AGENDA
[pic]
Committee Members:
Lt. Jeff Owens – Marion County Sheriff’s Office
Ms. Wanda White – Escambia County Sheriff’s Office
Lt. David Parisi- Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office
Commander Kevin McGowan – Collier County Sheriff’s Office
Sgt. Brad Delaere – St. John’s County Sheriff’s Office
Capt. Don Ross – Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office
Attendees:
Major Paul Laxton – Marion County Sheriff’s Office
Stephen Sirmones – Seminole County Sheriff’s Office
Isaiah Dennard – Florida Sheriff’s Association
James Aguiar, Jr. – Marion County Sheriff’s Office
Bernard Johns - Seminole County Sheriff’s Office
Tracy Florence – Seminole County Sheriff’s Office
Major Michael Allen – Polk County Sheriff’s Office
Anne Gibson – Polk County Sheriff’s Office
Dr. Richard Hough – University of West Florida
Loretha Tolbert-Rich – Marion County Sheriff’s Office/Ocala Community Care
Sgt. Jason Caban- St. John’s County Sheriff’s Office
Bobbi Pohlman-Rodgers – G4S Youth Services
Capt. Selena Favors – Marion County Sheriff’s Office
Michael Davis – Awake Marion
Leonard Dixon – Wayne County, Michigan
David Utter – Southern Poverty Law Center
Paul Lawson – Okaloosa County Department of Corrections
Tim Little – Pasco County Sheriff’s Office
Barbara Taylor- Pasco County Sheriff’s Office
Justin Wetherington – Pasco County Sheriff’s Office
Amanda Tipping- Charlotte County Sheriff’s Office
John Valdez Jr. – Putnam County Sheriff’s Office
Mark Elder- Putnam County Sheriff’s Office
Sgt. David Harvey – Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office
Brian Weddle – Lake County Sheriff’s Office
C.H. Janes – Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office
Jimmy Holderfield – Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office
David Kildredge – Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office
Howard Rich- Indian River County Sheriff’s Office
Jay Dreschnack – Hernando County Sheriff’s Office
Nancy Noonan – Awake Marion Coalition
Vishal Persaud – Ocala Star Banner
William James - NAACP
Tammy Stakes – Flagler County Sheriff’s Office
Cassandra Capobianco- Florida Institute of Legal Services
Julie Ebenstein – ACLU of Florida
Steven Soloman - DJJ
Welcome: Lt. Owens welcomed everyone and thanked them for their attendance.
Established Quorum
Lt. Owens established a quorum.
Legal Notifications
Lt. Owens established that the proper legal notifications had been made.
Pledge of Allegiance
Lt. Owens led everyone in the invocation and pledge of allegiance.
Florida Sheriff’s Association: Mr. Isaiah Dennard came forward to speak and welcomed everyone in attendance. He thanked Sheriff Dean and his Staff for their assistance in this meeting. Mr. Dennard stated on behalf of the Florida Sheriff’s Association, their president, Susan Benton and their Chairman, Sheriff Al Lamberti, he welcomed everyone. He would like to thank Sheriff Dean and his staff for providing this open forum for the discussion of standards for Youth Detention Facilities or Youth Detention. He stated that last summer, several sat on the Subcommittee to develop these standards that we will be discussing today to revise or amend. Several special interest groups have brought issues and concerns and those concerns were vetted during the creation of Chapter 20 standards for juvenile detention in the Florida Model Jail Standards. These standards were developed specifically for children by comparing and integrating standards used by the Department of Juvenile Justice and Florida Model Jail Standards. These best practices have been developed and refined by experts with significant input from those stakeholders. The primary objective of the Florida Model Jail Standards Youth Detention facility standards is to protect the health, welfare, and safety of those youth in custody. Sheriffs take the task of detention very seriously and the standards we adopted were intended to protect the youth, the public, and the officers. We focus on safety while running model centers which focus on efficiency and saving taxpayer dollars. We provide a higher level of care at a much lower cost. Not only do our facilities undergo rigorous annual inspections by external national and state accreditation agencies to ensure best practices, but locally operated juvenile facilities submit to an annual inspection which is required by Florida law. There are many differences between juveniles and adults including how the process is supervised and services that are offered. Sheriff’s offices go to great lengths to ensure juveniles receive consistent educational programming and have access to medical services including mental health, dental, and community resources that are not available for adults. FMJS ensures that youth are kept strictly away from adult inmates by sight and sound, as well as during transportation of juveniles. There is no interaction with adult inmates at all. From accredited medical care, which is better than the quality of medical care they will receive at home, to quality education from the classes and dedicated instructors. The Florida Sheriff’s Association strives to make sure our children are safe, whether they are home schooled or in detention centers. We look to improve the lives and take an active part in them growing up to be law-abiding, productive adults. Some of the concerns that were brought up by the advocacy groups last year during the vetting of these standards were the use of chemical and electronic restraints. They are only used in case of emergencies as an intervention when de-escalation is necessary to protect the safety of the youth in custody and the correctional staff. Chemical agents and electronic restraints are never used as punishment. This is stressed in every inspection, during training classes, roll calls, accreditation offices and the list can go on. Corrections officers do not carry electronic restraints on their persons. These restraints are under lock and key at all times. Once again, and as we talked last year, he would like to emphasize the officers are trained and certified in the use of chemical agents and the use of de-escalation techniques and the use of electronic and chemical weapons and only as a last resort.
Finally, he would like to refer to the language adopted in Senate Bill 2112, adopted in 2011. This law requires Sheriffs Offices and those seeking to operate pre-adjudicated youth detention facilities to follow the Florida Model Jail standards. They must be accredited either through the Florida Correctional Accreditation Commission or the American Correctional Association. Accreditation requirements exceed best practices adopted by the Florida Model Jail standards. Sheriffs that operate the youth detention facilities must meet the minimum standards and accredited standards also, which many concerns may be expressed over the next two days. Mr. Dennard thanked everyone for taking the time for the courtesy of listening to him. He welcomed everyone ad thanked them for participating today.
Lt. Owens thanked Mr. Dennard for all of his travels and hard work he does for us. Lt. Owens also introduced Mr. David Utter. He stated that many of the discussions that will be done over the next two days will be on Chapter 20 and the pre-adjudication model which we abide by through the Florida Model Jail Standards. Mr. Utter has, many times over the course of the last year, brought subject matter topics to the podium. There was also discussion about bringing the subject matter expert to the table. He asked Mr. Utter to come to the podium.
Mr. David Utter from Southern Poverty Law Center came to the podium and thanked Lt. Owens and the Subcommittee for their attention to this matter. Mr. Utter stated he believed it was key for this committee to reflect back on Sheriff Dean’s opening comments to the committee way on June 17, 2011. Mr. Utter stated he looked back on the minutes and quoted from them. In an audience that included Governor’s Office staff, as well as Department of Juvenile Justice Wansley Walters and some of her staff, Sheriff Dean stated, “The children are what matters. The children have to be protected in this process.” Mr. Utter stated that he is here today and suggested revisions that were submitted, because in at least one county, that has not happened. Last summer’s meeting had a lot of discussion of best practices. Literally the term used by Commissioner Johnson, when he argued against Chief Wilder’s suggestion about the standards allowing for chemical agents to be carried on correctional officers as they supervise kids; the subcommittee decided to allow pepper-spray to be carried. As the Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators noted in 2011; by allowing staff to carry pepper-spray in juvenile detention, the current standards that we have run counter to the practices in 45 other States and in every other county in Florida, save one. Surely 45 other States, every other County in Florida and the DJJ cannot be said to be following something that does not keep kids safe. Allowing staff to carry pepper-spray in juvenile detention cannot be said to be a best practice. As you are aware, Southern Poverty Law Center just completed the evidentiary portion of a hearing on a motion for preliminary relief on the issue of whether or not children are safe in Polk County’s Jail. While he cannot comment on what the judge said or might do, he stated the evidence presented by children in the jail and the experts in mental health talked about the extreme terror of being pepper-sprayed and its painful, physical effects and on the adolescent’s mind inability to process the situation, all of which make its use cruel and unusual. In addition, the experts spoke to the fact that no amount of decontamination can protect children with special needs from serious and irreparable harm when sprayed; whether they be asthmatic or ADHD or on psychotropic medication.
Finally, testimony in Tampa, last week showed that kids in the Polk County jail were being sprayed and thrown in isolation, really for behaving like we know kids behave. They behave irrationally and impulsively. No amount of training is going to protect pepper-spray and isolation’s misuse. Both need to be eliminated or severely circumscribed in their use in Florida. Mr. Utter further stated that they have submitted many suggested revisions, but it all comes down to just a few key changes that are needed to adhere to Sheriff Dean’s promise made on June 17, 2011. They are four: 1) stop allowing jail officers who supervise kids to carry chemical and electronic restraints; 2) mandate that staff supervise children directly, not via camera; 3) provide strict limits on placing children in isolation and 4) mandate that Sheriffs and counties who detain children have a full day of education, counseling and programming. All of the suggested revisions are summarized in those four items. There is something like 24 or 25 requested revisions, if you boil it down, that is it.
Mr. Utter stated that they request that the standards be revised to include all children to include those being tried as adults. A preliminary look at the data, last year in Florida there are about 2500 kids being tried as adults in Florida according to the DJJ. Only 300 to 400 of those make it into the adult system. There are hundreds of kids in these jails that, if you provide a full day of education, counseling and programming, they are in much better shape when they get out on the street, which a lot of them do;
whether it be parole or back in the Juvenile Justice system. Raising the standards to protect all kids would help reduce recidivism and make the facility safer because the children would be occupied in pro-social activities. Mr. Utter stated he is prepared to discuss all the revisions at the appropriate time, but would like to introduce Mr. Leonard Dixon, the Director of the Wayne County Children and Family Detention Service Center. Mr. Utter advised that he previously provided Mr. Dixon’s resume’, as well as standards recently adopted for all of Louisiana’s juvenile detention centers, as a proposed best practice. He also provided a recent best practice statement by the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry opposing the use of solitary confinement on children; an article by Dr. Michael Cohen with evidence pepper-spray used on children amounts to child abuse and torture; a chapter on the importance of programming for juvenile detention centers from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and a chart prepared by the CJCA showing that in 2011 showing that only five States reported allowing guards to carry pepper-spray in juvenile units. Mr. Utter thanked the Subcommittee again for considering these important issues. He implored the Subcommittee to take standards and set standards that really protect kids. Mr. Utter relinquished the floor to Mr. Dixon.
Lt. Owens thanked Mr. Utter and welcomed Mr. Dixon.
Mr. Dixon thanked the Subcommittee and attendees for his be allowing to address this group. He stated he is a native Floridian, so when Mr. Utter asked him to come to Florida, he was happy to do so. Mr. Dixon gave a synopsis of his history. Mr. Dixon stated he was in the Department of Juvenile Justice, which was HRS before then for 16 years. He ran the detention center in Miami when people said it could not be corrected. He stated they went in and corrected a lot of the problems which were going on in that facility. He stated that in a large urban area, there is a lot of diversity, gang related issues and the staff was carrying around handcuffs when they began. Mr. Dixon stated he comes from a law enforcement family and there is discussion about crime and rehabilitation. Mr. Dixon stated that the Bobby M. consent degree and litigation brought a lot of good things. Mr. Dixon stated he received a request to transfer to Detroit. Detroit, Wayne County, Michigan is a large metropolitan area, and there are several million people in the county. At the time, there were 300 kids in the detention facility. Mr. Dixon advised they reviewed the data and determined who should be in the detention center and who should not. They built the new detention facility and he advised them they only needed about 200 beds. He advised that a lot of people said it was impossible and it could not be done. Wayne County was also under federal investigation at the time. They created some different programs, electronic monitoring, house arrests and Michigan also has a bail program for juveniles like they do for adults. They were able to get the kids out who did not need to be in detention. Mr. Dixon stated that they finished and never went under the consent decree because they created a lot of programming. When he arrived people were walking around with handcuffs and they took the handcuffs from them and said they were going to create programming in place of handcuffs and they were going to train people to properly understand dealing with kids.
Mr. Dixon asked the audience who had children in the ninth grade and who had children as freshmen in college. He stated that there is a difference in the two and that is how you have to approach children in a detention facility. There is a distinct difference in the maturity. One will not treat their kid in the ninth grade the same way you would treat the kid in college. The other thing he tells people is that youth are sent to detention as punishment because they have done something wrong. They are not sent to detention to be punished, which is a big difference. Youth are sent there for us to try to correct some of the behavior; do some assessments to find out what is going on and then try to get them into the best place to make them better adults. Mr. Dixon stated he believes in jails, without question and a free society has to have discipline and structure. He stated his position is what you do with people when you get them there because 95 percent of the people who are going to jail are coming out. They are coming to your community, my community and every community. He stated that based on his experience of 34 years, what he has seen is that the worse the institutions are, the more angry the people become. They are coming back into the community, angry. Mr. Dixon stated we need to understand they are coming back and as law enforcement do you want them back angry or do you
want them back so they can be productive members of society. It is the repeat offenders who are coming back all the time and when they return, what happens. Mr. Dixon provided a profile of kids in Wayne County, because a lot of places he goes, people state that theirs kids are worse than those of Wayne County. Detroit is one of the poorest cities in the country. Violence is every day. There are killings, murder, and maiming. He stated that last week, in three days, they had 15 murders and half were kids. He is not talking about the kids who are going into nice places, these are serious, serious kids and it was the same thing in Miami. Mr. Dixon stated he can only give his experience. He advised that his job is to give people what the facts are and people will make the decision based on that. He stated he looks at the research, and understands practical application and they should be able to be merged. There are people doing research and not dealing with the day to day application.
Mr. Dixon advised that their facility takes kids up to 17, sometimes 20 years old, based upon the adult and still having juvenile charges. The average age is between 15 and 16, large urban community and the bed capacity is about 94. They average about 155, over 4000 annually. They screen 100 percent of the kids who come in for mental health. What they found is that 60 percent of the children coming in have some type of mental health diagnosis. If they are not screened property and the staff has to deal with that, is stress on the staff. If there are 20 kids and one kid may have a mental health issue, then what happens is the officer spends most of their time dealing with that one child and cannot spend time with the other 19. 75 percent in the Wayne County facility have been diagnosed with mental health issues.
A good educational program with structure will help the institution because the kids will be in school most of the day. This includes special education. Kids, by law, have to be given the same services they would receive if they were in a regular school, which is a legal issue. The facility can be sued if they do not have special education in the program. Most of the children who come in have a poor education prior to coming to the facility. A profile of the kids in the institution is as follows: Arson, Criminal Sexual Conduct, Child Abuse, Kidnapping, Murder I and II, Manslaughter, Robbery.
Good standards in juvenile detention discourage and deter wrongful behavior from staff and kids. If you have good structure, and good programming a lot of bad behavior will be deterred. It will hold staff and kids accountable when you have good standards and good programming in your institution. It also helps identify issues and reduce the risk. If you have kids that are being locked out all the time, what kind of system do you have in place? No one is saying you can’t lock at kid down. There is no standard that says you can’t do it. The issue is how do you do it and do you have justification and goo and sound documentation to show you are doing it. There are some kids who are very dangerous. The question is do you have programming in place to deal with those kinds of kids. These kids have been very damaged and they will hurt people. The question becomes do you have the services in place to deal with that kind of kid.
Reduce liability and intention. He heard everyone talking about pepper-spray. A lot of times the staff who works with kids get frustrated. He stated that he has worked with people who would get frustrated and instead of dealing with the kid, they go to the first thing they have available whether it be pepper-spray or handcuffs. In one facility they had batons. This is what they were using. In New Jersey, they had real serious gangs and would have the separate gangs on separate floor and he put the gangs together. The reason for this is who runs the facility? Do the gangs run the facility, or do the staff run the facility? If you have a safe environment for people, they are less likely to get into things. There are going to be problems, but a lot of times, if it is safe and staffed properly that will be reduced to almost nothing.
Comply with Constitution- 14th and 18th amendments; cruel and unusual punishment and due process, which apply when the juvenile is in the facility, along with state laws in reference to abuse and neglect. All activities involve risk but doing nothing also has risks. To clarify, if one has a lot of violence going on in the institution and chalk it up to kids fighting, if you do nothing, it’s the same thing. Take a risk and change the way you work with kids. There is risk in what we do anyway, so why not take the risk in doing something better and get out of some of the things the facility might be doing.
Mr. Dixon stated he spoke with some people from the Southern Poverty Law Center in Mississippi several months ago and I asked them what they thought detention was. They stated they believed it was rehabilitation. Detention is for two things: it is to hold a kid for court and to ensure that youth is not in the community creating violence. Thirdly, has to do with the beginning of the rehabilitation process. Most people would tell you that detention is rehabilitation, but that is not the case. Detention is short term. Protection of the community and to hold the kid for the courts; those are the basic fundamentals of what detention is, however, it is the beginning of the rehab process. It is a secure restricted environment, humane environment, temporary custody, services, education, programming and recreation. Recreation is to kids what work is for adults. That is how they get along, that is how they learn how to interact. All he tells people is go back to when you were in school; you couldn’t wait to get outside. It teaches lessons. Sports and recreation does that. That is how you learn how to get along, how to lose and how to win. It is the same thing with a kid, it doesn’t change. There are some kids who physically cannot do certain things and do you have a recreation program for them that they can win by doing some things that do not have physical requirements?
