The California Supreme Court decided to move forward with Senate Bill 10 (SB-10), even though thee bill remains on hold until a referendum vote this November. They’ve already begun implementing the policies laid out in the bill, and have spent $68 million of taxpayer dollars in the process.
Where Did The $68 Million Go?
When the California Judicial Council approved the $68 million, courts began spending it on implementing policies and pilot projects described in SB-10. Individual court systems throughout the state requested the following amounts from the fund:
| Court | Funding | New or Existing Program? |
|---|---|---|
| Los Angeles | $17.3 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Alameda | $14.4 million | Restoring an Existing Program |
| Sacramento | $9.59 million | New Program |
| San Mateo | $6.19 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Sonoma | $5.76 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Tulare | $3.77 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Ventura | $3.7 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Napa | $1.7 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Santa Barbara | $1.6 million | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Kings | $1.12 million | New Program |
| Yuba | $844,000 | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Modoc | $746,000 | New Program |
| Tuolumne | $632,000 | Expanding an Existing Program |
| Calaveras | $531,000 | New Program |
| Nevada-Sierra | $331,000 | Expanding an Existing Program |
| San Joaquin | No funds requested | Maintaining their Existing Program |
Prominent Academics and Experts Oppose SB-10
Both the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the California Judicial Council received letters on Jul 17, 2019, from 27 different academics. All those letters pleaded and instructed the two institutions to put a stop to pretrial risk assessment and SB-10 in general. Of course, both organizations wholly ignored the pleas of industry experts.
A shared statement sent along with the letters stated:
“We include with this letter a statement outlining some fundamental flaws with pretrial risk assessments and the negative consequences that their use will invite. We have closely watched the development and deployment of pretrial risk assessment tools, conducted research, and carefully studied others’ research in this field. Although pretrial risk assessment tools are often promoted as an essential part of bail reform that can help judges make more informed and objective pretrial decisions, these tools suffer from serious methodological flaws that undermine their accuracy and effectiveness. As a result, pretrial risk assessments do not increase the likelihood of better pretrial outcomes, much less guarantee them.” – Statement included in the the letters sent to the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors and the California Judicial Council
Want To Help Fight Against SB-10 And Unrealistic Risk Assessment Tools? Contact Bad Boys Bail Bonds
It should be abundantly clear that the new pretrial assessment system is entirely flawed and unrealistic. It stands a chance at seriously and negatively impacting both the bail industry and the pretrial justice system at its core. If you’d like to help in the fight against SB-10 and unrealistic, methodologically flawed pretrial risk assessment software, then contact us here at Bad Boys Bail Bonds. We’d be more than happy to point you towards resources. And, if you need bail assistance, then contact us as well. Remember, Mama wants you home!
