The 2022-23 Budget: Governor’s Public Safety Package

2022-23 BUDGET The 2022-23 Budget: Governor’s Public Safety Package Summary In this brief, we provide an overview of the Governor’s package of public safety proposals, our assessment of these proposals, as well as recommendations and options for legislative consideration. Governor Proposes $179 Million in 2022-23 for Package of Public Safety Proposals. The Governor’s budget includes a total of $179 million General Fund in 2022-23 (declining to $22.5 million annually by 2026-27) to support nine different public safety proposals across multiple state departments. The goals of this package are to (1) reduce organized retail theft and mitigate harm on businesses that have been victims of such crimes; (2) reduce the presence of firearms, thereby reducing both violent crimes involving firearms and suicides; and (3) reduce other crimes, particularly drug-trafficking by transnational criminal organizations. Package Lacks Clear Objectives, Other Public Safety Goals Could Be Higher Priority. Overall, we find that the Governor’s package lacks clear objectives for achieving the intended public safety goals. We also find that the Legislature may determine that there are other public safety goals of higher priority than those put forward by the Governor, such as targeting the recent increase in some violent crimes—particularly involving firearms—rather than retail theft. Two Proposals Appear Reasonable, Others Raise Concerns. Related to the Governor’s nine proposals, we find that two of the proposals—a proposed $2 million ongoing General Fund augmentation to support the University of California Firearm Violence Research Center and $5 million ongoing General Fund to maintain the Department of Justice Task Force Program— appear reasonable. We identify concerns with the remaining seven proposals. Specifically, we find that (1) the Board of State and Community Corrections grant program proposals would provide the administration with significant implementation authority, (2) details on the grants to small business victims of retail theft are not yet available, and (3) certain proposals may not be structured to achieve their desired outcomes. Recommendations. We recommend the Legislature consider approving $7 million ongoing General Fund to support the two proposals that appear reasonable. For the remaining funding, we recommend the Legislature first consider whether public safety is a priority for additional funding relative to its other budget priorities. If public safety is a priority, we recommend that the Legislature consider how to allocate the remaining funding by determining its specific highest-priority public safety goals, specifying clear objectives, and providing funding in a manner that ensures its goals and objectives are achieved. To assist the Legislature with its deliberations, we provide various options—such as those that expand upon existing programs or are based on research—that the Legislature could take to the extent it prioritizes addressing specific crime-related public safety goals. GABRIEL PETEK | LEGISLATIVE ANALYST FEBRUARY 2022 www.lao.ca.gov 1 2022-23 BUDGET INTRODUCTION As part of his proposed budget plan for 2022-23, of public safety proposals, some overarching the Governor proposes a package of nine different issues for legislative consideration, and our public safety proposals broadly aimed at reducing assessment of the Governor’s proposals, as crime—particularly organized retail theft—and the well as recommendations and options for presence of firearms and illegal drugs. This brief legislative consideration. provides an overview of the Governor’s package GOVERNOR’S PROPOSED PACKAGE The proposed budget includes a total of suicides; and (3) reduce other crimes, particularly $179 million General Fund in 2022-23 (declining to drug-trafficking by transnational criminal $22.5 million annually by 2026-27) across multiple organizations. Figure 1 provides an overview of the state departments to support the implementation specific proposals in the Governor’s public safety of the Governor’s public safety package. Based package, which we describe in more detail below. on our conversations with the administration and review of budget documents provided by PROPOSALS ADDRESSING the administration, it is our understanding that ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT the Governor’s proposed package is intended to Chapter 803 of 2018 (AB 1065, Jones-Sawyer) address multiple goals. Specifically, the Governor established organized retail theft as a specific aims to (1) reduce organized retail theft and mitigate crime that involves working with other people to harm on businesses that have been victims of such steal merchandise with an intent to sell it, knowingly crimes; (2) reduce the presence of firearms, thereby receiving or purchasing such stolen merchandise, reducing both violent crimes involving firearms and or organizing others to engage in these activities. Figure 1 Overview of Governor’s Proposed Public Safety Package (In Millions) 2026-27 and Department 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 Ongoing Proposals Addressing Organized Retail Theft Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program BSCC $85.0 $85.0 $85.0 — — Vertical Prosecution Grant Program BSCC 10.0 10.0 10.0 — — CHP Organized Retail Crime Task Force Expansion CHP 6.0 6.0 6.0 $10.5 $15.0 DOJ Organized Retail Crime Enterprises Program DOJ 6.0 6.0 6.0 0.4 0.5 Grants to Small Business Victims of Retail Theft GO-Biz 20.0 — — — — Proposals Addressing Firearms Gun Buyback Grant Program BSCC $25.0 — — — — UC Firearm Violence Research Center UC 2.0 $2.0 $2.0 $2.0 $2.0 Proposals Addressing Drug Trafficking and Other Crime Counterdrug Task Force Program Expansion CMD $20.0 — — — — DOJ Task Force Program DOJ 5.0 $5.0 $5.0 $5.0 $5.0 Totals $179.0 $114.0 $114.0 $17.9 $22.5 BSCC = Board of State and Community Corrections; CHP = California Highway Patrol; DOJ = Department of Justice; GO-Biz = Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development; CMD = California Military Department 2 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET Depending on the circumstances of the crime, CHP ORCTF Expansion ($6 Million). people who commit organized retail theft may In 2019, the state established three CHP ORCTFs be charged with other related crimes, such as that operate in the greater Bay Area and portions burglary, robbery, receiving stolen property, fraud, of Southern California. These three task forces or conspiracy. Below, we describe the specific are currently supported with $5.6 million General