Clinical observation and assessment: reviewing the kids and ensuring that they have assessed what is going on. The data is 60 percent of children in facilities have mental health issues, which is not the major problem. The major problem is the medical stuff, which may be more important than the mental health stuff. Kids come in with asthma and they don’t know it. Mr. Dixon stated that child came in last week who has seizures and has had one every day since she had been in the facility and last night she had two seizures yesterday. They took her to the hospital and have gotten her on medication and she is finally balanced so the seizures are under control. If one does not understand, sometimes there are kids who have all these health issues. Kids have come in to various facilities and they were not checked and those kids died in those facilities. One kid in West Palm Beach with some medical issues that were happening and everyone knows about Omar Paisley. Mr. Dixon stated he is a firm believer in that whatever is at the top of the institution will eventually get into the DNA of the institution. If the leadership is not good and does not care about kids and does not understand how to deal with kids, that will become a part of the institution. Leadership is a major part of dealing with the institution. They are a small community. One can spend more time at the facility that you do at home with working and overtime and can spend more time there than with your own family. The institution is its own small city. Whoever is at the top, whatever they are doing will eventually get into the DNA of the system: good, bad, or indifferent.
Mr. Dixon stated he looked at some of the standards, programming and the best way to avoid or reduce behavior issues is to have strong programming such as social services, education, and special education. What kind of social services do you have in your institution? We have a structured program. From 0600 hours until 2200 hours, there is something going; there is a structure. The structure is posted all throughout the building. When one talks about social skills, you would be surprised when we have groups with kids and teach them how to say please and thank you, which they are not accustomed to. One has to look at how the programs are set up. With the library, there are kids who don’t know how to go to the library. In his facility, they have a library and a librarian. They do not look things up in the computer they do it the old-fashioned way with the catalog cards. Mr. Dixon said he is basic and if you learn the basics, then one can be moved to the other stuff, but the basics have to be learned first. One does not give their officer a weapon and expect them to use it without any training. Simplicity- the more simple something is, the better it is. When it is complicated, there’s a problem. Everyone should be looking to make things simple, not more complicated.
Volunteers and religious programs – they have a senior citizen mentoring program. The seniors from the community come into the facility and they work with the kids. They have not had one incident since they have been there. The reason is that the seniors get out, they feed them, they sit in the classroom with the kids and you would be surprised with the conversations they have. The seniors will give you an experience you can’t buy and they sit and talk with the kids.
Cleaning- if one has a dirty facility, then it’s your fault because you have free labor. The law says that the kids can do anything that he would do in his own home. The facility has to be clean and the environment has a lot to do with that. If you have a bad environment, you’re going to have bad people.
He also looked at the direct supervision. He stated that the presence of staff can help prevent and avoid bad behavior. It is very difficult for a kid to act out if a staff member is there. He stated he has been in facilities where they thought the camera would take the place of supervision. Someone has to be there. We are still talking about kids and them getting into things. They are kids. They have done things and we have to deal with that, but the immaturity level is still there. Staff has to have good interpersonal skills and build a good relationship. A good part of supervision is good relationships. Good relationship is how you build trust with kids and that’s real basic. The staff has to know that we are not here to punish the kids, but are here to help them be as successful while they are in the facility. We cannot control what happens when they go home, but we do have control over what happens when they are in the program.
Comprehensive system of youth management- which again, the way that the kids are managed, the system should be able to do that if you have a good system and a good school program. Recreation programs manage the kids, counseling manages the kids. Adequate supervision is important. We are human beings and there is a reason for supervision. Facility design – if you are going to staff it properly you have to look at the design of the facility and where the dead-spots are. The reality is there are going to be those who have inappropriate relationships with kids.
Chemical and electronic restraints- contamination and pepper-spray is an irritant. If a child comes into the institution who has asthma or chronic lung disease and they are sprayed and you don’t know that, the facility is subject to litigation. The first thing that will be asked will be what kind of medical services you have. What kind of assessment did you perform with this child before he came into your facility? What kind of documentation do you have to show those kinds of things and if you don’t have that then there will be problems. Here is this kid, with all these different issues and nothing was prevented from happening because you didn’t know. This is why juvenile facilities are more expensive than adult facilities. They are a protected class; there are certain rules that you have to abide by. If you release someone from prison, you can give them a bus ticket and send them home, however, that cannot be done with a juvenile. Someone who is responsible for that kid has to come and get them or you have to make sure they are where they need to be placed. There is an added responsibility. Regardless, we are the surrogate parents of these kids, whether we like it or not. Being a surrogate parent means I have a responsibility. There is a big difference in the way that people perceive adults and juveniles even if they commit the same crime.
Mr. Dixon stated they don’t carry spray or handcuffs in his facility. He wants to build a relationship with the kids and work with the kids. The only handcuffs used are during transport outside of the facility. He stated that no one can tell him that a kid in Marion County is any different than a kid in Wayne County. The potential for officers to use stuff is going to happen because it’s human nature. Build good programming in and it will reduce the number of incidents from occurring in your facility. Choose to use it or not, Mr. Dixon stated he is just proving examples and alternatives.
Mr. Dixon stated that when he worked for Dade County, his medical people left at 2100 hours, and some facilities don’t have a medical person at all. Some only have a medical person coming in once or twice a week. If a juvenile is sprayed, who do you take them to? If you are going to pepper-spray the juvenile, the facility should have the funding to have medical people on their staff. If forty-odd other states are stating this is not a good idea, then maybe it is not. If you don’t like people, you can’t help them. That is no different with the officers. If you don’t like your officers, how can you help them? If you don’t like them, there is no difference.
Mr. Dixon stated that Texas was using pepper-spray and had so many problems with it. Texas underwent a major restructuring because of the sexual allegations and violence. Mr. Dixon stated that a friend of his took over the system and they stopped using pepper-spray and their own people did research to show it was not a good thing. Not one study that has been examined recommended pepper-spray as safe for kids. That is something that should be considered.
Consequences are increased medical. Pepper-spray is an irritant with the kids on psychotropic medications it will create a psychotic break because with those psychotropics there is a potential for psychotic breaks. For example, San Diego was using pepper-spray and they had litigation going on out there also and they discontinued the use of it. Through good programming, you reduce that. The research has shown that the use of pepper-spray creates an angrier kid and they become more hateful.
Use of Force should be a last resort. De-escalation skills and the kind of continuum you have in order to effect de-escalation of the youth. No justifiable punishment. There should be no punishment at all, but no justifiable punishment. There is physical presence which reduces incidents. Dr. Roush, who is the foremost authority on detention, made a good statement. He said size does matter. There has to be staff, big staff, physical presence and you must have small in stature staff. There must be a balance, but physical presence makes a difference. It is less likely that a kid is going to come up to me and physically threaten. On his staff there are a variety of builds. He looks for a variety of people when he hires his staff. There will be a variety of things going on in that institution.
Mr. Dixon stated he read the standards on search. He asked if the staff is trained in dealing with same sex search. One cannot have the male staff members searching the females, or vice versa. Mr. Dixon stated there have been female staff who have had relationships with the youth detainees, which happened in Miami and Detroit. Mr. Dixon stated that people always think of the male side, but you have to be mindful of the females. If the staff is not trained properly on how to deal with some of these things, this is a potential for issues. Based on the belief the juvenile is carrying contraband, body cavity searches are only done by medical staff, the officers do not.
Retaliation. Look at child abuse and neglect reporting. Is there a good grievance procedures? One can tell that a facility which has grievances is a well- run facility because it means the juveniles can express themselves to say something is wrong and someone will look at it. If a facility says it doesn’t have grievances, that is a facility with a problem, because someone is hiding something. These kids have all kinds of grievances. It doesn’t mean that they are valid, that means they have the ability, just like staff, to complain. If you don’t get any, there is no perfect system; there is something wrong with your facility.
Due Process Isolation. Do you have a process in which kids are isolated? What kind of system do you have in place for that and is there an impartial person conducting that hearing, which is a legal issue. Most facilities that get in trouble get in trouble over children being locked down all the time, school, and no education. If the kids are being locked down all the time and there is no impartial review, there will be problems.
Contact visits. Everyone is checked prior and after a contact visit. We are talking about human beings. Visitation twice a week. There is a good book which is called the Long Walk to Freedom by Nelson Mandela. There is a section about him being in prison and not having contact with people. When Mr. Nelson left home, his mother was ill, she died when he got out and he had only seen her one time. He had no other contact with her. If you can imagine that with an adult, imagine that for a juvenile.
Special Visits. There are going to be children who have been sentenced and they are going to the adult system. They will not see their parents for a long time. At his facility, there is a special visit for these juveniles since they will not see their parents for a while. Look at those kinds of issues when you have kids who are going to be transferred to the adult system, which is very important. These kids are
coming back eventually. You can’t say you’re not having visitation because you don’t have enough staff. That is impractical and there are some legal ramifications for that too. If you don’t have enough staff then the question becomes who is watching the kids.
Phone calls. Mr. Dixon stated they allow kids to have a phone call, but if there is good programming and they spoke to the kids, and figured out some of the things they want. The reason for that was to have something to take away. Kids like to be on the phone and part of the programming is that if you’re getting extra phone calls, they have to be earned, so when you get to the next level, you get an extra phone. Part of the programming is creating an environment where they like and want things. Most of the kids have cell phones and computers because they don’t go outside so much. Take the computer and cell phone away and find out what happens. Set the programming so it helps you with structure to include special visits. They do not monitor the phone calls as there are counselors who make the phone calls and they dial the number so the juvenile does not make the call.
Shackles and handcuffs are only used as a precaution to escape and during transport outside the facility. The court or the medical areas are included. There is case law, Clarence M. vs. Yakoma County, and you will be able to see where people got into trouble with handcuffs. They can be used as a threatening tool.
Design of the physical plant. One would be surprised when you change the color of something which is something the research is clear on. In one facility, there was a gray color and they wondered why everyone was depressed in the place. The colors were changed, the lights were out and they were repaired. Once the colors were changed and the energy level, even the staff changed.
Education space. Is there enough education space for the juveniles? Usually a good classroom size for their facility is 1 to 10 or 1 to 15 per teacher. There is staff in the classroom with the juveniles. Everything in Wayne County is unionized. The direct care staff, the nurses, and even the supervisors and managers are in a union. How do work through this? The reason to mention this is that the staff worked two hours a day. How can they work two hours a day if the kids are there? They had made a pact that the lowest seniority person would stay. Mr. Dixon stated he would walk through the building, which is six stories and not see any staff. They went to court and had to take the keys from the union president. The end result is the kids are in class and this has become what they do. The job is a direct care staff is to watch the kids and the teacher’s job is to teach.
Recreational space. There can’t be enough space for the juveniles to have recreation.
Discipline system. Is there a progressive discipline system which specifies sanctions? Are minor and major rules posted? When a juvenile comes into the facility, they should be signing that they understand the rules and it should go into their files so if a juvenile must be disciplined, there is no question about the rules which govern the facility. This is also on video so they can see it.
Safety. Does the facility provide safety from assault? Staff training, which can be a problem. Mr. Dixon stated he heard someone say earlier that there was going to be a day of training. Mr. Dixon asked how many who are in law enforcement went through one day of training to do your job? Mr. Dixon stated he does not know where that happens. Is one day of training sufficient to work in an environment you are not familiar with when it takes weeks and weeks of training before an officer is allowed to come to work? Mr. Dixon stated he would hope there would be more than one day of training, which is a disservice to kids and a disservice to the staff, which you would not do to your own profession.
Mr. Dixon showed a graph after going through several consent decrees. This will help you reduce the issues leading to litigation in your institution. These include: verbal intervention, communication,
counseling, medication, token economy, relationships and behavioral medication, due process, deliver to mental health for hospitalization, isolation, mental health evaluation and behavior management. Is there a mental health facility for those kids to go to when they are out of it? When it is not a mental health issue, they have the ability, if the kid is that bad, they have the ability to send the juvenile to the jail for 30 days with a judge’s order because they are just that out of control. They have only used this five times, because there are some kids who are just that out of it. This job is very difficult. Everyone he has talked to who worked in the jails and friends across the Country will tell you they would rather work with adults than juveniles because of all the rules.
Indigent kids should not be made to pay for damages. Mr. Dixon stated he read something that indicated if the youth damages something they will pay for it. If you have a good program, you will reduce these incidents. It’s the price of doing business. How is the juvenile going to pay for something? If they have resources they may not be in the facility to begin with. This is counterintuitive. Where are they going to get the money from? People are going to damage things. It’s what kind of chairs you purchase and other considerations. There are things that can be bought which will last. They have put sand in and it’s glued to the bottom where it can’t be moved around. It’s that hard plastic and that will last for a while. The kids should be in so many programs there is no time to cause any damage. The building should also be designed to reduce damage. Supervision should reduce property damage. Where is the staff when the stuff is being torn up? If there isn’t enough staff, that is a factor.
Suicide watch. Is there a mental health authority? One of the things he tells everyone is if there is a mental health program, and you must have one, have the mental health authority write the policies. The administrator sign off on them, but there needs to be policies and have the mental health authority sign off on them. Also, what degree do you have in mental health? Is there a psychologist or psychiatrist? From a medical standpoint and from a mental health standpoint, those people should write the protocols in the facility and they sign off on them because they are the experts. It reduces liability.
Chapter 18. It is important to remember that children are entitled to a higher standard of care than adults. Mr. Dixon asked if anyone had any questions.
Commander McGowan thanked Mr. Dixon for coming and speaking to us and enjoyed his presentation. He did ask when the last time he visited a Sheriff’s Office in Florida. Mr. Dixon stated it was a few months ago and he toured the jail. Mr. Dixon stated he toured the Glades County jail. He also toured the Hendry County. Commander McGowan stated that what he was trying to say was that the vast majority of the jails in the adult population in Florida understand absolutely everything you have presented. We understand the difference between juveniles and adults and will say this until someone can prove him different. The Sheriff’s Offices of any county in the State can do a better job with children than DJJ, simply because they have more resources and they have the availability of staff to do it.
Mr. Dixon stated that it does not matter to him who does this. He was with DJJ for 16 years. He believes there has to be a shift in the mindset in dealing with kids and that’s a difficult piece if one is dealing with adults all the time. If one is going to do it, then put the resources in it. One has to have the resources to perform the things he is talking about. The county jail does not have has the resources that one needs to deal with juveniles. If that is the case, then the State of Florida must take their resources, DJJ, or wherever they get them from and say this is what you have to have in order to perform these duties and hold to these standards what must be done. Mr. Dixon stated he tells people if anyone’s child or grandchild is in a facility, he wants to ensure they are getting the best services they can get. They are coming back to the community. Where the resources are obtained is insignificant, it’s if you have the resources. If it’s in the jail, if the Sheriffs take it, the federal government takes it, do
you have the resources to ensure that from the Juveniles Justice perspective is maintained, there is no argument.
Lt. Owens stated he wanted to add one more thing. He stated he appreciated how Mr. Dixon put his PowerPoint together in context of the Florida Model Jail Standards. It says that he has done the research and thanked him for that because we, too, want to strengthen anyway we can. Lt. Owens stated there would be a break and when we return, they will get into the individual submissions.
Lt. Owens advised there should have been two hand-outs on the table. One hand-out that is the majority of the revisions and one that was almost forgotten and had to be added to the table as well. There will be a 15 minute break to stay on schedule. It’s 1040 hours and we’ll return at 1055 hours on the dot and we’ll resume.
Lt. Owens called the meeting back to order. He stated at this time, he had a discussion during the break. Polk County’s Legal Counsel, Anne Gibson would like to approach the podium and make some comments prior to getting into the individual standards.
Ms. Anne Gibson of Polk County, Sheriff Judd’s Director of Legal Affairs. She stated she appreciated the opportunity to speak to the group today. Ms. Gibson stated that based upon the comments that were submitted today to the subcommittee, she wanted to frame the issues before the group. She stated that she knew they were going to spend a lot of time today and tomorrow going over the proposed amendments to the juvenile standards of the Florida Model Jail Standards. She stated that Polk County is cognizant that this meeting is not about Southern Poverty Law Center’s law suit they currently have pending against Polk County in Federal Court. Although it has been mentioned today, she feels the need to make some statements about some of the statements that were made and the characterization of some of the evidence that was provided last week to Judge Pizzo in the federal hearing. Some of the statements made mischaracterized that evidence which is understandable because Mr. Utter was not present at that hearing, however, she was. Mr. Utter admitted telling you that we presented witnesses which discredited a whole lot of the juveniles’ statements, including testimony where juveniles alleged misdeeds against detention deputies who don’t even exist. Likewise, we had a whole lot of statements from the juveniles about alleged misdeeds against other inmates, but could not recall their names. The only evidence that SPLC presented about the traumatic or alleged traumatic effect of chemical agent was from the psychiatrist who admitted that she never once in her career ever treated any juvenile who alleged to have a traumatic event themselves from a reaction to the use of chemical agent, so she did not want the assembly thinking that was a fact.
