Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Corrections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
LAO and administration spar over SB 678 funding formula changes; LAO urges oversight and technical fixes
Summary
The Legislative Analyst's Office and the Department of Finance briefed the Assembly subcommittee on a trailer‑bill to change the SB 678 community corrections performance incentive formula, proposing a maintenance payment and baseline changes; LAO and Judicial Council urged different baselines, better oversight, and rejection of a growth payment.
Orlando Sanchez of the Legislative Analyst's Office told the Assembly subcommittee that the SB 678 community corrections performance incentive program—which shares state savings with counties for reducing prison commitments—has grown out of alignment with its original goals because of policy and sentencing changes. The LAO recommended technical corrections and stronger oversight to preserve incentives while improving transparency.
At the hearing, Justin Adelman of the Department of Finance described the administration's trailer‑bill approach: create a maintenance payment equal to roughly 80% of proposed awards (about $103 million) to provide stable funding for probation departments, and compare performance against a new baseline that averages 2021–2023 rather than reverting to the pre‑hold baseline. The administration also proposed a growth factor for the maintenance payment and a smaller performance incentive component.
Nut graf: LAO and the administration agree that the formula needs fixes, but they differ on details—LAO cautioned against using pandemic‑affected years in baselines, recommended replacing average cost with marginal cost assumptions, urged stronger statewide oversight (via the Board of State and Community Corrections) and recommended rejecting the administration's proposed growth payment and a statutorily guaranteed minimum that disconnects awards from performance.
Key details discussed included: LAO said using 2021 would artificially lower county baselines because of COVID effects and recommended using 2022–2023 instead; LAO also suggested the formula should use marginal prison costs (basic per‑inmate costs such as food and clothing) instead of average costs that include broader institutional overhead; LAO recommended requiring the BSCC to audit and provide technical assistance to counties and to reject a $200,000 minimum award provision that they say weakens incentives. Justin Adelman and Department of Finance staff said they were open to discussion on baselines and cost assumptions but defended the maintenance payment as a tool to stabilize county funding and preserve evidence‑based practices.
Francine Byrne of the Judicial Council described the council's assessment tools for evidence‑based practices, saying the Judicial Council conducts validated assessments and is restarting site visits this July.
Ending: Committee members signaled continued negotiation among stakeholders; no formal vote was recorded. LAO said it will supply formal recommendations on the administration's three proposed payment components as conversations continue.