proposals in the Governor’s package intended to Fund annually, which is scheduled to expire expand on the state’s efforts to address organized in 2026-27. The Governor’s budget proposes retail theft. $6 million annually through 2024-25 (increasing Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant to $10.5 million in 2025-26 and $15 million in Program ($85 Million). The Governor’s budget 2026-27 and ongoing) for CHP to make the three proposes $85 million annually from 2022-23 existing ORCTFs permanent and establish two new through 2024-25 for the Board of State and permanent ORCTFs in the Fresno and Sacramento Community Corrections (BSCC) to administer a areas. Due to CHP’s high officer vacancy rate, the new competitive grant program to support local proposal assumes that these new task forces will law enforcement agencies in preventing retail be operated by existing officers working overtime theft and enforcing theft-related laws. Proposed for at least three years. After that time, the new provisional budget language specifies that priority ORCTFs would be operated using dedicated staff “shall be given to localities that do not have a rather than overtime. designated CHP task force and that have the Department of Justice (DOJ) Organized largest increases in theft-related crimes over Retail Crime Enterprises (ORCE) Program a three-year period based on the most recent ($6 Million). The Governor’s budget proposes available data.” According to the administration, $6 million annually from 2022-23 through 2024-25 this language is intended to prioritize grant funds (declining to $500,000 annually beginning in for law enforcement agencies in the Fresno and 2026-27) for a new program to pursue ORCE Sacramento areas where the Governor proposes to investigations and prosecutions. Specifically, establish two new California Highway Patrol (CHP) the proposed resources for the first three years Organized Retail Crime Task Forces (ORCTFs), as would support 28 positions—15 positions to discussed further below. (ORCTFs consist of CHP pursue ORCE investigations and 13 positions officers who collaborate with local law enforcement and legal resources to prosecute resulting ORCE agencies and prosecutors in specified regions to cases. The ORCE investigators plan to focus on support investigation and prosecution of organized complex, multi-jurisdictional organized retail theft retail crime.) crime networks for fraud, tax evasion, and other Vertical Prosecution Grant Program white-collar crimes. These investigators would ($10 Million). The Governor’s budget proposes coordinate with federal, state, local, and retail $10 million annually from 2022-23 through 2024-25 partners as well as coordinate data collection for BSCC to administer a new competitive grant and information. The annual funding after the first program for district attorneys to fund vertical three years would support one sworn DOJ agent prosecution of organized retail theft. Vertical who currently participates in the existing CHP prosecution is a strategy in which the same ORCTFs. (The position is currently funded with attorney is responsible for all aspects of a case limited-term funding.) from arraignment to disposition. According to Grants to Small Business Victims of Retail the administration, funding would be prioritized Theft ($20 Million). The Governor’s budget for district attorney offices that have attorneys proposes $20 million one time for the Governor’s dedicated to the existing and proposed CHP Office of Business and Economic Development ORCTFs. The administration believes that vertical (GO-Biz) to administer grants to small businesses prosecution would provide for greater consistency victimized by smash-and-grab robberies or throughout prosecution of cases and the that have suffered damage caused during retail opportunity for attorneys to develop expertise in theft incidents. prosecuting organized retail theft. www.lao.ca.gov 3 2022-23 BUDGET PROPOSALS PROPOSALS ADDRESSING DRUG ADDRESSING FIREARMS TRAFFICKING AND OTHER CRIMES Gun Buyback Grant Program ($30 Million). Counterdrug Task Force Program Expansion The Governor’s budget provides $25 million one ($20 Million). The Governor’s budget provides a time in 2022-23 to BSCC for competitive grants to $20 million one-time General Fund augmentation local law enforcement agencies to support local to the California Military Department (CMD) for gun buyback programs. Such programs typically its existing Counterdrug Task Force Program. provide individuals with a safe place to dispose of This program, which currently receives $27 million firearms, with no questions asked, and may provide annually in federal funds, provides support to local a financial incentive to encourage people to bring in law enforcement agencies in areas known to have their firearms for disposal. Local law enforcement high levels of drug trafficking. The administration agencies receiving grants would be required to indicates that requests for assistance from local provide a 10 percent match for any awarded state law enforcement have far exceeded CMD’s level of funds. According to the administration, the intent of ongoing funding. Accordingly, the proposal would these local gun buyback programs is to safely get allow CMD to fulfill in 2022-23 more of the requests guns off the street and dispose of them as well as it receives from local law enforcement. promote awareness of gun and youth violence. DOJ Task Force Program ($5 Million). University of California (UC) Firearm As of August 2021, the DOJ Task Force Program Violence Research Center (UCFC) ($2 Million). included eight task forces around the state. In 2016, state law authorized the creation of These task forces, which generally consist of a the UCFC at UC Davis to conduct research into DOJ commander and various federal and/or local the causes, consequences, and prevention of law enforcement participants, typically focus on firearm-related violence. In 2019, state law further more serious or complex criminal investigations— directed the UCFC to develop education and such as complex homicides or violent crimes, training programs for medical and mental health drug smuggling networks, or transnational gangs. providers on the prevention of firearm-related Specific activities depend on the priorities of the injury and death—including suicide and homicide task force participants, but generally focus on prevention strategies as well as intervention regional needs. These task forces are supported tools (such as gun violence restraining orders by state, local, and federal funds, with each task and mental health interventions). The