BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 124
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 19, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
SB 124
(Leno) - As Amended August 17, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Public Safety |Vote:|5 - 2 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: YesReimbursable:
Yes
SUMMARY:
This bill establishes standards and protocols for the placement
of juvenile offenders in solitary confinement. Specifically,
this bill:
SB 124
Page 2
1)Prohibits the use of solitary confinement on a person confined
in a juvenile facility who is an imminent danger to himself,
herself, or others as a result of a mental disorder or who is
gravely disabled, or for the purposes of discipline,
punishment, coercion, or retaliation by staff.
2)Provides that a person confined in any secure state or local
juvenile facility, and who is not an imminent danger to
himself, herself, or others as a result of a mental disorder
or who is gravely disabled, shall be subject to solitary
confinement only if all of the following are true:
a) The person poses an immediate and substantial risk of
harm to the security of the facility, to himself or
herself, or to others, which is not the result of a mental
disorder.
b) All other less-restrictive options to address the risk
have been attempted and exhausted.
c) The performance of solitary confinement is done in
accordance with specified principles.
3)Requires every juvenile facility to document specific
information regarding each use of solitary confinement, and
this information is to be available pursuant to the California
Public Records Act.
SB 124
Page 3
4)Allows a person confined in a juvenile facility to request a
revocable voluntary time out, as defined, for no longer than
two hours in a 24 hour period. During any voluntary time out,
the person may participate in all programming and meals.
5)Changes the composition of local juvenile justice commissions
and requires commissions to review records relating to the use
of solitary confinement as part of their review of detention
facilities and submit specified reports with appropriate
recommendations.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Significant cost in the range of $2.7 million (GF) to the
Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), California Department of
Correction and Rehabilitation (CDCR), the first year, and $2.3
million (GF) every year thereafter. The first year costs
includes $340,000 for training, in addition to the ongoing
cost $2.2 million for 17.5 positions and $100,000 for higher
level of service for endangered youth (at an average of three
youth per month and three days per youth) that will need to be
escorted 16 hours per day.
2)Significant reimbursable state mandated costs to local
juvenile facilities, likely in the millions of dollars (GF).
3)Proponents indicate that current practice has resulted in
significant court settlements, and therefore, this bill will
result in significant savings. It is possible that
statewide-specific standards and protocols could reduce
litigation costs.
SB 124
Page 4
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. According to the author, "Solitary confinement is an
extremely harmful measure, widely condemned as torture, but
unfortunately it is one that continues to be used in the
California juvenile justice system under various programmatic
titles. Solitary confinement has not been shown to have any
rehabilitative or treatment value, and the United Nations has
called upon all member countries to ban its use completely on
minors."
"SB 124 does not ban the use of solitary confinement
completely as many other jurisdictions in the world have done,
it merely limits the use of solitary to instances where there
is an actual threat to the safety of staff, other youth, or
the general security of the facility."
2)Background. Current law states that the purpose of the
juvenile court system is to provide for the protection and
safety of the public and each minor under the jurisdiction of
the juvenile court and to preserve and strengthen the minor's
family ties whenever possible, removing the minor from the
custody of his or her parents only when necessary for his or
her welfare or for the safety and protection of the public.
Current law authorizes the court to place a ward of the court
in a juvenile hall, ranch, camp, forestry camp, secure
juvenile home, or the Division of Juvenile Facilities, as
specified.
The California Code of Regulations Title 15, Minimum Standards
for Juvenile Facilities, provides guidelines on the isolation
or separation of juveniles from the general population.
"Separation" is defined in the regulations as limiting a
youth's participation in regular programming for a specific
purpose. While the regulations provide some guidance on the
use of solitary confinement on juveniles, there is no
SB 124
Page 5
specified limit on how long a juvenile may be placed in
isolation.
The issue of solitary confinement has been an issue in the
past and has resulted in litigation against the California
Youth Authority (now DJJ) and various counties. A specific
Consent-Decree (Farrell v. Cate) imposed specific guidelines
on DJJ. The consent decree requires the DJJ to provide wards
with adequate and effective care, treatment and rehabilitation
services, including reducing violence and the use of force,
improving medical and mental health care, reducing the use of
lock-ups and providing better education programs. The ongoing
case is overseen by a Special Master who issues quarterly
reports. The most recent report, dated March 2015, is showing
that DJJ is making significant progress in reducing lengthy
lock-ups of juveniles. However, the provision, of in the
Consent-Decree do not apply to local juvenile facilities
SB 124 applies to all juvenile facilities and provides that
juveniles may be placed in solitary confinement for four hours
at a time as long as certain procedures and policies are met.
Effectively, SB 124 enacts minimum standards and protocols
statewide for the use of solitary confinement of juveniles,
which will provide additional protections once the consent
decree is lifted.
3)Argument in Support: According to the Children's Defense Fund
- California, a co-sponsor of this bill, "For over a decade,
Los Angeles County has been plagued by litigation and a
recently concluded Department of Justice oversight for abuse
and problems inside its juvenile facilities. This has cost
the county millions of dollars in legal fees and reform
efforts. SB 124, if enacted, would create a uniform
definition of solitary confinement consistent with national
best practices and limit the use of solitary confinement to 4
hours. It would also create a uniform practice of documenting
its use."
4)Argument in Opposition: According to the Chief Probation
SB 124
Page 6
Officers of California, "The bill fails to take into account a
myriad of issues that are present in a facility on any given
day that require probation to take action. Fundamentally, in
some situations the provisions of this bill are either
impossible to implement or implementation may cause harm to
the very youth this bill is designed to protect. Chiefs stand
behind ensuring best practices are put in place to operate our
facilities in the safest manner for all those detained.
Ultimately, the broad definition that remains in the bill does
not take into account all the types of situations we face
daily. Placing a definition in statute instead of relying on
a regulatory scheme that can account for a variety of
circumstances creates operational hurdles that significantly
limit probation's ability to put into place best practices in
response to the specific situation presented."
Analysis Prepared by:Pedro R. Reyes / APPR. / (916)
319-2081