Additionally, the psychiatrist failed to render an opinion on what the effect would be on a juvenile’s state of mind when you don’t use chemical agents and the only recourse is to therefore go hands on. That was not brought up, but that was certainly something Ms. Gibson felt the subcommittee should be considering when one hears the proposed amendments today.
Ms. Gibson stated they presented experts including use of force experts and juvenile detention experts who presented uncontroverted evidence that the use of chemical agent, when necessary, not only is desirable and preferable, but reduces the potential for injury to both juvenile and staff members every time, which is powerful.
Likewise, at the injunction hearing, SPLC’s attorneys had to admit to Judge Pizzo what the current state of the law is here in Florida. That is that the use of chemical agents upon juveniles is not illegal, unconstitutional or impermissible. It may be utilized, that’s the state of the law.
She also stated that she knows they have heard a lot in other hearings, but not as much today about allegations against Polk County stemming from the lawsuit. Ms. Gibson stated she wanted everyone to keep in mind that these are allegations, merely allegations and should not be part of the process. Polk
County is vigorously defending this lawsuit and will continue to do so every step of the way. They feel very confident that the lawsuit will be handled by the Judge appropriately and is not a consideration here today. They look forward to the outcome of that proceeding because they feel that the truth will ultimately come out.
Ms. Gibson thanked the subcommittee for their considerations. She stated that Polk County feels very confident that this subcommittee is comprised of professionals who understand the issues and all the nuances involved in detaining youth and that the subcommittee is giving this great weight and great consideration because this is about children. No one in this room, in any way, wants to harm children. But likewise, they have to make sure the policies that are adopted are doable, and are practical; that fantasy is separated fiction and that luxuries cannot always be achieved. One thing they know for certain from running their juvenile detention center for almost a year is that under these standards, a facility can safely house juveniles professionally, compassionately, and safely.
Ms. Gibson stated she had Major Allen here today who is going to be speaking about the proposed amendments, along with Dr. Hough to offer his expert opinion and we look forward to answering any questions the subcommittee may have. She thanked the subcommittee for their consideration.
Lt. Owens stated that in the interest of all due process, was there anyone else who would like to address the assembly. Lt. Owens reminded everyone that the first time they come to the podium to please state their name for the record so the recording secretary may get that information.
Mr. Timothy Little came to the podium, assigned to accreditation in Pasco County. He stated that for 20 years prior to being assigned to accreditation, he worked in housing with the inmates, mostly adults, but some juveniles which they house from time to time. Mr. Little stated that Pasco County does not currently run the Juvenile Detention Center but they do house some juveniles for a longer term. Mr. Little stated that he would be the first to say that a juvenile mind does not work the same as an adult mind, as he has four children, ages 19 to 4. He advised that he does not have a problem with training being in place specific to juveniles for staff. He also stated he did not have a problem with programming being in place that’s different for juveniles than the adult inmates. He stated he did have a problem with being told, as a deputy who is working with both adults and juveniles, which he can use a tool in this housing unit that he cannot in another. He stated he would touch on what the representative from Polk just spoke on, that he agrees with. Pepper-spray is a useful tool in lieu of going hands on which is really the only other alternative. He stated he has worked with juveniles who are being accused of very serious crimes. He has watched kids who were six foot three inches tall, 280-290 pounds and if someone like that become physical and you now have to deal with him trying to hurt another deputy or juvenile, you have to react to that. He stated that personally, he did not care what their emotional deficiency was as a juvenile, or their mental deficiency is that causes them to behave that way; it has to be handled, regardless. Pepper-spray is useful. Anyone that has carried pepper-spray has probably been pepper-sprayed as part of the training. It’s very effective, but it’s temporary. The effects wear off within an hour, you’re okay again. There is medical staff in place that triages anyone who has been pepper-sprayed or any other kind of use of force and that’s necessary but the effects of it are still temporary. Whereas, three, four or five, people having to physically handle someone who is a juvenile in a building that concrete and metal there could be a laceration, a cut or a bruise, maybe even something worse, which is not temporary. Mr. Little stated that the State has drawn a line, 17 to 18 juveniles to an adult. He understands there has to be a line somewhere, however, he is having trouble wrapping his mind around not being able to use a tool on a 17 year because it’s considered cruel but working on the other side of the building with an 18 year that’s considered to be an adult. Now, it’s not cruel. A lot of times a juvenile will become 18 while in custody. Well, Monday they can’t be pepper-sprayed because at 17, the emotional level is not going to be the same when the juvenile turns 18 the next day and now pepper-spray cannot be used. Mr. Little stated it doesn’t make and nothing about a chemical agent should be considered cruel. It’s a useful tool and it’s far less invasive than having to go hands on when that’s you’re only other alternative.
Lt. Owens asked everyone to pull out the large hand-out. He stated we will start at the beginning and trying to do this chronologically. He stated that what may happen is we may migrate away from a certain submission, so please be aware if you are a submitter. If you see your name coming up, please be prepared to speak to this. We will approach it in that manner. There is one page that you will see as an insert that you will see. It was uncovered late yesterday as a mistake, so you will see that in the packet as an add-on. The first order of business will be FMJS paragraph 2.01, parenthesis A. This is submitted by Mr. David Utter of Southern Poverty Law Center. Lt. Owens asked Mr. Utter to come to the podium.
NEW BUSINESS:
Standard 2.01(a) –
Standards Review Subcommittee Presenter- Mr. David Utter, SPLC
Standard: The inmate is always within sight and normal sound of an officer certified in accordance with Chapter 943, Florida State Statutes. This may be accomplished through means of electronic surveillance, provided that a certified officer is available to respond to calls for help
Proposal: The inmate is always within sight and normal sound of an officer certified in accordance with Chapter 943, Florida State Statutes. This may be accomplished through means of electronic surveillance, provided that certified officers regularly interact with the juveniles and are available to respond to calls for help. Juveniles shall at all times be supervised by posted officers inside the housing according to the following staff ratios: 1:8 during waking hours and 1:10 while youth are sleeping. Under no circumstances shall such juveniles be supervised through means of electronic surveillance.
Rationale: The proposal is based on research and best practices indicating that direct supervision provides detained youth with an environment more conducive to the goals of the juvenile justice system. The proposal ensures that facilities operate with adequate staff to youth ratios and ensure that staff interact with youth and actively supervise the unit--this will help ensure youth are protected from harm and violence. It recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that facilities operate in a constitutional manner.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated this was real basic and they have talked about this in the past. He stated that children respond much better to relationships and the best way to develop a relationship is to be there in that living unit with them. He stated it was illustrative that of three counties that have taken over the juvenile detention centers, Polk County relies primarily on cameras and rounds. What that has led to has been litigation. There was a newspaper article that a juvenile named Travis Winemiller who was attacked by other juveniles for 30 or 40 minutes. In fact, he was beaten up even though a staff member did a round. It was in a “dead zone” in an enclosed cell room which would not happen in a direct supervision housing unit where you have the staff member in the living unit with the kids, hands-on, listening to them all the time. Mr. Utter stated that Mr. Dixon spoke about this and it’s just what DJJ does. He recognized that the staff ratio is not the ratio that DJJ has, but it’s what they highly recommend. The most important facet of this is having adults in the living units with the kids and not relying on cameras.
Lt. Owens stated if there are comments, please approach the podium.
Major Allen approached the podium. He stated he did have the current standard that is in effect at this time. It says the staff is aware of the location of youth assigned to their supervision at all times. Staff monitors the movement of youth in the direct care unit from one location to another. Youth are in the presence of at least one juvenile officer at all times. It does not say that they have to be with them at all times. It does not say they will be with them at all times. It says they will check on them every ten minutes when they are in the room. Major Allen stated that he does not know where the standard is that Mr. Utter is referring to but he believes that the standard we have now mirrors the current standard with DJJ.
Lt. Owens asked where the ratios came from, what the origin of those are and if that was an ACA standard.
Mr. Utter stated that it came from a blend of ACA and JDAI is where they pulled the ratios from. There will be a discussion later on about PREA, but this is a discussion that has come up in court cases but it’s not specific. Mr. Dixon stated he would be glad to provide the documentation.
Major Allen stated he would be glad to provide the information. It’s the current Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Office of Program Accountability.
Dr. Richard Hough from the University of West Florida came to the podium. He stated he is here on behalf of the Polk County Sheriff’s Office. He said he knew he would be speaking on several different issues. He is the former Director of Corrections for Santa Rosa and Manatee Counties; the Florida Regional Detention Center Coordinator for two of the facilities and what used to be called Chiefland Support Services for the Northern District of the Department of Juvenile Justice. Dr. Hough stated he built and oversaw the first juvenile boot-camp in the State of Florida back in 1991. Regarding Lt. Owens’ question about staff ratios, prior to 2006, DJJ had a day time and a night time ratio which was not something that was strictly followed. The Florida DJJ does not utilize a staffing ratio; they abandoned that some years ago and have been working for the equality of staff. In the lawsuit against Sheriff Judd and Polk County, there is commentary regarding widely accepted national standards for staffing. There are no such standards. Dr. Hough stated it will come up, and he cautions and direct very carefully when PREA comes up. PREA does not apply to jails, and does not apply to juvenile detention, but only applies to prisons. There will be some triggering measure in the future that can be adopted by states, but couched within a very lengthy document is staffing ratios. Mr. Dixon previously referred to staffing ratios, if you want to medical personnel, get ready for the funding. If Sheriffs’ Offices are concerned about funding, it would be problematic moving to that type of staffing standard and in fact, the standards and commentary on those provided by ACA and JDA stated that funding is why PREA does not apply to jails. Dr. Hough stated he would be happy to answer any questions on the standards.
Mr. Bernard Johns of the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office came to the podium. He stated that when he looks at the last sentence of the recommendation, it says, “Under no circumstances shall such juveniles be supervised through means of electronic surveillance.” Mr. Johns stated he did not believe it was worded properly. He stated from his interpretation of the current wording meant that he could not have cameras at all. He stated the word “solely” should be added. Mr. Johns advised that he did not want to leave any “wiggle room” later in the question of why a facility would have cameras in the detention center if the standard says you’re not supposed to have cameras. Mr. Johns stated he did not believe we should rely on cameras but we should not eliminate the possibility of having cameras because they help, as much as they hurt.
Director Jimmy Holderfield, Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office Department of Corrections came to the podium. He stated that in Jacksonville, they currently house four different dorms of juveniles who have been adjudicated as adults. They do operate medical 24/7, along with mental health on duty 24/7. They do screenings 24/7 and they have direct supervision with an officer actually assigned into the split level dorms. There are officers who have interaction with the juveniles 24/7. That is a mandated post. He stated that his problem with this suggested revision is the mandated ratio, because what is going on in the control pod is also the Sergeant, Control Officer and two roaming security officers in addition to those officers assigned in the dorms. We talk a lot about liability and the economic impact we place upon ourselves if we don’t put these precautions in place. Also, as an administrator, is the manager of his budget dictates that he see this as an economic mandate that comes down and is currently faced with shutting down a drug treatment facility because the City Council wants to do other things with the money set aside for the treatment facility. They oppose this revision based on the ratios. He believes this is going to hurt a lot of counties who manage great facilities and have to consider taking the one portion out.
Lt. Owens asked Mr. Johns a question in reference to blended staff. What are the thoughts on Mr. Utter’s comments and his proposal? Do you have certified officers who can respond at any given point 24/7, even though you have blended staff?
Mr. Johns stated that yes, they do. They have a Sergeant, male and female deputy on every shift. The female pod is supervised strictly by female officers and the male pod is strictly supervised by male officers. They had DJJ trained staff who are also there. The pods are never empty so long as there is a child in that pod.
Lt. Owens asked for recommendations from the Subcommittee.
Ms. White stated she had an issue with the first couple of sentences of this recommendation. She believes it should end at the word “help” and the rest of it is counterproductive for jails to have ratios at this level, during this budget crisis. She said that most of the juvenile facilities in Florida are understaffed at this time, so a ratio would be difficult to accomplish. Commander McGowan agreed.
Lt. Owens wanted to comment on Mr. Dixon’s presentation, but most should remember that he said if you have one kid act out, there goes the ratios because your attention is immediately forced to turn to that juvenile. Lt. Owens advised he makes this statement in defense of the comments which have been raised, along with the economic issue. The first time you have juvenile act out, the ratios go haywire. Lt. Owens stated that “no” or “never” is a difficult thing for us to agree with if we are forced into the “no” and “never” situation when it comes to language. The last sentence, “under no circumstances” it is a “turn-off” in reference to the standard to allow all Sheriffs to make their individual choices. He stated he is okay with changing it to the point of the word “help” in the proposal, but he will keep it open for the rest of the panel to comment.
Commander McGowan stated there were three things he did not like with this section. First, “…provided that certified officers regularly interact with the juveniles.” Commander McGowan stated he felt that was a little vague. He stated he did not like the ratios because the housing areas and other factors set the ratios, not a standard. He also advised that he agreed with Mr. Johns in reference to the cameras. Cameras, augment, in their case, they put cameras on people they feel are at risk so they have a set of eyes, a set of cameras. They are doing their best to make sure that person is well-served. Because it is not a chapter 20 exclusive revision, Commander McGowan suggests that they stay with the original wording in the paragraph.
Lt. Parisi stated he would have to agree with that as when he first read it, he believed it to contradict itself. It says in the first paragraph “this may be accomplished through means of electronic surveillance…”, but then you add “under no circumstances shall they be supervised through electronic surveillance.” So, it conflicts itself in the same standard. Again, there standards written for the juvenile chapters, so 2.01 should be left as it is.
Motion: Lt. Owens asked for further discussion. He stated that hearing none; there is no motion to change any of the language. There is no motion to accept.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter- Kevin McGowan
Standard: 2.19 – Prison Rape Elimination Act
Proposal: Prison Rape Elimination Act – Compliance with the Florida Model Jail Standards will require that a correctional facility comply with the Prison Rape Elimination Act.
Rationale: New submission.
Discussion: Capt. Ross suggested holding off on this until they establish the inspection because that would be your criteria for coming into compliance.
Mr. Dennard approached the podium. He stated he concurs with Captain Ross’ comments. When PREA first started, one of the issues that Sheriffs and jail administrators had was that you lumped in prisons and jails and kind of do the same things, they are different and distinct. Some of the problem was that here was federally mandated standard with no funding. The problem they have with jails, we hold Federal Detainees, ICE detainees or if you are accredited or receive some type of federal funding, the facility is bound to comply with PREA. There is a subcommittee that Bernard Johns is overseeing; we forward this to the PREA subcommittee to look at in more detail. There are a lot of items in PREA, to include staffing ratios that we have to take into consideration. FMJS is minimum standards. If we take PREA as a whole, there are a lot of information out there and the subcommittee needs to look at that first prior to bringing it to the Standards Review Subcommittee.
Motion: Commander McGowan stated that based on this information, he would like to withdraw his submission.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 3.02(d) – No employee shall….Abuse an inmate in any manner
Proposal: No employee shall….Abuse an inmate in any manner. In addition, no employee may threaten, intimidate or otherwise harass or retaliate against any inmate for complaining about treatment or conditions of confinement, reporting abuse, filing or seeking to file a grievance, communicating with counsel or seeking redress through the courts;
Rationale: It has long been the law that detained juveniles have a constitutional right to access courts and counsel. See e.g. John L. v. Adams, 969 F.2d 228 (6th Cir. 1992). For over twenty years juvenile standards clearly require detention staff to not subject juveniles to “reprisals or penalties” for exercising their rights.
Discussion: Mr. Utter came to the podium. He stated this goes to both juveniles and adults. This applies clear constitutional law that prisoners should be encouraged to file grievances, discuss their conditions without fear of retaliation by staff. He stated that what the children have experienced in Polk County is guards calling them “snitch”, guards making pejorative comments because the kids talking to us. He stated that this was something that was absent in the standard. There should be oversight and accountability. There are concerns about spurious claims, but the more light there is, the easier it is to run the facility.
Commander McGowan stated he liked this standard very much. He stated he didn’t like any of the reasons given for submitting the revision, but he liked it.
Ms. Gibson stated they disagree with the allegations against Polk which are untruthful, they have no objection to the revision.
Motion: Ms. Wanda White motioned to accept as written, which was seconded by Commander McGowan. Hearing None. No dissent. Motion Passes.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 3.02(h) - No employee shall: . . .Carry any firearm, ammunition, chemical agents, electronic device, blackjack or any other equipment or device into the secure area of the detention facility except in emergencies and as authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. However, the chemical agent oleoresin capsicum and electronic weapons may be carried inside the detention facility by certified law enforcement or correctional officers trained in its use, if authorized by the policy and procedure of the facility.
