Legal Advocacy Project 1949 Crescent Heights Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90034 424-279-4130 phone, cmariesmithlegal@gmail.com
July 27, 2015 Board of State and Community Corrections 2590 Venture Oaks Way Sacramento, CA 95833 Attn: Allison Ganter allison.ganter@bscc.ca.gov Re: Adult Regulation Revision Process (Title 15 and 24) Dear Board Members, I am the Executive Director of the Legal Advocacy Project and a member of All of Us or NONE. I work with a coalition of volunteer attorneys and civil rights advocates who are working to mitigate or release prisoners from county local detention facilities and state prisons who are suspected or have been diagnosed with disorders of social, cognitive, language, and motor development, including Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), learning disorders, social skill delays, and neurogenetic disorders. I have been excited to begin to contribute to the processes that affected my life so deeply for the past 3 years in both your meetings and multiple trips to the California legislature in offices and at hearings for the Public Safety Committees of both legislative bodies thanks to support from Legal Services for Prisoners with Children. I am pleased to be writing you during the week of the 25 th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 in response to the Adult Regulation Revision Process and upon referral from Diana Zuniga of Californians United for a Responsible Budget. The State of California has a long 20+ year history of problems with policing, in courts, in local detention facilities and in prisons in implementing clear rules and regulations to ensure that prisoners’ rights to accommodation are made in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The lack of such infrastructure often results in overcrowding, negligent medical care, and death. The legal cases of Armstrong v Brown, Plata v Brown, Clark v California and Coleman v Brown STILL exemplify the need for regulations that have been partially alleviated in California prisons, but pushed into California county local July 27, 2015, Letter to the Board of State and Community Corrections re Title 15 and 24 from Legal Advocacy Project Page 1 of 6
detention facilities because of 2011 Realignment. The “local discretion” granted by Article 13, Section 35 of the California Constitution provides for a breeding ground of problems that may take years to litigate and remedy while people are abused, traumatized and/or killed. Similarly, Monterey, Fresno, Riverside and Alameda counties have all been sued in local and federal courts for negligent medical care recently with the legal cases of Hernandez v County of Monterey, Hall v Mims, Gray v County of Riverside and Legal Services for Prisoners with Children (LSPC) Et Al. v Ahern Et Al. We believe, based on anecdotal evidence, the clear rules during the intake, classification and medical appointments could provide substantial changes in preventing negligence, abuse, trauma and death. Lastly, many of these counties are using private healthcare firms like Corizon (formerly known as Prison Health Care Systems or PHS), which is used in Santa Barbara County Jail. Not only has Corizon been involved in at least 304 medical lawsuits to date, there is no clear evaluation and reporting standard to prevent such criminally negligent firms from operating and advising courts and law enforcement improperly. The needs are particularly poignant for the population of prisoners that I advocate for because their disabilities are not readily apparent, but can be lifethreatening (such as those with epilepsy or other seizure inducing conditions) or incarceration can produced harmful long-term trauma that supersedes the need to “punish” that individual for their crime. Such standards to prevent abuse, trauma and death are often called “coddling” by medical staff and sheriff’s deputies. The upgrade in standards needs to start with compliance with the ADA and end with proper regulatory controls for counties to implement Title 15 and Title 24. We do not have 20 years of negligence and destruction of families and lives to wait for better regulations to be constructed. We need action now! The counties and sheriffs departments in the state of California have proven that they cannot be trusted with these decisions without supervision or the threat of litigation. Due to the above, we specifically propose the following revisions: For the purposes of these proposed revisions for those with mental and/or developmental disorders or disabilities include those who have a declared history of treatment or have been diagnosed with disorders of social, cognitive, language, and motor development, including Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), learning disorders, social skill delays, and neurogenetic disorders. These disorders may include those who have mental health disorders that are comorbid with the above. As a result, we are providing that there be an overall July 27, 2015, Letter to the Board of State and Community Corrections re Title 15 and 24 from Legal Advocacy Project Page 2 of 6
