Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08072001 - C.111 ontra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - FROM: JOHN SWEETEN, County Administrator ° k' ° _ ; Costa s DATE: AUGUST 7, 2001 °s'�A �o;; County SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 0104 ENTITLED "JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITIES" SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT report as the Board of Supervisors' response to Grand Jury Report No. 0104 entitled, "Juvenile Detention Facilities". BACKGROUND: The 2000-2001 Grand Jury filed the above-referenced report on June 7, 2001, which was reviewed by the Board of Supervisors on June 26 and subsequently referred to the County Administrator, County Probation Officer and Sheriff-Coroner, who jointly prepared the attached response that clearly specifies: A. .Whether the finding or recommendation is accepted or will be implemented; B. If a recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date; C. A delineation of the constraints if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within a six-month period; and D. The reason for not accepting or adopting a finding or recommendation. GGPIT-10"D 8N ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATUR .--*'RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECO NDATIO OF BOARD COMMITTEE ✓APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOA APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED _ GT+&rt- VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN UNANIMOUS(ABSENT _/-9-0 i ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE AYES: NOES: SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED CONTACT: JULIE ENEA(925)335-1077 JO11fTSWMtENL, CLERK OfKTHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CC: PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COUNTY PROBATION OFFICER SHERIFF-CORONER JUVENILE COURT JUDGE BY /,_,,,,,_�,,,a�� EPUTY Juvenile Detention Facilities August 7, 2001 Page 1 RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 0104 JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITIES ... ...: ..: NDIN 1. Construction of a new Juvenile Hall is scheduled for completion by summer 2003, at the earliest and is designed to accommodate a maximum of 290 residents. Groundbreaking was May 8, 2001. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. 2. The daily number in residence at Juvenile Hall often exceeds the currently authorized capacity of 169 juveniles. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. However, at those times when the Juvenile Hall population exceeds the authorized capacity, Board of Corrections standards are maintained by assigning additional staff to impacted units. 3. Some juvenile offenders detained by various police agencies, other than those apprehended for more serious offenses (e.g., use of a weapon in a crime) are not booked by Juvenile Hall staff because of a lack of space. Subsequently, they must be released by the various police agencies. Response: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. While it is correct that Juvenile Hall staff does not book juveniles apprehended for less-serious offenses, it is not due to a lack of space. The Welfare and Institutions Code and Board of Corrections regulations mandate that minors be handled in the "least restrictive means possible" Therefore, offenders that pose a relatively low risk to the community are not detained and, regardless of the population at Juvenile Hall, a minor that is assessed as a risk to the public's safety is not denied entry. 4. The Grand Jury found that juveniles entering Juvenile Hall with prescription medications were denied those medications. However, a memorandum dated October 30, 2000, that outlined a revised drug administration policy intended to rectify the issue, was sent to the Grand Jury, subsequent to the Chief Probation Officer's appearance before them. Response: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. While juveniles were never denied prescription medications, there was an isolated occurrence where medication could not be authorized by a psychiatrist on a Friday due to timing. The issue was reviewed and resolved based on an existing policy. A new policy was not required to rectify the situation. 5. There were several attempted escapes from the Juvenile Hall during fiscal year 2000/2001. Response: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. While there were no successful escapes in FY 2000/2001, there was one incident involving three minors at Juvenile Hall that was successfully controlled. Juveniles at Summit and Chris Adams Centers are not detained by the Courts and therefore cannot "escape" these non-secured facilities. 6. Juvenile Hall Counselor's hesitant/delayed use of their "panic pens" to summon assistance contributed to the severity of the escape attempt during the meal hour of July 28, 2000. Juvenile Hall staff indicated that often times counselor's mind set is a belief that if the panic pens are used "prematurely' the (counselor) will be conceived as being incapable of handling precarious situations. Juvenile Detention Facilities August 7, 2001 Page 2 Response: The respondent disagrees with the finding. Juvenile Hall Counselors are trained in appropriate emergency response measures and are never criticized for requesting assistance. The referenced incident was debriefed by the Probation Department and the results were incorporated into subsequent training sessions. 7. Counselors complained that the walkie-talkie radios in current use were not entirely efficient because of the concrete wall construction of Juvenile Hall. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. The Juvenile Hall staff does not currently have a permanent walkie-talkie system but are in the testing stage with various models. The objective is to purchase the best available system without requiring retrofits to the existing building. The targeted installation date is September 2001. 8. The Sheriff Department's West County Detention Booking Facility has remained unused since its completion in 1990. Response: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. The West County Detention Booking Facility is not being used for one of its originally intended purposes. However, the intake and transportation areas are used daily for receiving, staging, and moving inmates between facilities, courts and State Prison. Use of these areas is essential to the operation of the West County Detention Facility. 9. The West County Detention Facility has nine holding cells that could be used as temporary holding areas until the juvenile's detention hearing, if the Facility were utilized. Response: The respondent disagrees with the finding. The specified cells were designed as holding cells and do not meet Board of Corrections standards for the housing of either juveniles or adults. The holding cells are insufficient to allow for a bunk, the facility does not include shower or visitor areas, and there are significant sight and sound issues involving the legally required separation of adults and juveniles. .......... r- .,..:,:.::. CO N ATIM ONS N M E D •.is 1. Request the County Construction Administrator closely monitor the construction of the new Juvenile Hall to preclude unnecessary delays. Quarterly, written progress reports should be sent to the Board of Supervisors and the Probation Department of its review of construction progress. The Grand Jury should receive copies of these reports. Response: The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented within six months. Quarterly written reports are a requirement of the County's construction contract with the Board of Corrections. The recommended distribution will be implemented. 2. Investigate the possible use of the West County Detention Booking Facility that is not currently being used for its original intended purpose. With modification, it could be used as a receiving/assessment center for juvenile offenders awaiting disposition, until the new Juvenile Hall is completed. Response: The recommendation will not be implemented. The West County Detention Booking Facility does not meet Board of Corrections standards for detaining inmates. (See Response to Findings 8 and 9 above.) Additionally, the facility is an integral part of the adult detention system and is used daily by the Sheriff for the staging and transporting of inmates. If these cells were code compliant for the housing of inmates, the Sheriff would use them for adult inmates. Moreover, the decentralization of juvenile detention services would make the Juvenile Detention Facilities August 7, 2001 Page 3 requirements for education, recreation, medical, and mental health services very expensive to provide. 3. Instruct the staff at Juvenile Hall to increase their security awareness and place additional emphasis on the prompt use of"panic pens" to summon assistance. Response: The recommendation has been implemented. Security Awareness continues to be part of ongoing training. 4. Have the staff at Juvenile Hall test the use of walkie-talkie type radios with stronger transmission capabilities and place in service the most feasible and efficient one. Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The testing is in progress. The targeted installation date is September 2001. 5. Use funds from the Department's General Operating Expense Account or from the Board of Supervisors' General Funds to finance these recommendations, with approval by the County Board of Supervisors. Response: The recommendation will be implemented as needed. It is not anticipated that implementing the above recommendations will require additional funds. If need for such funding becomes imperative, it will be considered within the context of the County's fiscal resources.