Proposal: No employee supervising juveniles shall: . . .Carry any firearm, ammunition, chemical agents, electronic device, blackjack or any other equipment or device into the secure area of the detention facility except in emergencies and as authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility
Rationale: Chemical and electronic restraints are unnecessary in a juvenile detention setting. Their use is unnecessarily punitive and especially brutal, exposing juveniles to harm and counties to liability. Facilities across the country, including the Florida Dept. of Juvenile Justice and Marion County have safely detained youth without their availability, except in emergencies, and the FMJS should be modified to reflect these best practices. In the absence of these restrictions chemical restraints in particular are frequently used in an abusive manner. A number of facilities have faced costly litigation over the abusive use of chemical restraints and the remedy achieved through this litigation mirrors the language described above.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated they have talked about this issue a lot and is sure we will talk about this some more. He stated he understand the view that it’s a tool that many deputies needed to be in their toolbox. Again, he will point to the lack of other States, of other counties who are housing kids and the fact they are not using pepper-spray. He would think that this Subcommittee in a good exercise in research would be to examine the worker’s compensation claims in those counties who do not use pepper-spray. Mr. Utter stated that he understands in Seminole County, they do not use it in their adult facility either. This argument that pepper-spray is a better way of dealing with conflict rather than physical intervention, he believes they will find that may not be true by examining worker’s compensation claims. Mr. Utter stated this discussion of counties and Sheriffs taking over juvenile detention, this is going to be an upcoming discussion for the legislature and as we move forward for the next couple of years. Forty-five other states do not use pepper-spray in juvenile detention should tell us something. The liability here, we’re going to have a child die because their asthmatic and the staff did not know and then we’re going to be just like the Martin Lee Anderson case with boot-camps. Progress and history are against Polk County on this. This Subcommittee could take a giant step forward by adopting, at a minimum, the proposal that Sheriff Dean and Chief Wilder proposed last year when we were discussing this. The pepper-spray can be in the facility, but it has to be locked up. When you have it in the hands of deputies and they are walking the grounds, it’s too easy to use. This is an issue that is going to continue to come up. He stated we could get on the right side of history by not allowing staff to carry pepper-spray at a minimum. Mr. Utter reiterated that the Subcommittee should examine the worker’s compensation reports from those counties who use pepper-spray versus those who do not.
Major Allen stated there will be a lot of comment because we have talked about this for a year and a half now, however long we have been doing this. He stated he had a study from the National Institute of Justice and he will glad to provide a copy, and will talk about some data that is in this report. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement authorizes the use of chemical weapons for all trained officers, including law enforcement. We have heard that School Resource Officers and Detention deputies, so are we prepared to say that we are going to stop using pepper-spray across the board. If we do it here, isn’t the juvenile here the same juvenile who was arrested on the street. Of course, they are permitted to use it there. We talk about law enforcement having these tools and yes, it is a tool. Is it always used, no, but it is there for us to use. If we say here in a detention setting a juvenile can be affected by it, is it not the same juvenile that we arrest on the street, the same juvenile that is in the school that has been in a fight with another juvenile. A 2010 study of more than 24,000 uses of force incidents revealed that the use of pepper-spray decreased injury by 65 to 70 percent. It is a very important statistic. Polk County is not the only county. There are thirty-four counties who responded to an informal survey who state they use pepper-spray which is one of their tools to use on direct file juveniles. To say that Polk County is the only county to use pepper-spray is not true. To say that we’re the only State is not true. Other States do it, other Counties do it. Major Allen continued, “Existing officers are trained no differently than responding officers, “and “Deputies nor juveniles should have to wait until back-up arrives.” If we have the tool there, why wait? Why watch two people fight. “I don’t have it on me. I have to wait for someone to come in.” We are still responsible for their safety and security.
Dr. Hough came to the podium. The first time he came to Marion County, to the Sheriff’s Office was when he was coordinating CALEA accreditation for Manatee. The second time was when he was coordinating ACA accreditation with Manatee and they were hosted well and looked at some good practices here. One of the uniqueness’ of the vast majority of the audience, as well as everyone on the dais is the involvement with quality assurance standards, accreditation, and FCAC, the various things that we are held to. In respect to Director Dixon referring to his 16 years of experience with DJJ, everyone here remembers it did not exist in that period of time, it was HRS. When in Tallahassee, the German tourists were murdered by the teenagers, the legislature said they should look at other ways to look at juveniles in this large facility, Secretary Calvin Ross had a direct conversation with me advising that when he travelled the State, he could not tell the staff from the juvenile inmates, and the State very intentionally tried to move towards a system of accountability which involved standards for the officers. One of the things they know did not come readily in was the adoption of the Criminal Justices and Standards Training Commission use of force levels of resistance matrix. Many of the agencies may have participated and a state-wide teleconference that was done with a State-wide prosecutor about a year ago on recreating a use of force specifically for the State of Florida. One of the things we know is there is a debate back and forth nationally about where to place all the pepper-spray, what some refer to as chemical agents. There are articles cited and the medical one cited was 15 years ago, that SPLC brought that does not capture what we have learned in law enforcement and corrections in the last 20 years of the use of pepper-spray. As an OC instructor, most of the work he does is in correctional police practices and as a use of force expert. With that said, to establish for the committee, Mr. Dixon stated there is no study that shows it is safe to use pepper-spray on juveniles. As an academic and as someone who has been in the business for 30 plus years, Dr. Hough stated he cannot work in the negatives of what may occur or what may not occur and what we don’t see. There are no studies that as my colleague from Pasco pointed out, of a hypothetical, chronological day and time when the use of pepper-spray is problematic. We know that pepper-spray, conductive energy devices, all the things that research, we have tried to come up with over the years, is meant to do one thing and that is reduce the use of force, reduce the potential for injury, as cited by Major Allen, that is just one of many studies that point out over the last 20 plus years, that the use of pepper-spray reduces dramatically the risk of injuries to both people on the street in an arrest situation, inmates: whether they be adults or juveniles, and our deputies and our staff. That is clearly an asset, which are very important to us and may reduce that kind of damage. The tool itself is just that, a tool. He looked at the use of forces in Polk. He is familiar with fights in DJJ facilities in the State of Florida and Polk County, was not in any way outside of comparative numbers in having supervised as everyone is, there are juveniles even in adult facilities. While the attempt to lessen that is important, he will echo some of the comments from earlier about maturity, cognitive development, impulsivity, the things we know can go well into the twenties for males and for juveniles. The use of the tool is important to not injuring people, both staff and the actual people for whom we are responsible.
Commander McGowan stated there may be a misconception with the non-law enforcement entity in the building about why we use of pepper-spray or a Taser or something like that. Please explain why the use of pepper-spray is preferable, or in your syllabus when you teach the hazards of use of the tool.
Dr. Hough stated that he has now been continually teaching defensive tactics with CJSTC curriculum for 29 years and still does to both law enforcement and corrections. Pepper-spray or oleoresin capsicum work against the mucus membranes of the eyes and throat and temporarily blinds. For those who have been through the training, if you are still goal oriented, you may still take a swipe at someone and do some injury or damage. Again, what we know with the techniques, and what we know from the comments earlier, when you are inside a concrete and metal location, and there is hands on and you begin to use leverage techniques: hard techniques, soft techniques, all the various techniques we attempt to give to our officers to better prepare them to control people that risk of injury is so much greater. With the pepper spray, it decontaminates on its own in approximately an hour. We have already commented on, and he saw this with Polk County, and suspects it’s true for all counties, there is medical staff immediately. You don’t have that on the street. The arrestee may sit in the back of the car for an hour or so. The comment was made earlier, “Someone is going to die,” which is a dramatic statement. People do die in the use of less lethal technology, but not at the rates when we use lethal technology. Injuries: the worker’s compensation comment is a great suggestion, and great commentary. There are a lot less injuries with pepper-spray to stop the hostile intentions. Great commentary or great “hay” was made about one shouldn’t need these tools. That would be ideal. The National Law Enforcement Technology Advisory Council, in which Dr. Hough was an appointee from the Department of Justice for that body for several years. Dr. Hough stated he does not support pepper foam. The behavior that occurs afterwards, we’ve heard at least one juvenile detention commentary on perhaps the emotions that will be felt by the person after that. Dr. Hough stated he would controvert that, not just with his anecdotal experience, but the wealth of information out there. People don’t just hate you because you pepper-spray them. Rapport is important in any correction facility when you are in a facility 30, 50 or 100 inmates. In Orange County, they had 400 inmates in an open building like this and two officers. It comes down to quality of the staff and how well you are trained. In the cases we are discussing here, what tools do you have available. Dr. Hough stated he didn’t want to present a seminar to those who already had this information, but in response to the very important question, the tool reduces the potential for injury, and actually reduces injury. It’s not hypothetical. He believes that no one would knowingly use pepper-spray against someone who has breathing disability, but the idea of summoning someone to come in and deal with a situation who has pepper-spray, seems problematic.
Commander McGowan stated that pepper-spray is not the first resort there are several steps one would take prior to using pepper-spray.
Dr. Hough stated that with DJJ’s somewhat limited PAR training, which is contained within CJSTC. CJSTC contains further options, includes rapport, the on-going discussion that you’re having day in and day out. SPLC, in some of their presentations, specifically the expert they used in Federal Court, stated the officers should not need these tools that they should be able to prevent. Mr. Dixon stated he wasn’t dealing with any “choir boys” in his facility, and Dr. Hough stated he wasn’t dealing with any “choir boys” in Florida in his 30 years working here either. The rapport is really critical and afterwards. If you’ve had to take someone down and you’ve had to use pepper-spray you’re still going to need that rapport. One tries things leading up to that and as an instructor in Florida, Dr. Hough stated that what he treats to colleagues and to those in the academic community, do you utilize what’s appropriate but when one comes into a conflict, one doesn’t being with, “Wait, I’m here. I’m a corrections deputy cease and desist,” which may be part of it, because one will be giving verbal directions, but one acts to protect, in this case, juvenile inmates, from one another and so as not to harm your staff.
Mr. Utter stated he wanted to clarify that he never argued that other States don’t use it on adults and he thinks we should look at the studies that Major Allen and the Polk expert talked about in reducing injuries. The fact that Sheriffs use these on direct file kids was not part of the discussion. This is about juvenile justice and the fact the DJJ has not had pepper-spray in their facilities for years. Secretary Walters took the extraordinary step of writing this committee and asking to disallow the carrying of pepper-spray. DJJ’s detention supervisor, Rick Bedson, noted that they don’t use it and haven’t used it or needed it. Mr. Utter stated that we don’t need it either. He stated he wanted to clarify that he was not talking about adults, but merely talking about the studies on juvenile detention and juvenile facilities.
Lt. Owens wanted to add one thing to his comment about Mr. Bedson. Mr. Bedson did state that when all else fails, they contact the Sheriff’s Department.
Mr. Utter stated that was the case, but under exigent circumstances. That is what the language which was being discussed was meant to convey.
Lt. Owens stated that was the “hang-up” the Subcommittee had and he stated he was reflecting, but if one does not have all of the tools you may need in an emergency, the conclusion of the discussion was that any DJJ facility in their right mind, if they lost control would call their local Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff’s Office is the last stand and just to reiterate what Mr. Bedson agreed with when he was on our panel last year.
Lastly, Mr. Utter stated, the facilities have pepper-spray available. He stated that he believed Marion is one of those who have it locked up. When you look at the data, they have direct supervision, they are in there with the kids and they haven’t used.
Lt. Owens stated he would like to point out a gentleman in the back row, Lt. Savarese who is our commander over the pre-adjudicated youth facility we have here in Marion County. Lt. Owens asked Lt. Savarese to feel free to discuss anyone’s misconceptions about what happens in our facility, should that occur. Lt. Savarese agreed.
Major Allen stated he had to find the submission first and then he would comment. Major Allen stated that he knew this was going to jump ahead because this is going into Chapter 16 and Chapter 18, and does not know what section it is in each of the submission. He read, ”The Housing of Juveniles: Any facility that houses juveniles, whether charged as juveniles or adults, shall apply the juvenile standards contained in all chapters of these standards, including Chapter 20, to all juveniles in the facility.” This is something that Mr. Utter submitted. He stands here and says he is not saying those juveniles were included when that is exactly what he is saying. If we treat the pre-adjudicated this way, then we should treat the direct files this way. Major Allen advised that his comment was we do treat direct files a little differently, all the counties do who have them. He stated he just wanted to bring this up now.
Mr. Utter stated he would take that standard down if we would vote this one in.
Lt. Owens asked for further discussion from the Subcommittee. Commander McGowan stated his only feeling in this, because they don’t have a DJJ portion of this as yet, when Mr. Utter and what everyone else brings to mind, is what they are worrying about is the abuse of our authority. Commander McGowan stated he agrees with that. He does not want abuse of our authority either; however, if it comes down to a safety issue, we are better with the tool than without it. Anything can be abused, and he is against any type of abuse whether it be pepper-spray or an electronic device, however, the tool should be there, the abuse should not.
Sgt. Delaere stated that he believed we put that in there. If your Sheriff directs you and you have the policy and procedure to use it, that’s a tool. That is up to your own supervisor; do you use it or do you now. We left it open for everyone to make their own decision, not just what’s better for St. Johns county, Duval County, or Marion County; it’s for all the Sheriffs’ to use.
Capt. Ross stated that we talked about the fact that these things inside the facility, and it’s been said, it makes it too easy to use. Whether you have to go outside the facility to get it or inside the facility to use it, it doesn’t make it any more or less appropriate; it only makes it more available.
Lt. Owens stated that he worked through an era when they did not have a Taser or pepper-spray. As a patrol officer he can remember when he was issued this new tool. It does minimize the opportunity for an officer to be injured. It did the trick. They were happy to have the new tool. He stated he understands the rarity of an officer coming to work saying he wants to use this on someone. In his experience and with his peers, he does not recall having anyone or working with anyone that might have that mindset or frame of mind. Does it exist; somewhere between Florida and Michigan perhaps it does exist. He stated he has not witnessed that. He believes that every county represented in here have a strong supervisory framework and like Mr. Dixon said, it starts at the top and we have 67 Sheriffs that really do have leadership qualities that he is proud of and it does trickle down through the population whether it be a middle manager or a line level person. Lt. Owens stated he is not in favor of changing the language as his colleagues have stated, he believes that in the State of Florida, he agreed that the Sheriffs need the latitude to create and frame their own policy, is not in favor of changing the language that takes that freedom away. This standard, the way it’s written now, he remembered that we left it to be open to interpretation so the Sheriffs could decline to have officers to carry these weapons, tools, whatever you want to call them. He stated he did not see the dangerous ones in there as they are not allowing guns and ammo, blackjacks. He stated that blackjacks were a thing of the past that we needed to get away from.
Lt. Owens opened it up to the Subcommittee. Ms. White stated she wanted to state that she agreed with what he colleagues have said. She agrees it is a tool that it should be the decision that the CEO of the facility, whether that be a Sheriff or Jail Director, to determine that. She also stated that she clearly wants to state that no one on this Subcommittee is in favor of an abuse of power in any shape, form or fashion and they would all stand against that.
Motion: Hearing no further comments, Lt. Owens asked for a motion. Hearing no motion, there is no change to the standard.
Lt. Owens called a lunch recess of the meeting.
The meeting reconvened at 1300 hours.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 3.03(b)- Chemical agents and electronic weapons shall only be used with caution by employees trained in its use, when use of force is necessary, when this level of force is the least likely to cause injuries to staff or inmates, and only if in compliance with and if authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. In all cases where chemical agents or electronic weapons are used on inmates, each inmate shall be examined by a physician or other medical personnel as soon as practicable. Acknowledgment of the medical examination shall be annotated on the Use-of-Force report
Proposal: Chemical agents and electronic weapons shall only be used with caution by employees trained in its use, when use of force is necessary, when this level of force is the least likely to cause injuries to staff or inmates, and only if in compliance with and if authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. Chemical agents shall only be used on juveniles by certified officers when requested to respond to juvenile detention facilities during exigent circumstances that present a serious risk of bodily harm and that cannot be controlled by existing juvenile corrections officers. Before chemical agents are used, officers shall first attempt verbal de-escalation techniques. Under no circumstances shall electronic weapons be used on juveniles. In all cases where chemical agents are used on inmates, the minimum amount necessary shall be used and each inmate shall be examined by a physician or other medical personnel as soon as practicable. Acknowledgment of the medical examination shall be annotated on the Use-of-Force report and the use of force report shall further document the exigent circumstances that gave rise to the use of
chemical agents and all verbal de-escalation techniques that were used before the application of chemical restraints.
Rationale: Chemical and electronic restraints are unnecessary in a juvenile detention setting. Their use is unnecessarily punitive and especially brutal, exposing juveniles to harm and counties to liability. Electronic restraints have been involved in the serious injury and death of a number of juveniles throughout the country. These devices were not developed to be used on teenagers who, because of their immature physical development, are more susceptible to serious health complications after the use of electronic restraints. The Florida Dept. of Juvenile Justice and Marion County have safely detained youth without their availability, except in emergencies, and the FMJS should be modified to reflect these best practices
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated that mace can be used for exigent circumstances and that under no circumstances can electronic weapons be used. It’s that simple.
