BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 892
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 6, 2014

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                    SB 892 (Hancock) - As Amended:  May 27, 2014 

          Policy Committee:                             Public  
          SafetyVote:5-2

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:              

           SUMMARY  

          This bill creates detailed procedures regarding placement and  
          treatment of inmates housed in a California Department of  
          Corrections' Security Housing Unit (SHU).  Specifically, this  
          bill:   

          1)Creates a new associate director position to oversee the  
            security threat group (gang) validation and SHU operations and  
            conditions.  

           2)Specifies due process procedures for determining if an inmate  
            is a member or an associate of a gang, and subject to  
            placement in a SHU, including:
           
              a)   Timely written notice that gang validation is being  
               considered, and why.   
              b)   A dedicated and trained classification committee.  
              c)   An in-person hearing, with an interpreter, if necessary,  
               and an advocate.

          3)Requires the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to review  
            every gang validation based on confidential information prior  
            to an offender being placed in a SHU, as specified. If the OIG  
            concludes the determination is not supported by the evidence,  
            or the inmate was not provided due process, the gang  
            validation is deleted and the inmate may not be placed in a  
            SHU.
           
           4)Requires all SHU inmates to be placed in the existing Step  
            Down Program, as specified.  









                                                                 SB 892
                                                                  Page  2

           5)Requires the OIG to review the files of each inmate subject to  
            an indeterminate SHU term who is denied progression within the  
            program.  
                
          6)Requires all SHU inmates to have an individualized plan, and  
            requires programming to promote successful assimilation into  
            the general prison population. Requires assessment of inmates  
            every 90 days, provides inmates the opportunity to advance to  
            the next step of the program after 180 days, and requires the  
            OIG to review inmate files for CDCR compliance.

          7)Requires CDCR to prepare reentry plans for every offender who  
            will parole directly out of the SHU or Psychiatric Services  
            Unit (PSU) into the community. Requires the OIG to review  
            files for compliance.  

           8)Allows an inmate serving a determinate SHU term to earn  
            sentence credits.   

           9)Requires an inmate in a SHU or PSU to have access to  
            educational, weekly face-to-face interaction with staff,  
            exercise in the presence of other inmates (though inmates may  
            be separated by barriers), access to radio or TV, and the  
            opportunity to earn privileges and sentence credits. Requires  
            the OIG to perform biennial audits to assess CDCR compliance.  
                
          10)Requires mental health screening for SHU inmates, including  
            specified monitoring, with subsequent mental health  
            assessments, as specified. Inmates suffering from a serious  
            mental illness shall be removed from the SHU. Requires CDCR to  
            provide training regarding psychiatric crises. Requires the  
            OIG to perform biennial audits to assess CDCR compliance.    

           11)Requires CDCR to employ two ombudspersons as resource  
            specialists at the five prisons with a SHU or PSU.   

           12)Requires CDCR to collect specified data regarding inmates  
            subject to a term in a SHU, and requires the OIG, to use this  
            data to prepare a biennial report, as specified.   

           13)Requires the OIG to employ two secured housing specialists  
            for the five prisons with a SHU or a PSU to monitor  
            programming and conditions.
           
          FISCAL EFFECT  








                                                                  SB 892
                                                                  Page  3


          1)Significant ongoing GF costs, in the $20 million range, for  
            staffing, prescriptive procedures, and audits and reports.  
            Major cost component estimates:

             a)   $400,000 for a new associate director and related  
               staffing contingent. 
             b)   $100,000 for the OIG to review every gang validation  
               based on confidential information and to determine whether  
               the validation stands. 
             c)   $1 million to develop individualized plans for all SHU  
               inmates, including progress tracking and assessments every  
               90 days.
             d)   $50,000 for the OIG to review all SHU inmate files for  
               inmates who do not progress in the program, and to conduct  
               annual audits of CDCR compliance.
             e)   $2 million for additional staffing for expanded  
               recreational opportunities. 
             f)   $50,000 for the OIG to conduct biennial inmate  
               programming compliance audits.
             g)   $15 million for prescribed mental health monitoring,  
               including daily logs, weekly rounds, and comprehensive  
               evaluations every 90 days. 
             h)   $50,000 for the OIG to conduct biennial mental health  
               compliance audits.   
             i)   $1 million for 10 SHU ombudspersons. 
             j)   $50,000 for the OIG to report biennially regarding  
               prescribed SHU inmate metrics.
             aa)  $1 million for 10 SHU monitors under the OIG.

