FCL NEWSLETTER -- January, 2001

This January marks the beginning of legislative decision-making for the 2001-2002 session of the California State Assembly and Senate. FCL's staff and board met over the first weekend in December to determine which of the issues in the state's almost $100 billion annual budget and 3000-4000 pieces of legislation to focus on over the next two years. We welcome your response to our selections and urge you to take action as you see fit.

Institutional Crisis in Prisons and Youth Authority
California's prisons are too big to work. Gangs dominate. Lock-downs have become a standard way of doing business. Staff turnover is high and morale is low. The governor acts as if he simply wants to put a lid on these problems.

To salvage the humanity of prisoners and staff, FCL will be advocating for smaller prison populations and more program opportunities and spread the word that the current system just doesn't work. The situation and needs are similar in the California Youth Authority. Its over-sized institutions are still suffering from the loss of confidence in rehabilitation that began during Governor Wilson's administration.

Drug Policy
The passage of Proposition 36, the November 2000 initiative that mandated drug treatment instead of prison for non-violent drug felons, signals a new era of immense complexity. Law enforcement now acknowledges that treatment works but also wants to retain control of probationers. Corrections could benefit from a reduced prison population.

Politicians have a chance to rethink their budget priorities in the face of the public's cry for treatment. FCL will work to institutionalize an entitlement to drug treatment before, during and after incarceration.

[FCL FACTS -- Graph: California Crime Rate Is at a 35-Year Low]

Death Penalty Moratorium and Abolition
With dozens of death penalty cases nearing the end of their appeals, public opinion is receptive to a moratorium on executions in California, according to a recent Los Angeles Times poll. FCL will urge an in-depth study of capital punishment and will work with other abolitionists to keep up the pressure for immediate suspension and eventual end to state-sponsored killings.

Homelessness
The California Interfaith Coalition, of which FCL is a founding member, has designated homelessness as its top legislative priority for the upcoming legislative session. Among the issues we will focus on: housing, medical care, mental health, cash assistance, food and nutrition, legal rights.

Low-Income Californians
In a state where poverty levels are well above the national average, FCL will continue to promote legislation that allows low-income people to earn more and to retain a greater share of their earnings. Some issues we expect to be dealing with: the payday loan industry, state earned- income tax credit, and utility rates. Other issues under this heading relate to the special circumstances of the state's millions of low-income immigrants, including driver's license eligibility and in-state tuition rates for those awaiting legal immigrant status.

Peace
As in the previous legislative session, domestic militarization is likely to be an issue, including selective service registration, National Guard-run educational facilities, and economic benefits for military contractors. FCL will closely watch these and other peace-related budget items and bills and take action in collaboration with our peace partners in AFSC, peace action groups, and monthly Meetings.

Environmental Justice
In 2000, FCL spearheaded the effort to create a California Interfaith Environmental Justice Roundtable. In 2001, informational hearings and legislation will likely move environmental justice from the conceptual to the implementation stage in state law and in state agency practices. FCL and the Roundtable will work closely with sponsors to move that agenda ahead.

Human Rights
This year, FCL will focus on enactment of three human rights items vetoed by the governor in the 1999-2000 legislative session: 1) family care and medical leave for domestic partners and close relatives; 2) banning housing and employment discrimination based on actual or perceived gender; 3) restoration of Food Stamps and cash assistance for released drug felons.

Upcoming FCL Newsletters will update you on all these issues and the steps you can take to make your voice heard in Sacramento. Stay tuned.

? Ken Larsen and Steve Birdlebough

? Assembly ?
To contact your assembly member, write "State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814." All phone numbers are (916) 319-20 (district number); e.g., (916) 319-2070 for district "70".
John Campbell (R-70, Irvine)
Joe Canciamilla (D-11, Martinez)
Wilma Chan (D-16, Oakland)
Ed Chavez (D-57, City of Industry)
David Cogdill (R-25, Modesto)
Rebecca Cohn (D-24, Campbell)
Lynn Daucher (R-72, Fullerton)
Manny Diaz (D-23, San Jose)
Dario Frommer (D-43, Glendale)
Jackie Goldberg (D-45, Los Angeles)
Tom Harman (R-67, Huntington Beach)
Dennis Hollingsworth (R-66, Temecula)
Jerome Horton (D-51, Inglewood)
Christine Kehoe (D-76, San Diego)
Dave Kelley (R-80, Palm Desert)
Paul Koretz (D-42, Los Angeles)
Jay La Suer (R-77, La Mesa)
Tim Leslie (R-4, Roseville)
Carol Liu (D-44, Pasadena)
Barbara Matthews (D-17, Stockton)
Gloria Negrete McLeod (D-61, Ontario)
Dennis Mountjoy (R-59, Arcadia)
Joe Nation (D-6, San Rafael)
Jenny Oropeza (D-55, Carson)
Fran Pavley (D-41, Encino)
Keith Richman (R-38, Granada Hills)
Simon Salinas (D-28, Hollister)
Joe Simitian (D-21, Palo Alto)
Juan Vargas (D-79, National City)
Mark Wyland (R-74, Carlsbad)
Phil Wyman (R-34, Victorville)
Note: Kelley, Leslie and Wyman are former state senators.