Governor’s force participant’s employing agency typically budget proposes a $2 million ongoing General paying for their participant’s salary and associated Fund augmentation to support research conducted costs. For example, the state typically pays for the by the UCFC—increasing total General Fund salary and associated costs (such as equipment) support for the center from $1 million to $3 million. of the DOJ commander. The Governor’s budget The proposed increase would support additional proposes $5 million annually to support existing research and education topics. The UCFC DOJ costs—not covered by other fund sources— indicates such topics could include researching that are associated with the department’s eight the effectiveness of gun violence restraining orders task forces. According to DOJ, these costs are and community violence-intervention programs in currently supported by existing funding in its preventing violence. budget associated with vacant positions. (When positions approved in the budget go unfilled, the funding received by departments associated with the positions is often redirected by departments for other purposes.) According to DOJ, this funding will no longer be available as it expects to fill the vacant positions. 4 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET OVERARCHING ISSUES FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION In this section, we identify two overarching identify the specific actions to pursue with limited issues for the Legislature to consider as it evaluates resources. For example, if the objective is to the Governor’s public safety package. Specifically, arrest individuals engaged in basic shoplifting or we find (1) the Governor’s overall plan lacks clear organized retail theft at a low level of sophistication, objectives for achieving the intended public safety the use of video surveillance cameras could be goals and (2) the Legislature may determine that an effective use of state resources. In contrast, if there are other public safety goals that are of higher the objective is to dismantle criminal organizations priority than those put forward by the Governor. engaged in organized retail theft, employing complex operations to uncover individuals who are LACK OF CLEAR OBJECTIVES running theft rings, as opposed to those they hire MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO ASSESS or exploit to shoplift for them, could be an effective use of state resources. GOVERNOR’S PLAN As mentioned earlier, the Governor’s proposed OTHER PUBLIC SAFETY GOALS public safety package is intended to achieve the MAY BE OF HIGHER PRIORITY goals of reducing crime—particularly organized While pursuing the specific goals of the retail theft—and the presence of firearms and illegal Governor’s proposed public safety package may drugs. However, the Governor has not specified be worthwhile, there could be other goals related clear and specific objectives for achieving each to public safety that the Legislature deems to be goal. The absence of such objectives makes it of higher priority. Below, we provide data related difficult for the Legislature to determine the extent to recent crime trends and firearms to help the to which each of the Governor’s nine funding Legislature identify its highest-priority public proposals would help meet the identified goals. safety goals. Having clear objectives would also help facilitate future oversight of those proposals that the Crime Trends Legislature ultimately decides to approve. This is DOJ collects data on crimes reported to law because the expected outcomes of each proposal enforcement agencies throughout California. should be tied to specific objectives. Otherwise, it While these data underestimate the total number is unclear how to measure the effectiveness of the of crimes that have occurred (as they do not reflect proposals and determine whether they should be unreported and certain types of crime), they provide continued in the future. useful metrics for tracking changes in crime rates For example, one of the Governor’s three goals over time. The most recent available year of data is to reduce organized retail theft. The types of is 2020. However, analysis by the Public Policy criminal activities related to organized retail theft Institute of California (PPIC) of preliminary data on can range from two people working together to certain crimes from four large cities (Los Angeles, steal merchandise and return it for store credit to Oakland, San Diego, and San Francisco) covering a criminal organization that exploits marginalized the first ten months of 2021 gives an early indication people to steal on its behalf and sells the stolen of 2021 crime rate trends. merchandise through online marketplaces. Crime Has Fluctuated During the Pandemic As such, there are essentially numerous ways to Yet Remains Well Below Historical Levels. potentially reduce organized retail theft. However, During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, without clear and specific objectives it is difficult California’s total crime rate—consisting of to determine which of the various criminal activities both property and violent crime—declined by related to organized retail theft to target and to www.lao.ca.gov 5 2022-23 BUDGET 6 percent between 2019 and 2020—from 2,724 to reporting shoplifting due to a sense that individuals 2,552 crimes per 100,000 residents. While the exact will not be sufficiently held accountable as a result causes of this decline are not clear, experts have of Proposition 47 (2014), which generally reduced suggested it could be associated with businesses the punishment for shoplifting. However, it is being closed and people staying home in response unknown what effect—if any—Proposition 47 has to public health orders. However, preliminary had on the quality of shoplifting data. (Please see 2021 data suggest that the total crime rate may be the nearby box for more information on the effects returning to pre-pandemic levels. From a historical of Proposition 47 on crime rates and crime data.) perspective, such a potential increase in crime Recent Increase in Motor Vehicle-Related is occurring in the context of a major long-term Theft. Between 2019 and 2020, thefts of motor decline in crime rates. As shown in Figure 2, vehicles increased by 20 percent (from 352 to between 1980 (when the total crime rate peaked) 422 per 100,000 residents) and thefts of motor and 2020, the state’s total crime rate declined by vehicle accessories (such as catalytic converters) about 67 percent. Moreover, the property crime rate increased by 26 percent (from 138 to 174 per is at the lowest level ever recorded since reliable 100,000 residents). Moreover, preliminary 2021 data data collection started in 1960. show motor vehicle theft may be further increasing. Limited Retail Theft-Related Data Does We note that this increase in motor vehicle thefts Not Show Substantial Increases. There are no was not unique to California. Preliminary 2021 data official crime statistics that report all retail theft from 27 cities across the United States show a separately from other types of crime in California. 