BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 124| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SB 124 Author: Leno (D), et al. Amended: 6/1/15 Vote: 21 SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 4/7/15 AYES: Hancock, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Monning NOES: Anderson, Stone SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 5/28/15 AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza NOES: Bates, Nielsen SUBJECT: Juveniles: solitary confinement SOURCE: California Public Defenders Association DIGEST: This bill establishes standards and protocols for the use of solitary confinement in state and local juvenile facilities for the confinement of delinquent wards, as specified, and makes changes to the composition and duties of local juvenile justice commissions, as specified. ANALYSIS: Existing law: 1) Provides that when a minor is adjudged a ward of the court SB 124 Page 2 on the ground that he or she is delinquent, the court may make any and all reasonable orders for the care, supervision, custody, conduct, maintenance, and support of the minor, including medical treatment, subject to further order of the court, as specified. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 727(a).) 2) Requires the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) to adopt minimum standards for the operation and maintenance of juvenile halls for the confinement of minors. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 210.) 3) Provides that in each county there shall be a juvenile justice commission consisting of not less than seven and no more than 15 citizens. And, that two or more of the members be persons who are between 14 and 21 years of age, provided there are available persons between 14 and 21 years of age who are able to carry out the duties of a commission member in a manner satisfactory to the appointing authority. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 225.) 4) Provides that in lieu of county juvenile justice commissions, the board of supervisors of two or more adjacent counties may agree to establish a regional juvenile justice commission consisting of not less than eight citizens. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 226.) 5) Provides that it shall be the duty of a juvenile justice commission to inquire into the administration of the juvenile court law in the county or region in which the commission serves. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 229.) 6) Provides that a juvenile justice commission shall annually inspect any jail or lockup within the county which in the preceding calendar year was used for confinement for more than 24 hours of any minor. (Welfare and Institutions Code § 229.) 7) Provides that a "juvenile justice commission may recommend to any person charged with the administration of any of the provisions of this chapter such changes as it has concluded, after investigation, will be beneficial. A commission may publicize its recommendations." (Welfare and Institutions SB 124 Page 3 Code § 230.) This bill: 1) Defines "solitary confinement" to mean "the placement of an incarcerated person in a locked sleep room or cell alone with minimal or no contact with persons other than guards, correctional facility staff, and attorneys. Solitary confinement does not include confinement of a person in a single-person room or cell for brief periods of locked-room confinement necessary for required institutional operations, including, but not limited to, shift changes, showering, and unit movements." 2) Provides that solitary confinement cannot be used for the purposes of discipline, punishment, coercion, convenience, or retaliation by staff. 3) Provides that a person may be held in solitary confinement if: a) The person poses an immediate and substantial risk of harm to the security of the facility; b) The person poses an immediate and substantial risk of harm to others that is not the result of a mental disorder; or c) The person poses a risk of harm to himself or herself that is not the result of a mental disorder. 4) Provides that solitary confinement be used in accordance with the following guidelines: a) The person may be held in solitary confinement only for the minimum time required to address the risk, and for a period of time that does not compromise the mental and physical health of the minor or ward, but not to exceed four hours. SB 124 Page 4 b) If a person who is released from solitary confinement and is returned to regular or individualized programming poses an immediate and substantial risk of harm to himself or herself, or to others, he or she may be placed back into solitary confinement only in accordance with the protections and requirements of this bill, and that confinement shall be treated as a new and separate use of solitary confinement, as specified. c) If a person in solitary confinement poses a risk of harm to himself or herself that is not a result of a mental disorder, the condition of the person shall be monitored closely by custody staff of the juvenile facility. 