          2)One-time capital outlay costs in the $1 million range for  
            exercise yards and security barriers.

          3)Unknown annual GF savings, potentially in the low tens of  
            millions of dollars over the course of a decade, by making SHU  
            inmates eligible for sentence credits. 

           COMMENTS
           
          Rationale.  The author contends the use of SHUs to house and  
          punish inmates indefinitely for real or alleged gang affiliation  
          - rather than for actual crimes or rule violations - is  
          inappropriate. According to the author, "Psychological research  
          has found that a lack of social interaction can lead SHU inmates  
          suffer from a variety of psychological and psychiatric  








                                                                  SB 892
                                                                  Page  4

          illnesses.  These can include chronic insomnia, panic attacks,  
          and symptoms of psychosis (including hallucinations).

          "SB 892 would create an infrastructure to ensure humane  
          conditions for SHU inmates, provide oversight and accountability  
          in the use of the SHU, provide for evidence-based programming to  
          inmates, and provide greater due process."

           1)Current Law and Regulations  .

             a)   Provides an inmate placed in a SHU, PSU, Behavioral  
               Management Unit, or an Administrative Segregation Unit for  
               specified violent misconduct, or upon validation as a  
               prison gang member or associate, is ineligible to earn  
               sentence credits for time spent in these units. (Penal Code  
                2933.6(a))

             b)   Requires an inmate found guilty of specified offenses to  
               serve a determinate term in the SHU, ranging from two  
               months to 60 months.  (Cal. Code of Regs)  

             c)   Allows CDCR to place an inmate in the SHU for an  
               indeterminate term if the inmate is validated as a gang  
               member or associate.  (Cal. Code of Regs)

           2)SHU Background  .  As detailed in the Assembly Public Safety  
            analysis, CDCR has SHUs in five institutions - Pelican Bay  
            State Prison, California State Prison in Corcoran, California  
            Correctional Institution in Tehachapi, California State Prison  
            in Sacramento, and California Institution for Women. As of  
            April 2014, CDCR reports these SHUs had a population of about  
            2,200 validated prison gang members and associates.  
             
             Inmates are assigned to the SHU in two ways.  First, inmates  
            may be assigned to the SHU for a determinate time period as  
            punishment for actions within a prison. If an inmate is found  
            guilty of violating specified rules, regulations, or laws, for  
            example, possessing a weapon, assault, or any of a series of  
            violent offenses, the inmate may be placed in the SHU for a  
            determinate period of time. Second, if an inmate is validated  
            as a member of a prison gang, the inmate may be placed in the  
            SHU for an indeterminate period. 

            As of February 2014, according to CDCR, 289 inmates have spent  
            more than 10 years in a SHU; 46 inmates have spent more than  








                                                                  SB 892
                                                                  Page  5

            20 years in a SHU; and 39 inmates have spent more than 25  
            years in a SHU. 

            Historically, an inmate placed in the SHU as a validated gang  
            member or associate would serve the remainder of his or her  
            sentence in the SHU, unless the institutional gang  
            investigator determined the inmate had no gang activity for  
            six years, or the inmate agreed to debrief.  Debriefing  
            requires the inmate to provide gang investigators with  
            detailed information on alleged gang members and associates.   
            Most SHU inmates choose not to debrief, however, for fear of  
            reprisal.  

            In October 2012, CDCR implemented a 24-month pilot program  
            entitled "Security Threat Group Identification, Prevention,  
            and Management Instructional Memorandum."  Under the Security  
            Threat Group (STG) Plan, gang members and affiliates are  
            placed in a step-down program that provides for graduated  
            housing, privileges, and personal interaction with the goal of  
            integrating participants back into the general population of  
            the prisons. While there are recommended time frames for each  
            step, there is no limit on how long an inmate may remain in  
            each step.  Debriefing remains available for inmates who do  
            not wish complete the step-down program.

            In implementing the STG Plan, CDCR conducted reviews of  
            inmates currently in the SHU to determine whether their  
            continued placement in the SHU was appropriate. According to  
            CDCR, as of April 2014, CDCR had completed 551 reviews, and  
            355 of those inmates were released to the general population.