14 percent increase in motor vehicle theft between Specifically, while retail theft can occur in the 2020 and 2021. form of burglary, robbery, embezzlement, and various other types of crimes— the numbers of these crimes that occur at retail establishments is Figure 2 not officially tracked statewide. Current Crime Rates However, shoplifting—a subset of Remain Well Below Historical Levels retail theft—is tracked. DOJ data Per 100,000 Population show a 29 percent decrease in shoplifting—from 226 to 161 per 100,000 residents—between 2019 9,000 and 2020. Some unknown portion of this decrease is likely associated 8,000 with retail establishments being Total 7,000 closed in response to COVID-19 public health orders. Preliminary 6,000 2021 data indicate that total larceny 5,000 theft—which generally includes Property stealing from retail establishments, 4,000 non-retail establishments, and 3,000 private individuals—may be increasing in 2021, but as of 2,000 October 2021 had not returned to Violent 1,000 pre-pandemic levels. We note that public concerns have been raised about the 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 quality of reported shoplifting data, primarily due to retailers not 6 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET Notable Increase in Homicides and Crime Rates Vary by Region. We note that Aggravated Assaults. As shown in Figure 3 on statewide crime trends may not be representative the next page, between 2019 and 2020, California of certain regions of the state. According to an experienced a 31 percent increase in homicides— analysis by PPIC, the 2020 violent crime rate in the from 4.2 to 5.5 homicides per 100,000 residents— San Joaquin Valley was more than double that in the largest increase since reliable record keeping the southern and border regions. In addition, the began in 1960. In addition, between 2019 and property crime rate in the Bay Area was nearly 2020, aggravated assault increased by 9 percent— double that in the Sierra region. from 262 to 285 crimes per 100,000 residents. Potential Public Safety Goals Based on Preliminary 2021 data shows that both homicides Crime Trends. To the extent the Legislature and aggravated assaults may be increasing again in wants to prioritize crime reduction as proposed 2021. These increases observed in California mirror by the Governor, the above data suggest that the nationwide trends. However, while the increases Governor’s specific goals may not be well targeted. are concerning, we note that the rate of homicide For example, the limited data on retail theft does and aggravated assault remain well below historical not appear to support a conclusion that retail theft levels, similar to the total crime rate. Specifically, is a significant problem in the state. Accordingly, the 2020 homicide rate is 62 percent lower than its the Legislature could choose to instead peak in 1980 and the 2020 aggravated assault rate target homicide, aggravated assault, or motor is 55 percent lower than its peak in 1992. vehicle-related theft given the recent increases in Effects of Proposition 47 Proposition 47 Changed Sentencing Related to Shoplifting. Prior to the passage of Proposition 47 in 2014, stealing from a commercial establishment could be charged as commercial burglary, regardless of the value of merchandise stolen. Because commercial burglary is a wobbler, this meant that people who shoplifted (or attempted to shoplift) could be convicted of a felony, regardless of the value of merchandise involved. (Wobbler crimes can be punished as either a felony or a misdemeanor.) Proposition 47, created the crime of shoplifting, which consists of stealing (or entering a commercial establishment with the intent to steal) property worth $950 or less. Unless the person has certain prior convictions, the punishment for shoplifting is limited to a misdemeanor under Proposition 47. Impact of Proposition 47 on Property Crime Unclear Based on Existing Research. According to research conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) on the impact of Proposition 47 on crime, there is some evidence that the implementation of the proposition increased property crime. While Proposition 47 was found to have no apparent impact on burglaries or auto thefts, PPIC concluded that it may have contributed to a rise in larceny thefts, particularly thefts from motor vehicles. PPIC found no evidence that Proposition 47 increased violent crime. However, researchers at the University of California, Irvine, concluded that Proposition 47 had no statistically significant effect on either violent or property crime. Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime Data Unknown. Some concerns have been raised that reported crime statistics may not fully represent the impact of Proposition 47 on crime. Since statute and law enforcement practices typically require a higher threshold to support arrest and/or booking for misdemeanors as compared to wobblers, there are concerns that Proposition 47 limited the ability of law enforcement to arrest and book people into jail for the crimes it reduced from wobblers to misdemeanors. This has resulted in concerns that retailers have become less inclined to report such crimes because they do not think offenders will be held sufficiently accountable. However, the extent to which this is occurring is unknown. www.lao.ca.gov 7 2022-23 BUDGET these crimes. We note, however, that some experts Increase in Number of Armed and Prohibited and retailers report observing an increase in the Persons. The state’s Armed and Prohibited criminal sophistication of shoplifters and the level Persons System (APPS) identifies individuals of brazenness and violence involved in incidents of who legally purchased or registered firearms, theft. This could warrant concern even if the total but subsequently became prohibited from number of incidents has not changed. In addition, owning or possessing them. These “armed and crime rates tend to vary by region and type of prohibited persons” include those convicted of crime. Thus, while crimes like retail theft may not felonies