LA Jail System Not Expanding After All As Taft Deal Dies

Prison reform advocates were appalled when Los Angeles County’s top elected officials last month agreed to lease an empty jail about two hours from Downtown LA.

“It’s so disappointing,” Lynne Lyman, the California director for the Drug Policy Alliance, a national advocacy group, said at the time.

Los Angeles County, which includes the city of LA, already had more people behind bars than any other U.S. county or city -- more than Miami and New York City combined. By adding the remote Taft city jail to its network of crowded facilities, the county would be able to lock up about 500 more people, raising its total inmate population as high as 22,000.

But on Tuesday, the county scrapped the plan after a key supporter changed her mind. Now, the county will have to come up with another way to relieve overcrowding in its jails.

County Supervisor Gloria Molina, who joined two of her colleagues in a 3-2 vote for the deal last month, told the Los Angeles Times she reversed her position after learning about an ongoing legal battle over the Taft jail. Until 2011, California used the Taft facility to house state inmates. Last year, Taft sued the state, after the state canceled the contract.

Molina told the LA Times she didn’t want the county to get dragged into the dispute. Molina’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Huffington Post on Wednesday. Molina generally favors jail expansion, and the county is likely to come up with another plan for enlarging its jail system soon.

In the meantime, prison reform advocates said they hope to convince Molina and the other county supervisors to support what they call “alternatives to incarceration.” That includes substance-abuse treatment, transitional housing, and other programs aimed at making sure people don’t go back to jail after they’re freed.

“Most of the people going into the jail system were already disconnected from basic services, such as housing, health services, and employment,” said Lyman. “Services provided after release can help them establish a basic foundation that moves them toward long term stabilization and ensure they do not return to jail.”

LA’s struggle with jail overcrowding goes back to 2011, when Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed a law that shifted responsibility for many low-level, nonviolent offenders from the state to the counties in an attempt to ease overcrowding in state prisons.

To fund the program, Brown dedicated a portion of state sales tax revenues and vehicle licensing fees to the counties. In the program’s first three years, Los Angeles has received more than $700 million.

Lyman and her colleagues said they had hoped the county would spend that money on substance-abuse treatment programs, prisoner-reentry programs, and other alternatives to incarceration.

So far, however, only about 5 percent of LA’s funds have gone to reentry programs, although an additional 15 percent has gone to the Department of Mental Health and the Department of Public Health for treatment services.

“We are not investing in what we know works,” said Lyman.

In some parts of California, including San Francisco and Santa Clara, counties have invested in a different approach. Two years ago, for example, Santa Clara opened a reentry center that provides services to people coming out of prison or jail.

Ten months after the program began, only 20 percent of released inmates in the county were getting rearrested, compared with about 65 percent before the center opened.

By investing in similar programs, prison reformers said, LA could reduce its jail population by thousands of inmates.

“I walk the jails every month,” said Herman Avilez, the head of California Drug Counseling, a group that provides substance-abuse counseling and other services to low-income people in Pasadena. “Those places are packed with people that shouldn’t be in there.”

via http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/30/la-jails-taft_n_4179372.html

Gov. Jerry Brown signs clean energy pact with two states, Canadian province

SAN FRANCISCO — Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new pact Monday to formally align California's clean energy policies with those of Oregon, Washington state and British Columbia.

The agreement commits all four governments to work toward ways to put a price on carbon pollution, require the use of lower-carbon gasoline and set goals for reducing greenhouse gases across the region.

The nonbinding blueprint also sets new targets for electric vehicles — aiming for 10% of all new cars and trucks in the region to be emission-free by 2016 — and calls for the construction of a bullet-train system from Canada to California.

"These are modest steps," Brown told about 100 people at the San Francisco offices of computer hardware maker Cisco Systems, with sweeping views of the bay behind him. "We have to take action."

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat elected last year after 12 years in Congress, said he hoped the accord would send a message to the nation's capital, where Democrats and Republicans have been unable to agree on sweeping environmental legislation.

