Fresno joins fight to ensure jail funds from state
By Kurtis Alexander
The Fresno Bee Wednesday, Jan. 04, 2012 | 10:17 PM
County leaders across California want to make sure the state keeps paying for the dramatic realignment of criminal justice that's put more inmates in county jails.
Communities such as Fresno have struggled with the new policy. Jail space has run short and probation officers are stretched thin, even with a shot of state cash in the current budget. And it's not guaranteed beyond this year.
Counties, however, remain at odds over how to get a financial commitment from the state. The disagreement threatens to sink their argument for state money, and some fear that counties will wind up with nothing.
Today, the California State Association of Counties decides whether to push for a ballot initiative that would constitutionally guarantee money for counties and their criminal-justice systems. At least a handful of counties, including Fresno and Los Angeles, don't want to see it succeed.
They say the proposed measure doesn't provide enough cash -- as little as 60% of what they need -- and they don't want to finance a political campaign.
Supporters, though, have urged the opposition to back down. They say having a guarantee of some money is better than no guarantee. And they say the cost of pursuing a ballot measure would more than pay for itself through future savings.
"I'll be surprised if it passes," said Fresno County Supervisor Henry Perea, who serves as Fresno County's representative to the California State Association of Counties. "While it makes sense at some level to protect the money we're getting, it's not enough. We're already taking in more prison population from the state than we thought and our jails are not equipped for this."
Perea said he plans to vote against pursuing the ballot initiative and instead will look for ways to scale back the new responsibilities that counties have been handed. His position follows a decision last month by the Fresno County Board of Supervisors to not support the measure.
CSAC's proposal, which would appear on the November ballot, would lock in funding for counties at the level they're getting now. It also would prevent the state from passing off more work to counties without paying for it.
The realignment started in October and has put counties in charge of managing low-level felons instead of the state. While no criminals are being directly transferred to the counties, the courts have begun sentencing more people to county jails, and county probation departments have begun supervising more of those freed from state prison.
The governor pushed for the change as a way to reduce state prison overcrowding.
This year's state budget includes funding for the realignment -- close to $400 million of projected vehicle license fees and sales tax -- but there's no guarantee the money will be there in future years.
CSAC President Mike McGowan, a Yolo County supervisor, said counties are stuck with their new responsibilities, so they might as well seek a commitment to fund them.
"You can be mad about realignment, but what happens then is you get stuck with it anyway and you don't have funding guarantees," he said. "Then you're right back where you started: trying to cajole money from the Legislature.
"Our biggest fear is that the governor and Legislature will shift work to us and not fund it."
The only viable option besides pursuing the county-backed measure, McGowan said, is to support Gov. Jerry Brown's ballot proposal.
Brown's measure, introduced last month, includes a similar guarantee of realignment money for counties. But its centerpiece is a tax hike to support education programs.
The new taxes are likely to make Brown's measure an even tougher sell.
McGowan and other top officials at CSAC have expressed concern about tying realignment funding to a more controversial proposal -- despite pleas from the governor to drop their measure and support his.
Already some counties have said they'll back the CSAC measure but not the governor's.
"We're uncomfortable with the taxes at this point with the economy in the shape it's in," said Jean Rousseau, Tulare County's administrative officer.
Last month, Tulare County supervisors took a position to support CSAC's measure.
"We want to secure at least some level of protection for the funding," Rousseau said.
As part of CSAC's plan for the ballot measure, counties would face higher association dues -- as much as a 40% increase for some counties for at least six years.
The money would not directly fund the ballot measure. But it would pay for other programs that CSAC's fundraising partner won't be able to afford when it finances a planned $6 million campaign for the measure.
A spokeswoman for Los Angeles County Supervisor Don Knabe, a representative to CSAC, said he has a problem asking counties to pay more.
"The counties aren't the ones who created this situation," said Knabe's spokeswoman, Cheryl Burnett. They shouldn't be the ones paying to get funding for it, she said.
Like in Fresno County, authorities in Los Angeles have complained that too little money is coming from the state for realignment.
Knabe will not support CSAC's ballot measure, his spokeswoman said.
Madera County Supervisor Frank Bigelow, a representative to CSAC, also cited the onus on counties to pay for the measure as a reason he wouldn't support it.
CSAC's measure was written in conjunction with the California State Sheriff's Association and the Chief Probation Officers of California. CSAC filed the measure in October and last week won approval to begin collecting signatures.
CSAC officials said they won't press forward until after today's meeting. The measure's fate could be put up for a vote, in which case every county would have a say.
"What's going to happen? I don't know. I really don't know. ... The counties are a mixed bag," McGowan said. But "the goal of protecting counties' interest won't change on my watch regardless of what's decided."
No comments:
Post a Comment