and some misdemeanors, found by a be of significant concern statewide, targeting such court to be a danger to themselves or others crimes in those areas where they are of significant due to mental illness, or have a restraining concern could merit legislative consideration. order against them. From 2008 to 2021, the Alternatively, given that the total crime rate is number of such persons more than doubled— currently quite low relative to historical standards, from 10,266 to 23,598 individuals. Individuals the Legislature may want to prioritize public safety are generally removed from this list when law goals not directly related to reducing crime. Such enforcement reports they no longer possess goals could include better addressing the mental their firearms (such as if a police department health or housing needs of individuals involved with seized them). the criminal justice system. Firearms Figure 3 Recent Increase in Firearm Notable Increase in Deaths. As shown in Figure 4, Homicides and Aggravated Assaults in 2020 total firearm-related deaths Per 100,000 Population increased from 2,925 deaths in 2019 to 3,428 deaths in 2020— 6 an increase of 503 deaths (or 17 percent). Of this amount, 5 homicide firearm deaths increased 4 from 1,246 deaths in 2019 to Homicides 3 1,731 deaths in 2020—an increase of 485 deaths (or 39 percent). 2 In contrast, while there are slight 1 fluctuations over the past decade, suicide firearm deaths were roughly the same in 2019 (1,586 deaths) 300 and 2020 (1,552 deaths). 250 Increased Role of Firearms Aggravated Assault in Crime. As discussed above, 200 California experienced a concerning increase in homicides 150 and aggravated assaults between 100 2019 and 2020. In a July 2021 analysis of violent crime in 50 large California counties, PPIC found that the share of crimes 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 involving guns increased for homicides, aggravated assaults, and robberies. 8 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET Potential Public Safety Goals Related to Firearms. In view of Figure 4 the above data, the Legislature could consider prioritizing certain Firearm-Related Deaths Increased in 2020 firearm-related goals. Specifically, the Legislature could consider 4,000 Other addressing (1) the growth in Suicide homicide firearm deaths or (2) the 3,500 Homicides increase in the share of homicides, 3,000 aggravated assaults, and robberies that involve firearms. Additionally, 2,500 the Legislature could consider targeting the removal of firearms 2,000 from armed and prohibited persons—particularly those who 1,500 are prohibited due to mental illness 1,000 or restraining orders. Research suggests that firearm prohibitions 500 associated with mental illness may decrease violent crime and those 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 associated with domestic violence restraining orders may decrease total and firearm-related intimate partner homicides. ASSESSMENT OF GOVERNOR’S SPECIFIC PROPOSALS While the above section focuses on overarching UCFC Research Could Help Inform Future issues for the Legislature to consider as it reviews State Actions in Addressing Firearm Issues. the Governor’s overall public safety package, this Firearm research has historically been constrained section provides our assessment of the nine specific for decades—most notably by a prohibition on proposals within the proposed package. While we certain federal funding being used to advocate or find that two of the proposals appear reasonable, promote gun control that has been in place since we identify several concerns with the remaining 1996. While this prohibition was relaxed slightly in seven proposals. Specifically, we find that (1) the recent years, it has generally left a gap in available BSCC grant program proposals would provide research. As such, providing additional funding to the administration with significant implementation UCFC could help address this gap by generating authority, (2) details on the grants to small business research that could be used by the state to victims of retail theft are not yet available, and determine how best to address firearm violence, (3) certain proposals may not be structured to injury, or other related issues effectively in the achieve their desired outcomes. future. For example, UCFC indicates that it plans to research topics including identifying risk factors TWO PROPOSALS for future violence among authorized firearms APPEAR REASONABLE purchasers and assessing the effectiveness of California’s firearm regulations in preventing We find that two of the Governor’s public safety firearm violence. proposals—the $2 million augmentation for UCFC and the $5 million to maintain the existing task forces in DOJ’s Task Force Program—appear reasonable. www.lao.ca.gov 9 2022-23 BUDGET DOJ Task Force Program Facilitates More BSCC GRANT PROPOSALS Complex Investigations With Both Regional PROVIDE ADMINISTRATION and Statewide Benefits. Because each SIGNIFICANT IMPLEMENTATION agency that participates in the DOJ Task Force Program typically pays for the costs of their own AUTHORITY participants, there is incentive to ensure each The Governor’s package provides the regional task force focuses on investigating administration with significant authority in the those crimes that are of highest priority to all implementation of the organized retail theft participating members—likely the most pressing prevention, vertical prosecution, and gun buyback and/or complex criminal issues in the region. grant programs. While the administration proposes Each task force also benefits from the different some budget provisional language with broad resources and expertise of each participating parameters, the specific implementation details agency, which allows the pursuit of more complex would be left for BSCC to determine sometime or multi-jurisdictional cases. This collaboration after the budget is enacted. This is problematic as allows for benefits or outcomes that may not have it significantly limits legislative input and oversight otherwise been achieved without great cost or if in various ways and could lead to unintended the participating agencies worked in isolation from consequences, as described in more detail below. one another. For example, a local law enforcement Unclear How Funding Would Be Allocated agency may not be able to afford to dedicate and Used. Given that the Governor proposes to sufficient resources to pursue complex cases give significant authority to BSCC to implement at the expense of more routine patrol activities. the three grant program proposals, it is unclear