Major Allen stated they were probably going to keep touching this issue on chemical agents until they have exhausted all of them. He had a few more things to say about chemical agents. This is 3.03(b), which he knows that Mr. Utter and everyone understands affects the entire jail, not just the juvenile population, so he wants to caution everyone in what we look at in other standards. When you look at responding to an incident and waiting until back-up arrives so a chemical agent to be used, he had some questions. First, who will bear the litigation for inmate who is seriously injured while we’re waiting? He has seen altercations between adults and juveniles where multiple juveniles or adults will beat up on one person. With a readily available chemical agent, those people can be kept from hurtig that person. The staff has been trained to take of what needs to be taken care of, however they are not trained to stand back and wait for someone else to arrive. It must sometimes be controlled immediately. The courts have used the term objective reasonableness of the process of examining an incident for an officer’s appropriate response. So, we don’t have the luxury of time. If, has been mentioned, if we misuse it or use it in a way that has not been intended individually, we can certainly face consequences from the agency or the courts and we can see the courts recognize that. In Graham versus Connor, they say we can have 20/20 hindsight. We can sit here and talk about what happened at the time, but it’s based upon what the officer sees and what they believe is reasonable at the time.
Ms. Cassandra Capobianco, an attorney of the Florida Institutional Legal Services and are a legal aid office came to the podium. She stated they provide legal aid to people in all sorts of institutions in Florida. She stated she appreciated the opportunity to speak on this standard, in particular. She has been involved in litigation involving specifically regarding the State’s use of chemical agents for nearly ten years. In this case, they support exclusion of chemical agents entirely from juvenile units, except in emergencies. However, if you decide to permit it, she strongly urged the Subcommittee to consider exemptions for certain types of inmates; populations of inmates such as asthmatics and mentally ill inmates. These are people you would know of as asthmatic or mentally ill. The current state of the law Florida supports these exclusions. It’s unconstitutional in the 11th Circuit, which includes Florida, to use chemical agents against known mentally inmates, except in an emergency. This is based on a case out of the Department of Corrections where, several inmates, but two in particular, who were severely burned and traumatized for years by chemical agents despite their mental illness. It’s good law. The current state of Florida law in this district is that the use of a chemical agent against a disabled inmate, and in that case it was specifically asthma, when the chemical agents will have more of an impact on an inmate because of his disability, is unconstitutional and violates the ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act. This was based upon the actual death of an inmate who gassed with pepper-spray asthmatic. And he died. He was an adult, however, this is a real case where they say a death and they have made some strides to change their policy; the State system. The effects of chemical agents can be fatal in certain circumstances; they can be lasting. The guidelines on the chemicals suggests it not be used against is they not used it against these certain populations. In this Circuit there is an established law
on the issue. Ms. Capobianco volunteered to provide the citation for the case law. As a general matter, she urged the Subcommittee to be explicit in these exemptions. She stated this would not be the first time. The State of Florida has exemptions and they exempt whole units of people from the use of chemical agents and she urged everyone to consider that in regards to this standard.
Motion: Lt. Owens stated that based on the commentary, two issues are in front of us and the second is an opportunity to examine language of the exempt populations of the future. He asked for a standard revision for the exempt populations for the future on the discussions for this particular paragraph. No motion to change the language.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 4.02 - During the admission and booking process the inmate shall be examined for contraband, medically screened, and permitted to bathe unless the inmate is belligerent and unruly to the point of being unmanageable. In case the inmate cannot be controlled on entry he/she will be allowed to bathe as soon as the inmate's manageability permits. A body cavity search shall only be conducted by licensed medical personnel. Birth control devices or other foreign matter shall be removed by the inmate or licensed medical personnel. A written report documenting such action shall be submitted to the Officer-in-Charge or designee.
Proposal: During the admission and booking process the inmate shall be examined for contraband, medically screened, and permitted to bathe unless the inmate is belligerent and unruly to the point of being unmanageable. In case the inmate cannot be controlled on entry he/she will be allowed to bathe as soon as the inmate's manageability permits. A body cavity search shall not be conducted on juveniles and only be conducted on adults by licensed medical personnel. Birth control devices or other foreign matter shall be removed by the inmate or licensed medical personnel. A written report documenting such action shall be submitted to the Officer-in-Charge or designee.
Rationale: The proposal recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that facilities operate in a constitutional manner. If the facility has a reasonable suspicion a juvenile is attempting to introduce contraband into living areas, a strip search and close monitoring of the juvenile is sufficient to ensure its interception.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated to strike the rational for the revision. There was a typo there. Mr. Utter stated this was to exempt kids from body cavity searches just because of the special consideration that kids have about their body image, teenagers in particular. It’s not necessary.
Commander McGowan asked the Subcommittee if any one of them had done a body cavity search, to which they stated they had not. Commander McGowan stated he has never seen one compelled. Circumstances would have to be rather overtly obvious to order one.
Lt. Owens stated they are done periodically, but the policy at the Marion County Sheriff’s Office says medical personnel conduct the search, which he believes it is State-wide.
Commander McGowan stated that he believed that Mr. Utter was trying to not have body cavity searches done on juveniles at all.
Sgt. Delaere stated that would depend on contraband issues and other factors.
Commander McGowan stated the rule, along with the case law would have to be that medical personnel have to do it. The evidence for one would have to be rather plain.
Mr. Bernard Johns stated that he is against automatically outlawing any body cavity searches because he can present anecdotal evidence to support it. Mr. Johns stated he is against doing body cavity searches for no articulable reason. He stated he can think of reasons for a body cavity search and fully agree that it should be medical personnel and not staff. He also stated that he can think of instances during road patrol where a lady was a member of a biker gang and hid a weapon in her person and it was found in the jail. It is not unreasonable to think that although rare, it can happen. If there is an articulable reason it should be done.
Lt. Owens stated he would like to point out the paragraph beings “admission and booking process”. Our policy locally is that if you can articulate the likelihood of contraband and the necessity of a body cavity search, it can occur at any time during their stay whether it’s in booking, in a pod, or at another point prior to their release. He stated he hoped there was no confusion because it could occur at any given time.
Major Allen stated we have heard the term “best practices”, so with this standard, he researched the literature and what it says on some the accreditations that we are mandated to have, but it is very wise to have if you run a jail. For instance, the Florida Corrections Accreditation Commission states that a written directive is required before body cavity searches are conducted only by licensed medical personnel and complete written reports are submitted to the jail administrator. As you know if you read Chapter 20, we either have to be FCAC or ACA accredited. The other standard that he found with specificity to juveniles was NCCHC, which is the medical standard for jails. This one is specific to juveniles. It states that health staff is prohibited from the collection of forensic evidence except when in conducting body cavity searches and blood or urine testing for drugs or alcohol or other drugs when done for other medical purposes by a physician’s order. DJJ has their own policy that states a body cavity search consists of the examination of the youth’s body cavities. Body cavity searches shall be approved by the superintendent or designee only when it is suspected that a youth has concealed contraband in a body cavity. Trained medical personnel, in an emergency room setting must conduct any body cavity search. Detention staff is not authorized to conduct a body cavity search of youth other than a visual search of their oral cavity.
Major Allen stated they recently bought a very expensive machine in their county which allows one to walk through it and shows the observer anything that one has on their person or in their body. If we see something in someone, through the use of that machine, there would be probable cause to have a body cavity search conducted which he whole-heartedly agrees he would not do, nor would any other correctional staff do. It would strictly be done by medical personnel and in his agency, they would send the inmate to the hospital and an emergency room would do that. Major Allen stated he offered these standards to look at in addition to what has previously been offered.
Commander McGowan stated that technology is helping out Polk County and Collier County has one as well, it is called a Density Scanner. It doesn’t show what the outside of a person looks like; you can’t tell a boy from a girl but you could see something on the inside. The rules in place in Collier for many years are they don’t do a body cavity search unless there is ample evidence. The officers would not do one. Commander McGowan stated he is not inclined to change the wording on it and he would not have a problem of breaking this into two standards in a subsequent session. One to take care of the bathing and one to address the body cavity search.
Lt Owens asked for further comments.
Motion: No motion to change.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 4.03 - Inmates shall be searched by certified staff when being admitted to a detention facility. The provision of 901.211, Florida State Statutes, shall apply to such searches.
a) Inmate being admitted to the facility for traffic, regulatory or non-violent misdemeanor offenses will be strip searched only for cause. A strip search will be conducted by a person of the same gender as the arrested person and in such a manner that the search cannot be seen by persons not physically conducting or observing the search. Any person observing shall be of the same gender as the arrested person.
b) A body cavity search shall only be made for cause and shall be conducted by licensed medical personnel.
Proposal: Inmates shall be searched by certified staff when being admitted to a detention facility. The provision of 901.211, Florida State Statutes, shall apply to such searches.
(a) Inmate being admitted to the facility for traffic, regulatory or non-violent misdemeanor offenses will be strip searched only for cause. A strip search will be conducted by a person of the same gender as the arrested person and in such a manner that the search cannot be seen by persons not physically conducting or observing the search. Any person observing shall be of the same gender as the arrested person.
(b) A body cavity search shall only be made for cause and shall be conducted by licensed medical personnel. Body cavity searches of juveniles are prohibited.
Rationale: The proposal recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that facilities operate in a constitutional manner. If the facility has a reasonable suspicion a juvenile is attempting to introduce contraband into living areas, a strip search and close monitoring of the juvenile is sufficient to ensure its interception.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated this just adds juveniles to the category of people strip searched only for cause. The body cavity language is identical to the last one; a prohibition on it.
Lt. Owens asked Mr. Utter if he feels confident that the discussion on the previous submission would apply to this standard as well.
Mr. Utter stated the Subcommittee may just want to add juveniles to the strip-search cavity. There are low-levels people coming in to the jail and it’s being said that you will only strip-search for cause, and he would suggest adding the juveniles to that.
Lt. Parisi stated it was the same thing.
Commander McGowan stated that he understood that Mr. Utter was asking for a category, but under the rule, even though the 11th Circuit states that they can strip-search anyone who comes into the facility, they do not.
Mr. Utter stated the Supreme Court said it.
Commander McGowan agreed. The fact is we still do not. If you come into the facility and it’s a minor charge or the person is in and out, we don’t go through the trouble of a strip search; you’re leaving. In Collier County, if a person is taken to a secure holding or housing, a strip search would be conducted or they would be run through the scanner. Someone who is being processed and taken right back out again, they would not be strip searched unless they have come in on a weapons or drug charge. They do not just arbitrarily anyone who walks in the back door. Commander McGowan stated he was very confident that the rule as written takes care of that. Juveniles, if they would come in with a drug charge, they may be stripped, because if they have anything on them, they may take them. There is nothing worse than having someone convulse in the holding cell or in your booking room because they have ingested drugs. With Collier, we observe a person coming in, adult or juvenile, from the time they get to the door, to observe if there is anything going on. If someone is all of sudden crashing, he is going to get medical help and he is going to be strip searched to see if something else is on him. He did not believe that juveniles needed to be added to this section, he believed it was already implied.
Mr. Utter stated that all the reasons he gave are cause, and right now the regulations just says that the only inmates that are strip searched for cause are the low-level inmates. This is the adult section of the code. When he read the policies, there is nothing in Chapter 20 that says juveniles are treated different than adults on this issue, so he was just adding juveniles.
Commander McGowan stated juveniles would not be treated any differently. If there is cause, they can be strip searched. If there is cause, they can do a body cavity search, but that was already addressed. It has to be articulated what the cause is, it cannot be arbitrary. That is not how it’s done. If someone was caught with 15 oxycodone pills; whether juvenile or adult, they will be strip searched because if they have any more on them, they could take them. Low-level inmates coming in, say a traffic offense, unless there is some type of circumstance that goes with it, they are not going to be strip searched.
Mr. Utter stated that the statute or the regulation as written, proposes two separate classes of inmates. There are inmates for low-level things who are coming in and can only be strip searched for cause and there is everyone else who are strip searched for cause or no cause. He is just suggesting that the juveniles are thrown into the first group who are strip searched only for cause.
Mr. Johns stated he understands what Mr. Utter is saying, which is that all juveniles have to be strip searched for cause regardless of the reason they are coming into the facility whether it be felony or misdemeanor. He stated he made the argument last year that he did not feel the facility should be any less secure whether it’s a felony inmate or juveniles going into secure housing for any period of time.
Mr. Lawson stated it was his understanding that DJJ’s regulations stipulate that all juveniles be strip-searched upon intake.
Ms. White asked if Major Allen still had the DJJ regulations. Major Allen responded that the DJJ regulations state that all juveniles will be strip-searched.
Mr. Johns stated that all DJJ youth are strip searched regardless of the reason why they are being admitted to a DJJ detention center. Lt. Owens asked if that applied to pre-adjudicated youth, and Mr. Johns replied that it applied to them also. Mr. Johns stated when they come through the door, they are strip searched.
Commander McGowan noted that the standard they have here is much less strict than DJJ’s.
Ms. White stated that this one is basically talking about traffic offenses for the most part, and non-violent offenses. In case a juvenile is brought into an adult facility, this was written for adult facilities, for traffic and regulatory, and non-violent misdemeanors, which is most of the time is traffic crashes, that they would not be strip searched without cause.
Major Allen stated the chapter he has is youth management and does not include intake, but he is familiar with the intake standards, but cannot directly quote it. However, it does say in the standard that all youth must be strip searched upon intake. He would like to add that even though we don’t want to want to differentiate between direct file and pre-adjudicated juveniles, no matter what your facility is, you’re going to treat those individuals different. For instance most pre-adjudicated juveniles, the intake is conducted at the juvenile assessment center which is run by the DJJ. If they are direct file, they will go through the regular booking process, which we send the adult inmates through. The DJJ decides to do their intake and screening, we could change it for those counties that do that, it would really not change the process for those who don’t do that. We do not do the intake for the pre-adjudicated juveniles that are done by the juvenile assessment center.
Lt. Owens stated that if a change were made it would force Polk County to change their policy, would that be correct. Major Allen stated it could make some changes in their policy. He stated that Chapter 20 is very specific in what they have to abide by.
Lt. Owens stated that if the intake center did not do what they did, that would force you to change the policy, not the subcommittee. The fact that it’s done prior to coming to your campus is why you don’t do it. Major Allen stated that upon intake, they take their clothing. He stated that Florida law speaks to this very well. Not unlike Collier, they do the same thing. If it involves a weapon, or a violent offense, then they would be strip searched. Major Allen stated they do not care if it’s juvenile or adult, the law is the law and they are going to follow it.
Ms. White stated she would concur with that as Escambia County does the same thing and sees no reason to change.
Lt. Owens asked if there were any motions to change language. Hearing none, there is no change.
Motion: No motion.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – Wanda White
Standard: 3.02 - 3.02) No employee shall:
(a) Report to duty or exercise supervision or control over inmates while under the influence of an intoxicant;
(b) Report for duty or exercise supervision or control over inmates while under the influence of a narcotic, barbiturate, hallucinogenic drug or central nervous stimulant. Exception will be made only when such medication has been prescribed and is taken under a doctor's care and if it does not impair the employee from carrying out their assigned duties;
(c) Use profane or abusive language in supervising inmates;
(d) Abuse an inmate in any manner;
(e) Trade, barter with, or accept anything of value from an inmate, his/her friends or family except as provided in the policy and procedure directive for the facility;
(f) Introduce into or remove from the property of any detention facility any article without authorization from the Officer-in-Charge or designee;
(g) Recommend or furnish any legal advice or any other advice concerning the selection of a specified lawyer or bonds person for an inmate. If requested by an inmate, a directory or list of names of all area lawyers or bonds persons should be made available for the inmate's use;
(h) Carry any firearm, ammunition, chemical agents, electronic device, blackjack or any other equipment or device into the secure area of the detention facility except in emergencies and as authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. However, the chemical agent oleoresin capsicum and electronic weapons may be carried inside the detention facility by certified law enforcement or correctional officers trained in its use, if authorized by the policy and procedure of the facility;
(i) Have keys to any area of a detention facility, which have not been issued to him/her by an authorized employee;
(j) Employees will make a complete written report to the Officer-in-Charge or designee on all unusual incidents that occur during a tour of duty. Examples:
(1) Assault/battery by an inmate on an employee or another inmate;
(2) Any occasion in which an employee discharges firearms or uses chemical agents;
(3) Attempts by inmates to bribe an employee;
(4) Escapes or attempted escapes;
(5) Death, serious illness or serious injury;
(6) Strikes, riots, and other disturbances.
