To e Cai ni Legislatu Regula S in 2009-10 - Streetsblog San Francisco

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Summary of Significant Changes by Major Program Areas 46 • • • • of reoffending. Prohibit low and moderate risk offenders from being returned to prision for technical violations. Required the use of science-based, risk assessment instruments to determine appropriate sentences and expanded use of active GPS monitoring as a part of parole supervision tool. Credit Earning Changes — Enhanced sentence credits were put in place for time served in county jails while awaiting placement with CDCR, completing rehabilitative programs, placement on a waiting list to serve in a fire camp, and time served while being processed for return to custody due to parole violations. Reduce the Number of Felony Probationers Coming to Prison — A system of financial incentives for counties to reduce the number of failed felony probationers sent to state prison. Parolee Revocation Courts — Pilot program establishing parole reentry courts designed to prevent parole revocation and return to prison for parolees who would benefit from community drug treatment or mental health treatment. Cap Medical Rates — Limit hospital, physician, and ambulance service provider reimbursements rates at or slightly above the amount payable under the Medicare Fee Schedule. The significant General Fund budget solutions are as follows: • Reductions • Reduce Funding for Medical Services Program — A decrease of $811 million General Fund to the Receiver’s Medical Services Program budget to reduce per-inmate medical costs to a level comparable to other correctional health care programs. Currently, New York spends approximately $5,757 per inmate per year on health care, Pennsylvania approximately $4,418, and Florida approximately $4,720. In contrast, in 2008-09 California spent an average of $11,627 per inmate per year. This reduction will bring California’s per-inmate medical costs in line with New York’s costs and can be achieved without adversely impacting inmate care through a combination of measures including: reducing inmate over-utilization of the medical services program, reducing clinician salaries, reducing unnecessary referrals to outside providers and clinical specialists, increasing the utilization of telemedicine, reducing the ratio of clinical staff to inmates to levels comparable to other states, and reevaluating the classifications that provide medical services. Furthermore, other states have implemented more efficient correctional health care models that have enabled Governor’s Budget Summary 2010-11
• Summary of Significant Changes by Major Program Areas them to maintain lower costs than California. For example, Pennsylvania contracts for medical, psychiatric and pharmacy services, but utilizes civil servants for nursing, psychology and administrative services. Texas has a major contract with the University of Texas Medical Branch; Oregon utilizes state employees for practitioners but contracts with a third-party administrator, whereas Indiana contracts for all inmate medical services. The state will explore these alternatives as a means to provide appropriate inmate medical care in the most cost-effective manner possible. Jail Time Instead of Prison for Specified Felonies — A decrease of $291.6 million related to proposed statutory changes that would modify sentencing for specified non-serious, nonviolent, non-sex felonies, including drug possession, to be for one year punishable by imprisonment in local jails. Juvenile Offender Population Reform — A reduction of $41.3 million and $6.7 million Proposition 98 General Fund related to proposed statutory changes to reduce the juvenile offender population by restricting the age of jurisdiction to 21, transferring eligible offenders to adult institutions, and limiting time-adds. Federal Funds Obtain Federal Funds to Offset the Full Cost of Incarcerating Criminal Aliens — A decrease of $879.7 million, which is the estimated amount that the federal government fails to reimburse California each year for the cost of incarcerating undocumented immigrants who commit crimes. The budget assumes a vigorous and successful effort to obtain full reimbursement for the cost of incarcerating these inmates. Non-General Fund expenditures are proposed to decrease by $388.4 million, or 58.4 percent. The significant non-General Fund workload adjustments are as follows: • • • • • Reimbursement Authority Adjustment — A decrease of $358 million to reflect the expiration of ARRA funds received as reimbursements from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Local Public Safety Account Adjustment — An increase of $21.2 million Local Safety and Protection Account funds for allocation to counties that operate juvenile camps and ranches, pursuant to Chapter 4, Statutes of 2009, Third Extraordinary Session. Governor’s Budget Summary 2010-11 47
Page 1:
To e California Legislatu Regular S
Page 5: Dear Governor: DEPARTMENT OF FINANC
Page 9 and 10: Introduction In 2009, the United St
Page 11 and 12: 150,000 140,000 130,000 120,000 110
Page 13 and 14: Reforming the Federal-State Relatio
Page 15 and 16: Trigger Reductions and Revenues The
Page 17: The Governor’s Budget projects th
Page 20 and 21: Summary Charts 12 Figure SUM-01 201
Page 22 and 23: Summary Charts 14 Personal Income T
Page 24 and 25: Summary Charts 16 Corrections and R
Page 26 and 27: Summary of Significant Changes by M
Page 79 and 80: Economic Outlook Governor’s Budge
Page 81 and 82: 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% -2.0% -4.0% -6.
Page 83 and 84: California personal income fell sha
Page 85 and 86: Revenue Estimates The revenue estim
Page 87 and 88: Figure REV-01 displays the forecast
Page 89 and 90: General Fund Revenue General Fund 2
Page 91 and 92: The budget’s revenue estimates in
Page 93 and 94: and $4.456 billion in 2010-11. The
Page 95 and 96: Governor’s Budget Summary 2010-11
Page 97 and 98: Corporation Tax Corporation tax rev
Page 99 and 100: In 2008, $123.5 billion in taxable
Page 101 and 102: Property Taxes Article XIIIA of the
Page 103 and 104: Other Revenues Governor’s Budget
Page 105 and 106:
Chapter 322, Statutes of 1998 estab
Page 107:
containing 15 percent or less gasol
Page 111 and 112:
Appendices and Schedules
Page 113 and 114:
Statewide Financial Information Pro
Page 115 and 116:
Reference to Schedule General Fund
Page 117 and 118:
Fiscal Estate Alcoholic Motor Year
Page 119 and 120:
Positions subject to Administration
Page 121 and 122:
SCHEDULE 5B ACTUAL 2008-09 FISCAL Y
Page 123 and 124:
SCHEDULE 5D ESTIMATED 2010-11 FISCA
Page 125 and 126:
SCHEDULE 8 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF
Page 127 and 128:
SCHEDULE 8 -- Continued COMPARATIVE
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
SCHEDULE 9 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
SCHEDULE 10 -- Continued SUMMARY OF
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
SCHEDULE 11 STATEMENT OF GENERAL OB
Page 163 and 164:
SCHEDULE 12B REVENUES TO EXCLUDED F
Page 165 and 166:
SCHEDULE 12C NON-TAX REVENUES IN FU
Page 167 and 168:
From Corporations Fund, State (0067
Page 169 and 170:
Finance Glossary of Accounting and
Page 171 and 172:
Augmentation An authorized increase
Page 173 and 174:
Budget Revision (BR) A document, us
Page 175 and 176:
appeal to continue the positions. I
Page 177 and 178:
expenditure totals the amount of en
Page 179 and 180:
Fiscal Committees Committees of mem
Page 181 and 182:
Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO
Page 183 and 184:
Overhead Those elements of cost nec
Page 185 and 186:
(K-14) beginning with fiscal year 1
Page 187 and 188:
savings is estimated on the basis o
Page 189 and 190:
Senate The upper house of Californi
Page 191 and 192:
such that interference with a contr
show all

To e Cai ni Legislatu Regula S in 2009-10 - Streetsblog San Francisco

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?