Moreover, since the state only supports DOJ’s how the grant funding would be allocated. costs associated with the task forces and not According to the administration, after the budget is those of the participating agencies, the Governor’s enacted, BSCC would convene Executive Steering proposal appears to be a cost-effective method Committees—composed of board members, content for the state and local governments to continue area experts, practitioners, and other stakeholders— addressing more complex investigations that have and receive public comment in order to determine both regional and statewide benefits. how funding will be allocated. As such, it is unclear As noted above, the state’s share of costs how the proposed funding would be targeted or related to DOJ’s Task Force Program has been prioritized, whether there would be minimum or supported using funding associated with vacant maximum grant amounts for a single applicant, positions that DOJ expects will no longer be and what metrics or outcomes would be collected. available as vacant positions are filled. To the It is also unclear how the grant programs would be extent the DOJ Task Force Program is a priority, administered—such as what information would be ongoing General Fund resources—as proposed required in a grant application and the criteria that by the Governor—would provide a stable source will be used to determine which applications will be of funding. For budget transparency purposes, approved. Without this information, it is difficult for the Legislature may want DOJ to report in budget the Legislature to determine whether the proposed hearings on how it would use the vacant position funding will be allocated equitably or accountably. funding currently supporting the DOJ Task Force For example, the Legislature may want to know Program if this proposal is approved and the whether BSCC would prioritize funding for applicants vacant positions are not filled as planned. If these who are disproportionately impacted. activities are not a priority for the Legislature, it Difficult to Assess Whether Programs Will could choose to reduce DOJ’s budget accordingly. Be Effective. The lack of details on how the BSCC grant funding would be allocated and used makes it difficult for the Legislature to assess whether programs are structured in the most effective manner, what outcomes could be achieved, and how likely the Governor’s proposals are to 10 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET be successful. For example, if the goal of the gun LACK OF DETAIL ON GRANTS TO buyback program is specifically to reduce firearm SMALL BUSINESS VICTIMS OF crime-related violence, research suggests that such RETAIL THEFT programs are more effective if they require firearms be working in order to receive an incentive, prioritize The administration indicates the budget trailer the types of firearms used in crimes (such as newer language for the small business grant program firearms or semiautomatic pistols), and/or focus is forthcoming and will provide more specific on the types of individuals or locations more prone details on the allocation and use of the small to firearm violence. However, it is unclear whether business grant program monies. As a result, key BSCC will ensure the gun buyback program is questions about the program remain unanswered. structured effectively. For example, it is unclear what damages are eligible to be covered by the small business grants and Similarly, the organized retail theft prevention how GO-Biz will verify the amount of damages grants to local law enforcement are competitive claimed by an applicant. This could mean that state grants that can be used to support any activities funds could be used to pay for damages that may that prevent retail theft or enforce theft-related laws. otherwise be covered by insurance or inadvertently The breadth of the existing language means that reward retailers that took few precautions against there are numerous possibilities for how the money theft. (For more information on this proposal, please ultimately could be used. A large portion of the see The 2022-23 Budget: Governor’s Office of funding could go to increasing law enforcement patrol Business and Economic Development Proposals.) of retail locations or to participate in task forces, instead of other activities such as the purchase of CERTAIN PROPOSALS NOT cameras or other technology that could achieve different outcomes and/or be a more effective use of STRUCTURED TO EFFECTIVELY limited-term funding. ACHIEVE DESIRED OUTCOMES Supplantation of Local Funding Possible. We find that some of the remaining proposals The broad budget provisional language allowing are not structured in a way that would achieve the BSCC to determine most implementation details Governor’s desired outcomes. In many cases, it is could result in the supplantation of local funding. because the proposed programs may not be the Law enforcement agencies and district attorney responsibility of the most appropriate administrative offices have an incentive to investigate and prosecute entity or are not targeted appropriately. We discuss certain theft crimes—particularly if there is an a couple examples below. ongoing local surge in such crimes—as this impacts CHP ORCTF Expansion Could Face the local economy and is frequently a concern of Challenges. If the state is interested in targeting local constituents. This means that local agencies organized theft coordinated by criminal gangs or have a strong incentive to redirect resources networks, DOJ could be a better entity than CHP to internally to make the investigation and prosecution administer such task forces. This is because of such crimes a priority—even if the state does not DOJ has existing expertise in operating dedicated specifically provide resources to do so. Accordingly, task force teams as well as managing task forces any state funds that are provided to local agencies that consist of federal, state, and local partners. under the Governor’s proposed package might not Additionally, DOJ employs both law enforcement change the amount they would otherwise spend investigative personnel as well as attorneys who addressing such crimes. However, it is unclear can more easily work together to successfully whether BSCC will take steps to avoid this, such as investigate and prosecute cases. Furthermore, requiring locals to provide matching funds. While CHP currently does not have the ability to dedicate it is possible that BSCC ultimately addresses this full-time sworn officers to the two new ORCTFs concern upon actual implementation, specific budget proposed by the