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 ****