mandate of at least 20 hours per year of training for all custody operations and medical staff on how to recognize and provide for the most current recognitions of these disorders according to the DSM V and ICD 10 (and ICD 11 when it is released in 2017 by the World Health Organization). All of our proposed revisions require that such training be managed by a panel of at least 3 medical specialists on a monthly basis who DO NOT work at the local detention center and are selected from the community at large to function as a supervisory and auditing of medical care in each local detention facility to prevent trauma, abuse and mistreatment of those with mental and/or developmental disorders or disabilities. Article 5. Classification and Segregation §§ 1050 et seq. – Provide that all classification and segregation for those who have a record of, declare or have shown in their in-custody behavior at any point in their incarceration to have mental and/or developmental disorders or disabilities have their files reviewed by an outside qualified medical specialist for their specific disorder or disability in the community on a bi-weekly basis to prevent any possibility of further abuse, trauma or other illegalities and improper handling, intake or treatment protocols by custody operations staff and/or local detention facility medical staff. Such medical specialists selected must have a medical practice that adheres to the current year’s standards of treatment and care commensurate with those of a similar profession and practice in the region of which the local detention facility is located. An additional court appearance shall be scheduled in no more than 30 days for such an inmate for his or her judicial officer to determine if alternatives to being housed in the local detention center are appropriate and shall include the reported recommendations by the above medical specialist(s). § 1044 Incident Reports – Where a record, declaration or in-custody behavior at any point in incarceration shows a mental and/or developmental disorder, that all incident reports with such a status must be immediately reported to the facility commander who create a case management file and shall forward such reports to an appropriate medical specialist specific to the disorder or disability in the community. Such a medical specialist will in-turn provide a report with specific in no more than 7 days of how medical, custody operations staff and transportation staff shall how to best care for the inmate’s condition on a weekly, monthly and quarterly basis appropriate to the inmates’ sentence. The commander will review any and all reports about such inmates on a bi-weekly basis to ensure compliance with the appropriate supervisors of each affected department. An additional court appearance shall be scheduled in no more than 30 days for such an inmate for his or her judicial officer to determine if alternatives to being housed in the local detention center are appropriate and shall include the reported recommendations by the above medical specialist(s).
July 27, 2015, Letter to the Board of State and Community Corrections re Title 15 and 24 from Legal Advocacy Project Page 3 of 6
§ 1047 Serious Illness or Injury of a Minor in an Adult Detention Facility – In addition to a parent, guardian or loco parentis being notified, such a status must be immediately reported to the facility commander who create a case management file and shall forward such reports to an appropriate medical specialist specific to the illness or injury in the community at large who is contracted on a bi-annual basis with the local detention center. Such a medical specialist will in-turn provide a report with specific instructions in no more than 7 days of how medical, custody operations staff and transportation staff shall how to best care for the inmate’s condition on a weekly, monthly and quarterly basis appropriate to the inmates’ sentence. The commander will review any and all reports about such inmates on a bi-weekly basis to ensure compliance with the appropriate supervisors of each affected department. An additional court appearance shall be scheduled in no more than 30 days for such an inmate for his or her judicial officer to determine if alternatives to being housed in the local detention center are appropriate and shall include the reported recommendations by the above medical specialist(s). Article 11. Medical/Mental Health Services, §§ 1200 et seq. – All inmates who have a record or, declaration or in-custody behavior at any point in incarceration that shows a mental and/or developmental disorder shall be reviewed on a monthly basis for efficiency and effectiveness of care by a medical specialist panel selected from the community at large of at least 3 qualified doctors in the areas of mental health, developmental disorders and general practice who are elected on a bi-annual basis and contracted by the respective county in which the local detention facility is located. Article 13. Inmate Clothing And Personal Hygiene, §§ 1200 et seq. – All inmates who have a record or, declaration or in-custody behavior at any point in incarceration that shows a mental and/or developmental disorder shall be reviewed on a monthly basis for clothing, personal hygiene, and housing checks as reported by a primary medical specialist selected from the community at large who interviews all such inmates as referred to the commander at any point in incarceration on a monthly basis. Such interviews shall be held strictly away from the witnessing of any other inmates or medical, jail or custody operations staff to ensure the safety of the affected inmate. The reports of the by a primary medical specialist of his or her interviews of such inmates shall be provided to a medical specialist panel selected from the community at large of at least 3 qualified doctors in the areas of mental health, developmental disorders and general practice who meet on a monthly basis to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of care of the above designated inmates. Again, these 3 medical specialists are elected on a bi-annual basis and contracted by the respective county in which the local detention facility is located.