"Congress has ground to a halt because of climate deniers," he said. "I hope this can restart a national conversation, and hopefully action, on climate change."

This is not the first time California has sought cooperation with regional governments on environmental policy. All four participants in the new pact were members of the Western Climate Initiative, a 2007 regional accord intended to create a joint carbon-trading market.

Efforts to establish that market, which would have set a common levy on carbon emissions and established regional pollution caps, stalled in the Oregon and Washington legislatures.

Monday's agreement could face similar obstacles, but it gives the states more leeway to devise their own ways of charging polluters.

California has a carbon market that allows large polluters to buy the right to emit greenhouse gases. British Columbia has had a carbon-pollution tax since 2008. Either method would be permissible under the new blueprint.

Oregon Democratic Gov. John Kitzhaber said his state has not yet decided which policy to pursue.

In California, business groups that have voiced opposition to the state's emission targets said Monday's announcement was a positive step.

"We have always believed that we need a broad market that includes not only other states but other countries, in order for it to function efficiently," said Shelly Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the AB 32 Implementation Group, a business organization that has opposed state pollution controls.

The group is named for the 2006 law requiring California to reduce its greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2020.

"We have long argued that a state-only approach would crush the state economy," Sullivan said.

Brown has made climate change policy a centerpiece of his administration, vowing not to wait for it to come from Washington, D.C., where President Obama's plans to tighten controls on pollution have been stuck in a deadlocked Congress.

Earlier this year, Brown traveled to China and has signed agreements with that country to work toward slowing pollution that leads to global warming.

California has taken a leading role in efforts to cut carbon emissions. It has established a market to set a price that companies must pay to pollute. The state plans to link its market with one in the Canadian province of Quebec next year.

Although the agreement signed Monday is not legally binding, environmentalists in California are hopeful that it could serve as a road map for the next wave of state policy.

"It sends a signal to the Legislature," said Dan Jacobson, legislative director for Environment California, an advocacy organization, "to start introducing the bills to put these goals into law."

anthony.york@latimes.com

via http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-brown-climate-20131029,0,140122.story#axzz2j3QS5Rql

California gets extra time to reduce prison crowding: another month

SACRAMENTO — Federal judges on Monday gave Gov.Jerry Brown an additional 28 days to meet their order to reduce prison crowding.

Brown, whose administration has been in court-ordered talks with inmates' lawyers in search of a long-term solution to overcrowding, now has until Feb. 24 to remove about 9,600 prisoners from state lockups.

The three-judge panel also said Monday that the negotiations must continue. State appellate judge Peter J. Siggins has been mediating those confidential talks, and on Monday he was told to provide another update in mid-November.

The judicial trio did not describe the state of the discussions in their order, and Siggins' report was confidential.

Last month, Brown filed a plan to expand rehabilitation services in hopes of eventually reducing new offenses by inmates who return to society, and he asked for three years to lower prisoner numbers that way. The judges gave him an extra month instead, moving their deadline to Jan. 27 from Dec. 31 and ordering the talks.

Corrections spokeswoman Deborah Hoffman said Monday the agency was pleased by the judges' extension of their deadline and would work with local government and law enforcement groups to "build upon California's landmark reforms to our criminal justice system."

Inmate advocates and civil rights groups want the state to take a different path from the one Brown has outlined in court filings. The groups want reductions in criminal penalties, expanded parole programs for the sick and old, and a backlog cleared for thousands of prisoners eligible to have their cases reheard.

California is halfway toward meeting the judges' inmate population cap through contracts for 3,180 beds in privately owned facilities and an increase in the number of prisoners sent to firefighting camps around the state.

The latest contract, announced Monday, is an $11-million, five-year deal with the private prison company Geo Group. California already has 8,300 prisoners in private prisons in other states, but the federal judges have temporarily blocked further such transfers.