           3)Inmate Hunger Strikes  . In early July 2011 about 6,500 inmates  
            refused meals in protest over SHU status and condition.  The  
            number of inmates gradually decreased until the hunger strike  
            ended on July 20, 2011. Following the strike, CDCR officials  
            agreed to a series of SHU changes such as wall calendars for  
            purchase, exercise equipment in SHU yards, annual photographs  
            for disciplinary free inmates, proctors for college  
            examinations, use of a CDCR ombudsman for monitoring and  
            auditing of food services, authorization of hobby items. CDCR  
            also agreed to conduct comprehensive reviews of  SHU policies,  
            increased privileges based on disciplinary-free behavior, a  
            step-down process for SHU inmates, and a system that better  
            defines and weighs necessary points in the gang validation  
            process.








                                                                  SB 892
                                                                  Page  6

             
             Last July 8, about 30,000 inmates joined a second hunger  
            strike led by Pelican Bay State Prison SHU inmates. The  
            inmates wanted more substantive changes to CDCR's policy for  
            validating inmates as gang leaders or accomplices. This strike  
            ended on September 5, 2013, with the promise of legislative  
            hearings on the use and conditions of solitary confinement in  
            California's prisons. Informational hearings were held in  
            October 2013 and February 2014.

           4)LA Times Op-Ed by CDCR Secretary Jeffrey Beard regarding  
            gang/SHU policy  .

            "So what is this really about? Some of the men who  
            participated in the last hunger strike have since dropped out  
            of the gangs for religious or personal reasons, and they said  
            it best in recently filed court declarations. "Honestly, we  
            did not care about human rights," one inmate said about the  
            2011 hunger strike. "The objective was to get into the general  
            population, or mainline, and start running our street  
            regiments again." Another described the hunger strike this  
            way: "We knew we could tap big time support through this  
            tactic, but we weren't trying to improve the conditions in the  
            SHU; we were trying to get out of the SHU to further our gang  
            agenda on the mainline."

            "It's no different this time. The inmates calling the shots  
            are leaders in four of the most violent and influential prison  
            gangs in California: the Aryan Brotherhood, the Mexican Mafia,  
            Nuestra Familia and the Black Guerrilla Family. We're talking  
            about convicted murderers who are putting lives at risk to  
            advance their own agenda of violence." (LA Times, Aug. 6,  
            2013.

           5)Support  includes a list of inmate advocacy organizations that  
            generally cite fairness and the lack of due process for SHU  
            terms. 

            According to the CA Public Defenders Association, "In 2013,  
            California prisoners throughout the state went on a  prolonged  
            hunger strike to demand changes in the desperate conditions of  
            inmates locked in the SHU, and in particular prison gang  
            members without hope of ever being released.  For such status  
            offenders, the only path to release is 'debriefing.'   
            'Debriefing' is the California Department of Corrections and  








                                                                  SB 892
                                                                  Page  7

            Rehabilitation's term for where a prison gang member or  
            associate renounces their gang affiliation by naming all of  
            the other gang members and their practices.  Since  
            California's state prisons are already rife with inmate on  
            inmate violence 'debriefing' has the potential to make the  
            former gang member a target.  Such a policy also puts members  
            of the community at risk since 'debriefed' former gang  
            members' families become targets as well."

           6)Fiscal Policy Concerns/Amendments  . 
             
             The author's office continues to work with the committee to  
            reduce costs and address fiscal policy concerns, which  
            include, a new associate director and staffing contingent,  
            giving the OIG override over gang validations, mandating the  
            Step Down Program for non-gang members, 90-day individualized  
            plan assessments, daily mental health logs and 90-day  
            assessments, and 20 new positions for ombudpersons and  
            monitors. 

           7)Related Legislation  , AB 1652 (Ammiano), which provides an  
            inmate may only be placed in a SHU for violation of specified  
            serious offenses, and deletes the provision of law making a  
            person who is placed in a SHU upon validation as a gang member  
            or associate ineligible to earn sentence credits, was amended  
            by this committee to deal only with credits. AB 1652 failed  
            passage on the Assembly floor. 

           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Geoff Long / APPR. / (916) 319-2081