Proposal: 3.02) No employee shall:
(a) Report to duty or exercise supervision or control over inmates while under the influence of an intoxicant;
(b) Report for duty or exercise supervision or control over inmates while under the influence of a narcotic, barbiturate, hallucinogenic drug or central nervous stimulant. Exception will be made only when such medication has been prescribed and is taken under a doctor's care and if it does not impair the employee from carrying out their assigned duties;
(c) Use profane or abusive language in supervising inmates;
(d) Abuse an inmate in any manner;
(e) Trade, barter with, or accept anything of value from an inmate, his/her friends or family except as provided in the policy and procedure directive for the facility;
(f) Introduce into or remove from the property of any detention facility any article without authorization from the Officer-in-Charge or designee;
(g) Recommend or furnish any legal advice or any other advice concerning the selection of a specified lawyer or bonds person for an inmate. If requested by an inmate, a directory or list of names of all area lawyers or bonds persons should be made available for the inmate's use;
(h) Carry any firearm, ammunition, chemical agents, electronic device, blackjack or any other equipment or device into the secure area of the detention facility except in emergencies and as authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. However, the chemical agent oleoresin capsicum and electronic weapons may be carried inside the detention facility by certified law enforcement or correctional officers trained in its use, if authorized by the policy and procedure of the facility;
(i) Have keys to any area of a detention facility, which have not been issued to him/her by an authorized employee;
(3.06) Employees will make a complete written report to the Officer-in-Charge or designee on all unusual incidents that occur during a tour of duty. Examples:
(a) Assault/battery by an inmate on an employee or another inmate;
(b) Any occasion in which an employee discharges firearms or uses chemical agents;
(c) Attempts by inmates to bribe an employee;
(d) Escapes or attempted escapes;
(e) Death, serious illness or serious injury;
(f) Strikes, riots, and other disturbances.
Rationale: To maintain correct outline format. Section 3.02 begins with No employee shall and lists actions (a -i) employees cannot do. Paragraph (j) should be a separate paragraph since it requires employees to take a specific action. I recommend renumbering it 3.06 so the other paragraphs do not have to be renumbered.
Discussion: Lt. Owens stated that was Ms. White’s submission and she was stuck in traffic, but on her way back to the meeting. The decision was made to skip this until she was present. They skipped to 3.03. After discussion of several other standards, Lt. Owens asked Ms. White to present this revision.
Ms. White did not want Lt. Owens to read all of it, but that basically, what 3.02 is a list of things that an employee shall not do, however, the last item is something that an employee will do. It is not correctly worded to be in this standard. She stated that all she is requesting is to remove the last item, which says that employees will make a complete written report to the officer in charge or their designee on all occurrences that occurred during the tour of duty with examples listed, that it be moved to a separate paragraph number: 3.06.
Lt. Owens asked if 3.06 does not exist yet, which is why she chose it and Ms. White stated it does not.
Motion: Lt. Parisi motioned to approve, which was seconded by Sgt. Delaere. All in favor. Motion passed by the majority.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – Wanda White
Standard: 6.05) Menus - The Recommended Dietary Allowances of the National Research Council - National Academy of Sciences shall serve as the standard for the preparation of menus and the evaluation of menus served. Menus shall be planned for not less than 28 days in advance and certified by a nutritionist.
(a) If a nutritionist is not employed by the detention facility, nutritional advice will be obtained from a qualified employee or person from outside sources such as county health services, local schools, hospitals or a professional dietary service.
(b) Modified diets shall be prepared for inmates when ordered by a physician or designee.
(c) Records of meals served shall be kept for one (1) year.
(d) Food may not be withheld, nor the standard menu varied, as a disciplinary sanction or as a reward for an individual inmate.
(e) Special management meals meeting the minimum daily nutrition requirement as approved by a physician or other qualified medical staff member may be substituted for regular meals in the event an inmate throws or otherwise misuses food, beverage, food utensils, food trays, etc. This includes utilizing trays, cups, or utensils to throw human waste or other substances.
(f) Inmates shall receive additional caloric intake in excess of regular meals if approved by a nutritionist or similarly qualified person, as being reasonably necessary because of work or labor being performed by the inmate. Religious diets may be provided to inmates if required by their faith. (SEE APPENDIX “C” CONCERNING YOUTH DETENTION FACILITIES).
Proposal: (6.05) Menus - The Recommended Dietary Allowances of the National Research Council - National Academy of Sciences shall serve as the standard for the preparation of menus and the evaluation of menus served. Menus shall be planned for not less than 28 days in advance and certified by a nutritionist or dietitian licensed by the State of Florida.
(a) If a nutritionist/dietitian is not employed by the detention facility, nutritional advice will be obtained from a licensed nutritionist or dietitian from outside sources such as county health services, local schools, hospitals or a professional dietary service.
(b) Modified diets shall be prepared for inmates when ordered by a physician or designee.
(c) Records of meals served shall be kept for one (1) year.
(d) Food may not be withheld, nor the standard menu varied, as a disciplinary sanction or as a reward for an individual inmate.
(e) Special management meals meeting the minimum daily nutrition requirement as approved by a physician or other qualified medical staff member may be substituted for regular meals in the event an inmate throws or otherwise misuses food, beverage, food utensils, food trays, etc. This includes utilizing trays, cups, or utensils to throw human waste or other substances.
(f) Inmates shall receive additional caloric intake in excess of regular meals if approved by a licensed nutitrionist or dietitian, as being reasonably necessary because of work or labor being performed by the inmate. Religious diets may be provided to inmates if required by their faith. (SEE APPENDIX “C” CONCERNING YOUTH DETENTION FACILITIES)
Rationale: Section 468.504, Florida Statutes, requires that nutritionists or dietitians are licensed. License required.—No person may engage for remuneration in dietetics and nutrition practice or nutrition counseling or hold himself or herself out as a practitioner of dietetics and nutrition practice or nutrition counseling unless the person is licensed in accordance with the provisions of this part.
Discussion: Ms. White stated she had several inquiries about this and the difference in what a nutritionist is and a dietician. If one searches the internet, they will find all sorts of things. Basically, it comes down to the level of training. However, there is a State Statute that says if you are going to represent yourself as a dietician or nutritionist they have to be licensed in the State of Florida. Ms. White stated she is recommending that we clarify this so if someone is going to approve diets for jails they be licensed in the State of Florida. There are several places which the wording needs to be changed. In the main sentence that it be certified by a dietician or nutritionist licensed in the State and then in paragraph a) if the dietician or nutritionist is not employed by the facility they seek advice from “licensed” nutritionist from outside sources. Again in paragraph f: it says that inmates shall receive additional caloric intake in excess of regular meals if approved by a licensed dietician or nutritionist. Ms. White stated it just ties everything together.
Lt. Owens stated that at the bottom of paragraph F, it says SEE APPENDIX “C” CONCERNING YOUTH DETENTION FACILITIES). Ms. White stated she did not look at that. Lt. Owens stated that he does not disagree with the point, he never sees in 6.05, anything that directs this rule to stand on pre-adjudicated youth operations also. Lt. Owens stated that throughout, the only word he sees is inmate, he does not see the word “youth” in the standard. Lt. Owens asked if the Subcommittee agreed to this standard, and he appreciates the Statute and the weight that it carries in this discussion, where can “youth detention facility” be added in 6.05.
Ms. White stated that at her facility they have different meals for juveniles, however, it basically is just the addition of snacks to the menu. They already address this with the pre-adjudicated juveniles, through the approval of a diet by the dietician and would not weaken Chapter 20 at all.
Dr. Hough stated that DJJ requires their menus to signed by a registered dietician.
Commander McGowan made a motion to change the standard to say “licensed” throughout. Lt. Parisi seconded.
Commander McGowan stated that he did not want it to say “licensed in the State of Florida” because if the facility has a food service like Collier County does, a licensed dietician is still licensed. They should have a license in whatever State they are practicing.
Lt. Owens stated so long as it does not conflict with Statute 468. The Subcommittee stated it just says “licensed”. Ms. White stated if they practice in the State of Florida, they have to be licensed in the State of Florida and if they are approving menus, they should be.
Lt. Owens stated to amend the motion and leave it as it is, and add subparagraph G,
“Facilities shall have credentialed nutritionists or dieticians as stated in F.S.S. 468.504.”
Motion: Lt. Owens motioned to approved, seconded by Ms. White. Motion passes unanimously.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: Appendix C- Youth Detention Facilities, 9.04 (m)- Juveniles permitted visitation with family at least three (3) times a week.
Proposal: Juveniles shall be permitted contact visitation with family members, including but not limited to parents, siblings, grandparents who are not guardians, and any legal guardians, at least three (3) times a week. Non-contact visitation may be provided only when facility staff documents a substantiated security risk.
Rationale: The proposal recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that children are able to maintain regular contact with their families.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated it just adds to the fact that juveniles shall be permitted contact visitation. When he means contact, he knows that some facilities have face to face contact and families are not allowed to touch the whole time. This just gets to point that the juveniles need to see and communicate with their families, not separated by mesh and glass. It’s the humane thing to do and the right thing to do.
Lt. Owens asked for subcommittee discussion. Lt. Parisi stated he knows this has come up in the past with a lot of agencies going to video visitation and are not even equipped to do contact visitation anymore. There is off-site visitation as well, they are not even in the same building.
Major Allen stated he could not hear what the Subcommittee was saying, and could they speak more into the microphone.
Lt. Parisi stated they have redone their facility and there are no contact visits anywhere. Some places have off-site visitation and some get on a bus and are transported. They are actually pushing now where visitation can be done from a home computer. The technology has come along and contact visits are probably on the way out.
Major Allen stated that he believed that is what was said. He said that was the comment he was going to make. As Lt. Parisi said, agencies have gone from allowing the public to come into their facilities to providing the services from the outside. There is a very good security and control reason for why we do that. It has nothing to do with not wanting a juvenile or an inmate to have contact with their people. The problem is that some of those people cannot be trusted to not come in and not try to trade things they shouldn’t have. Major Allen stated that when he first started at his agency many years ago, they allowed visitation in a large room like the one they are in now. They allowed people to sit in seats and you would be amazed at the amount of contraband they would pull out; drugs and other stuff that people would bring in. What they found was having them have the no contact type visitation decreased the amount of contraband and it provides security. When an inmate gets ahold of something and takes it and they have absolutely no idea what they have taken, but now they deal with an inmate being in a comatose state after visitation if you run a jail for a while, that has probably been experienced. Major Allen advised that although he would state that in an ideal world where everyone could be trusted and that the parents or other visitors would not try to bring things to inmates, it would be great. However, we live in the real world and these things happen so precautions have to be taken to prevent that.
He would also like to add that with the pre-adjudicated youth, the length of stay is anywhere from 10-14 days. There has been testimony about people changing over time when people are incarcerated for long lengths of time, but these are very short lengths of time they have a pre-adjudicated youth. If it is a direct filed youth, one could ask any jail which was direct file youth that they would love to get them through the system and where they need to go, whether to a youth facility, the State Prison system, or wherever. They just have a transient-type population and they do not incarcerate them for a long length of time. If they were looking at a prison which holds people for years, this might be an issue, but as a 10-14 day incarceration period, the juveniles have visitation three times a week and they get to see their people six or seven times while they are there if they come every time they are offered the opportunity. Major Allen believes that is enough contact when you weigh in the safety and security factors.
Lt. Owens asked for Subcommittee discussion. Commander McGowan stated that he would have to agree with the majority here. In Collier County, they removed all of the contact visitation facilities. Everything they do now is video and they are planning to go to Skype.
Lt. Owens stated he would disagree, and this goes back to a comment that Mr. Dennard made a few months back. We need to make sure we don’t box in some of the smaller agencies around the State. The fact is, to be quite honest they don’t have the budgets to provide that type of technology. Lt. Owens stated he was afraid to change this. He stated he is with the kids on this one, that they need the contact with their families; even if it is only the 14 day issue. If we make a change or don’t make a change, how will that affect the smaller agencies and will it negatively affect those agencies that want to go above and beyond. Lt. Owens asked Lt. Savarese if we in Marion County still allow face to face visits with the family, and Lt. Savarese stated that we do. Lt. Owens stated we intentionally market that in our facilities so the parents and guardians can show up three times a week to meet with their children.
Sgt. Delaere stated that the standard states that they will be permitted visitation with their family at least three times a week, it doesn’t say how you have to do it. Whether it’s video visitation, or glass, or a telephone, it doesn’t restrict what that county can do. If it’s a smaller county and they want to have it, it just states we will provide it three times a week. No one has a problem with that, it’s the way that it needs to be done.
Capt. Ross stated that those who have to video visitation do not have the space or the staff to accommodate that process. He believes they are putting the burden on the agency’s physical plant and staffing wise. There is no restriction that says these smaller agencies can’t do the contact visitation, if they choose to. He feels it’s an unnecessary burden on the agency.
Commander McGowan stated he agreed, and the next thing they are going to have to discuss is Chapter 18 and get that out of the way because some of these things here would be a lot more palatable if they were served to pre-adjudicated youth and not the entire population.
Lt. Owens asked if there were any further discussion. Hearing none, there was no discussion to change the language.
Motion: No motions to change the language.
Lt. Owens stated that the direction from the Subcommittee has been to move directly to Chapter 18, Housing of Juveniles. Lt. Owens requested of Mr. Utter to go ahead with Chapter 18 and we will skip along to that and hear the reasoning the Subcommittee wants to make.
Commander McGowan asked Mr. Utter if he conceded this and Mr. Utter replied he would if we would ban mace (laughs). Commander McGowan says we don’t carry mace, and Mr. Utter says, then pepper-spray (laughs).
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: Chapter 18- Housing of Juveniles
Proposal: Any facility that houses juveniles, whether charged as juveniles or adults, shall apply the juvenile standards contained in all chapters of these standards, including Chapter 20, to all juveniles in the facility.
Rationale: Recent data analysis by my office of the approximately 3200 youth transferred to the adult system every year showed that 44 percent eventually do not end up in the adult system due to their cases being dismissed, acquittals, and Florida’s blended sentencing laws. FMJS should treat every person under the age of 21 equally, applying all of the juvenile justice specific standards to all youth, whether transferred to the adult system pending trial or pending adjudication and disposition in the juvenile system. Given what we know about the adolescent brain development and the differences between juveniles and adults, keeping as many youth in conditions designed for the juvenile system increases the opportunity for success and enhances public safety.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated this is not an all of nothing proposition; that here are 25 things, here adopt them. Mr. Utter says they are just finding different programming available for direct file kids around the State. Ocala, when you talk to the kids, they say please stop them from giving us so much school. You go to Polk and the kids are like no, we didn’t go to rec today, and they only had an hour of school. Jacksonville has a super robust school program for kids, both direct file and juvenile. Mr. Utter stated that his main point is the majority of these kids are not going to DOC. A lot of them are going to probation or parole and a lot of them are going to spend time in the Juvenile Justice system. So just in the terms of reducing the recidivism, it might by Statute, but whatever programming you are giving the children, you should give them to direct file. Mr. Utter stated that Major Allen’s point about pepper-spray, notwithstanding, what they are advocating is a higher standard for all kids. This really gets to the programming issue. If you have counseling, recreation and school for the Juvenile Justice, it’s safer to do if for the kids in the adult system. In the long run, this will make for a safer community, because when the kids get out, as Major Allen stated, they can spend a long time waiting for their trial. If there are there six, nine, or 12 months that’s six, nine or twelve months of school they could be getting as a captive audience.
Commander McGowan speaking of a captive audience, there is a State Statute that mandates that education is provided to the juveniles. Mr. Utter asked why is it so inconsistent around the State. Commander McGowan stated that the School Board is responsible for education. Commander McGowan also stated they notify the School Board that the juveniles are in jail, but it’s up to the school board to take action. He said he was lucky because the School Board is in his building and there is a GED program and they get education. It’s up to the school to deliver to the need. He can present the individual and notify the School Board they are there per Statute, but they have to supply the teacher to come in and do it.
Mr. Utter stated they know that with DJJ, there are different ways they handle education for those children and they know that Seminole, Marion, and Polk have different arrangements made for the JJ kids. Mr. Utter advised that the focus is on education, but the same goes for recreation. Making sure that the juveniles on an adult charge get out for large muscle exercise would be helpful. Mr. Utter stated that he wished that everywhere was like Collier.
Commander McGowan stated that although not everywhere was like Collier, not everywhere was like the worst nightmare. Each of the individual agencies do the very best they can with what they have and they would never tell you to stop swinging. We as a group, with these, do the very best we possibly can, when you’re talking about youth, like you’re talking about in a different program, we do warehouse quite a few people. If we get them early, get them educated and get all the support the youth need, they like to do the same thing. The people that are in the Collier facility right now are both murderers. We can’t do a lot with them for social functions; it can’t be done because security won’t allow it. The adult side of it must be maintained. If it were something else, altogether, one has to do something pretty egregious to get direct filed. Commander McGowan stated he is comfortable leaving this under the adults.
Mr. Utter stated he believed there were two points. One is when you look at the data; over 60 percent of the children pushed into the adult system are pushed in for non-violent offenses. That may be the case in Collier, because the way you (McGowan) talks about it, it’s its own slice of heaven. However, there are a lot of kids in the system who are there for non-violent offenses. Are they chronic? Are they habitual? There’s a good chance but, Florida does not save direct file for the worst of the worst. The second thing is that the purpose of this subcommittee is to set standards for the whole State and he has heard a couple of times the statement that the smaller counties can’t afford to do certain things or they have to be accounted for and what they can afford. The kids did not ask to be transferred to the County system. There was one Sheriff, one Senator, one law. They were in a State System which had really consistent standards. Were they the best in the world, absolutely not, but they were consistent. DJJ is not perfect, but this notion that some counties can provide less for kids than other counties that have more resources is not fair to the kids, they did not ask for this.