Governor due to a high vacancy language to prevent it from occurring would increase rate. The requested funding would instead go the likelihood the monies are used effectively. to support overtime to pay for patrol officers to www.lao.ca.gov 11 2022-23 BUDGET conduct increased enforcement in the initial three of illegal drugs, by increasing CMD’s capacity to years. This may not be the most effective way to respond to local law enforcement requests for operate a task force as the patrol officers likely support. However, according to the administration, would not be able to fully focus on addressing retail the vast majority of local law enforcement requests theft in the same manner as full-time dedicated tend to involve targeting illegal cannabis cultivation officers. This could then impact the outcomes that and trafficking rather than illegal drugs linked can be achieved in the near term. to overdose deaths. Accordingly, as currently CMD Counterdrug Task Force Program structured, the proposal is likely to have little effect Expansion May Not Address Overdose Deaths. on overdose deaths. Addressing illegal cannabis The Governor’s proposal seeks additional resources cultivation and trafficking is a reasonable statewide to reduce opioid overdoses, as well as crimes and goal. However, if the state is interested in reducing violence related to the smuggling and distribution overdose deaths, this proposal would likely not be an effective way to do so. RECOMMENDATIONS CONSIDER APPROVING a priority for additional funding relative to its other budget priorities. If public safety is a priority, we PROPOSALS THAT APPEAR recommend that the Legislature consider how to REASONABLE allocate the remaining funding ($172 million General UC Firearm Violence Research Center Fund in 2022-23) to address its highest-priority and DOJ Existing Task Force Funding. public safety goals. This could include addressing Two proposals—totaling $7 million ongoing specific aspects of crime (including those identified General Fund—merit legislative consideration by the Governor) or other areas of public safety relative to the Legislature’s overall budget priorities. (such as better equipping the criminal justice Specifically, we recommend the Legislature system to respond to individuals with mental health consider approving the proposal to provide needs). We also note that the Legislature could $2 million ongoing General Fund to the UCFC as the consider making changes to address public safety funding would address a research gap that could goals through the policy process. help the state determine how to effectively address Specify Clear Objectives and Weigh firearm violence in the future. We also recommend Trade-Offs. Once the Legislature determines its the Legislature consider approving the proposed goals, it will also want to specify the key objectives $5 million ongoing General Fund for the DOJ Task for each goal and identify specific actions to Force Program as the funding would maintain DOJ effectively achieve them. When considering the participation in its eight existing task forces. Such specific actions to pursue, the Legislature will task forces can be cost-effective ways of targeting want to weigh the relative trade-offs. For example, more complex or multi-jurisdictional criminal certain actions could require ongoing—rather than investigations that could have statewide benefits. one-time—General Fund resources to operate effectively, placing ongoing fiscal pressure on CONSIDER HIGHEST-PRIORITY the General Fund. Other actions could focus PUBLIC SAFETY GOALS FOR on providing resources to state entities, rather than local entities, in order to address statewide REMAINING FUNDING problems. Such actions could mean that local Determine Specific Goals. Given the concerns priorities may not be addressed. (In the next section raised above with the remaining proposals in of this brief, we provide options for the Legislature the Governor’s package, we recommend the to address crime-related public safety goals.) Legislature first consider whether public safety is 12 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET Ensure Goals and Objectives Are Achieved. on how the funding can be used or allocated, and Regardless of whatever actions the Legislature (4) the expected outcomes are clearly tied to key chooses to fund, it will be important to ensure objectives. Additionally, the Legislature will want to that the funding is provided in a way designed to ensure that it has sufficient oversight over the use achieve its goals and objectives. This includes of any provided funding. This can occur in various (1) ensuring that the appropriate entity receives ways, including requiring regular reports on how the the funding, (2) the funding is provided for clearly funding has been used or evaluations assessing the defined purposes, (3) there are specific guidelines effectiveness of programs that received funding. OPTIONS FOR ADDRESSING CRIME-RELATED PUBLIC SAFETY GOALS In this section, we provide various options that • Firearm Removal From Individuals the Legislature could take to the extent it prioritizes Immediately When They Become Prohibited. addressing specific crime-related public safety goals. Beginning in 2018, courts have been required Specifically, we discuss options including those to inform individuals upon conviction of a that expand on existing programs and are based felony or certain misdemeanors that they on research. must (1) turn over their firearms to local law Options to Expand Existing Programs. enforcement, (2) sell the firearms to a licensed The Legislature could consider expanding certain firearm dealer, or (3) give the firearms to a existing programs targeted at crime, particularly licensed firearm dealer for storage. Courts are those programs with subject matter and/or also required to assign probation officers to operational expertise that could be leveraged to report on what offenders have done with their address problems more effectively and quickly firearms. Probation officers are required to than establishing a new program. Using an existing report to DOJ if any firearms are relinquished to program can avoid duplication of effort as well as ensure the APPS armed and prohibited persons start-up challenges (such as taking time to identify list is updated. To the extent the Legislature and develop stakeholder relationships or to create would like to limit growth in the number of new operational processes) that would face a new armed and prohibited persons, providing program. Potential programs that the Legislature funding to local law enforcement agencies and could