing recidivism. Recidivism can be reduced through rehabilitation by addressing the criminogenic needs of individuals within the criminal justice system. Local Sheriffs are responsible for providing the services that address these individuals’ needs. Looking at success rates will afford local and State decision makers with the knowledge necessary to efficiently allocate limited resources to those programs that best reduce recidivism and encourage rehabilitation.”
   
3. Argument in Opposition: According to The California State Sheriffs’ Association, “Sheriffs across the state provide meaningful rehabilitative programming to jail inmates with the desire to enhance formerly incarcerated persons’ re-entry into society and reduce the likelihood that people re-offend. Unfortunately, the bill is ambiguous and creates unreasonable expectations about what data individual jails possess about recidivism that may take place in other jurisdictions. As a result, the bill would likely be interpreted as requiring county jails to ascertain from courts, other jails, or state prisons, potentially including such entities in other states, information regarding subsequent convictions. Requiring such would be very expensive and exceedingly time consuming; a problem exacerbated by the fact that the bill provides no funding for its requirements.”
   
4. Related Legislation: SB 519 (Atkins), would expand the Board of State and Community Correction’s (BSCC) mission to include the promotion of legal and safe conditions for youth, inmates, and staff in local detention facilities. SB 519 is pending in the Senate Committee on Public Safety.
   
5. Prior Legislation:
   
   1. AB 731 (Bauer-Kahan), of the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, would have required the sheriff in each county to compile and send data to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) on antirecidivism programs and success rates in reducing recidivism, and report the data to the Legislature. AB 731 was vetoed by the Governor.
      
   2. AB 2483 (Bauer-Kahan), of the 2019-2020 Legislative Session was substantially similar to this bill and AB 731. AB 2483 was vetoed by the Governor.
      
   3. AB 152 (Gallagher), of the 2017-2018 Legislative Session, would have required the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) to collect and analyze data regarding recidivism rates of all persons who receive a felony sentence or who are placed on postrelease community supervision. AB 152 was held on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
      
   4. AB 2521 (Hagman), ), of the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, would have required, on and after July 1, 2015, the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC), in consultation with specified stakeholders, to collect and analyze data regarding recidivism rates, as defined, of all persons who receive sentences for felonies punishable by imprisonment in a county jail, or who are placed on postrelease community supervision on or after July 1, 2015. AB 2521 was held on the Senate Committee on Appropriations suspense file.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Public Defenders Association (CPDA)
Initiate Justice

Oppose

California State Sheriffs' Association

Analysis Prepared by:

1. Indeed, it is important to note that the best measures of recidivism depend on the purpose of the analysis. For example, if the primary goal is to understand the effect of a policy change on the cost of operating correctional institutions, then the most appropriate metric to examine may be returns to custody. If the goal is to understand how a policy change has affected the demands placed on police departments, then the best recidivism measure may be rearrest rates. No single measure of recidivism fits all purposes. ↑

2. “Committed” refers to the date of offense, not the date of conviction ↑