HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04201984 - X.3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: THOMAS POWERS, Supervisor, District No. 1 Contra
'Costa
DATE: March 19, 1984 :` J' .. County
SUBJECT: SUPPORT OF AB 3805, INTRODUCED BY ASSEMBLYMAN RICHARD ROBINSON,
DETAILING BY COUNTY THE ALLOCATION OF STATE JAIL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FUNDS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) a BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Support AB 3805 (Robinson) which details the allocation, by county, of Jail Capital Expendi-
ture Funds that may be provided by Proposition 16 and other State funds based upon the
Proposition 2 rankings and evaluation process.
BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION:
On February 14, Contra Costa County supported the allocation of Proposition 2 Jail Capital
Expenditure Funds according to an alternate distribution formula that would give partial
funding to all 19 counties submitting large project applications, including this County.
The Board of Corrections rejected such an allocation and, instead, voted six to three to
adopt the recommendations of its Evaluation Committee which funded only the six top ranked
counties and part of the seventh. This decision by the Board of Corrections has engendered
considerable controversy throughout the State since it does not address the pressing jail
needs of the 12 large project applicant counties below the funding line.
Counties responded to the Board of Corrections' action by starting a consensus-building
process involving all 19 large project counties (including those being recommended for
Proposition 2 funds) and the small project counties. The goal was to develop a funding
package that would permit all Proposition 2 applicants to meet their pressing jail needs
as identified in the Proposition 2 application and evaluation process.
The County Administrative Officers Association of California, through a committee, developed
a report that recommended (1) that the Proposition 2 recommendations of the Board be imple-
mented, and (2) that Proposition 16 money and $125 million of State General Funds be utilized
to fund the balance of the large project counties evaluated by the Board of Corrections,
including augmentations for Los Angeles and Alameda Counties, and that the small project
counties be further augmented by $9.4 million. The County Supervisors Association of
California sponsored a Statewide workshop at the San Francisco Airport on Wednesday, March 14.
That meeting was successful in developing a Statewide consensus of large and small project
counties which supported the CAO report mentioned above, with the further amendment of adding
another $35 million for small project counties. That report will be presented to the CSAC
Executive Committee at its Spring Conference for approval. This consensus is based on the
premise that the Proposition 2 planning process was a' lengthy and costly one for counties
and represented a substantive effort that ought to be recognized in any allocation of State
funds for county jails. ,
Crucial to implementing this agreement is Assembly Bill 3805 (Robinson) which details the
allocation supported at the March 14 CSAC meeting. This bill is being heard in the
Assembly Criminal Law and Public Safety Committee meeting on Wednesday, March 21, and it is
important that this Board support such legislation.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON -Q"-' '20 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
The Board also requested that its support for AB 3805 be communicated to
Assemblyman T. Bates and W. Baker, members of the Criminal Law and Public
Safety Committee .
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY Or AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.- n -i
2 12
CC: CJA (for distribution) ATTESTED 2Xg=� a p2 /!9eP--�
J.R. OLSSON. COUNTY CLERK
(� AND EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE BOARD
-moi iJl `y>'/__"/ - -----