? Senate ?
To contact your state senator, write "State Capitol, Sacra-mento, CA 95814" or call (916) 657-9900.
Dick Ackerman (R-33, Fullerton)
Jim Battin (R-31, Palm Springs)
Sheila Kuehl (D-23, Los Angeles)
Mike Machado (D-5, Stockton)
Bob Margett (R-29, Arcadia)
Tom McClintock (R-19, Simi Valley)
Rico Oller (R-1, Roseville)
Jack Scott (D-21, Pasadena)
Tom Torlakson (D-7, Martinez)
Ed Vincent (D-25, Los Angeles)
Note: All of the new senators are previous assembly members.

SB 39 (Charles Poochigian, R., Fresno) would put $400 million into con- struction of jails and juvenile halls. The bill is aimed at 20 counties whose correctional facilities are so overcrowded that prisoners who have not served their full sentences have been released.

But over-crowding alone is not a sound reason for jail expansion, when community corrections alternatives that could alleviate the crowding are severely under-funded. It is important for local officials to provide a balanced range of alternative public safety measures, and state funding of more lock-ups could hamper efforts to achieve a more balanced criminal justice system. Intensive supervision, restitution, com- munity service, and drug treatment programs play an important role in restoring the public's sense of safety, and in making victims whole. These community corrections programs also address the reality that most offenders must eventually be re-integrated into law-abiding society.

Non-custodial sentences avoid the very real danger that incarceration may do permanent damage to a young person. Whenever someone is taken into custody, there are risks of exposure to gang influences, sexual abuse, and suicide. The jail experience causes some individuals to become more entrenched in the culture of crime, and some become a danger to themselves and to others.

[graph: Average Jail Population (24,035 in 1960; 76,312 in 1999)]

More half-way houses, drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs, and sheltered housing for vulnerable youth are sorely needed at the local level. While it would be good to see more classrooms and job training programs attached to jails and juvenile halls, upgrading of these facilities nearly always leads to expansion. Usually, state money isn't available for local uses, but this year the state expects to be rolling in revenues, and the governor will be figuring out how to spend a $10 billion surplus without expanding the appetite for services. He worries that an extended economic downturn will reduce future revenues and make it painful to cut newly entrenched programs.

There are ways that the State can invest tax dollars wisely, without "increasing the base" of public com-mitments. We can re-build worn-out classrooms and provide enhanced teacher training so that all teachers become credentialed. We can renew aging bridges and transit vehicles, and we can pay off accumulated bonded indebtedness.

However, building more juvenile halls and jails increases the long-term commitment of funds, because larger jail capacities lead to higher staffing costs. Experience shows that regardless of crime levels, jails and juvenile hall beds are usually filled. Without intelligent limits on the numbers in custody, money that is needed for crime prevention gets swallowed up by jails.

WHAT YOU CAN DO
[box]
Contact your city council members and county board of supervisors to ask if they plan to expand community corrections alternatives to jails and juvenile halls so as to save local tax dollars. Find out how state funding of custodial facilities would affect these plans. Let FCL and your state legislators know about your findings.

? Steve Birdlebough

The controversial proposal got a critical boost from Brown's former chief of staff, Governor Gray Davis. Davis made only his second appearance before the Board of Education to tout the military charter.

Plans call for students to wear uniforms and participate in inspections and Outward Bound-style physical and mental challenges as part of a rigorous, six-day-a-week college prep program. They would take classes from California National Guard personnel and civilian teachers.

Brown emphasized that the school would not be a boot camp aimed at pushing students into the military. But in a letter and testimony to the state board, Wilson Riles Jr., regional director for AFSC and a former Oakland City Council member, said the proposal represents the "continued and deepening influence of militarism and the legitimization of violence in our community."

The proposed school has been turned down by both the Oakland Board of Education and the Alameda County Board of Education. Such opposition prompted Brown to take his case directly to the State Board of Education. Under the charter school law, the board becomes the final arbiter for a charter school petition if a petitioner believes that a school plan has been unfairly denied.

Charter schools, which are publicly funded but operate independently, are run by parents, nonprofit groups and businesses. They are sprouting in states across the nation as parents seek alternatives to beleaguered public schools.

A military school would not leap to mind as a pet project for Brown, who studied with Jesuits and whose first foray into the political arena was to develop the peace campaign for the California Democratic Council in 1967. But he pointed that "I was commander in chief of the National Guard, and I created the Oakland Guard program in 1975."

More than $3 million in state and federal funding has already been earmarked for the school's inaugural year, including $1.3 million that Davis included in the state budget. Roping in additional funding is a done deal, Brown told board members, dropping the name of Senator Dianne Feinstein as a likely supporter in future campaigns for federal aid.