Lt. Owens wanted to add to Mr. Utter’s comment. He stated it was a majority of Senators and the majority of House Representatives, other Sheriffs and we were actually doing it before the Senate Bill passed. To point out that the County or any individual County was wrong, I’ll take you back to day one of this issue. It had to do in a large part with a financial issue brought on by the down-turn in the economy and the litigation the State is facing now by overcharging Counties by millions. So, the tax-payers deserve the battle that the Sheriffs’ proposed with the State. He does not believe it’s right to stand near the podium and litigate an individual Sheriff for the results. The Governor signed it also. It is what it is and we are faced with a law we have to abide by if we choose to operate under these conditions. Lt. Owens stated he wanted to clarify that. Is it litigation, yes. There are some special interest groups who are not happy with some of the rules that have been made since this Subcommittee has been asked to take this over. He will just make the case that we recognize this. He is a little bit out of sorts when that comes up, because everyone here has made great strides and we’re not going backwards.
Mr. Utter stated that he appreciates that and because there is a record being made, he will clarify. When Marion County took it over they did it under the Statute prior to SB 2112, and they were happy to work with DJJ and DJJ accredit the facility before SB 2112 passed. The law allowed for counties to take it over, they just had to follow protections and DJJ standards. When Marion County did that, Marion did not have a problem with doing that. This bill was passed the House and Senate and did not have a single substantive hearing in the House or Senate. It received one single hearing before the Senate Budget Committee, which was chaired by the sponsor of the bill. This is 40 years of policy that was changed without a whole lot of discussion. Advocates have said that before and because there is a record, he just wanted to make that point.
Lt. Owens stated that back to Commander McGowan’s statement, it had nothing to do with direct-filed juveniles, either. That’s the strongest argument on Chapter 18.
Major Allen stated that although he has nothing to do with this standard, if people are going to come up to the podium and talk about Polk County then he’s going to talk about Polk. The direct-file youth that they have at the Center County Jail used to be housed at the South County Jail. Unbeknownst to us, and maybe they were and we didn’t see them. Southern Poverty Law had nothing to do with those youth until we decided to move them to the Central County Jail and afford them the same opportunities that we do the pre-adjudicated youth. No one told Polk County to do that. They did that because it was a good idea because as Commander McGowan has said, the School Board is responsible for their education. Polk County has a school in their jail; it’s called the Central School Jail. They provide educational services so whether one population goes to school, or another population goes to school differently, really has nothing to do with Polk County, it has to do with the Polk County School Board. Major Allen stated the Subcommittee may be interested in knowing that they have fought to have the same opportunity that pre-adjudicated youth get to go to year-round school because direct-file youth do not get the opportunity right now. Polk County School Board, through the Sheriff’s Office pushing that issue is trying to get them the education that they would get year-round, so not just off in the summer like a normal school. Polk County tries to give them as much opportunity as they can, but unfortunately, this populations sometimes presents problems where they fight, they can’t get along and where security cannot give them the opportunity that others would get so there is a distinction in that manner, maybe not with this standard, but if you try to supervise that population, there is a difference. They tried to put them together, although they don’t live together, we try to give them the same opportunities that each has.
Mr. Dennard wanted to address some of the issues that Mr. Utter brought up about making distinctions between the three counties that run the facility. He stated that he had an opportunity to go to all three: Marion, Polk, and Seminole. Mr. Dennard stated that what Seminole County inherited from DJJ took three-quarters of a million dollars to bring up to standards that we would occupy their facility. He did the pre-inspection for Marion, even though DJJ certified their facility. Under our rules, we still had to go do a pre-inspection, to make sure it met these minimum standards. When we talk about those smaller counties, it doesn’t mean the smaller counties aren’t trying to meet these minimum standards, they are. They are in a position where they don’t have the funds to do video visitation, they are still doing the visitation the old way. Mr. Dennard stated we should not be getting off base with this because we have the option under the statute to run these pre-adjudicated facilities that we don’t know what we’re doing. We have always housed post-adjudicated kids in jail. Mr. Dennard stated that he has been doing this for almost 30 years and they have always had juveniles in jails and we have never had this issue come up under 33-8 when we were run by the State or when FMJS came to be. No advocacy group made any protest about post-adjudicated youth; even though they are tried as adults, they are still treated as youthful offenders and juveniles. They have always done that and that has not changed.
Mr. Paul Lawson, Chief Correctional Officer of the Okaloosa County Department of Corrections. He stated he would presume that the Jail Standards Subcommittee would not want a standard more stringent than statute and would suggest that we reference Florida State Statute 951 before we make a change like this. Mr. Lawson stated he would be opposed to this change.
Ms. White stated that she also is opposed to this change. Most of the jails in the State of Florida are not going to be operating youth detention centers at this point in time, so holding them accountable for the standards that were developed specifically for youth detention standards is not feasible. Ms. White stated that she knows what her Sheriff would want.
Lt. Owens asked if there were any further discussion to adapt or change to this philosophy.
Motion: No motion and no change.
Lt. Owens asked if Mr. Paul Liles was here. He has submitted the next submission, which is 9.08 and he is with Disability Rights Florida. Lt. Owens asked if anyone was here at the meeting representing Disability Rights Florida. Lt. Owens stated they would look at the standard and see if they can determine the change Mr. Liles is requesting.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – Paul Liles
Standard: 9.08- Each inmate shall have reasonable access to a telephone at reasonable times.
Proposal: 9.08) Each inmate shall have private access to a telephone at reasonable times.
(a) Inmates shall have the right to contact and to receive communicationfrom their attorneys at a reasonable time.
(b) If an inmate's right to communicate is restricted, written notice of such restriction and the duration of the restriction shall be served on the inmate and his or her legal guardian.
(1) The restriction of an inmate's right to communicate shall be reviewed at least every seven (7) days.
(c) Each inmate shall have ready access to a telephone in order to report an alleged abuse at any time.
(1) Jail staff shall orally and in writing inform each inmate of the procedure for reporting abuse and shall present the information in a language the inmate understands.
(2) A written copy of that procedure, including the telephone number of the central abuse hotline and Disability Rights Florida and reporting forms, shall be posted in plain view.
i) Posters delineating rights of inmates with disabilities, including the telephone numbers for the Florida Abuse Hotline and Disability Rights Florida shall be legible, a minimum of 14 point font size, and shall be posted immediately next to telephones which are available for inmates and staff.
Rationale: The proposal recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that children are able to maintain regular contact with their families. This is to be consistent with F.S.S. 394, 916 and Rule 65E-5.140(3) of the Florida Administrative Code.
Discussion: Mr. Bernard Johns stated that he had no issue with this revision except for the word private. He stated that juveniles have no more expectation to a right of privacy in the facility than an adult. His facility is set up like the adult facility where it is recorded automatically unless it is an attorney. We don’t listen to them unless we have a reason to go back and pull the tape. Mr. Johns stated they do not have the legal right to sit there and talk to just anyone on the other end of the phone, which is what they are saying.
Lt. Owens stated they got into a juvenile gear over several of these revisions he was not certain this was focused on juveniles specifically.
Mr. Johns stated this does not refer to juveniles.
Commander McGowan stated this is under 9.08 and if it were resubmitted under Chapter 20, which takes all inmates out of it and the word private out of it, it would be worthy of discussion. As it stands right now, juvenile, adult, this is the wrong place to have it which is why he asked for Chapter 18 to be dealt with. These revisions which are for the good of the youth have to be in the proper spot and that is Chapter 20.
Lt. Owens asked if anyone in the audience knows if Mr. Liles was planning to attend tomorrow. He has been very helpful with Chapter 20, but we may have to ask him to resubmit.
Motion: Lt. Owens made a motion to table this. He felt there is value in the submission; however, there is confusion about where to place it. If someone could produce Mr. Liles, that would be great. The motion to table was seconded by Ms. White.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 11.09 - No person will enter a detention facility with firearms, ammunition, chemical agents, or electronic weapons, except in emergencies, and then only when authorized by the Officer-in- Charge or designee.
a) The chemical agent oleoresin capsicum or other such suitable agents are authorized to be carried inside the detention facility by certified correctional officers trained in its use, only if authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. A weapons depository will be established near the secure entrance of the facility. Under no circumstances will weapons or ammunition be placed in a desk drawer or other container which has common access.
b) Electronic Weapons are authorized to be used inside the detention facility by certified officers trained in its use, only if authorized by the policy and procedure directives of the facility
Proposal: No person will enter a detention facility with firearms, ammunition, chemical agents, or electronic weapons, except in emergencies, and then only when authorized by the Officer-in- Charge or designee.
a) The chemical agent oleoresin capsicum or other such suitable agents are authorized to be carried inside the detention facility by certified correctional officers trained in its use, only if authorized by the policy and procedure directives for the facility. A weapons depository will be established near the secure entrance of the facility. Under no circumstances will weapons or ammunition be placed in a desk drawer or other container which has common access. Chemical agents shall only be used on juveniles by certified officers when requested to respond to juvenile detention facilities during exigent circumstances that cannot be controlled by existing juvenile corrections officers.
b) Electronic Weapons are authorized to be used inside the detention facility by certified officers trained in its use, only if authorized by the policy and procedure directives of the facility. Under no circumstances shall electronic weapons be used on juveniles
Rationale: Chemical and electronic restraints are unnecessary in a juvenile detention setting. Their use is unnecessarily punitive and especially brutal, exposing juveniles to harm and counties to liability. The Florida Dept. of Juvenile Justice and Marion County have safely detained youth without their availability, except in emergencies, and the FMJS should be modified to reflect these best practices.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated this is the electronic and chemical restraint issue again. Again, he sought to track the language that Chief Wilder and DJJ had from last year. Pepper-spray, not used except under exigent circumstances and Tasers not used on youth.
Commander McGowan asked about the Tasers.
Mr. Utter stated in the research he has seen, Tasers are especially dangerous on kids because you don’t know what is going to occur, especially if they are small. The safer route there is to absolutely prohibit it in terms of liability and the safety of kids
Commander McGowan stated he just wanted to clarify the statement.
Mr. Dennard stated he thought they brought this up last year. Agencies have to have policies and procedures and directives and the training that the staff receives. Mr. Dennard stated that he believed that any reasonable to believe that any professional who has been around for a while, if they see a small-frame kid. There is some reasonableness, and he is sure that Mr. Utter understands there is reasonableness that goes on. If we have some misuses, we are not here to abuse anyone, but if we have any of those abuses administratively, they know how to deal with that staff who has abused the tool that has been given to them.
Sgt. Harvey stated that on the issue on electronic weapons, he has been a Taser Instructor since 2004. As far as pepper-spray and asthmatics, if you deploy a Taser on anyone, it’s over in five seconds, it’s done. Everything returns to normal, and he is against taking out electronic weapons.
Mr. Utter just wanted to comment on the Taser stated that Florida is one of those State’s that has no floor. Mr. Utter stated he has interviewed a child at the Polk Jail who is eight years old. He said if they wanted to put age limits in here, but there is no agreement. The Polk County expert refused to make a limit, say eight or nine years old in using pepper spray. In Florida, there have been five and six years old arrested in some of the schools, they may not make it to detention, but there is no floor on how young kids are who come in to detention. Mr. Utter stated if the Subcommittee is confident of policy that does not set a limit on the use of electronic weapons, so a deputy could use one on a five or six years old, if that gives them safety, that is the decision of the Subcommittee.
Commander McGowan stated that is true, however, under the FDLE Use of Force matrix, there are conditions which have to be met before an officer can go hands on than just a custodial touch. DJJ was trained on their matrix, but unfortunately, law enforcement’s goes up to deadly force. Commander McGowan stated he understands Tasers and pepper-spray; and understands where they come in the use of force matrix. If you have a five year old and they are Tased, that’s an issue, but that’s not the issue that’s being talked about here. That’s an issue between the employee and employer for an abuse, which he has already stated in this building today that we do not support that. The use of a Taser and use of pepper-spray in a correctional setting, it set out by some very good case law and some very reasonable policies and procedures. Commander McGowan stated that he did not see, coming into Chapter 11 that this conversation needs to happen. It is why I asked for Chapter 18 to be reviewed first. There are some good points in here, but it doesn’t belong here referencing the adult population, it belongs in Chapter 20. Chapter 20 is minimal standards that we are all willing to abide by. We are talking about willful and wanton infliction of pain and that’s wrong, in any case, in any way.
Major Allen stated that Polk County does not have Tasers in their facility and do not use them in the jail. They only time they have them is if they are on hospital watch or during transportation. Major Allen stated he doesn’t carry one and they don’t have them The Department of Juvenile Justice has a tool which is called a DRAI, detention risk assessment instrument. That instrument determines whether a juvenile comes to jail or not, it determines if a juvenile goes to the detention center or not. The Sheriff has absolutely no authority to put anyone in jail. They have the authority to arrest on probable cause. The juvenile is then taken to the JAC (juvenile assessment center) or in some cases, the booking area, and they look at certain criteria and if they meet those criteria then they are incarcerated. They have to go to first appearance the next day and it’s viewed by a judge who knows what probable cause is and determines whether that juvenile should stay or go. If it’s determined the juvenile needs to stay, then they stay. We only get what we’re given and if the concern is there is a five year old, Major Allen says he has that concern too because he has to be responsible for that youth. Perhaps the DRAI assessor or the DJJ might be better to speak with about that. They have tried to understand that instrument and understand how they could get a five year old and they don’t want them in the facility if there is no need because it would take a special kind of supervision. For instance, they have to have a deputy who is attached to that person the entire time to make sure nothing happens to them. We understand that and take it into consideration.
Major Allen stated he had one more thing, and he was not going to do this because it’s their policy, but he wanted to provide explanation of what most agencies do. “A sample procedure for use of force- members should strive to use the minimum amount of force or amount of protective action practical to control a subject.” Deputies will say the best use of force is no use of force. If we can talk someone out of it, he would much rather do that. He does not want to touch them, does not want to spray them, but unfortunately we have responsibility for those other people. When he tells someone “…don’t touch him. Don’t hit him,” and they do it he has no option but to put hands on, which PAR allows. DJJ does have that and he has evidence they use it quite often. It means a large individual takes a smaller individual and either pulls him down or basket-weave, or whatever you use, you can wrap around them and get them on the ground, which is a PAR technique. At the Polk facility, they choose not to do this. When this is done, there is 65 or 75 percent chance of being injured. There are some very large individuals and there are some very small individuals. They have some very large inmates and there are some very small inmates, and there is not always the option of choosing what individual to use force against. Having the tools available is helpful.
Major Allen continued to read. “However, members need not apply protective action, in gradually increasing steps in order to justify physical control. Instead, members need to respond with all the protective action practicable for the circumstances in each specific situation. As soon as compliance and control are reached, a member must de-escalate their response to the minimal amount of protective action practicable to control a subject. Each succeeding response in member administrative control should include elements of the previous responses when applicable. For example, passive resistance control techniques should include verbal communication and direction.” They are constantly telling whoever it is to stop their actions. If they keep doing it and they come at an officer, they get into the physical realm and this is where they start talking about the chemical agents and Tasers and other devices. Now, Polk chooses not to use Tasers, but that is the Sheriff’s decision; he chose to do that. There are other agencies that carry them throughout the facility. If there happens to be a direct file juvenile and they fall under the use of force continuum, they will get the same treatment. So, just a blanket statement taking it all away may not be such a good idea. It is a tool, it is useful. Major Allen does not advocate the use of these tools for punishment or sadistic reasons, or against the Constitution in violation of the Eighth Amendment because he would not be standing here today if that was the case. He would be in the jail locked up for committing a crime.
Lt. Owens asked for discussion from the Subcommittee. Ms. White stated that we should address the idea of the age limit. Unfortunately, looking at some juveniles, it is impossible to guess what their age may be. Obviously, five year olds and eight year olds can be different in size from fourteen year olds, but has observed fourteen year olds that look like their eight. However, she does not know how we could address this.
Commander McGowan stated the only thing we could possibly do is follow the policies and procedures of the agency, and FDLE and DJJ guidelines for use of force. One should be good with that. To add or detract from it does not serve a good purpose.
Lt, Owens stated he was not a legal scholar, but he was taught that that a child 7 and under, did not have the ability in their mind to create criminal intent.
Commander McGowan stated that this is where he and Mr. Utter totally agree that children do not belong in secure housing at that age. They don’t belong there and should not be brought to jail in the first place.
Motion: There was no motion to change the language. Hearing no motion, there will be no change.
Lt. Owens called for a five minute break.
Lt. Owens called the meeting back to order and we proceeded with 11.11. He stated this was again by Mr. Paul Liles of Disability Rights Florida. He stated it is difficult to manage a decision without him here to defend the proposal. Again, based on that, he would suggest tabling this revision until Mr. Liles can be here to defend. Commander McGowan stated there are some good things in here.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – Paul Liles
Standard: 11.11 - Shackles or other personal restraints may be used within the secured areas of the facility. This standard should apply to inmates in transit or to inmates whose behavior presents an immediate danger to themselves, other inmates, or staff. Such inmates may be temporarily restrained by such devices only upon orders of the Officer-in-Charge or designee. Restraints shall never be used as punishment.
