THE QUESTION Should the state borrow $220 million through the sale of general obligation bonds to finance the construction of new local crime laboratories, the renovation of existing ones, and the supporting infrastructure? PROVISIONS § This measure authorizes the sale of $220 million in general obligation bonds. § It establishes an independent, seven-member Forensic Laboratories Authority (FLA) in the Department of Justice. This board shall include the Attorney General, the director of the state's laboratories and five members appointed by the Governor to serve for three years. § The FLA shall prescribe the process of application and, upon approval, shall make grants from the Forensic Laboratories Capital Expenditure Bond Fund established by this measure. § Local governments must provide 10% matching funds for grants (unless this requirement is modified or waived by the Legislature) and must agree to pay the ongoing operating costs of the crime labs. § Projects must comply with state or local bidding and contract requirements. BACKGROUND After a crime is committed, law officials send evidence for analysis to laboratories. These laboratories are known as forensic crime laboratories. They perform tests such as fingerprinting examination, drug analyses and DNA testing. Proposition 15 is the result of a study that grew out of AB 920, which called for appropriations for an assessment of construction and renovation needs for forensic laboratories around the state. AB 920 indicated legislative intent to appropriate $21 million each fiscal year (FY) until FY 2022-23. The bill was signed by Governor Wilson on 10/12/97, but the appropriation was vetoed. The veto allowed for a study to be made with General Fund resources. This study was to be completed by the Auditor by January 1, 1999. The Auditor's report identified 19 local and 11 state forensic laboratories, many of which lacked accreditation, and handled most of the law enforcement requests in the state. The Auditor concluded that the majority of these labs need significant improvement due to increasing caseloads and the accelerated pace of technological advances, including DNA identification. The present system is cumbersome and time-consuming. This costs the courts in lengthy trials and longer periods of fact-finding. It not only allows criminals to go free but also poses a "risk to wrongfully accused defendants." FISCAL EFFECT According to the Legislative Analyst, the total estimated state cost would be $377 million over 25 years ($220 million in principal and $157 million in interest). Payments would be about $15 million per year. Cost to local governments is 10% in one-time matching funds ($20 million) plus annual operating costs--which could be millions. IMPACT OF YES OR NO VOTE A YES vote means the state could issue $220 million in general obligation bonds for construction and improvement of local forensic laboratories. A NO vote means that the state would not be able to issue bonds for construction and improvement of forensic laboratories. SUPPORTERS SAY § Repairing deteriorating, outdated crime labs will ensure that more criminals are identified, caught, convicted and punished. § Funds will be used to examine and identify DNA, speed up evidence analysis and improve blood alcohol content analysis. § This measure will save taxpayers money by reducing the time it takes to go to trial and reduce the length of trials. OPPONENTS SAY § Using bond financing to pay for government projects almost doubles the cost, to $395 million instead of $220 million if paid from the state budget. § Local government should use private labs, use portions of existing police stations, or rent private space instead of constructing new buildings. SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS The official ballot arguments in support are signed by Gray Davis, Governor of California; William J. Hemby, California Organization of Police & Sheriffs; Daniel A. Terry, President, California Professional Firefighters; Charles C. Plummer, President, California State Sheriffs Association; and Tom Torlakson, Member, California State Assembly Information Technology Budget Subcommittee. Other supporters mentioned in the ballot arguments include Crime Victims United of California, California Police Chiefs Association, Attorney General Bill Lockyer, California Association of Crime Lab Directors, Assembly Member Bob Hertzberg, California Union of Safety Employees, California Peace Officers Association, and Senator Richard Polanco. The official ballot arguments in opposition are signed by Gail K. Lightfoot, Past Chair, Libertarian Party of California; Thomas Tryon, Calaveras County Supervisor; and Ted Brown, Insurance Adjuster/ Investigator. For more information: Supporters: Robert Hertzberg, Committee to Repair and Upgrade Crime Fighting Forensic Labs--Yes on Prop 15, 916-448-4199, www.proposition15.org Opponents: Ted Brown, Libertarian Party of California, 626-614-0630, email tebrown@earthlink.net, www.ca.lp.org
| ||||||||