In 2009, federal judges ordered California's prison population reduced, declaring that overcrowding was the root of unconstitutionally poor inmate care. Despite construction of a new medical prison and a court-run healthcare system, lawyers for prisoners say that care remains substandard and that mentally ill prisoners are mistreated.

California's corrections department "has never taken its obligation to provide basic healthcare seriously," said Don Specter, lead attorney for the Prison Law Office, testifying Monday at a legislative hearing on the state's prison problems.

The hearing was mostly a basic briefing, and no corrections officials testified. Assembly Public Safety Committee Chairman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) said the next hearing, Nov. 13, will focus on alternative programs and sentencing.

Brown has taken the position since January that California's prison conditions are vastly improved. But court experts have continued to report poor medical services at some prison hospitals. A federal court has refused to relinquish control over mental health services, and the U.S. Supreme Court has rebuffed Brown's attempts to appeal capacity limits that he argues are arbitrary.

A report last week from the corrections department shows California's prison population up by more than 500 from a year ago, to more than 133,860 inmates.

paige.stjohn@latimes.com

chris.megerian@latimes.com

via http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-ff-prisons-20131022,0,1115000.story#axzz2j3QS5Rql

Steinberg: Making high school relevant is 'top focus'

California high schools could see an infusion of new programs that link academics with career exposure to provide students a richer learning experience. That's the goal of a competitive $250 million grant process Senate leader Darrell Steinberg is promoting to schools and businesses.

The Sacramento Democrat joined several local education and business leaders at Health Professions High School today to highlight a piece of the 2013-14 state budget that he hopes will give high school a boost of relevancy by connecting students to the world of work. 

Steinberg encouraged schools and community colleges to collaborate with employers in their region and apply together for grants to create more opportunities for applied learning.

"We want business, we want lead industries to step up and see this not just as a philanthropic add-on or something that would be nice to do for kids, but to see this opportunity as the beginning of a change in our American culture," Steinberg said. "For business, helping educate and train the next century work force is an indispensable part of the bottom line."

High schools could use the grants, for example, to hire someone to serve as an internship coordinator to match students with businesses, or to train teachers to teach academic subjects in a more hands-on way that shows how they relate to careers.

Educators bill the approach as "linked learning," and hold up Sacramento's Arthur A. Benjamin Health Professions High School as an example. The school teaches a college-prep academic curriculum but blends it with preparation for careers in health care. During a tour, Steinberg visited an English class where students had read "The Hot Zone," a book about the Ebola virus, and were doing a project about its symptoms.

"Linked Learning students understand how their high school education relates to their next step and beyond," said Deborah Bettencourt, superintendent of the Folsom Cordova Unified School District.

Bettencourt was joined at today's event by Sacramento City Unified Superintendent Jonathan Raymond and Elk Grove Unified Superintendent Steven Ladd.

"Linked Learning answers the question we've all heard, and we have in fact ourselves asked, 'Why am I learning this?' Once students can answer that question for themselves they are inspired and self motivated and have higher aspirations," Bettencourt said.

School districts will be able to apply for a piece of the $250 million through the state Department of Education early next year.

Steinberg and three other state senators recently returned from a trip to Switzerland and Germany to study the way those countries teach high school. He said he was impressed with the Swiss model in which businesses take an active role in preparing students for the workplace, and government spending focuses less on remediation and more on providing a relevant education.

"As I head into my final year in the Legislature, this is is my top focus," Steinberg said. "I don't have the luxury of multi-year projects, two-year bills or do-overs any more. This is it. When it comes to making lasting change, in my view there is no more important challenge to tackle."

PHOTO: Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg talks with students at Health Professions High School in Sacramento. The Sacramento Bee/Laurel Rosenhall

via http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/10/steinberg-says-improving-high-school-top-priority-for-final-year-in.html

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/10/steinberg-says-improving-high-school-top-priority-for-final-year-in.html#storylink=cpy

Jail is No Place to Treat Women’s Mental Health Issues

by Karen Shain, Criminal Justice Policy Officer

The first thing I noticed when we walked into the cell block was a woman sitting on top of a metal table. She saw us and slowly crawled off the table to sit on a metal stool. That’s as far as she could go, because she was tethered to the table by a chain.