July 27, 2015, Letter to the Board of State and Community Corrections re Title 15 and 24 from Legal Advocacy Project Page 4 of 6
TITLE 24, Part I Article 1 Minimum Standards for Local Detention Facilities 6. Design Requirements, Section B (9) and (15) Spaces for the disabled and medical/mental health care housing and treatment space. Article 2 Minimum Standards for Juvenile Facilities 6. Design Requirements, Sections B (8) and (10) Spaces for the disabled and medical/mental health care housing and treatment space. All designs spaces for the disabled and medical/ mental health care for all inmates who have a record or, declaration or in-custody behavior at any point in incarceration that shows a mental and/or developmental disorder shall be reviewed on a monthly basis for the duration of the building and operation of a local detention center for efficiency and effectiveness of care by a 5 physician panel comprised of at least 2 different types of mental health specialists (one for complex, 1 developmental disorder specialist (for adults or juveniles as appropriate), 1 general practice physician and 1 medial specialist for chronic and/or complex conditions selected on a bi-annual basis from the community at large in which the local detention facility is located. TITLE 24, Part II All local detention facilities must have at least one housing unit designated for those inmates who have a record or, declaration or in-custody behavior at any point in incarceration that shows a mental and/or developmental disorder which is not part of protective custody, administrative segregation, isolated housing and/or secured housing units to prevent trauma, abuse or retaliation from medical, jail or custody operations staff. The conditions and operation of such a housing unit must be reviewed by a primary medical specialist selected from the community at large who interviews all such inmates as referred to the commander at any point in incarceration on a monthly basis and reported to the county Board of Supervisors who will decide on any and all recommendations made by the medical specialist for needed changes in operations, sanitization and/or overall conditions.
Our group is excited to be in dialogue with you as we examine how the BSCC can utilize best, evidence-based practices as it re-examines Title 15 and 24 in the areas of intake/classification, grievance procedures, medical care and disciplinary procedures, including the building of structures in new or renovated facilities for providing proper spacing and units for these processes to be initiated and safely communicated to local detention facility administration without fear or threat of retaliation by fellow inmates, local detention facility staff, medical staff, sheriff deputies or the district attorney’s office, as well as the examinations of proposals from counties for local detention facility construction and alternatives to local detention facility and Social Innovations bonds projects. We are also July 27, 2015, Letter to the Board of State and Community Corrections re Title 15 and 24 from Legal Advocacy Project Page 5 of 6
examining how the mandates from the legislature as they are determine to be implemented into rules are governed by the Administrative Procedures Act through the Office of Administrative Law. We look forward to dialoguing with the BSCC as we grow in numbers and strength in the remaining months of 2015 and throughout the years to come until such standards are brought to a level that honors the human rights of all and both the constitutions of the United States and California. Sincerely,
C. Marie Smith C. Marie Smith Executive Director, Legal Advocacy Project Cc: Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, Santa Barbara County Counsel, Santa Barbara News Press, Santa Barbara Independent
July 27, 2015, Letter to the Board of State and Community Corrections re Title 15 and 24 from Legal Advocacy Project Page 6 of 6