|
Friday, March 24, 2006
|
|
VOLUME 106
Issue 11
|
|
|
|
|  |
|
|
Administration of Justice
For more information, contact Rubin R. Lopez at 916/327-7500, ext. 513, or rlopez@counties.org, or Elizabeth Howard at 916/327-7500, ext. 537 or ehoward@counties.org.
Crime Stoppers
AB 2300 (Parra) – Request for Comment
AB 2300, by Assembly Member Nicole Parra, is a measure that would create a statewide Crime Stoppers Council, create a statutory definition of local crime stoppers programs, provide immunity for those persons who report criminal activity, and establish a $5 penalty enhancement increase to fund state and local crime stoppers efforts. The bill is sponsored by the California State Association of Crime Stoppers.
Crime Stoppers originated 30 years ago in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and has since expanded to over 1,200 communities in 20 countries. In California, there currently are active programs in nearly 30 communities. The mission of Crime Stoppers is to combat crime and preserve public safety through a partnership of community members, the media, and law enforcement. Local programs are not-for-profit charities managed by a volunteer board of directors; the board raises funds to reward anonymous tipsters who provide information resulting in an arrest for criminal activity. The Crime Stoppers programs primarily work to (1) provide information about specific crimes to the public, (2) encourage reporting of information to law enforcement agencies in a safe, anonymous fashion, and (3) assist law enforcement agencies in identifying individuals who are responsible for committing crimes.
Assembly Member Parra’s bill would formalize the creation of a statewide Crime Stoppers Program in California. Among the key elements contained in the measure are the following:
* Establishment of California Crime Stoppers Council. The measure would create a 15-member California Crime Stoppers Council, vested with the authority to certify local crime stoppers programs. The composition of the council, details associated with members’ terms, and participation and commitment expectations are all specified in the measure.
* Definition of Local Crime Stoppers Programs. AB 2300 specifies the purpose, objectives, and general operational principles associated with local programs.
* Creation of immunity for anonymous tipsters. The measure provides civil immunity to those persons who report criminal activity to a crime stoppers program, unless something about the reporting was intentionally negligent or done with “indifference or reckless disregard” for the safety or reputation of others.
* Imposition of increased penalty enhancement. The measure would impose a $5 enhancement to every fine, penalty, or forfeiture associated with criminal offenses. Of this increase, $3 would go to the crime stopper program in the jurisdiction in which the penalty assessment was levied and collected, and $2 would be directed to the state Crime Stoppers Fund created under this Act.
* Identification of appropriate uses for revenue. AB 2300 also specifies the specific activities for which revenue collected under this measure can be used. Such purposes include paying rewards, supporting hotline operations, public relations and marketing of local program efforts, and other purposes directly related to obtaining information on criminal activity.
The measure is currently awaiting hearing before the Assembly Public Safety Committee. We encourage counties to examine this measure and provide any feedback to CSAC staff.
Child Death Review Teams
SB 1668 (Bowen) — Support
CSAC has taken a support position on SB 1668, a measure by Senator Debra Bowen. This bill would set forth communication and information-sharing protocols related to information shared within or developed by child death review teams.
As detailed in a previous Bulletin, it is our understanding that the purpose of the measure is to make the communication and information-sharing protocols of child death review teams consistent with those of both elder and domestic violence death review teams. In the statutory language governing the creation and operation of elder and domestic violence death review teams, it is expressly stated that communications shared within or developed by the review team are confidential and not subject to either disclosure or discovery. Senator Bowen’s measure would simply apply these same disclosure standards to documentation and communication between a third party and a child death review team. SB 1668 would further clarify that upon the completion of a child death team review, the recommendations of the team may, at the discretion of a majority of team members, be disclosed.
Counties believe that this measure makes good policy sense. It simply permits child death review teams to benefit from communication and disclosure protocols that have proven successful in other similar settings. Counties are encouraged to review this measure and join in support. SB 1668 is set for its first policy committee hearing on March 28 in the Senate Public Safety Committee.
Public and Private Conservatorships
AB 1363 (Jones) – Request for Comment
AB 1363, a measure by Assembly Member Dave Jones, seeks to significantly reform the conservatorship and guardianship system. The author’s office convened a meeting of stakeholders in early February and appears very willing to consider modifications to the bill. CSAC, the County Counsels’ Association — who was on hand to offer technical advice and subject-matter expertise — as well as representatives of the California State Association of Public Administrators, Public Guardians, and Public Conservators participated in that discussion to assure that operational and fiscal impacts on counties were brought to the table. While CSAC appreciates the openness of the process thus far and the willingness of Assembly Member Jones and his staff to consider the input of interested parties, we remain concerned that the bill contemplates major new unfunded mandates for public administrators, guardians, and conservators.
As introduced, AB 1363, which would enact the Omnibus Conservatorship and Guardianship Reform Act of 2006, contained the following major elements:
· New licensing and regulations for professional conservators;
· Improvement of court oversight over conservators and guardians;
· Enhanced training and education of participants;
· Provision of assistance to non-professional conservators and guardians;
· Increased requirements of the Public Guardian; and
· Establishment of an Ombudsman within the Department of Aging.
A set of substantive amendments was released on March 21 that seek, in part, to address the input provided during the February stakeholder meeting. While CSAC staff has not had sufficient time to assess the full scope of the most recent draft, we understand that it continues to impose major new, unfunded mandates on counties. At this point, CSAC remains interested in continuing discussions on how to address county concerns and mitigate the major fiscal impact that the measure appears to contemplate. AB 1363 has been referred to two policy committees in the Senate – Business, Professions, and Economic Development, as well as the Judiciary Committee, but no hearing dates have been set. In the meantime, we continue to urge counties to review and analyze AB 1363; that input should be directed to Elizabeth Howard at ehoward@counties.org.
Family Violence Prevention / Family Justice Centers
SB 1599 (Ducheny) – Request for Comment
Counties are encouraged to review SB 1599, a measure by Senator Denise Ducheny, which would enact the California Family Violence Prevention and Public Safety Act of 2006. The measure is co-sponsored by the Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF), Prevent Child Abuse California, and the District Attorney Offices of Riverside and San Diego Counties. As currently drafted, the measure would permit (but not require) a county to raise fees on vital records (marriage and birth certificates, as well as death records) to support public safety and prevention programs aiming to reduce family violence and support community-based Family Justice Centers. CSAC’s Administration of Justice and Health and Human Services Policy Committees will receive a report on this effort from a representative from one of the bill’s sponsors, the FVPF. We understand that the measure is a work in progress and would encourage interested counties to get in touch with Elizabeth Howard (ehoward@counties.org), Kelly Brooks (kbrooks@counties.org) or Qiana Charles (qcharles@counties.org) for more information. SB 1599 now awaits hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION
|
|
|
Published by
The LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN is published weekly during the State Legislative Session by the California State Association of Counties, 1100 K Street, Suite 101, Sacramento, CA 95814.
|
|
|
| |
