OLA#: 016-03A

LEGISLATIVE ANALYST REPORT

TO: Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors

FROM: Office of the Legislative Analyst

DATE: June 30, 2003

SUBJECT: Employee Suggestion #32: Booking Fees

EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION

The employee suggests that once booked a booking fee should be added to the arrestee's fines.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Under the following laws, the City and County of San Francisco (the "City") may recover booking costs only from convicted persons (not from all arrestees).

· Section 10.39-2 of the City's Administrative Code allows the court to order someone who has been convicted of a crime to pay all or part of the costs of his/her stay in county jail, depending on his or her ability to pay. This section specifically allows for the recovery of booking costs.

· Section 29550(c) of the State Government Code allows the court to order someone who has been convicted of a crime to pay a fee for the administrative costs of receiving him/her into county jail, also depending on his or her ability to pay. Booking costs are specifically included in this fee too.

The Director of Adult Probation is responsible for collecting monies ordered by the courts pursuant to these provisions of the law. The Department estimates that in FY 2003-2004 it will collect approximately $722,000 from various court fines and fees. Booking costs will most likely be small because Adult Probation recovers them only from convicted persons (not from all arrestees). Also, any monies collected by virtue of these laws are highly dependent upon court discretion and persons' ability to pay. Within this context, the Legislative Analyst believes that the City is probably already recovering most booking costs it is allowed to recover.

In addition, the Legislative Analyst found that currently the Juvenile Probation Department does not recover booking costs from convicted juveniles. The Board of Supervisors may wish to consider this option. A Chief Probation Officers of California survey on this issue to be discussed next month (July 15) may better inform this policy option.

ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS

All those arrested in the City and County of San Francisco are brought to County Jail #9, which serves as the Sheriff's intake and release center, for booking and processing. In 2002, the Sheriff booked 44,746 arrestees.

Local Law

Upon adoption of a local ordinance, when someone serves time in a county jail after conviction of a crime, the court may order the person to pay all or part of what it costs to keep him/her in jail, depending on his/her ability to pay.¹

In 1984, San Francisco voters approved Proposition J which amended the City's Administrative Code by adding Section 10.39-2 to allow the court to order someone who has been convicted of a crime to pay all or part of the costs of his/her stay in county jail, depending on his/her ability to pay. Jail costs are based upon a determination made by the county Sheriff of "the average per day costs of incarceration."

State Law

According to State law, the court may order someone who has been convicted of a crime to pay a fee for the administrative costs of receiving him/her into county jail, depending on his or her ability to pay.² The fee ordered to be paid may not exceed the "actual administrative costs" incurred in booking or processing arrested persons.

Cost Recovery

The Director of Adult Probation is responsible for collecting monies ordered by the courts pursuant to state and local provisions of the law and depositing them into the City's General Fund. The Department estimates that in FY 2003-2004 it will collect approximately $722,000 from various court fines and fees. Booking costs will most likely be small because Adult Probation recovers them only from convicted persons (not from all arrestees). Also, any monies collected by virtue of these laws are highly dependent upon court discretion and persons' ability to pay.

Notably, Government Code Section 29550 says a county may impose a fee upon a city for reimbursement of county expenses incurred with respect to the booking or other processing of persons arrested by city employees (i.e., Police) and brought to the county jail.³ Cities may in turn seek reimbursement for the fee from the State, up to a statewide annual appropriation of $50 million. However, the Mayor's Budget Office advises that for the Police Department to reimburse the county Sheriff for booking costs pursuant to this section is impractical, as San Francisco is both a city and county and departmental monies come from the same General Fund. Furthermore, the Mayor's Budget Office believes that the State would not reimburse San Francisco for such costs as the Government Code says only "cities and special qualified districts" (not city and county entities) are eligible for reimbursement.

San Mateo County

Pursuant to Government Code Section 29550, San Mateo County imposes a fee of $202 per booking upon police departments (i.e., cities) within its boundaries.

San Mateo County's booking fee is based on the actual cost to book an inmate into jail as determined by Maximus, an independent accounting firm. The fee computation consists of the jail's cost of booking services divided by the total annual number of bookings. For FY 2001-2002 the bookings total 17,053 (excluding the 2,904 DUI arrests). Resulting in a total cost of $202.25 per inmate. The fees are then finalized through a process of negotiation with the served agencies.

The fee is adjusted periodically for changes in the cost of living and other increases in labor and operating expenses associated with booking inmates. San Mateo County anticipates approximately $1.3 million in revenue for FY 2003-2004 from these fees.

Juvenile Probation

The Legislative Analyst found that currently the Juvenile Probation Department does not recover booking costs from convicted juveniles. The Board of Supervisors may wish to consider this option. According to the Department, no jurisdiction in California currently recovers these booking costs. Departmental staff advised the OLA that convicted youth have little to no income and booking costs would therefore need to be recovered from parents. There is some precedence in State law that makes parents responsible for the delinquent acts of their children by imposing sanctions and involving them in the juvenile justice system.⁴ If the City wishes to pursue this option the Board of Supervisors may require Juvenile Probation to enact a departmental policy or it may pass a local ordinance.

Moreover, the Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC) recently commissioned a survey to estimate the revenue likely to be collected by a county that imposes a fee upon a city for reimbursement of county expenses incurred with respect to the booking of juveniles arrested by city employees (i.e., Police and Sheriff) and brought to the juvenile hall. At its upcoming July 15, 2003 meeting, CPOC will consider the results of the survey and decide whether or not to pursue State legislation to establish a recovery mechanism for booking costs. However, this legislation would not generate new revenue because San Francisco is both a city and county and departmental monies come from the same fund.

Conclusion

The Legislative Analyst believes that the City is probably already recovering most booking costs it is allowed to recover. It is important to remember that Adult Probation recovers booking costs only from convicted persons (not from all arrestees) pursuant to the subject laws. Also, any monies collected by virtue of these laws are highly dependent upon court discretion and persons' ability to pay.

In addition, the Legislative Analyst found that currently the Juvenile Probation Department does not recover booking costs from convicted juveniles. The Board of Supervisors may wish to consider this option.

¹ California Penal Code, Section 1203.1c

² California Government Code Section 29550

³ Ibid.

⁴ California Penal Code, Section 186.20 , a.k.a. Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention (S.T.E.P.) Act