Building more beds and creating safer conditions

To meet current demands, prepare for growth and provide prisoners and correctional officers with a safer environment, the Governor proposes $10.9 billion to expand California’s prison and jail capacity. This funding will add 78,000 additional beds total.  

• Local jails and juvenile facilities: $5.5 billion ($4.4 billion lease revenue bonds, $1.1 billion in local matching funds).

o        In 2005 alone, 233,388 individuals avoided incarceration or were released early from jail sentences due solely to a lack of jail space.

o        Proposal will fund 45,000 local beds (20,000 for local needs, 25,000 for state to shift prisoner populations) and 5,000 juvenile beds.

o        Twenty jails are currently under court-ordered population caps and twelve more have self-imposed caps.

• State prisons: $4.4 billion ($3.3 billion lease revenue bonds, $800 million contract authority, $300 million General Fund).

o        California’s 174,000 prison population lives in facilities designed for 100,000, and overcrowding has forced more than 17,000 inmates into gymnasium and classroom housing, a dangerous alternative that puts both offenders and correctional officers in danger. CDCR estimates it needs 50,000 new state prison beds over the next 15 years.

o        Proposal will fund 16,238 new state prison beds on existing sites; add 5,000-7,000 beds in new secure re-entry facilities; build a new training facility; and construct a modernized Death Row at San Quentin.

• Medical Facilities: $1 billion (lease revenue bonds)

o        Proposal will construct medical, dental and mental health facilities as mandated by the federal receiver. Court appointed receiver Robert Sillen has indicated he will use the state’s General Fund to pay for these facilities if necessary. This proposal protects the Fund and will go towards construction of 10,000 beds in small facilities statewide.

Keeping low-level offenders at local jails

Governor Schwarzenegger proposes placing low-level and juvenile offenders in county jails instead of state prisons.

• Up to three years in local jail. Sentences up to three years will be served in local facilities rather than state prisons. Currently sentences of more than 1 year are served in state prison.
• Keep juvenile offenders at the local level. As part of his initial proposal, female and non-serious, non-violent juvenile offenders will serve in local facilities. The state will pay $94,000/juvenile/year to locals.

Reducing recidivism

The Governor is focused on reducing California’s recidivism rates. The first step in increasing anti-recidivism programs is building appropriate housing facilities so that beds currently located in prison gyms, classrooms and workshops can be removed.

• $41.1 million increase in funding this year. The 2007 budget almost doubles funding for anti-recidivism programs—like drug treatment, job training and housing assistance—from $52.8 million in 2006 to $93.9 million in 2007.
• $50 million for probation services.  The Governor also proposes designating General Fund revenue to increase the effectiveness of adult probation services in California, with a focus on 18-to-25 year olds.
• Moving female inmates. Proposal includes authorization to contract for 4,350 beds for non-violent female inmates, to provide resources that will help reduce their chance of recidivism.

On the Record

Court Receiver Robert Sillen on General Fund. “If they’re (Department of Finance) smart, and they are, they’ll do it through bonds, not me reaching into the General Fund.” - Testimony Before Little Hoover Commission, November 16, 2006

Court Receiver Robert Sillen Is “Willing To Back Up The Truck” To Raid State Treasury. “Robert Sillen, the court-appointed prison health care receiver, said he's willing to back up the truck to raid the state treasury if need be, waive whatever civil service protections and state laws that get in his way and seek contempt-of-court citations against any state employee who tries to thwart his efforts to renovate California's $1.5 billion prison medical system.” - “Bold vow on inmate health,” Sacramento Bee, November 17, 2006

Joan Petersilia and Robert Weisberg: Re-Entry Centers Are “Clearly Necessary.” “The governor also suggests new local re-entry centers to help disperse inmates out of prison. These are clearly necessary, but must be sensibly designed and operated – small and close to prisoners' homes, with job training, family unification and other forms of re-entry planning. They need to be transitional ‘decompression chambers,’ especially for those who have served longer than five years.” - “Slammer time,” Op-Ed, Sacramento Bee, July 23, 2006

Just the Facts

Early release

• In 2005 alone, 233,388 individuals avoided incarceration or were released early from jail sentences due solely to a lack of jail space. Currently, 20 jails are under court-ordered population caps and 12 counties have established self-imposed caps. Source: “Do the Crime, Serve the Time? Maybe Not In California,” California State Sheriff’s Association. June 2006.

Overcrowding and violence

• Crowding, and the tremendous increase in the prisoner population that underlies it, fuels violence. Crowding severely limits or eliminates the ability of prisoners to be productive, which can leave them feeling hopeless; pushes officers to rely on forceful means of control rather than communication, and makes it harder to classify and assign prisoners safely and identify the dangerously mentally ill. Source: “Confronting Confinement," John J. Gibbons, Nicholas de B. Katzenbach, The Commission On Safety And Abuse In America's Prisons. June 2006.

Moving low-level offenders

• Returning offenders have a better chance of success with greater access to information, a spectrum of community services, and greater preparation for the job market. Source: “Services Integration: Strengthening Offenders and Families, While Promoting Community Health and Safety," Shelli Rossman, The Urban Institute. December 2001.

• Between 1991 and 1999, the number of children with a parent in a federal or state correctional facility increased by more than 100%, from approximately 900,000 to approximately 2,000,000. According to the Bureau of Prisons, there is evidence to suggest that inmates who are connected to their children and families are more likely to avoid negative incidents and have reduced sentences. Source: "The Impact Of Incarceration: Issues Affecting Reentry," U.S. Department of Justice, Reentry Working Group. May 2004.

• Strong results, in terms of lower recidivism rates, appeared for juveniles in community residential programs, and that juvenile offenders gained from community-based treatment. Source: "Effective Intervention for Serious Juvenile Offenders," U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. April 2000.

Secure re-entry facilities

• National statistics show that 10 percent of all state parolees fail to report to parole officers after release. In California that rate is over 20 percent, which may be due in part to California’s lack of an effective re-entry strategy for its prisoners. Source: California Department Of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

• A 2003 Ohio Community Corrections Association study showed that 400 offenders could be served, at an annual cost savings of $2 million, by providing 100 halfway house beds for re-entry prerelease/transitional control or for parole violators in lieu of returning to prison. Source: "Halfway House Utilization: The Key to Reentry, A Cost Savings Report," Anne Power, Power & Associates. Prepared for the Ohio Community Corrections Association. February 25, 2003.