Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12101985 - IO.4 Ij TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEECon} ra DATE: November 25, 1985 CWIQ coufty SUBJECT; Detention Staffing Analysis SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AM JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Indicate that the Board does not support total replacement of Deputy Sheriffs in' the County' s detention facilities with Correctional Officers. 2 . Direct the County Administrator, Director of Personnel, and Sheriff-Coroner to conduct a further analysis of the feasibility of using non-sworn personnel in various roles in the Detention Division in positions that do not have as their primary responsibility that of supervising inmates. Examples of positions which might be studied include Bailiffs, Transportation Officers, Work Alternative Project staff, Classification Officers, staff in the Bureau of Administrative Services, and Work Furlough field and custody officers. A report on the results of these studies should be made to the Board in conjunction with the 1986-1987 budget process. 3 . Direct the County Administrator to develop any further comparisons which can be made on detention staffing patterns among Contra Costa, Solano, and Ventura counties. BACKGROUND: At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator' s Office carried out a study of detention facility staffing. The .purpose of the study was to provide information which Contra Costa County could use in developing, if possible, more cost-effective custody staffing patterns for its adult detention facilities. The report: "Detention Staffing Analysis Study" , was presented to the Board July 19, 1985 and referred to the Internal Operations Committee. (Attachment #1) The report , was circulated to interested 'individuals and organizations. Written responses were received from the Sheriff-Coroner, the Deputy Sheriffs ' Association, Public Employees Union Local One, the Contra Costa County Taxpayers Association, and the Correctional and Detention Services Advisory Commission. A summary of these responses and the full responses are attached. (Attachment #2) CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR I END T ' N OF BOARD COMMI FEE~ X APPROVE OTHER )m SIGNATURE(S): Tom Torlakson p ToJ owers ACTION OF BOARD ON December 19-, 1985 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED -X_ OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County Administrator ATTESTED /O Personnel Director I- -Sheriff-Coroner PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Deputy Sheriffs' Association SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Public Employees Local 1 Taxpayers Association BY ,k.?.f� )A-0-k-.r/ Y,DEPUT M382/7-83 Page 2 The report and responses were presented at the October 14, 1985 meeting of the Internal Operations Committee. Additional information was requested of the County Administrator' s Office at that meeting and presented at the November 25, 1985 Internal Operations Committee meeting. (Attachment #3 ) Testimony on detention staffing was given at the November 25, 1985 meeting by the following people: Earnest Clements, Chief of Police, Richmond and Police Chiefs ' Association Donald L. Christen, Executive Vice President Contra Costa Taxpayers Association Henry Clarke, General Manager Public Employees Union Local One Paul Katz, Administrative Assistant Public Employees Union Local One Clemitt Swagerty, Chair Marie Goodman, Member Correctional and Detention Services Advisory Commission Richard Rainey, Sheriff-Coroner Jerry Mitosinka, Assistant Sheriff Larry Ard, Chief Deputy Sheriff Larry Aulich, Deputy Sheriffs ' Association Testimony from all parties, with the exception of Local One representatives, supported the option of maintaining Deputy Sheriffs as supervisors of inmates in the Contra Costa County adult detention facilities. Several arguments were raised in support of this option: o Due to rising salaries of correctional officers, particularly at the California Department of Corrections (where they will be hiring 3 ,500 additional staff in the next year) , and similar benefit packages for deputies and correctional officers, significant cost savings are not likely. o Deputy Sheriffs provide more flexibility than correctional officers within the Sheriff ' s Department and in case of emergencies or disasters. o More correctional officers than deputies may be required to do the same job. Local One representatives argued that a correctional officer position, such as that used in Solano County, would reduce detention facility costs and that these savings could be given to other needed services, such as those for abused children and drug addicts. They distinguished the type of correctional officer used in Solano County who do not carry weapons with that of State correctional officers who are trained in the use of weapons and, in fact, carry them and continue to maintain that the use of correctional officers like those used in Solano County would result in large savings. Page 3 Supervisor Torlakson indicated he has no trouble with the use of non-sworn personnel in positions which require some inmate supervision. He also suggested the need to review the cost of training sworn versus non-'sworn personnel, in addition to the ongoing operational costs and savings. Our Committee also notes that architectural decisions may have to be made prior to the time for the 1986-87 County Budget. In cases where such decisions will affect the use of sworn versus non-sworn personnel, these decision points need to be brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors. • MA e -` DETENTION STAFFING ANALYSIS STUDY Prepared by COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE July 1985 , DETENTION STAFFING ANALYSIS STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number I. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 •III. Summary of Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 A. Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 B. Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 C. . Operating Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 IV'. 'Conclusions' , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 . Appendixes, Appendix 1: Survey Results A. Alameda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 B. Contra Costa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 C. Fresno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 D. Kern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 E. . Riverside . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 7 F. Sacramento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 G. San Bernardino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 H. San Joaquin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 I. San Mateo . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 J. Santa Clara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 K. Solano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 L. Sonoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 M. Ventura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Appendix 2: Detention Staffing Survey DETENTION S'T'AFFING ANALYSIS STUDY TABLES Page No. Table 1: Use of Deputy Sheriffs and Correctional Officers in California County Fails 3 Table 2: Detention System Personnel and Budget Figures 6 Table 3: Counties Ranked According to Operational Cost Indices 10 Table 4: Pay Scale for Deputy Sheriff and Classification Supervising Inmates 12 DETENTION STAFFING ANALYSIS STUDY ` I. BACKGROUND . At the request of the Board of Supervisors,' this Office carried out a study of detention facility staffing. The purpose of the study was to provide information which Contra Costa County could use in developing, if possible, more cost-effective custody staffing patterns for its adult detention facilities. This question-is of.. particular importance because the County is planning a new 560-bed pretrial. and sentenced detention facility. This facility is scheduled to open within the next five years and will require staff increases in the Sheriff's. Department .Detention .Division. In planning for the Martinez Detention Facility (MDF), the Board of Supervisors decided to employ direct supervision of inmates by staff within the housing units. Despite negative predictions by many professionals within and outside the County, this approach has worked extremely well. Vandalism and graffiti are almost non-existent within the facility. There have been dramatic reductions in sexual assaults and the level of violence experienced against staff and other inmates. . Few escapes and no major disturbances have occurred. High staff morale, job satisfaction, and pride in work have been achieved. The facility and supervision strategy, although strained, continues to operate efficiently even.though the facility has been up to 70 percent over capacity. The detention facility operation meets the highest correctional standards in the country. Contra Costa County was the first in the country to use direct supervision of inmates in a county jail, and the MDF serves the country as a National Institute of Corrections Resource Center. One hundred seventy-five tours of the MDF are taken each year. Direct supervision is now implemented in many county jails across the country. In February 1984, the Advisory Board of the National Institute of Corrections "formally endorsed the direct supervision/non-barrier approach to correctional facility design and operation for those jurisdictions contemplating construction or renovation of prisons and jails."* The programming work for the new West County Justice Center assumes continuation of this direct supervision model. However, a great deal of information and experience has been gained over the last four years of operating the Martinez Detention Facility that can be applied to the design and staffing configurations in the new facility to use staff more efficiently. For example, based on the behavior of the vast majority of inmates at the MDF, it appears possible (if the difficult prisoners remain at the MDF) to increase the number of inmates per housing.unit that can be supervised by one individual. Also, more freedom of movement can be provided to most inmates (inmates moving to programs rather than programs moving to inmates) without increasing staff. The physical design of the building has significant influence on the staff-to-inmate ratio that can be achieved. We are researching different physical configurations to make the operation more efficient; for example, consideration has been given to having one individual monitor up to 130 inmates during the graveyard shift. Currently, *See Designs for Contemporary Correctional Facilities, National Institute of Corrections Facility Monograph Project, 1985, .p. vi. 1 i one deputy monitors 55 inmates on each shift. Systemwide consolidation of certain functions, such as transportation, is also being studied to determine if efficiencies can be achieved. The programming report for the new facility will include all proposed staffing and costs. The report will be ready in the next few months. Currently in Contra Costa County, Sheriff's deputies are responsible for the direct supervision of inmates; however, there may be a number of different types of staff that could provide detention functions. This issue has been studied during the planning for the Martinez Detention Facility and again during the Adult Correctional Facilities Master Plan process. The purpose of this study is to .look again at this issue, given current circumstances, to explore options as they have been used in other counties, and to suggest how they might apply to Contra Costa, County. II. METHODOLOGY Preliminary telephone inquiries were made in each county in California regarding the classification of staff that supervised inmates in the adult detention facilities. From these inquiries, it was determined that there were three basic staffing models (see Table 1): (1) Use of sworn deputy sheriffs only; (2)_Use of non-sworn correctional officers only; and (3) . Use of a combination of deputy sheriffs and correctional officers. 2 Table' 1: USE OF DEPUTY SHERIFFS AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS IN CALIFORNIA COUNTY JAILS County Jail Staff Organization Deputy Correct. Inmate Sheriffs Officers Populations Only Only Both Total 0 - 250' 9 (3) (4) 15 4 (1) 28 251 - 500- 1 5 2 8 501 - 1000 3 (4) 2 3 (l) 8 1001 - over 7 (4) 1 4 (2) 12 Total 20 23 13 56 Notes to Table 1e (1) El Dorado and San Joaquin are in the process of converting to correctional officers. (2) Los Angeles has four percent correctional officers remaining who work only' at the minimum security facility. These positions are being eliminated through attrition. (3) Placer is in the process of converting their correctional officers, to deputy sheriffs (27) and correctional technicians (no inmate contact--167.' (4) In Tuolumne, Yuba, Sutter, Alameda, San Bernardino, and San Mateo, there are two classes of deputy -one for the field and a lower paid deputy for detention. 3 :There are numerous variations of the models. For example, some counties use two classifications of sworn staff, with one classification being primarily responsible for detention functions at a lower pay scale. In those counties that use correctional officers for inmate supervision, some supervise correctional officers with sworn staff; other counties supervise correctional officers with non-sworn sergeants and lieutenants. Some counties use correctional officers for inmate supervision, while others use correctional officers for limited detention functions only (escorting, fingerprinting, or in certain types of facilities, e.g. , minimum security). Generally, the majority of counties with fewer inmates to supervise use correctional officers, and counties operating large institutions use sworn deputies. A questionnaire was developed, with the assistance of staff from the Contra Costa:County. Sheriff and Personnel Departments, to obtain more detailed 'information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of these staffing models. Thirteen_ counties were selected for further study, including Contra Costa County. These counties have been included in prior studies related to Sheriff's Department organizational issues because they are similar in size and structure `to Contra Costa' County. They also represent the three basic models of detention staffing. III. SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS The: problems' involved' in comparing one county with another are complex and not subject to. easy description .or analysis. An extensive amount of information is required from each county in order to compare the costs and benefits of different systems. (see Notes to Table 2). Perfect comparisons are not possible. The pay scale in one county may be lower than another due to labor force availability. . The inmate population in one county may require greater security precautions than the inmate population in another.. The average staff-to-inmate ratio is 1:6.3 for the surveyed counties. However, this average includes at least one minimum security facility which is operated at a ratio of 1:30.. County policies regarding the use of alternatives to incarceration may lead to variations in staffing costs. Also, it is not possible to ascertain whether the facilities in this study are being operated in a safe manner. Information regarding compliance with State of California Minimum Jail Standards and significant litigation is included in this analysis to provide some background. A description of the detention system in each of the twelve surveyed counties is contained in Appendix 1: Survey Results. Comparisons between the counties are made in the three following general areas: facilities, staff, and operating conditions. A. Facilities With a few exceptions, the thirteen counties provide similar detention services. All counties have one large main jail that holds primarily persons awaiting trial and, in some cases, sentenced persons who cannot be held in less secure settings. Riverside County operates four such facilities, and Ventura, Solano, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Contra Costa have an additional separately located branch jail. All thirteen counties operate at least one honor farm-type facility for mostly sentenced inmates. A number of counties operate a complex of 4 facilities on a single site. For example, Alameda County operates three facilities at the Santa Rita site for' pretrial male inmates, sentenced males, and females in a range of 'security levels. Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara operate separate work furlough facilities for men and women. ' Contra Costa, Sacramento, and Ventura operate coed facilities. Fresno, Riverside, San Joaquin, Solano, and Sonoma operate work furlough programs out of their sentenced facilities. Kern and San Bernardino do not operate any type of work furlough program. Sonoma and Ventura are the only two counties where the Sheriff does not provide a "work in lieu of jail" program (PC 4024.2) in which persons sentenced to jail may instead work on public projects. The counties-with the,-lowest per-inmate operating cost operate the fewest facilities: San Bernardino (2), Fresno (2), Kern (2), Sonoma (2), and San Joaquin (3 facilities at one. site). The county with the highest cost per inmate (San Mateo) operates the most facilities (5). Personnel and cost comparisons are displayed in Tables 2 and 3. San Bernardino, Contra Costa, and Riverside Counties have the lowest cost per citizen for detention. 5 C w 0 Q) U •'1 CD N O Ln to 1 co 0 v rn r•i 01 .. w N W J) O O rn v v O N N D N r1 W O v •+ cr a i) ,W Q) o Ln o 01 Ln o 01 r- O v rn ID t1 01 -•iN 41 N r-1 H N14 N r-1 N N ri ri N U.O a) U A Lr G w rq ri Lo O m O a`Ln N W m v M of ,� a Q1 N v h h m tD t0 01 mto t(nO tD tD ' Ld 41tD r N r-1 Ln r-1 tD M r v O - O of 1D O w ,) Id Q) Ln E O L') n r ri O t0 r v 14 O of O O O U f1 y w C to O O Ot O r N 61 N N tD :jN 140 O m O O N to O tD tD O coLb h r-1 ID ,J ,) •rt \ O O en N C Ln 6t r O N Ln IT N •riQ) 4J -,T 'O o+ C m Ln N O Ln n Ln .-1 r ID o of c ra m C 'o (1) of " Dt of- co N m -t•1 ID v r O tD v Ln 0 a ✓ r4 O of 1 W N O Ln O N of r-i M C X OI ] > v O ON fn N r of h N P') In Ln v W w N ri 11 r-1 en .•i 1 0 O N 1) Q) co C1 cD r♦ Ln rl r-i N O tD r-I (r1 N M ,moi > w m y Ln v m rn v Ln m r IR to 12 V L71 tD ro ww_� C. a lis ri H ri - ,r•1 ri r♦ r-1 r♦ .••i r-1 r•1 r•i ri r-1 .-1 H w ,) O Q) a C -rr G H Q) w V C ea da da dP as dP dp dP an an da do do W U o C 0 N r r•1 ra o ri d' to m �o Ln 'i Ln w 3 Q) (n h r Ln m r r v m r v Q) Ln ,) w a Q) (u CJ a Q N Id w w' r4 0 a) w 2d U n OO O 1 m O Ln O r v n N .. � JO-) W 1 r�-1 r to Ln N of O u o.. Z N- O Q) -ri C-ri C W w w LI C .-i O .-1 N O O v .4 ri co ID N r a O -O C O of r N M tD c0 r v th M .0 3 Q) N M .- F N ra r-I v r-i ,J U)-u w4 W < A 11 H a) O N N U) -rl r•1 -.-1 C w it W C � W .-1 .-1 1 � D r Ln m v to � %D.z 0 ,J C O (rl v N Ln Ln O to v Ln Ln h 14 r O Q 0 w v Ln N .•� N en m N -1 r•1 Ln r-1 r-4 m ,.1 w F-I a o a H H o W ,moi w A w a O c v CD O7 N N v O M O N v r O O U N of ri N co L^ of V' N 'O' N of to N 01 w ,j O r-1 14 N Ln .-1 1•1 r♦ N ri N r-I r•i N r•1 N � rx r•I Q) N Q) C Ln [.-4 T rJ O m ' 'd C 'd v n O O ID O N r r•1 a% N N Ln m b H b CD v (+l co N O CD of 11 v r .-i trl r•i w 1-1 Qt N N co N c 1D v of c0 O Ln Ln Lh Q) O .-i > 4 Q1 N .-1 r♦ 14 r-1 ri M 4 •r1 0 >� o a w a O '-i Ln O ra v O r4 N n r ri r) of >i•r) r- O r ri r o r tD of tD of N o1 ,j 4J r v tD m r o+ r v .1 c C C v c rt rJ ra v 0 r r n O o o v Ln Ln 0 n tD 0 a w o of o 0 12 r O 61 O to O u n. .-1 n Ln v n to o v ID ri N r1 Ln 0 ro Q ,�) N O 'U - N W.N U ' b ) G O' 0 .-roi O..Oi o ro .1 w w m aJ v ro vu p U t13 fa c C ai w > U OG C C —rot G 4 w8 o w m , I'd ro ro 5 o o Q) > a v w u i m to m Ln m o to a. 6 NOTES TO TABLE ,2 1. County population - Source: Department of Finance, January 1985. 2. Average Daily Inmate Population - Fiscal Year to Date - July 1, 1984-April 30, 1985 for all county-operated adult detention facilities. 3. Includes all personnel assigned to detention division. 4. Ratio Supervising Staff to Inmate = Average daily inmate population divided by authorized sworn detention personnel and/or correctional officer personnel. 5. Expenditure Budget: (a) estimated expenditures for FY 1984-85, as verified by county budget analysts. (b) excludes medical and mental health costs for inmates (c) excludes bailiff costs (d) excludes building maintenance costs (e) excludes revenue (f) excludes costs for temporary holding facilities, e.g. , substations (g) includes inmate transportation costs' (h) includes program personnel costs--librarians, chaplains, recreation specialists, inmate services coordinators, etc. (i) includes fixed assets but not capital expenditures such as County Jail Capital Expenditure Funds. 6. Operating Cost Per Inmate = Expenditure budget divided by average daily inmate population. 7. Citizen Cost = Average daily population times cost per inmate divided by county population. 8. Alameda - effective May 20, 1985, seventeen (17) new sworn personnel were authorized for the North Oakland Jail at $760,000. These numbers are not included in personnel or budget figures. 9. Contra Costa - budget figures include $65,000 remodeling cost at the Rehabilitation Center and $129,000 for additional bunks at the Martinez Detention Facility. 10. Fresno - budget figures include an estimated $10,000 for law library improvements ordered by the court. Program personnel in Fresno are volunteers. 11. Kern - budget figures include $140,000 for repair of parking lot and roads. No program personnel are in Sheriff's Department budget. Chaplain is only program person assigned to detention. 12. Sacramento - the 69 persons listed under correctional personnel are Sheriff Records Officers. 13. San Bernardino - budget, personnel, and inmate population figures do not include the six substation holding facilities operated by the Sheriff's .Department. ,• All program personnel in the adult detention facilities are volunteers. 14. San Joaquin budget figures include an estimate of inmate transportation costs of $399,500. 15. '"Santa Clara - the Probation Department cost to operate the Men's Work Furlough Facility ($1,416,000) and the average daily inmate population (250) at that facility are included. The 27 persons listed under correctional personnel are custody staff at the Sheriff's Women's Residential Center (9) and probation staff (18) at the Men's Work Furlough Facility. Two additional custody ,, counselors at Work Furlough were just authorized but are not included in budget ,. . , or personnel figures. 16. Sonoma - budget''figures include .costs related to court intervention=-court monitor' ($25,000'), consultant ($30,000), over-population ($57,000). Budget projections estimate over a $l million increase in the next fiscal year as more beds are .added to the system. The legal fees associated with the detention system lawsuits,°:which will be in the millions of dollars, are not included. 17. Ventura - budget ($1,241,068), personnel (33), and average daily inmate population (250) figures for the work furlough program-operated by the Correctional Services Agency are included. There are 69 Sheriff Services Technicians included in the correctional personnel figures. z: 8 B. Staff Types of Staff and Costs Of the thirteen counties studied, six use sworn deputies to supervise inmates (Alameda, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Mateo, and San Bernardino). Three counties use correctional officers only in detention (Sonoma, Solano, and Fresno). Four counties use a combination of deputies and correctional officers (Kern, Riverside, San Joaquin and Ventura). Kern County is requesting conversion to all deputies in housing units, and San Joaquin is converting to all correctional officers. Ventura utilizes "Sheriff Services Technicians" who have no direct contact with inmates (which is possible, given the facility design). Deputies I and II are used in Alameda`, San° Bernardino, and San Mateo. Deputy I's are sworn peace officers in Alameda and San Bernardino, but are non-sworn, limited-- duty deputies in San Mateo. Deputies receive the highest salary of persons supervising inmates in the thirteen counties (see Table 3). In the two counties using Deputy I's, they receive 29 percent and 10 percent less in salary than Deputy II's at the top step. In counties using correctional officers, they receive 15- percent to 32 percent less than deputy sheriffs at the top step. Some counties use, classifications other than .deputy sheriff or correctional officer to supervise inmates. These classifications are also paid less than deputies: sheriff records officer (21 percent less), group supervisor (28 percent less), group counselor (27 percent less), and senior group counselor (9 percent less). Benefits for correctional officers and deputy sheriffs are similar in almost all counties. This is because the most significant cost of the benefit package is safety retirement. (Safety retirement benefits apply,to 'employees in safety services--police and fire--on the assumption that their effective working life is shorter because they are exposed to greater hazard. ) Only a few counties do not grant safety retirement to correctional officers who physically supervise inmates (Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura).* Sonoma is now in the process of adding their correctional officers to safety retirement. Because of the similarities in benefits granted deputies and correctional officers,. cost savings cannot be anticipated in this area. The major cost in providing detention services is staff. Although correctional officers may receive lower salaries than deputies, the staff-to-inmate ratio is also clearly a dominant. staff cost determinant. The four counties with the lowest cost per inmate are *See Ames v. Board of Retirement of Tulare County (App. 5 Dist. 1983) 195 Cal. Rptr. 453, 147 C.A. 3d 906. The decision states that county correctional officers are entitled to "safety member" status in county retirment systems, inasmuch as their principle duties, including regular contact with minimum and medium security prisoners with- attendant exposure to hazards and risk of injury from prisoner contact, could be said to consist .of "active law enforcement." 9 also the four counties with the lowest staff-to-inmate ratio (San Joaquin, Fresno, Kern, San Bernardino). Two of these counties use correctional officers; one uses a combination, and the county with the lowest cost per inmate uses deputy sheriffs. Of the counties with the highest cost per inmate, two of the top three are also in the top three with respect to. staff-to-inmate ratio (Riverside and Contra Costa). Contra Costa uses deputies, but Riverside uses a combination of deputies and correctional officers. The county with the highest cost per inmate, San Mateo, uses deputies and limited-duty deputies. Table 3: COUNITIES RANKED ACCORDING TO OPERATIONAL COST INDICES Ranking based on Ranking based on Ranking based on Ranking based on Cost,; per Inmate Percent Sworn Ofcrs. Staff to Inmate' Ratio Cost per Citizen (High to Low) (High to Low) (High to Low) (High to Low) 1 San Mateo 1 San Mateo 1 Sonoma 1 Kern 2 Contra Costa 2 Contra Costa 2 Riverside 2 Santa Clara 3 Riverside 3 Santa Clara 3 Contra Costa 3 Ventura 4 Santa.Clara 4 San Bernardino 4 Solano 4 Sacramento 5 Alameda 5 Alameda 5 Sacramento 5 San Mateo 6 Ventura 6 Sacramento 6 Ventura 6 Alameda 7 Sacramento 7 Kern 7 Alameda 7 Solano 8 Solano 8 San Joaquin 8 San Mateo 8 San Joaquin 9 Sonoma 9 Ventura 9 Santa Clara 9 Sonoma 10 San Joaquin 10. Riverside 10 San Joaquin 10 Fresno 11 Kern 11 Solano 11 San Bernardino 11 Contra Costa 12 Fresno 12.Fresno 12 Kern 12 Riverside 13 San Bernardino 13 Sonoma 13 Fresno 13. San Bernardino The counties with the highest percentage of sworn staff in detention are also the counties with the highest operating costs (San Mateo, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara) with some anomalies, particularly San Bernardino. Advantages and Disadvantages to Particular Classifications in Detention .Sheriff's representatives in agencies using correctional officers indicate that it has worked well because the majority of their deputies do not .want to work in the jail. However, in Contra Costa County, 60 percent of the deputies working detention request reassignment to the jail. Deputies gain respect within the Department for operating housing modules well. Also, the interpersonal skills gained in detention can be used in the field on patrol and vice-versa. Training costs are significantly less for correctional officers than for deputies. Correctional officers are required to complete an 80-hour jail operations course within -the first year of employment and 24 hours of in-service training per year thereafter. Some counties provide PC 832 (firearms) training to correctional officers. Deputies 10 must attend a law enforcement academy (540 hours in Contra Costa) and take a 40-hour jail operations course. After the Academy, deputies in Contra Costa spend 10 weeks working in the Detention Division with an experienced officer and 12 weeks on patrol with an experienced officer prior to an independent assignment. Correctional officers can be on the job much sooner. However, some county staff argue that because correctional officers are not as well trained, it is necessary to operate with a higher officer-to-inmate and supervisor-to-officer ratio. At least one county (Sonoma) has had difficulty in recruiting qualified correctional officers. Sheriff's Department representatives say that .the.correctional officer salary level is too low to make it worthwhile for someone to move to the area for the job, and the existing labor pool is small. The most qualified correctional officers have historically left- detention for patrol opportunities or a better paying job at San Quentin. It then becomes difficult to promote from within the remaining ranks of correctional officers. Kern County representatives also noted that they have experienced problems due°.to correctional officers leaving for better jobs. In counties using both deputies and correctional officers in' detention, the attrition rate for correctional officers is slightly higher. Higher attrition rates could offset lower .training costs for correctional officers. Most persons agree„ that there is a definite need for an established career ladder when using correctional officers. If supervisory and promotional opportunities do not, exist, .itis difficult to attract well qualified applicants, and the most effective officers ,leave for better job opportunities. A number of Sheriff's value the inherent operational versatility associated with utilizing deputies in detention. In an emergency situation, there is a larger reserve of manpower and a greater flexibility of response. 11 O al O to a 3 " N U) i W >1 1N N W N to U a) N 7 ,Qa) 11 C Q) .0 Q) Q) U (1) a) a) O 0 O O N E W 0 >a Y� N >+ >� N �+ >� Z Z 2 2 a U) J-1 W f -4 O w N W N 0 dP N dP dP x ,. y C C .•� In M "o M •.i a) a) ro dP dP df dP dP dP dP aW dP dP dP dP'dP <a dP do tIP aP ap yJ fJ] U U) N O H O II1 M a 'V' N CO C C U1 111 V to O ri N N C W N M M N Mm N Mm M M M Mm M M M M NM M N N 4) KCn W N ...-._ � H •.i N {D Q r3;' W Q y C � W to Z N H W M co N M tD LD U1µtD N.•i Q1 1n C a1 01 M l0 O U1 U1 CD .-i Ln C � 'a ri co t0 C W O C C M N to Ln to r r co M co O C v M M - C7 a al O 1n C 41 r C r C M 61 N 1 V lD M 1n c 0z M CO OD yJ _ �+ V1 N N N H ri Nr-1 N N ri N r-1 N N N N N N ri H N ri -i H C IQ I 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I t I I t 1 I I I 1 1 y - ul 0 P4 U1 ri U1 l0 fT .i 01 O -4 O N o 0 0 0 (D n CO' ID O N U1 N O W M N 01 C r O'r r•I U) r N 0 O O N r to � O C M ri �. 'V ro coCD-r-I O U1 Q' at COD 01 111 co Ul O N Q• H 01 1n tD O d' M J-1 b i+•1 U G11 ri N N ,-i r-I ri ri r•1 H r•1 r•1 ri N N ,1 N r-1 ri ri r•1 r-1 .i .-i a H O w U 0 cai roro w H _ ro O , U H H H H U aJ O Ot .� •.i C F"1 W W W •ri W a ri W W U > C Q) a) a) W a) 'D Q) O a) Q) a) W O U U U w U H M. .-1 U U E a) ,4 bJ .,j H .H -4 H •rl O •N H H '0 H C W •A -4 U) CTa JJ H H W W H W H w HH Q a W W N. W Fi ro. w w w N w 4J W0 G, 44 w a) 0-4 u w Ga U ro W W w o 0 1W o w w'0 W o w W w 0 U o o w U N ro H -.iN W W w w ww W w w w 41 1.4 a� .i44 > > O p w •.i •.i -H H ri .1 .i •.i 0 .14r .r •.i •i -HQ) U1 -4; W W Wm 'oW ro WW U a W W W U) > 0 It 'a W W W•r m N El a) a) Q) C C C) C O a) Q) a) C Q) a) �- U r:,d 0 3 C C Q) 0) a)1J w yJ m a x c o o c o .c ca c o c 0 0 c uJ aU Al lo ro u) u) N "i .•.1U) •r♦ U) u) u) -4u) u) H u) O O U, N •,i •'i N a a) a H J-1 4J iJ . W 11 U - L JJ W !n W U u V U >v >1 U U' U > >.W >1 U >. >. >+ U W C U U >. W W W J-J 1J 4J W Cl J.J a) J.1 1J-4N J L a a) 4J 4J JC4 0 " a) Q) 1J •ri a O a s a W W a W a a W a W a a a a 3 ,� W W a W aU z a a N Si a a, a a s c,o-- C -- si.,. W Cl, a, 0— a) ro Uo uo c°� c cn o coy � � �cW� u) u u° "S ul u.. U W a o W w w H Ea W Qui +'J W a .. W •.i O w x N aJ ro as dP NN ro M dP dP dP M as dP dP dP dP dP� dP dp "• o CQ U u) O r•I M r V1 01 IT co C Ln O to -4 yJ (++ >'1 $4 M M N M M M M M M M N M M ro u W m u) mro fn o G wQfn U) r N > P: M O w a v) as G=1 O N N t0 l0 N 0 C 01 M N 01 co - > N . ULD Lo r O C M 01 In r- co LD M C' )4 W N N N N N N N N N N N N N a N I 1 1 I I I I t 1 1 1 1 1 ul {� -i N V' r♦ O r 01 01 C \o r Ln N C W M N' M r r -4 U1 .•1 O N, N N Ef) . W >I H O O 01 1 01 O O N = O tT CO .,.i ' ro P. N N N H r-1 r•i N N N N N ri ri W O C d 0 W > LL N 4j 4J W H H H H H H r H H W 4.1 d+ a O H H H •d W W W W W W W W W W W W W U pt N yJ W W W W W W W W W W W W W y C rl ro a) -4 •r♦ •rl -A •rr •.i -4 •.1 •.i •'i „i •.i •rl y -A U 4J W W W W aa)) a) Q) Q) N N a) N N a Ra X w "rl x x x a 4 x c x c 4 x x > o E-1 .,i [1 u) to U) u) UJ U) Ul U) ul Ul u) U) U) O 3 En >, >, >, > >, >, >, >, >, > >, >, >, m a W JJ N JJ 1J N J-1 JJ 4jJ-J >J ♦J JJ 4-j14O ro ,•.1 a a a a a 0 0 a a a a a a ro ,J w U a a a O, a a a a a a a a a a) a) 0 N a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) Q) J; .H a a a a a a a a a a a a a a u (I a m Ci C W C C 0 w ro rl $ aJ W .rl W 0 �4 ..,Cj N U O u ro U 44 H Q)N Croy u ro v 1 1n (am 10 o m o o ro W U m i o v W C W w h ro a E a m N - U a aNi > T M c a [ i). a N U) UI U) I N I to I .r N m- 12 -12 C. Operating Conditions The detention systems in this study are all overcrowded. The counties report a range from 10 percent over rated capacity in Alameda to 73 percent in Kern County during the last fiscal year. (Kern County also has one of the lowest per-inmate costs. ) Contra Costa County is 21 percent over rated capacity. The average of all counties is 34 percent. There is no clear pattern as to how overcrowding affects per-inmate cost. Obviously, if an increase in the inmate population is not followed by a comparable increase in staff, the average cost per inmate will decrease. This has happened in Ventura County, which has switched to double bunking in all housing modules with no increased staff. Alameda County has also received a temporary variance to double bunk up to one-third of the cells in the North County facility. : However,.. temporary two-year variances of this sort are granted by the Board of Corrections with the understanding that the county will alleviate the overcrowding problem and return the facility to the original rated capacity. Facility configuration is related to whether particular spaces can be safely overcrowded without an increase in .staff. Compliance with California Minimum Jail Standards, or higher standards such as the Amer.ican ,Correctional Association standards, reflects a county's capability ,and effort to operate a safe jail system. Certainly unsafe . . conditions in the jails can lead to expensive litigation. Although meeting the requirements does ,not prevent litigation, itis basic to a strong defense. Nine of -the thirteen counties studied have detention-related court orders. Fresno County recently paid $350,000 to the survivors of a deceased jail .inmate who died as a result'of a beating in an area that did not offer adequate separation and was overcrowded. Two counties (Sonoma and Santa Clara) are being monitored by the court. Both counties have incurred significant legal and associated fees, and both will ultimately experience major increases in their operating budgets for detention as new facilities and staff are added to meet court-imposed conditions. All the counties in this study have received State bond monies and are planning to build new detention facilities. Contra Costa and Sacramento Counties are the only two counties to have American Medical Association accreditation for the inmate medical program in their facilities. Contra Costa County is the only county in California to .be accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Corrections. The mission statement for the new facility- in San Joaquin includes a commitment to meet the requirements for ACA accreditation. IV. CONCLUSIONS There are two main determinants of staff operating costs in the detention system: the wage paid to personnel and the number of personnel needed to operate the system. A reduction in either or both will achieve cost savings. There also appear to be economies in centralizing detention services. For illustrative purposes, annual custody costs are projected for three different levels of staffing that could be needed to operate a new 560-bed detention facility in Contra Costa County--80 - 100 - 120 additional custody officers. (These are hypothetical figures. A staffing study for the new facility is still progress. ) The annual custody salary costs are projected, 13 .. using current .top step pay (no benefits included) for the three various types of staff studied in this report: Current Annual Salary Annual Salary Annual Salary Top Cost of 80 Cost for 100 Cost for 120 Classification Step/Mo. Officers Officers Officers -------------- -------- ------------- ------------- ------------ Deputy Sheriff $2,462 $2,363,520 $2,954,400 $3,545,280 (Contra Costa County) Deputy SheriffI $2,269 $2,178,240 $2,722,800 $3,267,360 (San Bernardino) Deputy Sheriff i . $2,013 $1,932,480 $2,415,600 $2,898,720 (Alameda) Correctional Officer $1,905 $1,828,800 $2,286,000 . $2,743,200 (Solano--closest county to Contra Costa geographically using correctional officers) Correctional Officer $1,745 $1,675,200 $2,094,000 $2,512,800 (Riverside--lowest top, . , step salary) Using these pay scales, the annual salaries of Deputy Sheriff I's are 9 to 22 percent less than that for deputy sheriffs in Contra Costa,.County. Correctional officers' annual salaries are 29 to 41 percent less. These estimates are only for those additional custody officers that might be needed .to open a new Contra Costa County facility and do not include any costs or- savings ;from converting deputy sheriffs now in the detention division to some other classification.* The data obtained in this study indicates that use of lower paid Deputy I's or correctional officers is workable in some counties, although other counties have . " experienced recruitment, attrition, and competency problems. The choice between deputies and correctional officers is obviously not neutral, or the recommendation would clearly be for lower paid personnel. There are many v factors to be weighed in assessing how a conversion to lower paid staff would affect -this County: (1) Can the necessary number,of qualified staff be recruited? The Sheriff's Department currently has some problems in filling the available deputy positions, given the standards established and the current .wage scale which is below the majority of police agencies in this area. *Alameda County estimated a $3 million savings over the first five years from hiring 80.,new deputies. at the Deputy I level and from departmental attrition for five years at ,five percent per year. 14 (2) Can lower paid staff provide the quality of detention services required in the direct supervision facilities this County operates? How would this staff be integrated with existing staff? (3') Would .the safety 'of Contra Costa County citizens be jeopardized by reducing the manpower reserve for emergencies? (4) Is pay parity. for deputies and correctional officers a possibility, thereby negating continuous long-term savings? The National Institute of Corrections is recommending such parity. There is also currently a bill in the Legislature (SB 1373) which declares that recommendations for the salaries of correctional peace officers employed by the Department of Corrections and the Department of the Youth Authority shall be based on the estimated. average salaries as of July 1 of the year in .which recommendations are made for each corresponding rank for the police departments of the Cities of Berkeley, Glendale, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, Pasadena, Santa Clara, San Jose, Santa Monica, and San Francisco and the Sheriff's Department of Alameda County. (5) Will there be "hidden" costs associated with a switch to non-sworn personnel? Use of another classification in detention to perform certain functions can lead to" increased, rather than decreased, costs. For example, if deputies now doing booking are replaced with clerks; deputies will still be 'required to provide supervision of inmates while in the booking area. This would- lead to an increase in staff and cost because deputies now provide both clerical and supervision functions in booking. ' The Sheriff regularly assigns deputies on light duty to some non-custody functions, such as staffing the Work Alternative Project. If these deputies are replaced by civilians, they might have to remain off duty (with full salary). Also; the classification needed to perform work now being done by"deputies in some other non-custody functions, e.g. , Bureau of Administrative Services, may be more expensive than the deputy, e.g. , management analyst. The options for consideration that arise from this study follow. The options are not necessarily mutually exclusive. (0 - Maintain status. quo. Use deputy sheriffs for all custody duties and civilians for program and business/clerical functions. (2) Develop two or more classifications for the deputy sheriff position. One classification would be responsible for custody functions at a lower salary, and one classification would be qualified for patrol. (3) Develop a non-sworn correctional officer classification: a. for all detention functions - would need to convert 170 existing sworn detention personnel and hire whatever added positions are required for the new facility; b. for limited detention functions, e.g. , with no innmate contact (like Ventura's Sheriff Services Technician position) or limited inmate contact (depending on security level). Deputies could continue being 15 used at the MDF to supervise the maximum security prisoners and deputies, and correctional officers could be used at the new facility. The new facility will house minimum and medium security prisoners--the majority of whom will be sentenced. (4) Maintain current deputy sheriff classification but increase the use of non-sworn persons in various roles in the detention division:, a. . group counselors at Work Furlough - could convert existing sworn staff at Work Furlough (16) to non-sworn staff with one supervising custody person. b. group counselors at drunk driving sentenced facility (if developed) - If Rehabilitation Center were converted to sentenced drunk driving facility when new jail is operational and held 100 or more prisoners, it could be operated with one custody person and alcohol counselors. c. group counselors to staff the Work Alternative Project. 4 16 Alameda County Appendix 1: Survey Results ALAMEDA COUNTY 1. Facilities The Alameda County Sheriff's Department operates all County detention facilities: separate female and male work furlough facilities, the North County Jail (opened in 1984 for male and female pretrial inmates) and the Santa Rita complex made up of three facilities for both pretrial and sentenced prisoners. The Sheriff also operates a "work in lieu of jail" program for sentenced prisoners- 2. risoners-2. Staff Sworn peace officers supervise inmates in all County -facilities. In: May 1984,. the County began implementing Deputy I and II classifications. Personnel in the Deputy I position start work in the jail system and are paid 17-29 percent less than the Deputy II category. A Deputy I can move to Deputy II after 23 months service and successful completion of a performance evaluation. Deputies remain in the detention system, on the average, four years before assignment to patrol. Deputies ,have•direct contact with inmates at the work furlough facilities and Santa Rita and, to a more limited extent, at the new North County Jail. Housing modules are supervised by a deputy in a control room, and other deputies rove between hoesing modules. - The new Deputy I classification was established at the time the Board of Supervisors was considering the need for additional staffing to operate the North County Jail. . The Board agreed to a certain number of positions based on a dower starting pay. It was estimated that the County would save $3 million over . the first five years by hiring 80 new deputies at the Deputy I pay level and from departmental attrition for five years at five percent per year. Ongoing savings from attrition after the initial five years was estimated at $545,574 per year. Alameda County has only had a year's experience with the new classification. They have filled all authorized slots, and Sheriff's Department staff are satisfied with the quality of recruits. The department has had some recruiting problems because the starting pay is $1,825/month, and the nearby City of Berkeley's, starting pay for a police officer is $2,350/month. It is anticipated, that some deputies will ultimately leave for better paying jobs in other local law enforcement agencies. The current attrition rate for Deputy Sheriff II personnel is b.5 percent. 3. Operating Conditions Because of systemwide overcrowding, the Sheriff has been granted a temporary variance to operate the North County facility at a capacity of 778 persons. At this capacity, up to one-third of the cells are double-bunked. The County is currently in the process of replacing the Santa Rita Facility with a new 1,512-bed facility at the same site. In August 1983, the Superior Court, in Smith vs. Dyer, issued an order affecting the Greystone Facility at Santa Rita which required (1) inmates not sleeping on floors except in emergencies; (2) prompt •replacement of broken toilets, showers, and sinks; (3) immediate improvement and repair of the electrical system, heating units, steam lines, 1 Alameda County Appendix l: Survey' Results roof, and wire mesh over cells; and (4) several administrative modifications. In addition, the court ordered Greystone to be effectively closed on or before January 1, 1986. 2 Contra Costa County Appendix. l: Survey Results CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff-Coroner operates three detention facilities, all staffed by sworn deputies: the maximum security Martinez Detention Facility for pretrial and sentenced male and female inmates, a minimum security Rehabilitation Center for sentenced males with a branch jail for medium security male pretrial inmates, and a work furlough facility for minimum security sentenced males and females. The Sheriff operates a "work in lieu of jail" program for sentenced inmates. All facilities employ direct supervision of inmates by deputies. 2. Staff The Sheriff supports use of deputy sheriffs in all the facilities because the high recruitment and training standards provide the level of competence required to directly supervise inmates. Deputy sheriffs also provide a reserve of peace officers that can be quickly called out in time of emergency. Deputies in Contra Costa County view working detention as part of their professional responsibilities, and 60 percent of the detention officers requested repeat assignments to, detention. The attrition rate for deputy sheriffs 'in Contra Costa,County is 6.5 percent per year. 3. Operating Conditions The Martinez Detention Facility and the Work Furlough Center are model facilities. '' The .California Board of Corrections and the National Institute of Corrections train detention and corrections professionals from the State. and nation in the planning, design, and operation of new-generation jails at these two facilities. Contra Costa County facilities suffer the same overcrowding problems occurring in the other counties in this study. However, with the exception of current overcrowding in the housing modules at the Martinez Detention Facility, the County fully complies with all Minimum Jail Standards. The Sheriff recently signed: a. Superior :Court consent decree related to general conditions at the Martinez Detention Facility. 3 i Fresno County Appendix 1: Survey Results FRESNO COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff's Department operates a main jail for sentenced and pretrial male and female prisoners and a branch jail for sentenced, male and female, minimum custody prisoners. The Sheriff provides custody for work furloughees and a "work in lieu of jail" program for sentenced inmates. 2. Staff With the exception of one sworn officer, Fresno County relies entirely on correctional officers to operate the' detention division. Staff supervision is by non-sworn correctional sergeants and lieutenants. Correctional officers . provide intra-county transportaion of prisoners; sworn deputies are used to provide all out-of-county prisoner transportation. Officers have direct contact with inmates in the minimum security facility only. The fringe benefit package is similar for deputies and correctional officers. Correctional officers originally were not included in safety retirement, but through successful litigation, are now members. Fresno County representatives think that the cost savings from using correctional officers occurs only at entry level. Most correctional officers remain on the job, and a Correctional Officer III is ,paid more than an entry level deputy. The advantage of using correctional officers, they believe, is .the establishment of a rank of correctional professionals who know they will always be working detention. There are incentives to become knowledgeable regarding detention policies and procedures. 3. Operating Conditions In January 1983, the Fresno County Superior Court ordered numerous changes in the County's detention practices. In November 1983, a Fresno County jury awarded $350,000 to the survivors of a deceased jail inmate. The death occurred as the result of injuries suffered after a beating by another prisoner in a pre-booking holding area that did not offer adequate separation of prisoners and was overcrowded. 4 Kern County Appendix 1: Survey Results KERN COUNTY 1. Facilities_ Kern County currently employs deputy sheriffs to supervise inmates at the main jail (which houses mostly pretrial male and female inmates) and at the medium/maximum security facility at Lerdo (for pretrial and sentenced male prisoners). There is also a minimum security facility for men at Lerdo and a minimum security unit for women, constructed in response to a suit filed on behalf of equal programs and services for females. The County operates a work alternative program but does not provide a work furlough program. 2. Staff Correctional officers are employed to supervise the minimum security units at Lerdo. There is direct contact between inmate and correctional officer in minimum security units. Correctional Officer I's provide inmate supervision. Correctional Officer II's and III's are used in' staff supervisory positions. A sworn sergeant serves as the minimum security facility commander. Cooks, auto mechanics,", and maintenance workers are also correctional officers in Kern County. The personnel in .these classifications provide inmate supervision and are'members of safety retirement. Correctional officers transport minimum security inmates for work crews and to the hospital when-.needed. The Sheriff has requested conversion from correctional officers to deputy sheriffs for those positions assigned to provide security in minimum security housing. Correctional officers would continue to supervise crews working out of the. facility on County work projects. The additional budget request for conversion is $200,880 and will cover the same number of staff positions. The request has not .as yet been acted upon. Correctional officers and deputies have benefit parity, although correctional officers have a lower salary scale. The conversion: request. was prompted by several factors. Personnel in the correctional officer classification are expected to perform many duties which are similar to those assigned to deputy sheriffs. Hiring standards for correctional officers, however, are lower. The Sheriff thinks that because of this lower standard, many of the persons hired for the correctional officer positions are not competent to perform expected duties, particularly the supervision.of inmates and writing of reports. Also, because correctional officers are not qualified to carry firearms, they cannot be used in emergency situations. In 1983, there was an inmate riot at the minimum security facility, and it -was nearly destroyed before sworn personnel could arrive to quell the disturbance. The Sheriff's Department staff also indicate the best correctional officers leave for higher paying positions. If the. conversion request is approved, current correctional officers will be allowed to take the test for deputy sheriff positions. Officers not able to 5 Kern County Appendix 1: Survey Results pass the test will. be. allowed to remain, and their positions will be converted to' the deputy sheriff category as they leave. 3. Operating Conditions Serious overcrowding continues in Kern County, with inmates sleeping on the floor and in space designed for programs. Plans are moving forward to construct more housing at the Lerdo site. 6 Riverside County Appendix l: Survey Results RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff operates five facilities which detain persons for more than 24 hours. The Main, Blythe, and Indio jails hold male and female pretrial and sentenced persons. The Banning Jail holds pretrial male and female prisoners, and the Banning Rehabilitation Center holds sentenced men. The Sheriff operates a work furlough and "work in lieu of jail" program for sentenced men and women. 2. Staff Riverside County uses both deputy sheriffs and correctional officers to supervise inmates. The classification of correctional officer includes three steps, each with different functions: Correctional Officer I (15 positions) - responsibilities are basically clerical, e.g. , intake, business office, runners. Correctional Officer II (94 positions) - provides all inmate supervision at the sentenced minimum security facility under the command of a sworn lieutenant. Staff have direct contact with inmates at this facility. Correctional Officer . II's also work in the business office and provide court and out-of-county transportation. Other duties include providing general security at the county hospital and supervision in the security unit at the hospital. Correctional Officer III (34 positions) - responsible for supervision of in-custody work crews;: and at the Main Jail, CO III's operate the commissary and fill the procurement officer position. , Correctional Officer III's staff the , Type I jail in Riverside and will staff the two additional Type I jails that are going to be opened. There are also Supervising Correctional Officers who supervise correctional officers and/or deputy sheriffs. In some cases, correctional officers supervise higher-paid deputies in the jail facilities. Deputies assigned, to. detention are primarily responsible for inmate supervision at the maximum security main Jail and the jails at Indio and Blythe. Deputies have direct contact with inmates. Deputies also staff booking and release functions., Correctional officers provide support services at these facilities--transportation, food service, clerical, laundry. In an emergency situation, correctional officers are put on overtime, and sworn staff are assigned to.the field. Sheriff's Department representatives .think. this organizational scheme provides stability in the detention system. Correctional officers provide career staff for the jails. A career ladder was established for correctional officers to upgrade the caliber of personnel. In September 1982, the Correctional Officer III step was created and, at the top step, is comparable in pay to a starting deputy sheriff. There is still a wide gap in salary between starting correctional officers and deputies. 7 Riverside County Appendix l: Survey Results Two and a half. .years ago, correctional officers in Riverside became part of safety. retirement. The attrition rate for deputies is about 3.7 percent and for correctional officers, approximately 11 percent. 3. Operating.Conditions The County is involved in a building program and will continue to face heavy overcrowding pressures until new beds. are available. County facilities are in compliance with Minimum Jail Standards except for overcrowding and some space inadequacies in the main jail. Due to legal action, there is a population cap at the Indio substation, and no prisoners may sleep on the floor at the main jail. The Sheriff has had to triple-bunk several areas in response to the order. 8 Sacramento County. Appendix 1: Survey Results SACRAMENTO COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff runs the main jail for pretrial prisoners and a coed work furlough facility in •Sacramento, and a complex of facilities at the Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center in Elk Grove. This complex includes minimum to maximum security units for sentenced men and a women's facility. The Sheriff also operates a "work in lieu of jail" program. 2. Staff Deputy sheriffs provide the inmate supervision in all County detention facilities. However, there is a Sheriff's Record Officer (SRO) classification that provides some supervision of inmates in minimum security units only. SRO's working at the branch jail supervise clothing and property, perform accounting functions, and handle the commissary, laundry, and purchasing. At the .main jail, SRO's do not have direct contact with inmates but perform the following activities: . booking, writing medical reports, clothing and property, cashier, fiscal, commissary, librarian: SRO's constitute approximately 19 percent of the total detention staff. Except for a smaller educational incentive, SRO's receive the same benefits as 'deputies. SRO's ate members of safety retirement. The Sheriff recently circulated a memorandum regarding use of correctional officers vs. deputy sheriffs (December 4, 1984) in which it was indicated that no correctional class will be established in the foreseeable future. The decision was based on the following: 1) Use of correctional officers would not move deputies presently assigned .to jail. duties to field services any faster. 2) Promotional opportunities would be restricted. Qualified deputies might have a ten-year wait to take the test for sergeant. 3) When considering total personnel costs, including salaries, recruitment, training, personnel turnover, injury costs, etc. , use of correctional officers,will not constitute_a significant savings. 4) Deputies provide a high quality of service in the jails and there is no evidence to suggest that the use of correctional officers would improve performance. 3. Operating Conditions Sacramento County is constructing a new 1,000-bed main jail to replace an existing 431-bed structure that must be replaced pursuant to a settlement agreement. Due to overcrowding and unavailable program space, the main jail does not comply with some Minimum Jail Standards. A class action suit brought regarding overcrowding and lack of adequate fire protection and medical care was settled by consent decree in September 1981. The medical programs at the main jail and the branch jail are now certified by the American Medical Association. 9 San Bernardino. County Appendix 1: Survey Results SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff operates two major facilities in this County. The main jail in San Bernardino holds sentenced and unsentenced male and female prisoners., The Glen Helen maximum and minimum security facility holds sentenced male prisoners. In addition, the Sheriff runs six substations primarily for pretrial holding, each having an assigned.work force of sentenced prisoners. There are no work furlough programs operating in the County. The Sheriff does provide a "work in. lieu. of jail" program for sentenced inmates. 2. Staff San Bernardino, like Alameda County, has a Deputy I and Deputy II classification. Deputy I's are assigned to detention; they serve as bailiffs and supervise inmates in the jail facilities. Deputy I's are sworn peace officers and are eligible to take the exam for Deputy II after one year. A Deputy I can only- be promoted if there is a vacant position. Deputy II's have more supervisory,responsibilities and work both detention and patrol. The Deputy I classification was implemented 18 months ago. The Board of Supervisors told ,the Sheriff that any savings realized from filling Deputy II positions with Deputy I's could be used to increase the number of Deputy II's in the field. The Sheriff has increased the number of new field deputies by 48. In:. detention, about half the positions are currently filled by Deputy I's. ;.Deputy I's receive a lower salary, but the two classifications receive the same benefits. Custody-personnel are separated from inmates in all facilities except in the sentenced °minimum security housing units where there is direct contact. The attrition rate for sworn personnel in the Sheriff's Department is about three percent per year. ;3. Operating- Conditions. No significant litigation has- been reported, and all detention facilities are in basic compliance with Minimum Jail Standards, with some physical plant exceptions,.in the main jail. 10 San_ Joaquin County Appendix 1: Survey Results SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 1. Facilities There are three separate facilities operated by the Sheriff at French Camp--the men's jail for pretrial and maximum security inmates, a pretrial and sentenced woemen's facility, and the minimum security honor farm for males only. A work furlough program is available at French Camp for men and women. The Sheriff also operates a.,"work in lieu of jail" program. 2. Staff San Joaquin County began utilizing some correctional officers to supervise inmates in 1978 (they were called Institutional Support Officers). The County is now in the process of switching entirely to correctional officers in the jails. Deputy sheriff positions are being filled by correctional officers as they become available. Deputies riot qualified for the field will remain in detention (about three to eight percent). Deputies remain in the jails, on the average,, over three years before positions become available in the field. There are no.•differences in the functions performed by deputies and correctional officers in the. jails, although correctional officers do not transport inmates. There are, fixed .posts, and both classifications rotate through the detention system. Both classifications are supervised by sworn sergeants. Currently, no career ladder exists for correctional officers; however, there is a desire to establish a correctional sergeant classification in the future. The .Retirement Board in San ,Joaquin recently voted safety member retirement to correctional. officers. Correctional officers have' approached both the Deputy Sheriffs' Association and the Employees' Association of San Joaquin County, requesting representation .in their bid to receive equal pay with deputy sheriffs for equal work. A recent Board of Supervisors-sponsored citizen study of the entire corrections system recommended pay parity for correctional officers and deputies. County representatives expect the pay gap to at least be narrowed in the next negotiations. The attrition rate for deputies in 1983 was two percent, and in 1984 it was four percent.. . .The:.,attrition rate for correctional officers for those same years was five percent and 22 percent, respectively. 3i� Operating Conditions The County received $1 million' in State .bond money to construct a prisoner health care housing unit. The County is engaged in a major planning effort to decide the need for future expansion of bed capacity. No litigation has been reported, and the facilities are in compliance except for overcrowding in some housing units and the need for a safety .cell and a public information plan. Although the County facilities are not certified by the ACA or AMA, the mission statement for future facilities includes meeting ACA standards. 11 San .Mateo County Appendix 1: Survey Results SAN MATEO COUNTY 1. Facilities Five facilities are operated by the Sheriff in San Mateo County, including a Main Jail (men only), a Women's Correctional Center (including work furlough), and a Men's Work Furlough facility--all located in Redwood City. There is a Correctional Center in _La Honda for minimum security and medium security inmates, and a North County (Type I) facility. The Sheriff also provides a "work in lieu of jail" program for sentenced prisoners. 2. Staff San Mateo operates three of the five facilities using Deputy I and II's. However, the Deputy I classification in San Mateo is a "limited-duty peace officer", not the same sworn peace officer classification used in Alameda and San Bernardino. Limited-duty peace officers are basically correctional officers, but they receive PC 832 training in firearms. Limited-duty peace officers do not attend the Law Enforcement Academy but have peace officer powers while working in the jail. The .Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission (POST) has recently eliminated the "limited- duty peace officer" classification, effective-July-1, 1985. In the three facilities where Deputy I and II's work side by side (Main Jail, Women's Correctional Center, and North County), there are no differences in functions-performed. Both work regular custody in maximum and medium security units and have direct contact with inmates. Deputy I's do not work at the Men's Work Furlough facility.or the Correctional Center. The division 'of responsibilities between Deputy I's and II's is a labor issue. Deputy II's want to limit the areas of work eligible for Deputy I assignment. The rationale for not having Deputy I's work in the rehabilitation programs is that they do not have adequate training to provide counseling to inmates. Deputy II's also work patrol. Deputy I can be promoted to Deputy II through an examination after one year. ,..(Deputy I and II are flexible classifications, so there are no fixed numbers in either classification, only an overall authorized total. ) There are currently 39 Deputy I'*s out of a total 141 authorized custody personnel. About 50 percent of the Deputy Vs who pass the exam for Deputy II and go to the Academy fail the Field Training Officer Program and return to the Deputy I class. This particular organizational scheme has been in operation for five years. There are several advantages cited by Sheriff's Department staff. The more Deputy I's there are, the fewer Deputy II's have to remain in detention, which is viewed as positive by Deputy II's. It is also an excellent approach to recruit and train minority and female applicants. There is a less strenuous physical exam for Deputy I, and the year required before applying for Deputy II provides excellent on-the-job preparation for the Academy. There is about a five .percent turnover rate for both Deputy I and Deputy II. 12 San Mateo County Appendix 1: Survey Results 3. Operating Conditions - San Mateo County recently opened the women's facility (1980) and the North County Correctional Facility (1983). Despite significant construction, the increase of prisoners has outpaced the effort. San Mateo will receive $8 million of State bond money for the construction of additional beds. The County is not involved in any detention system litigation, and the jails are in compliance with Minimum Jail Standards except for the following: overcrowding, no infirmary (main jail), needed staff at Men's Work Furlough, segregation of mentally disturbed, needed medical prescreening (Women's Correctional Facility), and inadequate audio-visual monitoring (Men's Correctional Facility). 13 Santa Clara County Appendix 1: Survey Results SANTA CLARA COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff operates detention facilities in three areas within the County. The main jail in San Jose, which holds pretrial men, has been a focal point of a conditions-of-confinement suit. A special monitor has been appointed by the court. A second major complex is at Elmwood: the men's facility is utilized for pretrial and sentenced inmates at maximum (due to overcrowding at the main jail)., medium, and minimum security levels; the women's facility holds pretrial and sentenced women. . The women's facility is under the supervision of the. Federal .District.Court. The North County Jail in Palo Alto holds pretrial and sentenced male and female prisoners. The Women's Residential Center in San Jose is located in a former apartment building and houses up to 28 minimum security women on work furlough or on trusty status who may live there with their children. The Sheriff also operates a "work in lieu of jail" program for sentenced inmates. Last year, the County opened a 250-bed work furlough facility for men, operated by 'the Probation Department. 2. Staff All Sheriff's Department facilities have deputy sheriffs supervising inmates with the exception of the Women's Residential Center. A. sergeant is the Women's Residential Center commander, and Group Counselor II's (who work for the Sheriff) provide custody services. Group Counselor II's can work without supervision. Deputies working in detention receive five percent more pay than deputies in patrol. Deputies have direct contact with inmates in some, but not all, facilities. Six years ago, the County began phasing out a Deputy I classification. Deputy I's were correctional officers rather than peace officers, and they staffed the minimum security facility. They had no career ladder. The newly-elected Sheriff wanted the versatility provided by having peace officers in detention and the field. At that time, Deputy I's were allowed to waive the test for peace officer and attend the Academy for promotion to Deputy Sheriff. The attrition rate for sworn staff in Santa Clara County is eight percent per year. 3. Operating Conditions In a major court case, the County has been placed under a court order that limits the main jail population and establishes a timetable to develop .additional prisoner housing. To reduce crowding, the court has ordered the release of prisoners prior to the expiration of their sentences and has ordered 14 Santa Clara County Appendix 1: Survey Results the construction of several interim housing units at Elmwood. The County is in the process of completing construction documents for a proposed new jail. A recent study indicated that the County had relied primarily on alternatives to • incarceration to manage a growing jail population. These programs managed to absorb the normal increases in inmate population but were not able to impact an increasing crime rate. The main jail, the facilities at Elmwood, the North County Jail, and the Women's Residential Center are not in compliance with a number of Minimum Jail Standards.- 15 Solano County Appendix 1: 'Survey Results SOLANO COUNTY 1. Facilities . The main jail in Fairfield houses male and female pretrial prisoners and overflow or management problem sentenced prisoners. The Claybank facility houses sentenced males ,and females. The third facility is the Branch Jail in Vallejo for pretrial and sentenced men. The facilities, which include work furlough programs for men and women, are all managed by the Sheriff's Department. A "work in lieu of jail" program is also run by the Sheriff. 2. Staff Correctional officers provide all detention staffing with the exception of supervising sworn sergeants and lieutenants. Correctional officers currently supervise the graveyard shift and will replace supervising sergeants on the day shift in the future facilities. Correctional officers have direct contact with inmates and provide supervision at booking. Solano County. staffed the jails with correctional officers- eight years ago in an effort to reduce salary costs and as a method to free sworn personnel for patrol. The attrition rate for deputy sheriff is usually two percent per year; but in 1984-85, it was six to eight percent. The rate for correctional officers is . , eight percent per year. 3. Operating Conditions Solano County is planning a new detention facility with funds awarded from State bond monies. In July 1982, the County entered into a stipulated agreement with the Federal Court to provide inmates with an adequate legal access program. There are several physical plant inadequacies, based on Minumum Jail Standards, in Solano County facilities and several health program and facility needs. 16 Sonoma County Appendix 1: Survey Results SONOMA COUNTY 1. Facilities The Sheriff operates the main jail in Santa Rosa for all pretrial men and women and some sentenced prisoners and the honor farm for sentenced males classified for minimum security. Plans are underway to add beds for both male and female inmates at the present honor farm site. The work furlough program for men and women operates from the honor farm site. The Sheriff provides custody for work furloughees, but the Probation Department supervises work furloughees while out of custody. The Sheriff does not operate a "work in lieu of jail" program. 2'. Staff Correctional officers provide all custody functions in the County facilities. There is one sworn captain and one sworn lieutenant in the detention division. Correctional .Officer. III's and non-sworn sergeants and lieutenants supervise the correctional officers. The County has recently started operating two direct supervision :housing units modeled after the Contra Costa County Martinez Detention .Facility, using Correctional Officer II's. Correctional officers book inmates but do not provide out-of-facility transportation. Two advantages to using correctional officers mentioned by Sonoma County staff were: 1) the ability. to focus training on one function, and 2) the fact that training costs, are much less for correctional officers than for deputy sheriffs. Correctional officer salaries in Sonoma County have been increasing at a faster rate than deputy salaries since 1981. Difficulty in recruiting even minimally qualified correctional officers led to the wage increases. According to Sheriff's Department representatives, very few new applicants appear on the recruitment list, and the most effective officers leave for other positions. Also, very few officers are suitable for promotion. The County is initiating a study regarding the use of deputy sheriffs rather than correctional officers in detention. Wage increases and the opening of career ladder opportunities for correctional officers may have led to a drop in the attrition rate in the last two years from 20-60.percent to 10-12 percent. Although correctional officers are not eligible for safety retirement, the County Counsel has indicated the duties they perform entitle them to safety retirement. An issue still to be resolved is whether these retirement benefits will be retroactive. 3. Operating Conditions As the jail population has increased in Sonoma County, more attention has been focused on the detention system. The County continues to be monitored by the Federal District Court through a court monitor as a result of a class action suit settled in 1982. z 17 Ventura County Appendix 1: Survey Results VENTURA COUNTY 1. Facilities The County has two systems of adult detention and corrections. The Sheriff operates four facilities consisting of: the Pretrial/Main Jail for males in Ventura, an honor farm for all women and minimum security men, a medium security facility for sentenced males, and the East Valley Holding Facility (Type I). The Corrections. Services Agency began operating a 285-bed facility for both male and female work furlough inmates and weekenders in July 1976. The Board of Supervisors thought this was a more appropriate agency to run rehabilitation programs: Program participants in this facility are supervised by group supervisors. Senior Group Supervisors provide first-line supervision. Group supervisors are not members of safety retirement. 2. Staff In the Sheriff' s facilities_, visual surveillance of inmates is provided by _ Sheriff Services. Technicians (SST). At the Main Jail, the. SST's remain in control pods. and also work in areas such as the commissary. At the honor farm, SST's provide visual supervision of inmates -in the kitchen and laundry. SST's have no direct contact with inmates and are not members of safety retirement. Deputy sheriffs perform physical supervision, searches, transportation, escorting,-.and counseling at all facilities. SST's and deputies are supervised by senior deputies and sergeants. Ventura' County used correctional officers prior to 1977 when the County changed to the more limited classification of SST. At the time, correctional officers carried out the same functions as deputies in detention and were members of safety retirement. Correctional officers were organizing to achieve pay parity and a career ladder. The County elected to switch to the less expensive SST category, which County representatives think allows the maximum use of sworn staff. _ The attrition rate is low for both deputy sheriffs who work in the jails (3.5-4 percent) and SST's (2 percent). 3. Operating Conditions Ventura County; like Contra Costa County, has made strong efforts to address its detention system needs using County resources. The facilities are in good condition, although seriously overcrowded. The County applied for and received a temporary variance to double bunk up to half of the Pretrial/Main Jail population. Continuing jail population pressures have resulted in court orders to provide additional bunks in the remaining cells. County facilities are in compliance with Minimum Jail Standard except for overcrowding. 18 Appendix 2: Detention Staffing Survey COUNTY Person Contacted Phone No. Person Contacted Phone No. Person Contacted Phone No. A. Staff 1. What government department has responsibility for detention facilities? If more than one department, specify additional department(s) and specify type of facility and/or prisoner for which each .department is responsible. 2. what classification(s) of staff supervises inmates? If more than one classification, please specify differences in type of facility and/or inmate and/or. fun.ction between the classifications: 3. Are persons who supervise inmates: full-time sworn .peace officers correctional officers peace officers and correctional officers something else, please describe: 4. What classification supervises the classification that supervises inmates? Classification Sworn Non-Sworn Both 5. Does your custodial class have direct contact with inmates in any of your detention facilities? YES NO If yes, in what facilities: If yes, and if you use correctional officers or other classification besides peace officer, does the classification have direct contact with inmates in any facility? YES NO 1 Appendix 2: Detention Staffing`Survey 6. What are main advantages/disadvantages to using correctional officers rather than sworn deputies for specified functions? Advantages: Disadvantages: 7. What are main advantages/disadvantages to using deputy sheriffs rather than correctional officers for specified functions? Advantages: Disadvantages: 8. Pay range for Deputy Sheriff (see Series No. 432 Deputy Sheriff for comparable classification) . Range (per month) Pay range for. personnel classification supervising inmates if different from above. Range (per month) Deputy Sheriff (other than above) Correctional Officer Other, e.g. , Probation Officer 9. What does county have to pay in benefits to deputy sheriff (_o of salary) ? What does county have to pay in benefits to correctional officer (o of_.salary) ? Are correctional officers or other classification supervising inmates, if used, members of a safety retirement plan? YES NO 10. What career advancement exists for classification supervising inmates? 2 Appendix 2: Detention Staffing Survey 11. If used, have correctional officers sought wage and benefit parity with deputy sheriffs? YES NO If yes, what has the result been? 12. If classification supervising inmates also works patrol, do officers in jail receive additional pay? YES NO If yes, percent of salary: 13., Has'.your.: county. changed in recent years from one classification to another for ' supervision of inmates? YES NO If yes, please describe reasons for change: 14. What is the attrition. rate for deputy sheriff (see Series No. 432) ? 15. What is. the attrition rate in the classification supervising inmates if different from above? 16. What bargaining unit represents the classification(s) supervising inmates? If more thanone classification, specify unit for each. (1) (2) B. County Inmate and Personnel Statistics 1. County population 2. Average Daily Detention System Population 3. Authorized total personnel 4. Authorized total sworn personnel 5. Authorized total detention personnel 6. Authorized total sworn detention personnel 7. Authorized correctional officer detention personnel 3 Appendix 2: Detention Staffing" Survey C. Budget Summary 1. Detention,expenditures FY 1984/85: 2. Does detention budget include bailiffs? Yes No If yes, (a) Number of positions (b) Sworn or correctional officers? (circle) (c) Cost of bailiffs 3. Does detention budget include medical and mental health costs, including hospitalization? yes No 5. Has revenue generated by Sheriff's Department been subtracted from detention expenditures for FY 1984/85? Yes No If yes, what is total amount of revenue subtracted? 6. Are inmate transportation personnel and operating costs included in detention budget? yes No If no, what budget includes inmate transportation? 7. Are staff and costs for maintaining your detention facilities (e.g. , carpenters, custodians, painters) included in your detention budget? Yes No If no, what budget includes these costs? 8. Are program personnel (librarian, chaplain,, training personnel) included in detention budget? yes No 9, Does detention budget include fixed assets? Yes No If no, what is cost? 20. Are there any large one-time costs or other major costs (e.g. , construction) included in your FY 1984/85 expenditures that would not ordinarily be included? Yes No If yes, please specify 4 OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Administration Building Martinez, California INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE To: SUPERVISOR TOM POWERS , Date: October 8, 1985 SUPERVISOR TOM TORLAKSON AN \ From: GF� R, Di ctor Subject: DETENTION STAFFING ANALYSIS STUDY fustic System Programs The Board Order of July 19, 1985 referred the Detention Staffing Analysis Study done by this Office to the Internal Operations Committee. The report has been circulated to interested individuals and organizations. This Office has received responses from the Sheriff-Coroner; the Deputy Sheriff's Association; Public Employees Union, Local One; the Contra Costa County Taxpayers' Association and the Correctional and Detention Services Advisory Commission. This memorandum summarizes the responses received and outlines again the options under consideration for detention staffing. Attached to this memorandum are the full responses. I. Summary of Responses A. Contra Costa County Taxpayers' Association The Executive Committee was "impressed with the depth of the study" but concluded that further study should be made of the "profound implications of changing the staffing formula" from sworn deputy sheriffs. B. Public Emplovees Union, Local One Recommends instituting "Correctional Officer" position to reduce detention facility costs. The cost savings can be converted into programs which will keep-people from being institutionalized. Deputy sheriffs should be replaced through attrition by correctional officers and a promotion program for correctional officers should be established. . According to Local One, the differences in annual costs between our County and Solano County (which uses correctional officers only) show that for an 80-person staff, there would be savings of $534,720; for a 100-person staff, there would be savings of $668,400; and for a 120-person staff, there would be savings of $802,080. Replacing deputies with correctional officers, the County can effect annual savings ranging from $934,320 to $1,136,280 (170 officers x 12 months x $458/$557 per month). Internal Operations Committee 2 October 8, '1985- ' C. Correctional and Detentional Services Advisory Commission CADSAC believes detention facilities should be staffed with deputy sheriffs in areas where there is direct inmate contact, such as all the housing modules; and that County must pay a competitive wage to detention officers equal to what other law enforcement officers command. The Commission sees no advantage to changing a staffing system that works so well. D. Sheriff-Coroner The Sheriff, stressing the importance of this issue to the County, submitted a report covering a number of topics: 1. despite present overcrowding, the nation considers this County the model for design and operation of future jails 2. every dollar spent on training deputies will return major dividends; have seen ill effects of inadequate hiring, training and retention program upon cost and quality of service provided to public 3. current system uses deputy sheriffs only to supervise inmates and civilians for other functions 4. there is 18.47 turnover rate among correctional officers at State level 5. Sonoma County Sheriff is recommending replacing correctional officers with deputies because of serious recruitment problems that have left them with 40 vacancies, low hiring standards for correctional officers resulting in.complaints involving drug use, thefts, brutality 6. the current deputy sheriff salary is adequate compensation for supervising detention system with concentration of felons 7. if correctional officers implemented, must demand new program for proposed detention facility with much higher level of security hardware and construction 8. this County will have earthquakes, mass demonstrations, spills of toxic waste and riots; Board needs to consider significant negative consequences to .public order if cannot utilize 100+ off-duty personnel in an emergency because they are correctional officers. E. . . Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriff's Association Emphasizes that the supposed fiscal savings of replacing deputies with correctional officers are totally undermined by the current case law concerning "safety retirement". The County would be Internal Operations Committee . October 8, 1985 A3. required to include. correctional. officers in safety retirement currently applicable to sworn deputy sheriffs. Under Contra Costa County's present system of utilizing deputies, there have been no significant detention-related litigation costs. Public Safety would be diminished on a day-to-day basis by the absence of trained professionals supervising the inmate population, and in an emergency situation, the resources available to protect county residents would be severely depleted. II. Summary of Staffing Options The staffing options that arise from the Detention Staffing Study are as follows. The options are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A. Maintain status quo. Use deputy sheriffs for all custody duties and civilians for program and business/clerical functions. B. Develop two classifications for deputy sheriff. One classification would be responsible for custody functions at a lower salary, and one classification would be qualified for patrol. C. Develop,a non-sworn correctional officer classification: 1. for all detention functions - would need to convert 170 existing sworn detention staff and hire whatever added positions are required for the new facility; 2. for limited detention functions, e.g. , with no inmate contact (like Ventura's Sheriff Services Technician position) or limited inmate contact (depending on security level). Deputies could continue being used at the MDF to supervise the maximum security prisoners and deputies and correctional officers could be used at the new facility. The new facility will house minimum and medium security prisoners--the majority of whom will be sentenced. D. Maintain current deputy sheriff classification but increase the use of non-sworn persons in various roles in the detention division: 1. group counselors at Work Furlough - could convert existing sworn staff at Work Furlough (16) to non-sworn staff with one supervising sworn person. 2. group counselors at drunk driving facility (if developed) if Rehabilitation Center were converted tosentenceddrunk driving facility when new jail is operational and held 100 or more prisoners,, it could be operated with one sworn person and alcohol counselors. Internal Operations Committee 4 October 8, 1985 3. group counselors to staff the Work Alternative Project. Advantages to changing current staffing system in Contra Costa County: Save money in wages paid to staff if paid at lower salary and save money in training costs. Deputy classification is the highest-paid custody class, Deputy I is second highest and correctional officer is lowest-paid custody class. Almost all deputies and correctional officers are members of safety retirement. No cost savings can be anticipated in this area. In some counties, deputies did not like jail duty. This is not an accurate representation of staff views in Contra Costa County. Disadvantages to changing current staffing system: May need more people to do the same job. Sonoma County uses correctional officers and has the lowest pay scale but the highest staff to inmate ratio. Recruitment and retention difficulty. Sonoma County currently has 40 vacancies in detention and 767 of their detention staff has. been hired since January 1983. Kern County has a problem with correctional officers leaving for better paying jobs. Deputies in Contra Costa County currently leave for better paying city police agency jobs. Competency problems. The maintenance of control in the detention facilities, particularly under stressful overcrowded conditions, may be problematic with lower-qualified personnel. Can expect continued efforts by new non-sworn class to achieve pay parity with deputies. III. CONCLUSIONS Operating costs for the detention system are made up of wages, benefits and the number of personnel needed to operate the system. A reduction in any or all of the above will translate into cost savings. Marginal, if any, .savings• can .be anticipated in the benefit package. If the County elected to pay detention officers less than patrol officers' salary, savings could be achieved. A Deputy I classification would not save as much as a Correctional Officer classification (based on the experience in other counties) but would provide more flexibility. If it is determined that the salaries of deputies and correctional officers should be comparable (as recommended by the National Institute of Corrections and the American Correctional Association), there does not appear to be significant justification for making a transition to Deputy 1 or Correctional Officer. Internal Operations Committee 5 October 8, 1985- All 985All interested parties will be represented at the October 14, 1985 Internal Operations Committee meeting to discuss these options. As directed by your Committee, this Office 'is prepared to write a further report with recommendations on detention system staffing based upon the input and discussion at the October 14 meeting. GR/jw Attachments cc: Nancy C. Fanden, Supervisor, District 2 Robert I. Schroder, Supervisor, District 3 Sunne McPeak, Supervisor, District 4 Charles Hammond, Chief Assistant County Administrator Richard Rainey, Sheriff-Coroner Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriff's Association Contra Costa County Taxpayers' Association Public Employees Union, Local One Correctional and Detention Services Advisory Commission ;f ATTACHMSENT A TAA'kAFPAYE R tAmi'cis A-%r&0e4&:k)_W BOX 27 • MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553 415-228-5610 Contra Costa Count- August 15 , 1985 RECEIVED AUG 2 0 1985 Phil: Batchelor , Administrator oHicG ;;f Contra Costa County Count-,,, Administrator 651 Pine Street , 11th Floor Martinez , CA 94553 Dear Phil : The "Detention Staffing Analysis Study" has been reviewed by our Executive Committee . The Committee was impressed with the depth of -the study. .They concluded , however , that the County should further , study ,the .pro.found _implications of . changing the staffing . formula` aC_o' ur detention .facil.ities .from sworn ..deputy sheriffs only . ' We are , also interested -in -Association participation on the pro- posed ._Criminal .Justice .Task Force . Sincerely , Donald L . Christen Executive Vice President DLC : c1c cc : Don . Jo.ost , Pres . CCTA ATTACHMENT B P. Mcos!C to all. Supervisors) This letter sent PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL ONE �o �y� Contra Costa County Employees Association 4PLO11 PC`.COX 222 5034 OLUM ROAD MARTINEZ.CALIFORNIA 94553 • PHONE 226t6O0 Contra Costa County RECEIVED August 7, 1985 AUG - 9 1985 Ms. Nancy C. Fanden Office of Supervisor, District 2 Count, Administrator 805 Las Juntas St. Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Fanden : Enclosed for your information is a copy of a Tribune article on jail construction and our comments on the issue of "detention facility" staffing. I feel that the Tribune article pinpoints the fallacy of building bigger and bigger jails in order to reduce crime. I strongly believe that our arguments in support of institut- ing. the "Correctional' Officer" position provide you with the opportunity to reduce both the � jail population and detention facility costs. On behalf of Public Employees Union, Local No." 1, I urge you and your colleagues to promptly establish the "Correc- tional Officer" position and to implement Supervisor Torlakson' s suggested actions in his paper dated April 23, 19.85. Sincerely, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO.HenL.L. Clarke General Manager Enclosure /I 1 Batchelor Count Administrator/ cc: Phil Y THE UNION FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ORGANIZED 1941 ATTACHMENT B P. 2 Putting more peo em cut the nation 's crimer' ate 8y tester vetie and Jerome Miller guard and otherwise care for an inmate. So, as Attorney General Edwin Meese III has of- the American Correctional Association has [erect public lands to states that would build pointed out. the original rust is only a 16 percent prisons on them. Imprison more offenders, he down payment. A state (fiat invests $1.00 million argues, and you have less crime. Crime is down, on prison construction will eventually pay out he says, because the prison population is up. But $1.6 billion. does imprisoning more people lower crime The rush to build prisons is powered by a rates? counsel of despair; We're told the only thing that Take Texas and Pennsylvania, with similar- works is to sideline the offender as tong as sized populations. Texas imprisons three times possible. But better, less costly ideas emerge if as many offenders as Pennsylvania. yet crime in we examine who is behind bars. When Delaware Texas grew 2 percent.from 1983 through 1984; checked its prison population in 1983, it found crime in Pennsylvania declined 1.9 percent.The that only 21 percent of the inmates had com- Washington. D.C.,incarceration rate is three and mitted crimes requiring imprisonment. FBI data one-third that of the cruntrv. Yet while crime show that of the nation's total prison population declined nationally 3 percent from 1983 through during 1981, 1982 and 1983, inmates who com- 1984, in Washington it dropped 0.7 percent. mitted violent crimes constituted an average 37 Our prisons bulge with 40 percent more percent. inmates than in 1980. Yet rates of violent crime No one argues against locking up killers, — murder, rape,robbery, aggravated assault — rapists, robbers, muggers. But what about other have remained virtually unchanged since then, approaches? the Federal Bureau of Investigation says. it is 'Consider "Bessie," 26 years old. who faced a the decline in crimes against property — larce- three-,year sentence for welfare fraud. Instead, ny, fraud, car theft, breaking and entering (bur- she works at a fast-food job found by her proba- glary) without a weapon or violent intent — that tion department. She will earn and repay the accounts for the modest drop in overall crime $6,000 she embezzled. She must also put in eight since 1983. hours weekly for two years helping blind people Even the decline in property crimes can't be with housekeeping chores and transportation, ascribed to greater imprisonment. Rather,there and take night courses toward a high school have been fewer crime-prone youths 18 to 24 diploma. years old in the population. Her sentence was based on a pian prepared The notion that crime can be cut by jailing by a nonprofit organization, the National.Center more people has plunged us into a costly prison- for Institutions and Alternatives, in Alexandria, building binge that drains state revenues and Va.Such plans have diverted some 4,000 offend- makes us victims of our war on crime. ers who would have filled four large prisons. The corrections bite on state revenues since Fifteen states now support other groups provid- 1980 has doubled in New York, Texas and Cali- ing community-based alternatives to prison. fornia. and tripled in Delaware. Nationally, per In 1973, a national commission named by the capita prison construction costs, adjusted for Law-Enforcement Assistance Administration • inflation and population changes.have increased urged that more offenders be transferred to 52 percent in four years.To build one prison cell community-based programs and that prison con- costs New York State $110,000. Federal and struction be postponed until the need for more state spending on prisons and jails — either prisons was clearly established. Until this is C under construction or bond-approved — was$4.5 done, we will further punish ourselves and of- billion last year. Since our.prison'population — fenders by pouring billions into one of history's already at 700,000 — is increasing at the rate of great ratholes. 16,000 yearly, further billions will be needed for Lester Velie is author of "Murder Story. A prison building in the foreseeable future. Tragedy of Our Time."Jerome G. Miller heads Construction cost is only the beginning. To it the National Center for Institutions and Alter- noust be added 30 years of interest on borrowed natives. This article appeared in The New York money, plus an average $16,245 yearly to feed, Times. -P. ATTACHMENT B .3 - . JI*': ! Statement By HENRY L. CLARKE, General Manager, Public Employees Union, Local No. 1, regarding its position with respect to the issue of establishing the Correctional Officer classification for. the purpose of staffing the Contra Costa County detention facilities. ATTACHMENT B - P. 4 Public Employees Union, Local No. 1 h-as an established record of advocating the creation of the position of Correctional Officer. We first recommended this action in ' 1976 . It is our position now as it was then that adequate supervision of inmates can be provided by cor- rectional officers . The resulting salary savings can be converted into programs which will keep people out of long term high cost facilities , such as prisons , mental hospitals , nursing homes and our County Hospital. It is not my intention . to repeat what was so well presented in the April 23, 1985 , paper of Supervisor Tom Torlakson, which deals with the County criminal jus- tice system, and the paper entitled, "Detention Staffing Analysis Study" , dated July, 1985 , which was prepared by the County Administrator' s office. Both documents alert us to the hard fact that our County is confronted with an enormous fiscal problem which is far more threatening to our stability than that caused by the Health Services Department fiasco of 1983-84. Since passage of Proposition 13 you have cut staff, in all areas , reduced capital expenditures , delayed neces- sary maintenance, extended equipment usage and, in effect, set a salary and wage freeze for a period of many months. . .. ATTACHMENT B 2 _ The cost savings measures you have instituted have made your Wall Street bond raters. happy but the real cost in human suffering and its attendant high financial costs have not been tabulated. There are some things we do know. Emotionally dis- turbed people are in a revolving .door. They are sedated, sent out on the street and end up being abused, hospitalized or incarcerated in the already over-crowed County jail. AFDC families and BAC' s will not get proper care if our medical and dental clinics are closed down or if their hours are reduced, thereby causing physical conditions which will be more costly to treat. Our County streets will not be adequately maintained, thereby creating hazardous con- ditions which may and probably will lead to "deep pocket" settlements . Both juvenile and adult probation officers have and will continue to carry unrealistic caseloads which can only lead to their clients ' recidivism, thereby overloading the County jail and criminal justice system. The list goes on and on .as you well know. The- establishment of the Correctional Officer position will result in savings (the arithmetic to prove it is in the CAO's ' report) . Page 14 of the County Administrator' s report deals with projected annual costs for three differ- ent levels of staffing that could be needed to operate a new 560-bed detention facility in our County. The differ- ences in an.nual costs between our County and Solano County (which uses Correctional Officers only) show that for a 80-persons start., there would be savings or $534, 720 ; for ATTACHMENT B - P..6 3 - a 100 persons staff, there would be savings of $668 , 400 and for a 120 persons staff, there would be savings of $802 ,080 . Currently , according to the CAD' s report , the County has 170 authorized sworn detention personnel. If and when Correctional Officers are authorized and replace existing personnel through attrition, the County can effect annual savings ranging. from $934, 320 to $1 , 136 , 280 (170 officers x 12 months x $458/$557 per month) (see Table A, Page 12) . The fiscal crisis we are in and the burden of financing the construction and maintenance of the new detention facility require you to establish the Correc- tional Officer position immediately. As vacancies in the detention staff of the County jail occur they should be filled by the Correctional Officer. Despite claims by those who oppose the Correctional Officer classification, it need not be a dead end job. Careful planning in the development of the job specifications and an upward mobility/promotion program can make it an attractive job. In closing, let me say, Local No. 1 stands second to none in its concern which is translated into positive actions for humane solutions to people problems , but I cannot help but comment on the irony of providing better care to criminals than we do to the innocent citizen who is emotionally distressed, developmentally disabled, aged or a member of an AFDC family or one on General Assistance. ATTACHMENT B ,P.7 4 _ Let' s use the projected salary savings to help staff these departments : Probation , Mental Health, Public Health, Welfare, etc. , so that. our dedicated employees can do the job they are trained for--to help people survive in our society, thereby keeping them out of jails , mental in- stitutions , nursing homes , juvenile halls and our County Hospital . ATTACHMENT C Contra Stell services: Costa CORRECTIONAL AND DETENTION CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCY ' I_lfi'T`�J/ OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ��0.n r�i-mnn.1 L71vA x'101 C011 SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION GEORGE ROEMER,Executive Director (415)685 Administration Oldg.,Stir Floor Martinez,CA.94553 j415)372 48tt)S October 7, 1985 Honorable Tom Powers Honorable Tom Torlakson Internal Operations Committee Board of Supervisors Contra Costa .County Administration Building Martinez, California 94553 Dear Supervisors Powers and Torlakson: Re: Detention Staffing Analysis Study The .Correctional and Detention Services Advisory Commission received for our review the Detention Staffing Analysis Study prepared by the County Administrator's Office. Staffing the County's detention facilities in the most cost-effective manner is an issue of critical importance to our member- ship, and we studied the CAO report as well as the responses from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department, the Taxpayers Association, Local One, and the Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriff's Association. We are convinced that the County's detention facilities should be staffed with deputy sheriffs in areas where there is direct inmate contact, such as, all the housing modules. Many of our members were part of the planning for the Martinez Detention Facility, and through tours of other facilities and review of available research, we became convinced that we had to hire, train and keep a highly- qualified detention staff to operate the type of facility we were committed to building. We believe the County, through the Sheriff's Department; has accomplished that:.goal and we have a detention facility operation that has .great credibility throughout the County, State and nation. We believe strongly that to attract and keep quality applicants for detention, the County must pay a competitive wage equal to that of other law enforcement officers. If you pay detention staff less, it would mean ,a lowering of standards and, hence, quality. We do not think the County will save any money in the long run. Other counties, such as Sonoma, are finding that they are going to have to increase the pay of their correctional officers close to deputy sheriff to be able to recruit and keep a staff. They currently have 40 vacancies in their detention staff, and 76 percent of THE CORRECTIONAL AND DETENTION SERVICES ADVISORY COMMISSION WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE BOARD OF RUPE.RVISORS TO ADVISF.ON CURRENT AND PR(IPORFn AI)IU.T DFTFNTION FACILITIES,PROGRAMS.ALTFpNATIVEC TO INCARCERATION,PROPOSED LEGISLATION IN THE FIELD,ETC.ANY COMMENTS OR RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE COMMISSION OR ITS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS DO NOT REPRESENT THE OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE COUNTY OR ANY-OF ITS OFFICERS. ATTACHMENT C Internal Operations Committee 2 October 7, 1985 their staff has -been hired since January 1983. The Court Master in 'Sonoma is very concerned about the lack of ability of current correctional officers to maintain control of their facilities. The Sonoma County Sheriff is now recommending replacing correctional officers with deputy sheriffs. If the County has to pay correctional officers a comparable wage to deputy sheriffs and what we get is a lower caliber of person and a loss of flexi- bility, it does not appear justified to make a transition. In addition, the consequences of hiring less qualified persons is risking greater liability costs. We feel there may be some room for civilians working in such areas as the Work Alternative Project, but do not think there is reason to justify a major change in a staffing system that works so well. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, CLEMITT SWAGERTY Chairman CS:GR:pk . cc: Hon. Nancy Fanden Hon. Sunne McPeak Hon. Robert Schroder D ATTACHMENT D Sheriff- Coroner R Richard K.Rainey Contra Costa County A SHERIFF-CORONER F Warren E. Rupf P.O. Box 391 T Assistant Sheriff Martinez, California 94553-0039 415 372- Gerald T. Mitosinka Assistant Sheriff To: Philip Batchelor, County Administrator pate: Sep. 30, 1985 From: Richard K. .Rainey, Sheriff-Coroner Subject: STAFFING: DETENTION FACILITIES During my seven years as Sheriff-Coroner, many important issues have been the subject of mutual .d.iscussion between my Department and the Board of. Supervisors. Although there has been disagreement as to the ultimate solu- tions, I do believe that we have always been able to arrive at an accomo- dation acceptable to all parties, the Department, the Board of Supervisors and ultimately, the public. The issue presently under discussion, modes of detention staffing, is of such importance to the county at large, that I frankly do not foresee any solution other. than continuing the staffing of our detention facilities by deputy sheriffs. The final decision, in this matter will be one of the single most important votes taken by this Board. In view of the magnitude in which I perceive this issue, I am presenting the following information for your serious consideration. Please .review the enclosed carefully and make your decision, as I am sure it will be, in the best interests -- present and future -- of this county and its citizens.. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE The Department of Corrections Although it now seems like an eternity, it was only 10+ years ago, that the Department was initially under attack by those wishing a civilianized detention`system. The focus at that time was for an independent Department of Corrections, "We should hire only professional jail administrators and staff tooperateour counties jails" was the watchword. I was deeply offended at that time because I knew the caliber of staff that was then present and what could be accomplished if it were not for the antiquated and severely overcrowded facilities that we were then operating. Fortunately, that Board of Supervisors made the correct decision and allowed this Depart- ment to truly demonstrate its capabilities and professionalism. The Sheriff-Coroners Department has never forgotten that debate and the resulting vote of confidence which was given us. As Sheriff-Coroner, I have been determined to translate that vote into tangible proof that a sheriff's department; especially this Department, can and will manage the finest and most efficiently operated detention system in this country. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Staffing: Detention -2- 9-30-85 The Result From time to time over these past five years, I have forwarded to you samples of acclaim that the Martinez Detention Facility (MDF) and its staff have received. The American Institute of Architecture, the National Institute of Corrections, the National Sheriffs' Association, and the American Jail Association have all featured this facility and staff in its publications and training conferences. Additionally, they have developed policies endorsing the principles of operations that were founded in Contra Costa County. The MDF is one of only 14 accredited jail facilities throughout the United States and Canada. . Over 4000 professionals from 41 states and 11 foreign coup!-,ries have visited the facility. Major jail systems throughout the countr-,r,are now. adopting the architecture and methods of operation of the MDF: These systems include New York City, Miami , Portland, Seattle, Reno, Las Vegas, etc. , etc. A far cry from a decade ago. Despite our present overcrowding, the nation still considers this county the model for design and operations of the future. Are we professional ? You bet we are and we can prove it. Planning the MDF. We must ;not. forg.et that this county, in planning a new detention facility, initially. expended, in° excess of $1 ,250,000 for a traditional jail plan ;that was rejected by all concerned -= the Department, the public and thankfully, the Board of Supervisors. The rejected plan was certainly efficient, one deputy sheriff for each floor of 200 inmates. It was certainly secure, 14-foot thick walls at the foundation, no windows and filled with sophis- ticated: hardware and security devices. , However efficient and secure the building was, it would certainly have been an `expensive disaster for this county if it had been built. Upon rejection of this initial plan, the Board formulated a new approach, citing new national standards, envoking extensive citizen participation, hiring an outstanding national architectural firm and traveling to and learning from the state of the art jails at that time. The process was extensive, and at times slow and burdensom. However, the result of that foresight and patience has been the historical turning point for this nation's:.jails. - the. MDF. All parties. involved in the MDF planning process recognized that by removing the traditional barrier between staff and inmates, by providing humane and constitutional treatment, and by complying with national standards, would require sufficient staff that were well motivated, highly educated and specifically well trained for the challenge which awaited them. This was a different jail , unlike all others throughout the country and therefore different strategies were required. The Department, the citizen Detention Facility Advisory Committee (DFAC) , the County Administrator, the late Arthur Will , the Board of Supervisors and the public were all aware and recognized this additional challenge and accepted the responsibility for insuring that the quality of staff would equal the quality of the facility. We have met our responsibilities . f Staffi.ng: Detention -3- 9-30-85 Deputy Sheriff Training I make no apologies for both the extent and cost of our deputy sheriff training system and program. Throughout my 23 years of experience in law enforcement, I have seen the results of an inadequate hiring, training and retention program and the ill effect that it has upon both the cost ,and quality of service we provide to the public. Low hiring standards, negligent retention, inadequate training, poor policy and procedures and lack of supervision will result in poor performance and ultimately personal legal liability. Think about it. We are one of the very few counties throughout this country which is not under the mandate of a federal court and which does not have special masters dictating our budget and our policies. This is not an accident. It is a direct result of fully complying with the intent of all parties who built this facility and the amount of screening and: traini.ng.whi,ch we give our staff. It is unnecessary to quote the state- made by every management expert on the results of adequate hiring and training. Every dollar spent on hiring and training will return major - dividends throughout the careers of our staff. The Board and the public wanted a model facility with well screened and trained staff and they received everything which was envisioned. - Civilianization In January. of 1978, I was directed by then Sheriff Harry Ramsay, to trans- late the MDF Program Document into a proposed staffing plan for the facility. The instructions were clear-- Proposition 13 was on the ballot so be ,careful - .and document only that which is required. Additionally, deputy sheriffs were only to supervise inmates and not be utilized for clerical or support functions. . Following this direction, the committee formulated a staffing plan that fully complies. Dispatchers operate the electronic security system (Central Control ); clerks operate the reception desk, telephone answering, inmate accounts and records; institutional service workers perform sanitation and laundry duty; cooks prepare the meals; and the supervision and management of these units is performed by those within their respective career ladders. This policy is maintained now and will be into the future. Deputy sheriffs supervise inmates and clerical staff supervise paper flow. This is the way it is and should be. ' Approximately five years ago, the Board of Supervisors, acting upon a recom- mendation from the Sheriff-Coroners Department, reduced the training costs of deputy .sheriff by establishing the .position of Deputy Sheriff Recruit. This enabl;ed the Department to pay substantially lower wages (20%) to individ- uals while attending the basic-academy. This non-peace officer position enables the Department to still attract high quality personnel for they understand that successful completion of the training results in the ulti- mate transition to deputy sheriff. This program enables the Department to save substantial money while still obtaining the high quality of staff that is required. Staffing: Detention -4- 9-30-85. The Profession The -day has long passed in the corrections profession where an agency could ;.hire off the: street, pin a badge on, hand over a set of keys and put them to work. Jail litigation is the civil rights issue of the 1980' s. You must be good or the court is going to get you. In almost every system throughout this country, where correctional officers are employed, the demands for equal pay are present and in many cases they are granted. Las Vegas, for example, resolved their recuriting and retention problems only by granting equal pay with street deputies. Neighboring Sonoma County is now discussing reverting back to either equal pay or deputy sheriffs. Additionally, California State Senator Barry Keene, the Senate Majority Leader, stated the following in moving SB 1373 through the State Senate. "White. Cat.i.sonn.ia's coAAeetionae peace oss.icetts have one o ' the most demanding taw ensomeement jobs .in the state, thein compensation .Gags San behind that o5 tocat po.eice oss.icetus and deputie-6. . . . "keene's Senate Bitt 1373 pttovidu that recommendations Son cammect.ionat peace o66iceu' satGAy ranges adviz on y cot eect iv e bamga,in.ing punpos es-- be based upon pay scates'.in companabte toeat departments. "Theme's an 18.4 pehcent .ttutnoveA nate among eoAAecti.onat peace oss.icelus, twice the state employee ave,%age. Running state pttisonus .in a sale and seeune manner .ins a tough enough job. It shoutdn't be cam- pounded by poor morate caused by satcrties that ane. 30-40 percent below pan.". The' profession has taken a clear stance. The American Correctional Asso- ciation, the National Sheriffs' Association, the American Jail Association and the National Institute of Corrections have all adopted policy statements that demand equal pay for corrections. The Commission on Accreditation for Corrections, the agency which accredits our facility, has as one of their essential standards and one in which we have agreed by contract to comply with, the following: 112 5058: Compensation and bene6 is Son co)cAect-ionat o66icelcus cute eompatabZe tb those Son taw ensoreement oss.ieefus working .in .the same ongawizat.ion." As justification, .they cite the following: "Contectio,L6 has become an .inclteas-ingty complex and demanding S,iekd. The ski,M, knowledge atea�s, attAibutez and personat eharaeteA,i st.i.es requited oS corneet,ionat o66icens have arso become .ineutea,5ingty complex and demanding, and eonsideAab.Cy di6 'enen-t Smom those nequiAed o6 taw ensoneement peAzonneC. Corvtect.iona.t oss.iceAz must be able .to .intenpnet and .imp.eement count deeizions Aeeating to due pmocess and dizci.ptinamy Staffing: '.'Detention -5- -9-30-85 ma-t.teu, and have an dndeuta.nding o6 opeAati.onat 6ecuA ty, At6 o, they must be �abze,.to .intenptet:and ",6 i 6t .in .the man- agement o6 inmate behav,i,o, oven tong peteiodz oS time undeA the eonditi,o" o� eon6 inement. " ,Mr. Ray Nelson, Director of the National Institute of Corrections, states the following: "I6 you choose to compensate youx coA,ecti.onat zta65 at a toweA nate than otheA o A A icen..6 in your own agency, the dyicect supeAvision expeAienee wiU zunety bait. I6 we ane to tv n around the .mag e o6 .the CoAAect io nat 06 6 iceAc .in .the 80',s we need to accentuate the poz tiv e and that mea" making them 6eee, good about themsetvu. when a Co.,rAecti,onat 0J6-i.cen.',6 ke6ponz.ibit tiu ane gneateA ,than a road o66 cen and we ane: continua ty asking move o6 .them .in their da.i2y pe&6onmance, we need to compenzate .them accord ingty." Please note that Contra Costa County was the first direct supervision jail in the country and that our entire system is based upon the principles of direct supervision -- the very concept alluded to by Mr. Nelson and the principle which has led to our very success. Remember my previous state- ments. The Board, the County Administrator, the Detention Facility Advisory°. Committee. (DFAC) and the public all were aware of the implications of direct supervision when we built the Main Detention Facil-ity.- The profession has taken a united stance and the message is clear -- pay people for what they are worth and you will stay out of trouble. I find this entire debate ludicrous,, the agency which operates the number one facility in this country, with the most recognized professional staff, is strongly `considering self-immolation contrary to the national trend of which we set the pace. There is no other single agency of this county government that has achieved the national recognition and reputation than that accorded the MDF and its staff and we are seriously considering destroying the very foundation of our every success. The Available Workforce The citizens of this county take pride in the quality of the workforce available to staff the rapidly growing business and office industries which are being relocated within this county. The area, the climate, the institutions of higher learning and the standard of living throughout this county, all combine to create a positive atmosphere for the upwardly mobile high middle class workforce that is available for our new mush- rooming economy. This very workforce, however, produces the opposite effect on recruiting and retaining employees at the correctional officer salary level now under consideration. We need only to review the problems associated in our past experience with the recruitment of another class of employees in that same salary range, Sheriffs Dispatchers.. This testing is continuous and of those we do hire, 50+% fail either the training program or probationary status: Staffing: ' Detention -6- 9-30-85 Our neighboring county of Sonoma ,has experienced these very problems and the following is a direct quote from a recent report to the Sonoma Board of Supervisors concerning their efforts to recruit and train competent staff from their available workforce. "Nisto&icatty, jaUs have not been an area where Sund.ing bodies desZted to spend money nor taw enso.tceme:nt admini,sttca- totcs opted to send the.uc best peopte. Mone oaten than not, budget requests Son move st a66, better tAaining, on state- o6-the-art equipment went down to deseat quickty during budged hea)ti.ngs and taw ensorcement adminusttc.a.totLs did not u}anti to jeopardize the pattot on investigation request Son the not-so-poputar ja.i2 enhancements, i.e., the Co,vAectionat OSS-iceA se&i.es was .initia. ty devetoped Sar budgetary reasons which meant a towen,ing o6 quati6 icat.ions Standards and Training Brom the Deputy SheeiLiss's 5eAie5. ConsequentZ, ja.i2s remained a .tow ptiotc i ty and it was not unfit. the .intet- vention o6 the Fedetc.at Coutct,6 that enhancement began to happen. "Pnesentty, at the divicection o6 the Board os Supenv.i.sons, the County Petsonnet and .the SheAi66's Depa4tments have once again embarked on an "att-out" .n.ecn.u,&tmewt drive Son Contc.ecti.ona2 066iceu. Out oS the S.itcst 52 app.Pi,cawts ceAti6ied, only 4 have made it through the background process. When I o6 the 4 appt.icants toutned the Main Jait she rejected the job o 6 6 et. That test us with 3 new peopte. Dutc,ing the same petoi.od o6 time, we ate Losing poss.ibty 6 emptoyees Son a net toss o6 3 o66icens. FouA os those ate teaving to become Deputy SheAi66 's. "The second group, who ane presentty .in the process os back- ground .investigation, do not seem to be Baiting any better. Aster discussion with .the conttc.act psychotogi6t, Dr. 'Mtichaet Robetc tis, who iz one o6 the top taw ensorcement/connectional ps ychotog,ist .in the nation, the pee sent group o6 app.P i.cants ate among the worst he has even seen.. Dr. Robet�ts said he could not bet.ieve these peopte werce Looking Son. careeu .in connectioms and that, 'past ctc im.inat behavior, extensive up-to-date hand d,.ug use, poo). phyz icat health, and tying on the application aye genenaPly .the rote rathez than the exception. ' "This atso seems to be consistent with the Last testing os• appPicants where it came down to toweh i.ng some hi i_ng standards to meet the Detention Division's emergency needs . Thiz ,is not an acre;table method os bitting n. vacancies and hasesutted .in tc.aini.ng./supenv.ision ptobtems, and an increase .in comptai.nts involving drug use, thesis, brutatity, etc., resutting in intennat .investigations and .in some case, termination." "Many o6 -these Sotks have ptobtems with .inteApetvsonaP 512-iP2z, inabitity to dead at co ite teg-ibty, and the inab,i Pity to compn.ehend the comptex ity o6 an exttcemeey di"icu.Pt job with huge demands. In Sact, the Fedetcat CouAt Monitor, Mr. .Tom LoneAgan, has recommended Staffing: Detention -77 9-30-85 that the county utabZiz h a nemed:iat heading and wtit i.ng conA-6e bon not only Connecti:ona.2 O66iceAs but a?,so bot CoA ectionaZ SupehvxzOL6." Since .the "date of the Sonoma Report to the present time, the following personnel transactions have taken place: August 27, 1985: 40 vacancies 11 new employees 29 vacancies 7 resignations 4 terminations September 24, 1985: 40 vacancies The resignations cited how pay, poor working conditions and high expec- tations versus adequate compensation, the report (which I have previously forwarded to you) recommends a pay scale equal to that of deputy sheriff. Do we really think that the available workforce of this county will respond and permanently fill these vital positions when we are having great diffi- ,.,culty with the position of deputy sheriffs at their wage level ? There ` is no question as .to the answer. Sonoma cannot do it, Napa cannot do it, San Joaquin cannot. do 'it.and­ neither can the great State of California . do it. What makes, Contra Costa County any different. Of those we ultimately do hire, the best will leave to higher paying peace officer positions and the worst we wial attempt .to fire, leaving vacancies at both ends.. Those that remain, the .marginal , average employee will become the mainstay of our operation, frustrated that it is not a higher paid police officer position eand that they cannot afford even to purchase a house in any decent. area in the county which they serve. What some fail to understand, is that for the past two decades, the :position of peace officer is one of the most highly competitive job markets available. Almost any qualified and capable individual can move from one department to another at will . It is common for one to accept a .position, receive the training 'and then move through the lateral entry programs into another department. Currently, we are losing approximately lO deputy sheriffs per year to other jurisdictions through the lateral hiring process. From one perspective, this figure may not seem. too high. However, from another perspective, consider that the cost of a single resignation, to include hiring, training, and interim replacement, is $20,000 to $30,000. Then the problem becomes acute. If our present 7%- turnover rate for deputy sheriffs increases to the rate cited by Senator Keene (18/0) , we may then lose 3O- or more correc- tional officers per year at a replacement cost of $600,000 - $900,000. Please realize that any cost savings derived by lower wages will soon dissipate in new hiring, training and replacement overtime expenditures. Staffing: Detention -8- 9-30-85'. This department, for years, did not have a lateral hiring process and we host many fine staff because of this omission. Since becoming Sheriff- Coroner, the department has instituted the lateral hiring .program and now we do gain some personnel from the system. However, as in the past, we also lose personnel , two during the month of September. Presently, our system is stabilized, we gain some and we lose some. To lower standards and pay will create an irreversible exodus from this department. Frankly, who is going to leave another department to enter our service at a payscal.e 20-25% below what they are now earning? NOBODY. Methods of Implementation The implementation of a correctional officer series poses substantial problems. Think for a moment, how are .we going to accomplish this transition if, . regretfully, it occurs. Eliminate all detention deputy sheriff positions and downgrade them to correctional officer. A few presently unemployed; candidates will certainly accept the lower paid position, but only for a short duration. Experience has shown that the majority will quickly leave, taking with them their skills and training, to fill the numerous vacancies available in other departments. There is no question that it will take literally years, . if ever, to recover. Meanwhile, we will still have increasing numbers of inmates and shifts to fill with only senior deputy sheriffs at time and one half at top step. Hardly a cost savings. The only other alternative will be to phase in the program by replacing each ,vacant,.deputy sheriff' s position with that of correctional. officer. With the magnitude of the transition that will be required, it will literally take years, if again, ever, for such a transition to be made. In the meantime, either the equal work/equal pay provisions of law will be enforced, or the inevitable will occur; those hired, their union and this department''wil-1 be demanding equal pay based upon all the problems which we have heretofore outlined to you. In every county where this action has occured, equal pay and benefits are either being demanded or achieved. The entitlement to safety retirement membership has already been established by law and by the California courts. In any case, the county will not achieve any substantial savings through attrition for many years, if ever. You need only to remember the recent situation with your qualified nursing staff. You were faced with a situation of either paying the prevailing payscale available atA ocal public and private hospitals or of losing your .experienced; and �trained nursing staff. You made the correct decision at that time by paying individuals wtlat they were worth in the prevailing marketplace. Deputy sheriffs are certainly no different. Demands Upon Staff It is no secret that our facilities are acutely overcrowded and that this department has taken extreme measures to maintain our population levels at tolerable levels. The MDF was designed for 386 and hovers continually at 600+ and the Marsh Creek Facility, which housed 90-100, now holds 262 and after the first of the year will house 322. =Staffing: Detention -g 9-.30-$5 ^ -Additionally, as we move the less dangerous inmates to Marsh Creek, the population density at the MDF of the more dangerous increases dramatically. -We are ;able ,to maintain these l=evels only -due, to the quality, the training and the professional-ism exhibited by our staff. ' There is no question that without these vital ingredients, large numbers of additional staff will = be required to both maintain order and avert serious legal complications, i :e. , a federal court imposed population cap and facility monitor, all of which have serious budgetary considerations as evidenced by the experiences of Santa Clara, Sacramento, San Francisco and Sonoma counties. The bottom line is, does the public and this Board really want lower grade staff to handle this volatile and litigious inmate population. The answer is obvious, of course you don' t. The Criminal A encs Stud The study completed by the Criminal Justice Agency, directed by George '`Roemer, is an accurate snapshot of the comparisons between counties. I find little criticism with the facts therein contained. However, you must remember that the information was only a one day snapshot and does not reflect the continuing increasing costs of those systems under litigation. When you review the survey, look hard at the incarceration rates. Contra -,%Costa County has consistently .produced the lowest incarceration rate of any comparable county. We have fully complied with your Board Order 76/201 ='which states: "Redesign Guidet inu, A. 1 . That there wiU continue to be a maximum ut.iti.zation o6 ptetitia.2 tete.aae and post ad- judication a.2tennativea to ineatcenation that ane cutvicentty avaitabte'undeA exZ6ting, .haw and consistent with the pubtic'.a da6ety,, and that the County wilt ut,ieize,. any Jutune a.Pte, natives that become penm-ias.ib.t'e under .Cato, ahe 6.inane.iatty 6easibte and ate a 6o cons.i,atent with the pubt i:c 6a6ety." '4On one hand, we struggle to maintain the lowest incarceration rate in the state, and by doing so, we are subject to criticism because of the higher ' cost per inmate per day and lower staff/inmate ratios due to the lack of inmates. You cannot have -it both ways. Ve can certainly equal any other county in these categories, by eliminating our extensive release programs and retain zincustody th6 types of. inmates confined in other counties. Is this an appropriate solution"? Certainly not. Our comparable costs - per day and inmate/staff ratios will look good, but actual costs will dramatically increase. The important statistic that you should examine and consider in your deliberations is the cost per citizen, a true reflection of efficiency or non-efficiency. Contra Costa County is, presently one of the lowest in the state, if not the lowest, despite being an accreditated facility and staff, despite AMA accreditation and despite having the most recognized professional staff in the country. Yes, Contra Costa County spends a lot of money on corrections, but less per capita than other comparable counties and you have obtained undoubtedly the finest. What more can you possibly ask from the Department. Staffing: Detention -10- 9-30-85 Popular Myths Jails hold a peculiar fascination for everyone, government, the courts, the media and the public. Managing such a facility places one in that 'proverbial fishbowl . No matter what occurs, the jail is the subject of unusual attention. An assault or suicide. on the streets hardly.warrants media attention, .however, within a jail the same action results in front page coverage. This is a fact of life that one accepts and recognizes when occupying my position. Additionally, cutting the jail 's budget is a'.,•.ays a popular move because "they (the inmates) don' t deserve it anyway". This attitude has lead most counties down a long, difficult and expensive path. The false economies made by acting upon popular myths instead of a proper. and responsible discharge of the public trust, has resulted in court mandated, expenditures far above that which would have been normally required. .It is not popular to spend money on a jail and inmates and, yes, you will surely be criticized for such expenditures. However, as long as we have criminals, as long as we operate -jails, and as long as the public demands longer sentences, we must spend an appropriate amount of money to insure that our government meets its constitutional responsibilities, however unpopular that may be. This responsibility i.ncludes sufficient facilities . plus competent, .well trained and adequately compensated staff. You are now:considering a. path which others have already unsuccessfully taken;and 'are° now, returning to chart another course. Talk .to your fellow supervisors from other counties and ask them what their predecessors left for them to solve and then ask yourself which path to take. You are not now gambling with your present course. Comparable County Agency Facilities We have already discussed our low per capita expenditures compared with comparable counties, but how do we compare internally with other similar county responsibilities. The costs associated with housing and treating individuals in other county facilities are substantially higher when compared to our Department detention .system rate of $13,241 ,per year. When you consider the annual cost per year, per juvenile at Juvenile Hall ($39,818) , the Boys Ranch (' 17,946); the Boys Center ($28;428) ; the Girls Center ($32,674) , or the Detoxification Centers ($16,425) then you must also realize that we operate, .by far., the cheapest per person county facility. In addition, we have the. largest concentration of the violent, the mentally ill , and the recalcitrant inmates. What is an Appropriate Salary This is an extremely important subject to discuss. What should Contra Costa County pay their staff for working under the stress and strain of an overcrowded detention system where the non-violent and passive inmates have been selectively released. The concentration of felons, i .e. , .:=Staffing: Detention -11 - 9-30-85 murderers (30) , robbers (54) , burglars (102), rapists (19) and parole violators (53) has never been higher. When we speak of comparable worth, . consider it in a different context, what is"our, detention staff actually worth `for the difficult, demanding and stressful job they perform.. ,When making the following comparisons, keep in mind that the Board presently has a contractual obligation, with the various union employees working in our detention system, which provides additional compensation that is not reflected in the base• salary figures, i .e. , 5% hazard duty `pay and 5% shift differential . These obligations increase. basic salaries 10% and are hidden in the fringe benefit packages. However, for purposes of comparison and what level the county will actually set the pay scale, these percentages have been .omitted. The numbers most often used by those participating in the debate to calcu- .late savings, is the Solano . County Correctional Officer scale ($1567-1905) for purposes of comparison, this scale will be used. In general terms, consider the county scales as a whole. .-With approximately 700 differing wage scales, the correctional officer series will be lower than 534 different classifications and above or relatively equal to 166.. Additionally they will earn, at top step, less money than the following classifications: Sheriffs Dispatcher, Lead Gardener, Storekeeper, Apprentice Mechanic, Supervising Cook, Automotive Parts Technician, Deputy Probation ' ,,.Officer I, Equipment Operator, . Fingerprint Technician, etc. Additionally, "they will eitheristart at less money or take many step raises and years to equal.; Laborer, Sheriffs Services Assistant, Cook, Gardener, Security Guard, .Supervising Custodian., or Supervising Window Washer. This comparison is not meant to degrade the worth of the many valuable employees who occupy .those positions; however, it must be recognized that directly supervising incarcerated felons, .in a constitutional manner, requires more skills, training, and compensation than supervising cooks and gardeners. I know that you will agree, the salary of deputy sheriff is adequate compensation. Location of Detention Facilities The citizens of this county, who by circumstance, live within close prox- imity to our present detention facilities, i .e. , Clayton/Morgan Territory Road, Martinez and San Pablo, expect that our detention staff will be com- :-petent, well trained and professional . Would you be willing to co-exist -next to- a fac imity where its staff was anything less than the best? Of course you wouldn' t. Think back to the public meetings we have held with those concerned with the proposed sites of our new facility. We have assured the public that there is no danger and that those that staff our facilities are recognized as the best in the country. If implemented, this primary argument is literally out the window. Those who now have facilities in their backyards and those who are opposed to one in any proximity will surely feel betrayed by this county government. Staffing: Detention -12- ~9-30=85 Implications for the New Facility The Department and the New Facility Project Team have based the entire program for the new facility upon the demonstrated competence of our staff. For example, to save future dollars we have expanded modules from 48 inmates (recommended by the National Institute of Corrections) to 64. Additionally, we have approved a campus design which allows one deputy to supervise two modules (containing 128 inmates) on the morning shift. Toilets and security locks have been removed from the cells. The very program and future design of this building requires only the finest in staff if it is to be successful . If this proposal is approved, I am left with no choice but to demand that a ,new program and a facility which will incorporate a much higher level of security hardware. All of which will require substantial additional funds. Flexibility Flexibility in job assignments is vital to the long term operations of any sheriff's department. I have long insisted that all deputy sheriff personnel be able to respond to any emergency situation which may ari.se throughout this county. We will have earthquakes; we will have mass demon- strations; we have huge spills of toxic wastes; and we will have riots. Our previous history serves as a lesson for tomorrow. When such incidents have occured, the ability to quickly respond with all available trained staff has proven, i.nvaluable. I want trained deputy sheriffs on the line, no matter what their current duty assignment may be -- patrol , coroners, detention, etc. The public demands that their elected officials be prepared, :to the best of their abilities, for the efficient conduct of their responsibilities during times of emergency. This is an essential responsibility of government. I recognize that these incidents do not occur on a daily or even yearly basis. But when emergencies do occur, and they certainly will , we must be prepared. Please consider the negative consequences to the public order if I cannot utilize approximately 100+ off-duty personnel in an emergency situation because they are correctional officers and not trained in law enforcement responsibilities. Please understand that correctional officers are not police officers and therefore cannot. be..utilized outside the confines of a detention facility. Implementation of the correctional officer series would seriously jeopardize my ability to adequately respond to any large emergency situation. Conclusion Every county responsibility is important. Each person, no matter what their situation in life or responsibility with the county, performs an important task. . Lawyers, engineers, planners, equipment operators, nurses, etc. , all have a function to perform and the public expects, no demands, that each duty be performed by capable and qualified staff. We would never consider utilizing para-legals to represent us in court, students to engineer our roadways and flood control projects, or LVN"s to make a medical - diagnosis or prescribe medication. In that same light, we should Staffing: -Detention -13- 9-30-85 never consider a lower paid, less qualified or lesser trained person to supervise the hardened criminals which we hold in custody. During the 1950's and 1960's, this Department experimented with quasi- correctional officers, i .e. , Deputy I and Deputy II classifications. For all the reasons cited above, Sheriff Walter Young and the Board of Super- visors re-evaluated their positions and reverted back to the single Deputy Sheriff classification. We tried it once and it did not work. The same problems still remain; why try again. There is no short or long term financial saving for this county by insti- tuting correctional officers. Certainly you realize, with your experiences in your personal life, your professional careers and in your public service, that the old proverb is true, "You only get what you pay for". Therefore, I strongly. urge you to consider the evidence, appreciate what this county has accomplished in corrections and continue your support of a personnel management system that has served this county well and has become the model for the country. ATTACHMENT E C0NT,Rfv �COUNTY DEPUTY SHER 'E' *} f S,JCIAT10N INC. P.O. BOX 333 ; ,�q. 4' tb„yMARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553 � tober 3 , 1985 County Board of Supervisors Contra .Costa County Administration Building 651 Pine Street Martinez , California 94553 RE: Staffing of Detention Facilities Dear Members of the Board: This letter will set forth the position of the Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs ' Association on the critical issue of detention staffing now pending before the County Board of Supervisors. As the professional association representing deputy � sheriffs: throughout .the county, the Deputy Sheriffs ' Association is in a unique position to evaluate the merits of pending proposals to replace sworn deputy sheriffs with civilian correctional officers in county detention facilities. Our concern with the safety of our members, the public and the inmate population compels us to speak out strongly against these proposals. . We also feel compelled to emphasize that the supposed fiscal savings of such proposals are totally undermined by the current case law concerning "safety retirement. " The exemplary record of Contra Costa detention facilities under the present system of professional staffing is amply set forth in the memo prepared by Sheriff/Coroner Richard K. Rainey. The Deputy Sheriffs ' Association concurs in the Sheriff/Coroner' s remarks, and, like Sheriff Rainey, believes that without professional staffing by deputy sheriffs, the. positive effects of the current system, as well as the extensive praise it has received, would soon be lost. it is simply not possible for civilians with less training and less experience to perform at the professional level of sworn deputy sheriffs . While the attractiveness of budget cutting in an age of growing deficits is not unrecognized by the Deputy Sheriffs ' Association, the Association urges the Board to look seriously at any claimed 1 1985 rQ0TJ County Board of Supervisors Page 2 October 3 , 1985 attempt to save money when the potential cost of such savings may be the safety of county workers , county residents , and inmates under county supervision.—l/ Close scrutiny of pending proposals on detention staffing is particularly warranted in light of the fact that a switch from sworn deputy . sheriffs to correctional officers will not, because of the county safety retirement system, result in any substantial cost savings .to the county. Indeed, the Detention Staffing Analysis Study . (Study) recognized that "benefits for correctional officers and deputy sheriffs are similar in almost all counties. This is because the most significant cost of the benefit package is safety retirement. " (Study, at p. 9) The need to pay correctional officers safety retirement flows from a decision of the California Court of Appeal in Ames v. Board 'of Retirement, 147 Cal. App. 3d 906 (1983) . In Ames, cited by .the Office of the County Administrator in the Detention Staffing Study, the Court analyzed the statutory provision guaranteeing participation in the safety retirement system to employees "engaged in active law enforcement. " (See Govt. Code - Sections 31469 . 31 31469 .4 , 31470 .2 . ) "Active law enforcement, " the Court found, included the following activities: (1) . contact with prisoners on a regular basis; (2) exposure to hazards from prisoner conduct; . and (3) risk of injury from the necessity of being able to cope with potential dangers inherent in the handling of prisoners. (Ames, at p. 916 . ) In Ames, the Court applied this definition of active law enforcement to the facts before it and held that Correctional Officers at the Tulare County Correctional Center were entitled to .participate , in the state ' s safety retirement system. The duties of Tulare County. Correctional Officers that were deemed relevant to the Court' s ,.determination included the supervision of inmates in living quarters, on work assignments, during meals and at recreation; inspection of . living quarters for cleanliness and proper order; preparation of .written. reports on work, conduct and habits of inmates; and admission of visitors according to regulations. (See Ames, at p. 913 . ) As the Detention Staffing Study recognizes, 1/ The Detention Staffing Analysis prepared by the Office of the County Administrator candidly recognized that "it was not possible to ascertain whether the facilities in this study are being operated ii; a Safes mullilCl ." (study , at p. 4 . ) MM County Board of Supervisors Page 3 October 3 , 1985 a civilian detention... staff in Contra Costa County would have duties and responsibilities similar to those at issue in the Ames decision, and therefore, the county would be required to include such staff in the safety retirement system currently applicable to sworn deputy sheriffs.2/ The inclusion of detention staff in the county' s safety retirement system represents a significant cost to the county, and casts serious .doubt on claims that a change to a civilian staff "will save substantial money. The need to classify detention staff as safety members is not, however,` the only reason why a decision to remove inmate protection responsibilities from deputy sheriffs is not cost efficient. The Detention Staffing Anslysis Study recognizes the following additional "hidden costs" that may well result from a decision to replace sworn .deputies with a. civilian staff: . *Hicther� staff/inmate ratio: While training costs per employee are less for correctional officers than for deputy sheriffs,3/ the minimal training provided civilian detention staff may require a higher staff/inmate ratio, thereby requiring more. personnel to "get the job done" and, in turn, eliminating the savings traditionally associated with training costs. (Study, at p. 11..) Significantly, the county with the lowest cost per inmate is San Bernardino , a ' countyutilizing •°only sworn deputy sheriffs . . (Study, at pp. 9-10 .) *High turnover: Higher attrition rates for correctional officers as compared to deputy sheriffs require more frequent training of new staff , another factor tending to offset lower, training costs for correctional officers (Study at p. 11. ) !Another judicial decision that analyzes the phrase "active law enforcement" includes Kimball v. County of Santa Clara, 24 Cal. App. 3d .780 (1972) (Santa Clara Correctional Officers entitled to safety retirement status) . This decision . -and others, all analyzed in Aires lead inescapably to the conclusion that a civilian detention staff in Contra Costa would be included in the. safety retirement system. .. 3/Of course, a significant "unmeasurable" cost flows from the fact that correctional officers receive only 80 hours training compared to the other five hundred and forty hours required for the county' s sworn deputies . The importance of training cannot be overestimated when the job being trained for involves the guarding of inmates and, in turn, the safety of the public. , County Board of Supervisors Page 4 October 3, 1985 *Potential litigation: The County Administrator' s Study recognizes that potential litigation flowing from unsafe jail conditions represents a significant cost in the operation of a county' s detention .system. (Study at p. 13 . ) Under Contra Costa County' s present system of utilizing sworn deputy sheriffs, there has been no significant litigation costs in this area. , . There is .no: way .to guarantee a continuation of this record if trained deputy sheriffs are replaced with correctional officers; *Long-term salary savings: The Detention Staffing Study notes the possibility that pending legislation and recommendations from the National Institute of Corrections may eventually result in pay parity for deputies and correctional officers. (Study, at p. 15. ) In light of other costs, and the threat of diminished public safety- resulting from a change to a non-sworn staff, the possibility of pay parity virtually eliminates the hope that adoption of ' a new staffing system will represent long-term savings to the county; *Miscellaneous costs: The County Administrator' s Study . recognizes that replacement of deputy sheriffs with correctional officers in certain types of detention functions may increase , rather than decrease costs. (Study, at p. 15 . ) Thus , deputies may still be required to supervise some non-sworn positions, resulting in- an increase in the .overall number of paid staff. In . : other classifications, the salary of replacement civilian personnel may actually be higher than that currently paid to deputy sheriffs. The hidden financial costs attendant upon a shift from sworn deputies to civilian correctional officers require close attention to the proposals currently -pending before the Board. However, the Deputy Sheriffs ' Association believes that the nonmonetary costs that such a change would entail are far more significant and should be given even greater consideration in the Board' s deliberations, on this critical issue. For example , elimination of a professional detention staff poses a threat to the safety of the county employees who will be charged with guarding the inmate population. The lack of extensive and adequate training of correctional officers subjects them to greater risk of injury in the event of a jail emergency. This risk of injury may .well result in added costs per detention employee 'the. county will have to pay. And, lack of staff training also means greater risk of injury to the inmate population in the event of an emergency, again resulting in potential increased costs to the county. The most significant nonmonetary cost involved in this issue, however, flows from the fact that the county' s deputy sheriffs who currently guard our inmate population also provide a highly County Board of Supervisors Page 5 October -3, 1985 trained force available in the event of an emergency. This reserve of manpower would be eliminated were the Board to decide that a civilian correctional force is sufficient' in county detention facilities. Thus, not only would public safety be diminished on a day-to-day basis by the absence of trained professionals supervising the inmate population, but in an emergency situation the resources available to protect county residents would be severely depleted. - Even if correctional officers did not have to be included in the safety retirement system, and even if the elimination of sworn deputy sheriffs were not rife with hidden costs, the Deputy Sheriffs' Association submits that the cost to public safety resulting from the adoption of' pending proposals is too high a price for this county to pay. Thank you very much for your consideration of the information contained in this letter. I, and other members of the Association as well as our legal counsel, are prepared to testify further on this matter or answer any questions you may have. Very truly yyoou�rs, Larry Aulich President Deputy Sheriffs ' Association LA:yf cc: Phillip Batchelor, County Administrator OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Administration Building Martinez, California To: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Date: November 20, 1985 SUPERVISOR TOM TORLAKSON SUPERVISOR TOM POWERS C From: GEORGE ROEMER Director Subject: FURTHER INFORMATION RELATIVE TO Justice System Programs DETENTION STAFFING ANALYSIS STUDY The Detention Staffing Analysis Study done by this Office and the written responses to that study were presented at the October 14, 1985 meeting of the Internal Operations Committee. The following report presents some additional information requested at that meeting. 1. Salary Costs of Deputies and Correctional Officers The following analysis assumes that the cost difference between deputies and correctional officers is in salary and training costs and that there is no significant difference in benefit costs.* There .are currently 166 authorized deputies in detention. At any given time, . with the current level of patrol services and the average daily population in the detention facilities, there are a certain number of deputy positions which, if authorized and filled, will result in a direct reduction of overtime costs. At the present time, the Department estimates that this amounts to 15 deputies. For comparison purposes, let us assume Contra Costa County is paying for 181 custody deputies at the top salary step .of $2,462. Also, assume the County could replace these 181 deputies with correctional officers at the top step salary rate that Solano County pays their correctional officers--$1,905, or at the top step the Department of Corrections pays their correctional officers--$2,227.** (It is not clear that Contra Costa County could hire correctional officers at either of these rates. ) *Safety Retirement The Solano County Administrator's Office reported that correctional officers in that county received safety retirement benefits during the most recent negotiations. Thus, all personnel directly supervising inmates in the 12-county study now receive safety retirement. **It should be noted that Solano County is having some recent recruitment and retention problems due to the massive California Department of Corrections hiring program for correctional officers at Vacaville. This is expected to continue for at least the next five years. Internal Operations Committee 2 November 20, 1985 Annual Salary Annual Salary Savings for 100 Top Annual Cost for Every Correctional Step/Mo. No. of Salary Additional 100 Officers vs. Classification June '85 Officers Cost Officers . Deputies -------------------- -------- -------- ---------- -------------- --------------- Deputy Sheriff $2,462 181 $5,347,464 $2,954,400 (Contra- Costa County) Correctional Officer. $1,905 181 $4,137,660 $2,286,000 $6-68,400 (Solano County) Correctional Officer $2,227 181 $4,837,044 $2,672,400 $282,000 (California Dept. of Corrections) The above table shows the cost differences for every 100 additional custody officers needed, e.g. , to staff the new jail, using the salary rates in' Contra Costa, Solano and the California Department of Correc- tions. 2. Training Costs for Deputies and Correctional Officers a. Correctional Officers (l) Correctional Officers minimum training requirements are set by Standards and Training for Corrections (S.T.C. ). (2) Basic S.T.C. funds are obtained by using the following formula: *Allocation Per Person x Total Eligible Staff Department Allocation The 85/86 figures for the Sheriff are $500 x 175 staff = $87,500 *Allocation per person is set yearly by S.T.C. and is dependent on their resources. (3) S.T.C. funds will pay for: (a) Replacement costs. (b) Travel costs ($.30 per mile maximum). (c) Per them costs ($66 maximum). (d) Tuition costs. S.T.C. program funds can not be used to pay the salaries, benefits, overtime or shift differentials of those attending training. Internal Operations Committee 3 November 20, 1985 (4) The S.T.C. program distributes the funds to the participating agency on a quarterly basis with the amount being pre- determined by the department's Annual Training Plan. b. Deputy Sheriff (1) Deputy Sheriff minimum training requirements are set by Peace Officer Standards and Training (P.O.S.T. ) with an S.T.C. requirement if the Deputy is going to work in Corrections. (2) P.O.S.T.. funds are distributed by submitting a claim for reimbursement after training is completed and they use the following formula. (a) 60% of participant's salary. (b) $66 per day subsistance. (c) $.26 per mile travel. (d) Basic tuition costs. With the above information in mind and using an example of 10 new Deputies vs. 10 new Correctional Officers both being paid at the new Recruit level of $1,620 per month during basic training: 10 Deputies to Basic Academy 10 C. O. 's to S.T.C. Core Course (640 hrs) 520 hrs reimbursed (80 hrs) + CPR & First Aid P.O.S.T. Cost Reimbursed Cost S.T.C. Pays Tuition 5,'400 2,100 7,393 5,000* Salary 59,930 29,216 7,491 0 Subsis. 0 4,712 0 0 Travel 0 6,250 0 0 ------- -------- ------ -------- $65,330 $42,278 $14,884 $5,000 net cost net cost $23,352 $9,884 The Board of Corrections is in the process of upgrading the minumum training requirements for Correctional Officers. As of this date, the recommendation is to increase the S.T.C. basic training requirement from 80 hours to 156 hours for FY 86/87; which would almost double the present training cost of $9,884. *S.T.C. allows $500 per person for training during 85/86 FY. Internal Operations Committee 4 November 20, 1985 10 Deputies to 40 hour S.T.C. Course Tuition 3,700 3,700 Salary 4,684 0 Subsis. 0 0 Travel 0 0 $8,384 $3,700 net cost $4,684 DEPUTY TRAINING GRAND TOTAL; Cost $73,714 Reimbursed $45,978 Overall net cost: L$ 7,736 3. Maintain current deputy sheriff classification but increase the use of non-sworn persons in various roles in the detention division. A review was made of the various functions performed by deputies other . than the custody function in the living units to assess the feasibili- ty in further civilianizing detention functions. As noted in the Sheriff-Coroner's September 30, 1985 letter to the County Administrator, civilians already perform the following func- tions in detention: dispatch (central control), reception, telephone, accounts and records, sanitation, laundry and food service. The following positions have been identified as potential functions to be performed by non-sworn staff. Issues regarding the cost- effectiveness or feasibility of making a change have been noted. a. Bailiffs/Court Attendants The Superior Court bailiffs in Contra Costa County (who are deputies) maintain courtroom, building and exterior security and assist with security and movement of prisoners. The other tasks they perform are clerical in nature: mail, phones, library, etc. There are a number of concerns regarding the conversion of bailiffs from sworn officers to civilians. (1) There are no totally civil calendars in Contra Costa County. All Superior Court Judges must be available to handle felony criminal cases. In some of these criminal cases, there is a need for armed officers in the courtroom. Sheriff's Department transportation deputies transport and stay with all in-custody criminal defendants while in court. However, the bailiff is the only security for out-of-custody defendants while in court. Internal Operations Committee 5 November 20, 1985 The bailiff classification in all likelihood would have to have firearms training (P.C. 832). (2) It might be necessary to hire more civilian bailiffs than the current number (16) because the Sheriff fills requests for extra help, e.g. , visiting judges, from other manpower in the Department as a whole. b. Transportation Officers Deputies search, secure and transport inmates to the various courts, supervise. inmates in Superior Court, make out-of-county pickups on warrants and removal orders, transport inmates to state prison, County Hospital, act as relief-Bailiff, and additional court security as required. Some counties included in the staffing analysis study used correctional officers in transportation. Some used correctional officers only for intra-county transport (Fresno) and others used C.O. 's for both intra and outside of the county transport (River- side). The transportation function is a crucial security link. If an inmate is going to escape from a maximum-security setting such as the Martinez Detention Facility, the attempt may occur during transport of the inmate. The Sheriff transports 30-35 inmates with one deputy driver in the Department bus, and 13 inmates with one deputy driver in the vans. The Sheriff used to operate transportation with a civilian bus driver and a deputy. The deputy now drives the vehicle and provides the security. c. Work Alternative Project (WAP) The WAP deputies conduct applicant interviews, schedule work days, check work sites on random basis, and account for income. There are no security reasons why WAP staff need to be sworn officers. There are currently three deputies and one half-time civilian clerk operating the WAP project. However, little cost savings can be achieved by replacing deputies with civilians. WAP participants pay the cost of the project. By law, no profit can be made on participant fees, so if there were a staff cost reduction, there would have to be an accompanying fee reduction. An actual cost increase to the County might occur by replacing deputies with civilians because some of the deputies assigned to staff WAP are on light duty (one deputy currently). Internal Operations Committee 6 November 20, 1985 The Sheriff's Department has one of the best department records in the County in terms of workers compensation.* One of the reasons for the outstanding record is being able to assign people with various types of injuries or conditions to jobs they can perform while disabled.. Otherwise, these employees would be home receiving compensation. i d. Classification Officers Classification deputies interview all inmates to be housed more than 72 hours, determine proper housing assignments, respond to protective custody and administrative segregation requests, and attend prison gang task force meetings. While this is a specialized function and not part of direct security, the individuals performing this function must have credibility among custody staff, be cleared for access to confidential records, and be knowledgeable of, and able to work with, prison gangs. e. Bureau of Administrative Services Deputies in Administrative Services handle a variety of tasks including population analysis, court orders, facility inspections,. facility tours, training, etc. The positions do not require law enforcement capabilities. However, the positions would be comparable to management analyst positions. The top step for a Management Analyst II is $2,469 which is almost identical to a top step deputy. There would be some savings in benefit costs. A change from sworn to civilian for these positions might not be worthwhile from a cost savings or job effectiveness perspective. f. Work Furlough Field Officers There are currently three Work Furlough Field Officers who perform all the investigations for work furlough and County parole eligibility, the supervision of persons on work furlough at the work site, provide occasional relief for custody officers at the WFF, and the preparation and serving of arrest warrants for persons violating parole. If these positions were civilianized, they would probably be filled by a Deputy Probation Officer II at a top step salary of $2,375 or a DPO III at $2,555. Again, such a change would, at a maximum, result in salary cost savings of $100/month or cost more than the Work Furlough Field Officers. There would be savings in benefit costs. g. Work Furlough Facility Custody Officers Existing deputies at Work Furlough could be converted to non-sworn staff. If a classification such as group counselor was used, there might be some potential for cost savings. At the current time, the staffing pattern is: *Source: Personnel Department-Safety & Benefits. rs;•. Internal Operations Committee 7 November 20, 1985 Days 1 sergeant 2 or 3 deputies (one female) Swing 1 sergeant 2 deputies (one female) Graveyard 1 sergeant 1 deputy (female) (The work furlough dorm. is not staffed on this shift. ) In Santa Clara County, group counselors working at the work furlough facilities receive between $2,036 and $2,380/month. This would translate into a cost savings of $89 to $433/month per deputy position or $9,612 to $46,764 a year. There would also be benefit cost savings. An assessment would have to be made as to whether or not the same number of group counselors could supervise the WFF as deputies. An additional problem is that the WFF is not operated solely as a minimum-security facility. It serves as the branch jail for medium-security pretrial and sentenced women because of the overcrowding at the Martinez Detention Facility. This condition will continue and may worsen over the next five years until a new detention facility is operational. An additional consideration is that the WFF usually has persons assigned there who have work. related injuries or other disabilities. Again, absent certain types of jobs, these persons would be home drawing compensation. One light-duty employee recently released back to patrol had been at the WFF for two years. g. Marsh Creek Detention Facility The Marsh Creek Detention Facility now serves as a sentenced facility for all medium and minimum-security male County prisoners not eligible for work furlough; and the branch jail for the overflow of medium-security pretrial prisoners from the Martinez Detention Facility. The Sheriff has requested and had authorized an Institutional Service Worker for Marsh Creek to handle purchasing, inmate cash, and maintenance to relieve the sworn staff of those duties so they can provide more inmate supervision. At a future date when the new facility is opened, consideration should be given, if .the inmate population warrants, to operating the Marsh Creek Facility as a facility for persons sentenced for alcohol/drug-related offenses. Currently, Marsh Creek houses, on the average, at least 50 persons committed for drunk driving- related offenses alone. The majority of these offenders do not require more than a minimum-security setting. Such a facility could be staffed by alcohol rehabilitation workers who receive a top step salary of $1,728/month. Some sworn officer supervision of the facility would still be necessary. Internal Operations Committee 8 November 20, 1985 , Limited Classifications One overall consideration in contemplating conversion of deputies into smaller classifications, e.g. , group counselors, is the loss of flexibility with limited classifications. For example, if you have six male and six female group counselors and you have an unplanned absence, you would have no other option but to fill the position with a deputy on overtime. If you had 100 group counselors, you would have the ability to move personnel around more. GR/jw cc: Nancy C. Fanden, Supervisor, District 2 Robert I. Schroder, Supervisor, District 3 Sunne McPeak, Supervisor, District 4 Charles Hammond, Chief Assistant County Administrator Richard Rainey, Sheriff-Coroner Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriff's Association Contra Costa County Taxpayers' Association Public Employees Union, Local One Correctional and Detention Services Advisory Commission 1. Jail staffing analysis . i2. Deputy .Sheriff replacement not supported. r 3 . Detention Facility staffing. 4 . C/A to conduct comparison w/counties . {