5) Requires each local and state juvenile facility document the usage of each incident of solitary confinement, including all of the following: a) The name of the person subject to solitary confinement; b) The date and time the person was placed in solitary confinement; c) The date and time the person was released from solitary confinement; d) The name and position of person authorizing the placement of the person in solitary confinement; e) The names of staff involved in the incident leading to the use of solitary confinement; f) A description of circumstances leading to use of solitary confinement; g) A description of alternative actions and sanctions attempted and found unsuccessful; and h) The dates and times when staff checked in on the person when he or she was in solitary confinement and the person's behavior during the check. SB 124 Page 5 6) Subjects these records, without identifying information, to public disclosure as specified. 7) Provides that its provisions are not intended to limit the use of single-person rooms or cells for the housing of persons in juvenile facilities. 8) Provides that its provisions do not apply to minors or wards in court holding facilities or adult facilities. 9) Provides that its provisions not be construed to conflict with any law providing greater or additional protections to minors or wards. 10)Requires that two or more of the members of the juvenile justice commission to be persons who are 14 to 21 years of age, inclusive; two or more of the members to be parents or guardians of previously incarcerated youth; one member shall be a licensed psychiatrist, licensed psychologist, or licensed clinical social worker with expertise in adolescent development. 11)Requires the regional juvenile justice commission to consist of no less than ten members. 12)Requires two or more of the members of a regional juvenile justice commission to be 14 to 21 years of age, inclusive. Two or more of the members shall be parents or guardians of previously incarcerated youth. One member shall be a licensed psychiatrist, licensed psychologist, or licensed clinical social worker, with expertise in adolescent development. 13)Authorizes a juvenile justice commission to publicize its recommendations on the county government's internet website or other publicly accessible medium. Background The provisions of this bill apply to the Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF). Historically, the use of solitary confinement in the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) has posed significant issues and concerns. 15 years ago, the Legislature investigated a number of issues relating to conditions at what was then the SB 124 Page 6 California Youth Authority (CYA). A former CYA ward testified about his experience on "lock-down" at CYA in the early-to-mid 1990s: I spent ten months on the Taft lock-down unit for assaultive wards. I was considered a threat to regular staff. For the first month-and-a-half that I was there, I came out of my room for one hour a day. As soon as the shift came on, which is about 6 o'clock in the morning, I would have my handcuffs removed out of my room to shower. My shower would count as part of my hour, as part of my large muscle exercise. I would sometimes have to eat in my handcuffs in front of the TV. That would be part of my large muscle exercise. That would be it. For a month-and-a-half I did that. Transcript, Joint Oversight Hearing of the Senate and Assembly Committees on Public Safety Regarding the California Department of the Youth Authority, (May 16, 2000.) (http://spsf.senate.ca.gov/jointinformationalhearingonthecaliforn ia youth authoritymay162000.) As part of comprehensive litigation involving conditions at DJF which commenced in 2003 - Farrell v. Cate - DJF is required to adopt reformed methods for dealing with containment or isolation of wards. (See Consent Decree, Farrell v. Allen (Nov. 19, 2004) (http://www.prisonlaw .com /pdfs/farrellcd2.pdf.); Safety and Welfare Remedial Plan: Implementing Reform in California (July 10, 2006) http://www. prisonlaw.com/pdfs/SafetyPlanFinal.pdf.) In her most recent (and 30th) report in the Farrell case in November of 2014, Special Master Nancy Campbell wrote in part: There have been significant reductions in the reliance on solitary confinement in DJJ since 2005. The older and discredited policy and practice of confining youth in a lockup unit for 23 hours a day with minimal services is gone. In its place, the DJJ has developed a range of options that constitute a short term limitation on the program of youth who are in some kind of crisis and who may be a danger to themselves or others. These alternatives include a very short term cool down period in the youngster's room (or in a separate room) in those few remaining dormitory units. Another option for staff is to utilize "room confinement" in which the youth stays in their own room, usually for less than a day. Youth SB 124 Page 7 needing more specialized attention are managed in the Treatment Intervention Program (TIP) that is designed to last only a few days. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: Yes According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: Annual costs to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation DJF of less than $2 million (General Fund) annually for increased staffing, data collection, and training on new regulations. The provisions of this bill apply to the DJF population of approximately 700 youth. Ongoing likely state-reimbursable local costs potentially in the low millions of dollars (General Fund) statewide for over 100 local juvenile facilities with an average daily population of approximately 7,600 youth, to meet the operational and documentation mandates of this bill. Minor annual local costs to effectuate the changes to juvenile justice commission membership. Ongoing costs of about $30,000 (General Fund) to the BSCC for revised and extended training provided to juvenile justice commission members. Potentially significant annual state-reimbursable costs (General Fund) for local juvenile justice commissions to expand the list of annual inspections of jails and lockup facilities to include any facility within the county used for confinement for more than 24 hours of a minor. SUPPORT: (Verified 5/28/15) A New Way of Life Reentry Project Alameda County Board of Supervisors Alliance of White Anti-Racists Everywhere - Los Angeles American Civil Liberties Union of California American Friends Service Committee Anti-Recidivism Coalition Bend the Arc Bay Area California Alliance for Youth and Community Justice California Attorneys for Criminal Justice California Catholic Conference of Bishops SB 124 Page 8 California Civil Liberties Council California Coalition for Youth California Council of Churches IMPACT California Psychological Association California Teachers Association California Youth Empowerment Network Californians United for a Responsible Budget Center for Educational Excellence in Alternative Settings Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice Children Now Children's Defense Fund - California Children's Law Center Citizens for Criminal Justice Reform Coalition for Engaged Education Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice Conference of California Bar Associations Congregation Rodef Sholom Dignity in Schools Campaign Drug Policy Alliance East Bay Children's Law Offices Ella Baker Center for Human Rights Fair Chance Project Forward Together Free America Free Indeed Reentry Project Friends Committee on Legislation of California GSA Network Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club Human Rights Watch Inland Empire Immigrant Youth Coalition InnerCity Struggle Justice Not Jails Labor/Community Strategy Center's Community Rights Campaign Latino Coalition for a Healthy California Legal Services for Children Legal Services for Prisoners with Children Life After Uncivil Ruthless Acts Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Manifest Works Mental Health America of California Multifaith Voices for Peace and Justice NAMI-California National Association of Black Social Workers National Association of Blacks in Criminal Justice SB 124 Page 9 National Association of Social Workers-California Chapter National Center for Youth Law National Religious Campaign Against Torture Nollie Jenkins Family Center Office of Restorative Justice of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Peace Over Violence Policy Link Prison Activist Resource Center Public Counsel Resurrection Catholic Community Sacred Harmony Social Justice Learning Institute Starting Over Inc. Temple Beth El, Aptos, California Temple Beth El, Riverside, California The Association of Black Psychologists Urban Peace Movement Violence Prevention Coalition of Greater Los Angeles W. Haywood Burns Institute W.I.N.T.E.R. Youth Build Wilks Law Youth Justice Coalition Youth Law Center Numerous Individuals OPPOSITION: (Verified5/28/15) California Correctional Peace Officers Association Chief Probation Officers of California Fraternal Order of Police N. California Probation Lodge 19 Kern County Probation Officers Association Monterey County Probation Association Probation Peace Officers Association of Contra Costa County Sacramento County Probation Association San Francisco Deputy Probation Officers' Association San Joaquin County Probation Officers Association Santa Clara County Probation Peace Officers' Union State Coalition of Probation Organizations Ventura County Professional Peace Officers' Association ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: American Civil Liberties Union of California states: SB 124 Page 10 SB 124 seeks to remedy deficiencies in law regarding the use of solitary confinement in juvenile facilities. This bill is in keeping with efforts across the country to ban or limit the use of solitary confinement, and to curb its overuse and abuse. . . SB 124 follows efforts across the county and around the world to curb the use of solitary confinement. States like Alaska and Oklahoma ban the use of juvenile solitary confinement for punitive reasons. New York City recently banned the use of solitary confinement on people under the age of 21. ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: California Correctional Peace Officers Association states: We recognize that many parties believe that solitary confinement was overused in the past within the Department of the Youth Authority and the Division of Juvenile Facilities. However those issues were addressed by the Farrell court and subsequently by DJJ. In our view, the DJJ has adopted a far reaching set of policies governing the isolation of wards. These policies are specifically designed to keep wards safe and, when necessary, place a ward in a treatment program run by staff who are trained in evidence based curriculum to address the ward's violent or aggressive behavior ? Prepared by:Linda Tenerowicz / PUB. S. / 6/1/15 13:04:08 **** END ****