A guard told us it’s a violation to sit on the table, but they don’t sweat the small stuff in the mental health wing. We weren’t in a mental health facility; this was the Century Regional Detention Facility (CRDF), L.A. County’s main women’s jail.

This is where CRDF holds seriously mentally ill women who don’t have the resources to be admitted into private mental health hospitals. The guards explained that the women were always under physical control. They could stay in their single cells (which contained a metal bed and a toilet), be locked into a shower by themselves, could go “outside” (though a roof prevents them from seeing the sky or the sun), or they could sit chained to a table in the “day room.”

As long as a County mental health professional deems them a danger to themselves or others, these women will be held indefinitely.  The only way out is for them to get better, but how can they get better under these circumstances?

Mental illness is not a crime; it is a disease. CRDF does not treat women with this disease. It only pushes them further inward, back into their demons. What I witnessed was torture. Is that the best we can do?

I left the mental health wing of CRDF with an extremely heavy heart. But I also realized that if the Sheriff’s Department showed us this mental health wing – something they can’t be proud of – they must be looking for advocates to help them fund a new jail with improved conditions for women.

But even the goal of “improved” conditions misses the point.  Treatment, not incarceration, is the solution for most women, and effective treatment cannot happen under duress.
Nearly one out of every three women (31 percent) in county jails is there because of mental illness, which is double the percentage for men. As the nation and California dismantled mental health facilities and funding over the decades, our jails and prisons have become the largest mental institutions in the country. Believe it or not, they are also the largest geriatric facilities and homeless shelters.

Building more jails will not help these women or men, nor will it stop cycles of crime that jeopardize our neighborhoods and our personal safety because it is well-known that persons with mental illness who are put in jail have much higher rates of recidivism than those who receive mental health treatment in the community. Managing mentally ill people in our prisons and jails is also far more expensive than providing treatment in the community – treatment which is also much better than what is provided in jail.

This is not only about Los Angeles; it’s a national problem. But Los Angeles has the opportunity to do something better.

The LA Board of Supervisors is at a crossroads. They have several proposals before them to construct both a new women’s and mental health jail. The construction cost? Between $1.4-$1.6 billion, which does notinclude operating expenses, such as the almost $250 per day it costs to house and treat a woman with mental illness in jail. What if we tried something different—and better? Let’s redirect these billion plus dollars and invest instead in comprehensive and humane mental health and substance abuse treatment. As the Affordable Care Act (ACA), our national health reform law, is implemented in coming months, we have an opportunity to expand mental health and substance abuse access and treatment. Under ACA people who are financially eligible will be able to get mental health and substance abuse treatment at very little cost to California, but ONLY if they are not in jail.

California’s residents who bear the double burden of being impoverished and mentally ill should not find that their only option for mental health treatment is available if they fall into the criminal justice system. Treating them in the community would be the real way to improve their lives and those of their families and community, not putting them in a new and costly jail.

via http://womensfoundationofcalifornia.org/2013/10/18/jail-is-no-place-to-treat-womens-mental-health-issues/

Supreme Court refuses to hear Brown's appeal on prison crowding

SACRAMENTO — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to hear Gov. Jerry Brown's appeal of an order to reduce prison crowding, further narrowing the governor's options in his quest to end what he characterizes as an arbitrary cap on the inmate population.

The cap was ordered by three federal judges in California, and Brown had asked the high court to remove it. Having lost that bid, he will continue to pursue a request to the lower court for more time to comply, according to a California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation spokeswoman.

The Supreme Court justices said they found no grounds to take up the population limit, dispatching the governor's request in a single sentence: "The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction."