expand include: probation departments to ensure this process is followed can be effective as firearms would be • Gun Violence Reduction Program to Reduce surrendered at the time of conviction. Number of Armed and Prohibited Persons. • DOJ Resources Targeting Complex or As previously discussed, APPS identified nearly Organized Crime. If the Legislature wants 23,600 armed and prohibited persons as of to prioritize targeting organized crime or January 2021. The 2021-22 budget provided complex crime more broadly, it could provide $10 million one-time General Fund to DOJ’s funding for dedicated DOJ investigators and Gun Violence Reduction Program for competitive attorneys. DOJ special agents and attorneys grants to county sheriff’s departments to reduce have experience investigating and prosecuting the number of armed and prohibited persons complex cases and are best suited to by seizing firearms and ammunition from them. addressing multi-jurisdictional cases across To the extent the Legislature would like to further the state. DOJ also has experience working reduce the number of armed and prohibited with various local law enforcement agencies persons, it could provide additional funding to and other stakeholders. Finally, all staff are the Gun Violence Reduction Program and make within the same agency which allows for easier other law enforcement agencies (such as city coordination to successfully pursue such cases. police) eligible for grants. www.lao.ca.gov 13 2022-23 BUDGET • DOJ Task Force Program to Address Crimes beginning of the month (as is currently done for in Specific Jurisdictions. Certain crimes— CalFresh) reduced thefts from grocery stores including retail theft, motor vehicle-related theft, and violent crime in some cases. The 2021-22 or firearm violence—may disproportionately budget provided about $67 million annually impact certain jurisdictions. If the Legislature for three years for the California Violence prioritizes addressing this inequity, it could Intervention and Prevention Grant Program consider expanding DOJ’s Task Force Program (CalVIP) to provide competitive grants to (rather than expand CHP ORCTFs). This is cities and community-based organizations for because the task forces in DOJ’s Task Force evidence-based violence reduction initiatives. Program operate regionally and consist of In considering options for reducing violence, various law enforcement participants—including the Legislature could consider strategies that local law enforcement agencies—targeting the are different from those supported by CalVIP to highest-priority crimes in the area. Local law avoid duplication. enforcement would have incentive to participate • Research-Based Tools and Best Practices as costs would be shared with other task force to Address Retail Theft. To the extent the participants and the crimes being investigated Legislature aims to reduce retail theft, there directly impact the local community. The are a variety of research-based tools and best state also benefits as it does not bear the full practices that retailers can employ—often in cost of addressing such crimes. (We note the partnership with local law enforcement—to Legislature could alternatively target funding deter and detect theft. For example, strategically directly to specific jurisdictions to address placed surveillance cameras could help deter particular areas of increased crime.) theft by increasing the likelihood that individuals will be identified. Accordingly, the Legislature Research-Based Options could consider funding limited-term grants to The Legislature could consider options that help retailers and/or local law enforcement research has found to be effective at reducing crime invest in technology, infrastructure, training, or or certain types of crime. By pursing strategies that consulting services. This could help retailers have been found to be effective, the Legislature would better self-protect from theft and improve the increase the likelihood that its desired outcomes are sharing of crime data and evidence between achieved. Research-based options include: retailers and law enforcement. • Research-Based Interventions to Reduce Other Potential Options Community Violence. A panel of criminology, law, and public health experts assembled by the The Legislature could consider various other John Jay College of Criminal Justice recently options, such as those being tried in other reviewed existing research to identify policies jurisdictions. For example, some jurisdictions and programs found to reduce community operate partnerships between retailers, police, and violence without relying on police. Options prosecutors through which shoplifters identified by identified include place-based strategies retailers are required to complete a diversion program (such as improving lighting in public places) to avoid being prosecuted with a crime. Such and interventions to reduce substance use programs can be designed to help people understand (such as expanding access to substance use the harm that they cause when they shoplift as well disorder treatment). The panel also noted that as identify factors in their life that may be contributing policies or programs that mitigate financial to their behavior. This could help reduce shoplifting— stress on people, even from short-term whether by individuals working alone or by “boosters” income shocks, can reduce both violent hired by organized retail crime rings to shoplift on their and property crime. For example, several behalf. In another example, at least one California studies have found that spreading nutritional city has used GPS tracking devices in “bait” cars in benefit disbursements throughout the month order to reduce motor-vehicle thefts. Accordingly, as opposed to concentrating them at the the Legislature could consider funding a pilot to test these ideas. 14 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2022-23 BUDGET www.lao.ca.gov 15 2022-23 BUDGET LAO PUBLICATIONS This report was prepared by Caitlin O’Neil and Anita Lee (with assistance from Eunice Roh, Jason Constantouros, Jessica Peters, and Brian Weatherford), and reviewed by Drew Soderborg and Anthony Simbol. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) is a nonpartisan office that provides fiscal and policy information and advice to the Legislature. To request publications call (916) 445-4656. This report and others, as well as an e-mail subscription service, are available on the LAO’s website at www.lao.ca.gov. The LAO is located at 925 L Street, Suite 1000, Sacramento, California 95814. 16 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE