One of the significant impacts of AB 1926 is the imposition of additional responsibilities on local governments, thereby classifying it as a state-mandated local program. This change aims to enhance the oversight and effectiveness of restitution programs by ensuring that law enforcement representatives are included in the advisory boards. The bill also portrays a commitment to upholding the interests of victims by facilitating their ability to receive financial restitution from offenders.
Summary
Assembly Bill 1926 addresses the functioning of restitution centers in California. Specifically, it amends Section 6229 of the Penal Code to modify the composition and responsibilities of community advisory boards for restitution centers. Under existing law, community advisory boards are tasked with assisting the Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation in promoting the restitution program at these centers. The bill proposes that each board must include both the sheriff and the chief of police of the local jurisdiction, as well as a specified number of public members chosen by the city council or board of supervisors.
Contention
There may be points of contention regarding the increased burden on local governments to accommodate the additional members on the advisory boards. The bill mandates that local agencies are reimbursed for any costs incurred due to these new requirements, contingent upon a determination made by the Commission on State Mandates. This aspect could lead to debates concerning financing and responsibility, especially if local agencies perceive the state as offloading duties without adequate support.