Brown had no immediate response to the decision. A spokeswoman in his corrections department, Deborah Hoffman, issued a statement saying that the administration was "disappointed."

While awaiting the Supreme Court's decision, the governor recently asked the three-judge panel to give him three years to lower inmate numbers for the long term by, for example, expanding rehabilitation programs that could help keep offenders from returning to prison once they leave.

The court gave the state an extra month instead, until Jan. 27, and ordered officials to conduct settlement talks with lawyers for the inmates whose lawsuits led to the population cap. A report on those mediation efforts is due next week.

Brown and lawmakers approved funding in September for the rehabilitation programs, and the governor has touted "historic reforms" that have already been made — such as a new law requiring reconsideration of some sentences — that need time to work.

"California will continue to build on these landmark reforms with our law enforcement and local government partners," Hoffman said Tuesday.

If the settlement talks do not yield a result that is acceptable to the court, Brown could be left with more difficult options: Spend hundreds of millions of dollars to rent privately owned prison beds or concede to major changes in whom California incarcerates.

The governor so far has fought proposals to shorten the sentences of inmates who are considered at low risk to re-offend, saying that would threaten public safety. He has vowed to keep prisoners locked up, sending them to private facilities across the country if necessary.

But the judges have temporarily barred him from moving more prisoners out of state.

"I'm among those who think there are no easy solutions," said Michael Romano, director of the Three Strikes Project at Stanford University.

Romano said thousands of inmates could leave the system relatively quickly if local courts speed up reviews of sentences in about 2,000 pending three-strikes cases. Californians voted last year to ease the state's three-strikes law and apply its new standards retroactively.

The judges ordered that the mediation discussions include three-strikes prisoners, although Brown's administration has said the backlog of unheard cases is not its responsibility.

The state's prisons have long been beset by problems in the delivery of medical care and psychiatric services, inmate suicides and lawsuits over other conditions. The three judges ruled that the problems were due to overcrowding and in 2009 ordered the state to remove about 43,000 inmates.

The state moved some prisoners to private facilities, built a new medical prison and kept more than 20,000 prisoners and parole violators in county jails rather than send them to state prisons. Officials have also signed agreements with private prison operators for almost 3,800 beds at three facilities.

The latest of those is an $86-million, three-year contract announced Tuesday to take over a California City prison that houses federal immigration detainees.

But a corrections department spokeswoman said Tuesday that the state still has 4,400 more prisoners than the cap permits.

As part of its contract, Corrections Corp. of America will make the first $10 million in upgrades that might be needed to house California's higher-security inmates. After that, the bill falls to California taxpayers.

If Brown doesn't want to give up yet on his effort to be free of the inmate cap, one expert said, he might still be able to find ways to contest the cap before a lower court.

There is no "federal order that is not appealable," said Kent Scheidegger, an official of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. "It is a matter of finding" the right procedure, he said.

Scheidegger's Sacramento-based group submitted a brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of four former California governors, siding with Brown by arguing that the cap is unreasonable in light of the improvements California has made.

In the meantime, prisoners' lawyers are pressing for even greater court intervention, seeking new orders on treatment of inmates.

"Prisoners are still suffering from terrible healthcare," said Don Specter of the Prison Law Office, which represents inmates in the federal court cases.

"Reports from the court experts still show that prisoners are at great risk of injury or death from the lack of adequate medical care," he said.

paige.stjohn@latimes.com

California more accepting of Common Core education overhaul than other states

Controversy is dogging the rollout of the rigorous new Common Core curriculum in many of the 45 states that first embraced the bipartisan proposal, with critics saying the change in English and math standards are a federal intrusion, an attack on local control or just too expensive.

In Pennsylvania, passionate protests prompted the state to replace the Common Core with a hybrid that includes much of the state’s current — and less demanding — standards. In Indiana, critics succeeded in cutting off funding for implementation of the Common Core. Michigan legislators took similar action before reversing themselves in late September.

