In the past few weeks, fueled by a few egregious anecdotes, opponents of AB 109, the state’s realignment program that shifts custody in certain non-violent, non-dangerous cases from the state to the county, have asserted that the program has failed and produced a spike in crime.
However, an early study conducted by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) shows no such finding. According to a report release on Thursday, “One-year arrest rates are down and conviction rates are virtually static for offenders released after completing their state prison sentences post-Realignment.”
“For this Realignment Report, CDCR identified all offenders who had served their full sentence and were released from prison during the first six months after the implementation of realignment (October 2011 through March 2012),” the agency reported Thursday.
“Researchers then tracked the offenders, which include those released to state parole supervision and those released to county probation supervision, for one year to see if they were re-arrested, convicted of a new crime, or returned to state prison. CDCR then compared those results with all offenders released during October 2010 to March 2011 (pre-Realignment) and tracked them for one year in the same manner,” the report continued.
The critical findings show that post-realignment offenders were actually arrested at a lower rate than pre-realignment offenders – though the numbers were fairly simple, with 62 percent pre-realignment and 58.7 percent post-realignment. While the rate of recidivism is down slightly, it remains quite high.
The rate of post-realignment offenders convicted of new crimes is nearly the same as the rate of pre-realignment offenders convicted of new crimes (21.3 percent pre-realignment and 22.5 percent post realignment).
The one really key statistic is that post-realignment offenders returned to prison at a significantly lower rate than pre-Realignment offenders, an intended effect of realignment as most offenders are ineligible to return to prison on a parole violation (42 percent pre-realignment and 7.4 percent post-realignment).
The report notes, “Overall, this report shows that there is very little difference between the one-year arrest and conviction rates of offenders released pre- and post-realignment. However, the one-year return to prison rate was substantially less post-realignment, since most offenders in this cohort were ineligible to return to prison on a parole violation.”
In 2011, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill (AB) 109 and AB 117, what they say is “historic legislation that has helped enable California to close the revolving door of low-level inmates cycling in and out of state prisons.”
“For too long, the state’s prison system has been a revolving door for lower-level offenders and parole violators who are released within months-often before they are even transferred out of a reception center,” the governor said in a press release on April 5, 2011. “Cycling these offenders through state prisons wastes money, aggravates crowded conditions, thwarts rehabilitation, and impedes local law enforcement supervision.”
Last week, former Lt. Governor Abel Maldonado launched what may end up being a ballot initiative repealing realignment.
“I’m here to address an issue that threatens the lives of every Californian, an issue that is the most important issue in California in a generation,” Mr. Maldonado said. “It is an issue that affects the quality of life and the safety of every citizen of my home state of California. Today will be the beginning and the end of early release.”
Mr. Maldonado, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times, told the paper that this issue threatens the lives of Californians.
“This notion of families being afraid to go out on the street, being afraid of parking garages, families who are just afraid,” he said. “The governor uses a fancy word called realignment. At the end of the day, it’s early release…. A shell game is what it is.”
However, officials argue that this does not constitute an early release program.
CDCR Department Spokesperson Jeffrey Callison told the LA Times that they take issue with the term “early release,” stating instead, “There is no early release program called realignment. Realignment is not an early release program. There are no early releases as part of it.”
“Under California’s Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011, no offenders receive an early release from state prison,” said the press release on the CDCR’s report. “The law, which was passed by the Legislature in response to a federal court order to reduce California’s prison population, has achieved dramatic reductions by stemming the flow of low-level inmates and parole violators into prison.”
The release continues, “The intent of Realignment is to encourage counties to develop and implement evidenced-based practices and alternatives to incarceration to limit future crimes and reduce victimization.
“Prior to Realignment, more than 60,000 felon parole violators returned to state prison annually, with an average length of stay of 90 days. Beginning on October 1, 2011, most parole violations are now served in county jails. Also, offenders newly convicted of certain low-level offenses serve their time in county jail. Under another component of Realignment, inmates who have served their full state prison sentence for a non-serious, non-violent or non-sexual offense are now supervised upon their release by county probation rather than state parole. Realignment provides a dedicated, constitutionally protected, and permanent revenue stream to the counties.”
The Associated Press noted, “In its report, the corrections department did not address issues that have arisen at the county level since the realignment law took effect, including overcrowding in local jails that is leading many offenders to be released within days or weeks of being convicted. Local probation officers also are having a difficult time tracking sex offenders who disable or remove their electronic monitoring ankle bracelets, allowing many of them to operate without detection for days at a time.”
At the same time, critics have argued the early releases from county jails leave offenders with little fear that they will face significant punishment for committing new crimes.
Writes the AP, “That appeared to be reflected in the report, which found that offenders now are much more likely to be re-arrested multiple times. Nearly 5 percent of the parolees had six or more arrests in their first year, more than three times the previous rate.”
Finally, while the statistical analysis shows that the arrest rates are down, it does not assess the impact of placing a larger population out of custody at the same time.
At the same time, this might be a short-term phenomenon as a large amount of people had their status changed suddenly – changes that will not be occurring in the future.
Both the arrests and convictions declined as time went on under the new law, they found, but they cautioned that it is too soon to know if that trend will continue.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