FCL Legislative Advocate Ken Larsen reminded the State Board of Education in his testimony that the Guard already operates a military-style school in San Luis Obispo County, under contract to the Los Angeles Unified School District, with $4.2 million in federal Department of Defense money, and the district has complained about poor management and budgetary practices. He noted that the Guard is also being investigated by the state auditor general for questionable activities in its headquarters offices. Larsen maintained that it would not be in the best interest of the public or the military to assign the Guard new responsibilities at this difficult time in the organization's history. ?

Portions of the above were adapted from reports in The Sacramento Bee, Los Angeles Times and San Jose Mercury News; Other portions by Ken Larsen.

[box]

An Alternative to Military Schools

? excerpted from FCL's policy statement on "Peace"

[box]

What's Next?

? Wilson Riles, Jr.
12/7/00

At that time FCL had an office in the basement of the Meeting House on Lake Street in San Francisco and I ended up working as an intern for one semester there. Most of what I did was grunt work, but I did learn a great deal about FCL and its activities. Afterwards, I moved to New York to do graduate work and then eventually settled in Oakland where I reconnected with FCL as the Strawberry Creek Meeting Representative. Given that FCL is about to embark on a celebration of the 50th anniversary of its founding, it seems appropriate to explain a little of its history, structure, purpose and challenges.

Lobbying is not a new activity for Quakers. The FCL is modeled upon the Friends Committee on National Legislation, founded in the 1940's. Quakers at one time governed five American colonies. In 1659, 700 Quaker women petitioned the English Parliament, an action that greatly contributed to Friends notoriety. In other words, we have a long history of rabble-rousing.

On May 21, 1952, 60 Friends met at Berkeley Friends Church to form the FCL. It would become the first public interest lobbying group in California. (The American Civil Liberties Union would come along five years later, initially sharing FCL's offices.)

That was during the McCarthy era. Public figures were blacklisted for their political affiliations. Loyalty oaths were being demanded of public and private employees. Those who refused were fired from their jobs. Of course some of these resisters were Quakers standing against oaths as a manner of justifying a different standard of truthfulness. Civil liberty issues were the catalyst for the formation of FCL.

As the ACLU arrived on the scene to focus on civil liberty issues, FCL shifted its direction to other areas concerning oppressed or under-represented populations, such as community health services, farm worker and Native American rights, and now criminal justice issues. We now try to address those policy areas where there are groups of persons particularly without voice.

The only self-serving activity that I can remember the FCL engaging in was the writing and promotion of the 1988 Quaker Marriage Act, which allows weddings to be affirmed by witnesses as well as performed by clergy and justices. A few of our Meeting members have availed themselves of the Act.

FCL, as its name implies, is a committee of around 50 individuals, most of whom are appointed by their Meetings. The committee is separated into Northern California and Southern California sections, and operates through subcommittees responsible for policy (setting objectives for staff and positions on legislation), finance, personnel and nominations. (There is also a small separate board for the FCL Education Fund, a tax deductible affiliate. FCL is non-profit but, as a political organization, not tax deductible.)

The organization has a budget of about $180,000. It is funded by subscriptions to its well-regarded Newsletter and by donations from Meetings, individuals and fund raising events. Berkeley Friends Meeting conducts a yard sale while Redwood Forest Friends Meeting has an annual Strawberry Festival.

We seem to run at a perpetual deficit, which has been alleviated in recent years by occasional bequests. Sometimes I get frustrated by our tight finances. It seems that, with a public perception of politics as dirty business, many Friends do not wish to be involved. I think that our speaking for many of the less-valued members of society does not help. (It is pleasing to me, though, that we provide over 1000 free prisoner subscriptions.)

FCL currently has a staff of four, including two full-time public interest advocates. We make no political donations, so we must sway the legislators and the governor and their staffs through quality information, sound reasoning and moral persuasion. We do a good job of that. We are considered to be truthful and consistent. In addition to direct contact, our staff works to involve subscribers in citizen lobbying through alerts, the Newsletter, a web site and visits to Meetings.

For most of the last decade, FCL spent its efforts resisting legislation that expanded the death penalty and prison system, punished the poor and provided largess to the already powerful. At times, our Newsletter urged opposition to almost every bill to surface in the legislature. It was quite discouraging. This month's newsletter supported 34 bills and opposed two! There is hope after all.

If anyone wishes more information on FCL and its activities, I encourage you to talk to the FCL representative at your local Friends Meeting or contact the staff in Sacramento. We also organize several "Lobby Days" each year during which you will be briefed on legislation by our advocates over breakfast, taught effective citizen lobbying techniques and scheduled for an appointment with your representative or their staff. It is a quite pleasurable excursion. As you go with several others on the same mission, the visit is not intimidating.

FCL exists in order to express Friends values in the public arena. It can best do this if it receives direction from YOU!

? Bob Maynard
FCL Executive Committee