Variations of these fights have broken out in Alabama, Georgia, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma and South Dakota.

But that pushback is largely missing in California — home to more students than any other state — even among some of the more conservative districts.

Deputy state Superintendent Deborah Sigman says while she has seen some criticism, it’s been more muted than elsewhere.

“I don’t mean that we don’t have any controversy,” she says. “There are some naysayers. But I think it is fair to say that we have less at every level.”

California’s first standards, established in the late 1990s, were among the most ambitious in the nation. The new Common Core is not seen as a radical shift, says Gerardo Loera, who heads the curriculum office of Los Angeles Unified, the nation’s second-largest school district.

“We’re used to the idea of having standards that we have to teach toward,” Loera says. “We’re not questioning the philosophical ‘why,’ just the practical ‘how.’ ”

The Common Core’s political history in California also seems to be making a difference. Many governors agreed to adopt the new national standards in order to increase their state’s chances of winning extra money from the Obama administration’s Race to the Top education reform competition.

“There is backlash in other states that didn’t get Race to the Top money and are now ticked off,” says Jeannette LaFors of Education Trust-West, an advocacy group.

While California didn’t get any of that federal money either, the original decision to press ahead wasn’t motivated as much by money from Washington as “a more genuine commitment to improving standards,” she says.

Opponents who see the Common Core as an attack on local control have had a hard time getting heard here. California school boards have the right to opt out of the Common Core, says Barbara Murchison, who heads up the state’s implementation program. “There is nothing at the state level that requires them to do it.”

To date, no district has voted to reject the new standards, she says.

That may be, in part, because all districts are required to take an annual test given by the state.

Beginning in 2015, that test will be the new Smarter Balanced online assessment, one of two national tests, developed with federal funding, that are pegged to the new standards. About 24 other states have indicated they will also be giving the Smarter Balanced tests.

The Common Core has also attracted fans because it’s viewed by teachers as “more realistic and smarter” than California’s 1997 standards, which are often criticized as a mile long and an inch thick, says Dean Vogel, president of the California Teachers Association.

“It was impossible for teachers to cover everything,” he says, adding that teachers view the new national standards as “a breath of fresh air” because they require much less regimentation than the earlier standards. Districts have more freedom, this time around, to choose their own curriculum, instructional materials and teacher training programs.

“The Common Core is a document that recognizes the educator as the expert and provides for the teacher to have an authoritative role in pedagogical decisions to make things better for kids,” Vogel says. “From our point of view, this is a powerful antidote to the increasingly obtrusive, top down, ‘this is what you have to do’ view of reform.”

Worries about cost have been an issue in many states, including California, which currently ranks 49th in per pupil funding. But some of the pressure came off in the last year. The state recently revamped its funding formula in ways that funnel additional money to schools with more students who are from low-income families or are English learners.

In addition, last fall, California voters passed Proposition 30, which approved a temporary tax increase to raise more money for schools.

Gov. Jerry Brown announced in the spring that each district would get a proportional slice of $1.25 billion in new state money over the next two years that could only be used to implement the Common Core.

The one criticism of California’s rollout of Common Core that seems to stick is a complaint that the pace of state implementation has been too slow and uneven. Groups such as Education Trust-West have stressed that with California’s below-average scores on national tests, the state Education Department leaders shouldn’t be “dragging their feet” compared to other states.

California officials deny they are doing so. In any case, the relatively drawn-out pace of change and the low-key way educators are presenting it may help explain why there has been little opposition, at least so far.

“We talk about this as a remodeling effort,” says Sigman of the state education department. “This is an evolution of the system. The ’97 standards were good standards, but this set of college- and career-ready standards is better.”

This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, nonpartisan education-news outlet affiliated with Teachers College, Columbia University.

via http://www.sbsun.com/social-affairs/20131016/california-more-accepting-of-common-core-education-overhaul-than-other-states