Proposal: Shackles or other personal restraints may be used within the secured areas of the facility but shall only be used for the minimum amount of time necessary to ensure the security of the facility. This standard should apply to inmates in transit or to inmates whose behavior presents an immediate danger to themselves, other inmates, or staff. Such inmates may be temporarily restrained by such devices only upon orders of the Officer-in-Charge or designee. Inmates whose behavior presents an immediate danger to themselves shall only be shackled at the direction of qualified mental health staff. Restraints shall never be used as punishment. Absent an order from a qualified mental health professional, who determines that restraints are necessary in order to prevent self-harm, restraints shall never be used on juveniles within the secured areas of the facility. In the event that a qualified mental health professional orders a juvenile to be restrained within the secured areas of the facility, only soft, humane restraints may be used.
Rationale: The proposal is based on the lack of necessity to shackle and handcuff children who are already within the secure area of a facility. The Florida Supreme Court recently found the routine shackling of juveniles in the unsecured areas of courtrooms to be "repugnant, degrading, humiliating, and contrary to the stated primary purposes of the juvenile justice system and to the principles of therapeutic justice.'' See In Re: Amendments To the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, No. SC09-141 (December 17, 2009) (Per Curium); See also Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, Rule 8.100. Certainly if children can be free of shackles and handcuffs in courtrooms, jails can safely keep them in their secure areas without such restraints.
Discussion: Lt. Owens stated they would table this revision proposal
Motion: Ms. White made a motion to table, with a second by Lt. Parisi until Mr. Liles can attend. Motion to table passes unanimously.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 11.12- Each floor of a detention housing facility will have a correctional officer or certified juvenile detention officer present. Split level housing areas which share a common day room shall not require a second certified officer, provided observation is easily maintained from either level. The presence of two officers certified in accordance with 943, Florida State Statutes or Department of Juvenile Justice requirements, is required when moving high risk inmates in or out of a “housing area.
Proposal: Each floor of a detention housing facility will have a correctional officer or certified juvenile detention officer present. All facilities housing juveniles shall have juveniles directly supervised, with a direct care staff ratio of 1 staff per 8 youth during waking hours and 1:10 during non-waking hours. Facilities that do not house juveniles that have split level housing areas which share a common day room shall not require a second certified officer, provided observation is easily maintained from either level. The presence of two officers certified in accordance with 943, Florida State Statutes or Department of Juvenile Justice requirements, is required when moving high risk inmates in or out of a "housing area”.
Rationale: The proposal is based on research and best practices indicating that direct supervision provides detained youth with an environment more conducive to the goals of the juvenile justice system. It recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that facilities operate in a constitutional manner.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated this is the direct supervision issue and he was not concerned with the staff ratio, which can be taken off the table. This is about watching the juveniles with cameras, rather than staff. It’s about having enough staff in the facility so you are able to communicate with them, catch problems before they come up and deal with them before they get out of hand.
Major Allen stated that he realizes this has previously been discussed. He stated he was reading 5.01 and was reading out of the detention standards manual. The Florida Model Jail Standards policy already requires the supervision to be equal to or better than the current DJJ standard. We’ve all agreed at some point in time, in this room, that we need to ask the experts and they are the experts. He is reading from the experts’ manual. “Staff is aware of the location of youth assigned to supervision at all times.” The word is “aware”. It doesn’t say that they are in direct observation of them at all times. Major Allen stated he can assure everyone that no one who runs a jail would exclusively run it by camera. He knows of instances where there have been cameras in the recreation yard and a guy jumps the fence, and there was no one there to stop him. He stated he was in this room a year ago and fought against that and asked for more people and not putting money into the infrastructure of cameras because he made the point that the infrastructure of cameras don’t stop people from things, people stop people from doing things. If one looks at the DJJ standard, they do have at least one juvenile of justice detention officer in sight of the juveniles at all times. It doesn’t say they are in direct contact with the juveniles at all times. Major Allen stated he would encourage anyone who wants to come and see their facility to do so. They are like the Motel 6; they leave the lights on. We will accept you anytime 24/7. The facility has a very open design as compared to where the juveniles used to be housed. Most detention centers were not built for them to be observed like they do in Polk County. When he says the way they observe them, there are huge glass panels that there is nothing in those areas that you could see. Does every jail have blind spots? Someone up here said they do. Major Allen stated he wished he was back in 1986 when they designed the facility and maybe redesign it; however, he is dealing with what he has. As a result of that, they have spent quite a bit of money in putting in cameras. He stated he hoped Mr. Utter was listening. They are putting in more cameras, however, that is not going to stop them from having people down there watching the juveniles. No less, and often greater than what the counterparts do at the Department of Juvenile Justice.
Lt. Owens thanked Major Allen.
Mr. Dennard wanted to elaborate on what Major Allen stated. Those in the audience who know him know he has been an advocate against replacing staff with cameras because he does not believe we need to be doing that. He said when he talked with people around the State, they state the cameras are there to help the staff. The cameras are not there to replace the staff or do their job for them. He has been in all three juvenile facilities and one will see staff there and they also have cameras. Do they do video recording, they do. Cameras are not there to replace staff, but as jail administrators, they deal with staffing issues every day and it is a delicate balance. When you are talking about dealing with housing youthful offenders, he believes we go over and above to make sure that staff is there and available for them.
Lt. Owens asked if there was any Subcommittee discussion.
Mr. Utter proposed that in the interest of time, we review 11.14 and 11.16 now as it all deals with the same issue.
Lt. Owens stated that since these all deal with the same issue and asked for discussion or any motions to change the language.
Mr. Utter asked to fix one typo in 11.16, but it is not relevant to the issue.
Lt. Owens stated that 11.12, 11.14 and 11.16 all speak to the direct supervision issue. He asked if there were any discussions or motions to change the language.
Motion: No motions proposed. They shall remain the same.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 11.14- Correctional officer posts shall be located to permit officers to hear and respond promptly to calls for help.
Proposal: Correctional officer posts shall be located to permit officers to hear and respond promptly to calls for help. All facilities housing juveniles shall have juveniles directly supervised, with a direct care staff ratio of 1 staff per 8 youth during waking hours and 1:10 during non-waking hours.
Rationale: The proposal is based on research and best practices indicating that direct supervision provides detained youth with an environment more conducive to the goals of the juvenile justice system. It recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that facilities operate in a constitutional manner.
Discussion: See discussion points under revision submission 11.12.
Motion: No motion.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 11.16 - There shall be sufficient staff on duty so that at all times inmates within the detention facility will be within sight or hearing distance of a correctional officer or juvenile detention officer. This may be accomplished by means of electronic surveillance. Civilian staff that is not certified as correctional officers by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission or as juvenile detention officers by the Department of Juvenile Justice shall not be included as staff for purposes of this subsection.
Proposal: There shall be sufficient staff on duty so that at all times inmates within the detention facility will be within sight or hearing distance of a correctional officer or juvenile detention officer. Except for facilities housing juveniles, which shall at all times be directly supervised with a direct care staff ratio of 1 staff per 8 youth during waking hours and 1:10 during non-waking hours, this may be accomplished by means of electronic surveillance. Civilian staff that is not certified as correctional officers by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission or as juvenile detention officers by the Department of Juvenile Justice shall not be included as staff for purposes of this subsection.
Rationale: The proposal is based on research and best practices indicating that direct supervision provides detained youth with an environment more conducive to the goals of the juvenile justice system. It recognizes the distinct needs of children, generally incorporates national best practice, and ensures that facilities operate in a constitutional manner.
Discussion: See discussion points under revision submission 11.12.
Motion: No motion.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – Kevin McGowan
Standard: 12.05 - All garbage, trash, and rubbish from inmate residential areas shall be collected daily and taken to storage facilities. Garbage shall be removed from storage facilities at least twice per week. Wet garbage shall be collected and stored in impervious, leak-proof, fly tight containers pending disposal. All containers, storage areas and surrounding premises shall be kept clean and free of vermin. If public or contract garbage collection service is available, the detention facility shall subscribe to these services unless the volume makes on-site disposal feasible. If garbage and trash are disposed of on the premises, the method of disposal shall not create sanitary nuisance conditions and shall comply with provisions of Chapters 17-701 and 62-701, Florida Administrative Code.
Proposal: All garbage, trash, and rubbish shall be collected and removed from inmate residential areas at least daily (more often is recommended). Wet garbage shall be collected and stored in impervious, leak-proof, fly tight containers. All containers, storage areas (dumpster, compactor, etc.) and surrounding premises shall be kept clean and free of vermin. Garbage shall be removed from the site as often as necessary to maintain sanitary conditions.
If garbage and trash are disposed of on the premises, the method of disposal shall not create sanitary nuisance conditions and shall comply with provisions of Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Florida Adminsirative Code Chapter 62.
Rationale: Update
Discussion: Lt. Owens stated this is the one which originated with Leon County’s garbage container. Ms. White stated she believed that Commander McGowan came up with this revised language.
Commander McGowan stated this is the one Sheriff Dean asked us to review and try again, so he did so and this is his proposal.
Ms. White stated the issue was that trash compactors are not emptied twice weekly because they are not full and that becomes a cost factor. There is sanitation factors taken to make sure it does not become a nuisance, however, this would help agencies who do use the compactor so they do not have to pay extra.
Commander McGowan stated this goes back to 33-8 because this is talking about having a landfill on the property, which the EPA will not let the facility do. There are some administrative codes referenced that are way out of date. Commander McGowan stated that as long as it meets the standard and its leek proof, and reasonable, that a facility can empty it when it gets full and not twice a week. The other item that talks about is a landfill on your property. No one should be doing that, but it’s there in case someone is.
Lt. Owens asked Commander McGowan if he was satisfied that the proposal was printed on the page would be sufficient to replace the existing paragraph. Ms. White stated she was also. Ms. White also asked Lt. Davis of Leon County if this would be acceptable and he said it would be.
Lt. Owens stated that in addition to the Florida Administrative Code from the Florida Department of Environmental protection would now be added. Commander McGowan stated that was the only code which was applicable. The other one referenced is gone.
Motion: Capt. Don Ross made motion to accept this proposal, with it being seconded by Sgt. Brad Delaere. Motion passes unanimously. The proposal language shall replace the current paragraph.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: 12.06 - Housing
(a) Floors, walls, ceiling, windows, doors, and all appurtenances of the structure shall be of sound construction, properly maintained, easily cleanable and shall be kept clean. Walls, ceilings, and area partitions be of light color.
(b) All areas of the detention facility other than closets or cabinets shall be well lighted. Cell areas, dormitories, toilets, and day rooms shall have light fixtures capable of providing at least 20 foot candles of illumination to permit observation, cleaning, maintenance, and reading. Light fixtures shall be kept clean and maintained.
(c) Sufficient space shall be provided in all living and sleeping quarters to satisfy sanitary needs of all individuals incarcerated. Every bed, cot or bunk shall have a clear space of at least twelve (12) inches from the floor. There shall be a clear ceiling height of not less than thirty-six (36) inches above any mattress and there shall be a clear space of not less than twenty-seven (27) inches between the top of the lower mattress and the bottom of the upper bunk of a double deck facility. Single beds, cots or bunks shall be spaced not less than thirty-six (36) inches laterally and end-to-end. Sleeping arrangements shall insure that a minimum distance of six (6) feet is provided between inmate's heads, if a solid barrier is not used.
(d) All housing facilities shall be kept free of offensive odors with adequate ventilation.
(1) If natural ventilation is utilized, the opened window area for ventilation purposes shall be equal to one-tenth of the floor space in the inmate residential area.
(2) When mechanical ventilation or cooling systems are employed, the system shall be kept clean and properly maintained. Intake air ducts shall be designed and installed so that ducts or filters can be readily removed. In inmate residence areas and segregation cells with solid doors, mechanical ventilation systems shall provide a minimum of 10 cubic feet of fresh or purified re-circulated air per minute for each inmate occupying the areas.
(3) All toilet rooms shall be provided with direct openings to the outside or provided with mechanical ventilation to the outside.
(4) Adequate heating facilities shall be provided to maintain a minimum temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit at a point twenty (20) inches above the floor in inmate sleeping areas.
Proposal: Housing
(a) Floors, walls, ceiling, windows, doors, and all appurtenances of the structure shall be of sound construction, properly maintained, easily cleanable and shall be kept clean. Walls, ceilings, and area partitions be of light color.
(b) All areas of the detention facility other than closets or cabinets shall be well lighted. Cell areas, dormitories, toilets, and day rooms shall have light fixtures capable of providing at least 20 foot candles of illumination to permit observation, cleaning, maintenance, and reading. Light fixtures shall be kept clean and maintained.
(c) Sufficient space shall be provided in all living and sleeping quarters to satisfy sanitary needs of all individuals incarcerated. Every bed, cot or bunk shall have a clear space of at least twelve (12) inches from the floor. There shall be a clear ceiling height of not less than thirty-six (36) inches above any mattress and there shall be a clear space of not less than twenty-seven (27) inches between the top of the lower mattress and the bottom of the upper bunk of a double deck facility. Single beds, cots or bunks shall be spaced not less than thirty-six (36) inches laterally and end-to-end. Sleeping arrangements shall insure
that a minimum distance of six (6) feet is provided between inmate's heads, if a solid barrier is not used.
(d) All housing facilities shall be kept free of offensive odors with adequate ventilation.
(1) If natural ventilation is utilized, the opened window area for ventilation purposes shall be equal to one-tenth of the floor space in the inmate residential area.
(2) When mechanical ventilation or cooling systems are employed, the system shall be kept clean and properly maintained. Intake air ducts shall be designed and installed so that ducts or filters can be readily removed. In inmate residence areas and segregation cells with solid doors, mechanical ventilation systems shall provide a minimum of 10 cubic feet of fresh or purified re-circulated air per minute for each inmate occupying the areas.
(3) All toilet rooms shall be provided with direct openings to the outside or provided with mechanical ventilation to the outside.
(4) Adequate heating facilities shall be provided to maintain a minimum temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit at a point twenty (20) inches above the floor in inmate sleeping areas.
(e) Any facility housing juveniles shall be designed according to the American Correctional Association’s juvenile standards.
Rationale: The proposal is based on the fact that the current standard was clearly written for adults. Juveniles should be provided privacy and not be housed in facilities governed by standards that are acceptable for adult inmates.
Discussion: Mr. Utter stated this is applying ACA standards to all juvenile detention. This was discussed at the first FMJS meeting in reference to juveniles. The only change is the addition of subsection E.
Mr. Johns stated that he has nothing against ACA standards, and believes that we all try to meet them any time they have a chance, but to blanket adopt a list of standards that you don’t even know what they are, there needs to be explicit recommendations because that could be extremely expensive in a facility. He stated that some facilities are considerably older than others and they are nowhere near ACA new construction standards. He stated he has nothing against adopting ACA standards, but feels they need to be looked at more closely. He stated that in his case, their facility was built in 1974. During their renovations, they tried to meet the standards where they could; however it was not fiscally feasible.
Lt. David Parisi stated his question would be in looking at the rationale, which states that juveniles should be provided privacy. He asked what Mr. Utter was referring to. Mr. Utter stated the juveniles should have their own rooms where possible, for sleeping. Lt. Owens clarified that Mr. Utter meant one room per juvenile, and Mr. Utter confirmed.
Lt. Parisi read the proposed revision again. He asked if this should be under new construction standards for the future. Mr. Utter stated when they talked about this last summer, there were two standards that were discussed.
Lt. Parisi stated he thought it was about restrooms and showers, wanting doors. He stated if one goes to any of the schools there is a pole with five showerheads on it, there are no doors. He does not know why in jail, they should have any additional privacy issues than you or I would have going to a restaurant. Mt. Utter stated that with kids in detention, it’s a particularly vulnerable time for them and a lot of times this is the first time they have been away from their home. It’s different than going into a restaurant because they go into a restaurant every day.
Commander McGowan stated that sounds reasonable except, if one is going to an institution and the person is rather frightened, the subject may try to harm themselves, and then privacy is the last thing they need. Mr. Utter stated if they are suicidal. Commander McGowan stated they may not be suicidal, they may just tend that way. Commander McGowan stated he was trying to remember what the facility looks like, but believes it’s two per sleeping area. He stated he has a problem with the word privacy.
Capt. Ross stated that the word “privacy” was just used in the rationale; it’s not part of the proposal. It may be blanketed under E. Mr. Utter stated there were a number of things that could not be done because the smaller counties could not afford it or current structures would not allow it. This would certainly be a big ticket item. He is not withdrawing it, he is just stating that he does not think it requires a lot of discussion unless you’re willing to change philosophies all of a sudden and impose this on counties in the future. Mr. Utter also stated there is an edit require on 3, it should state the ACA juvenile detention standards, the specific detention standards, as opposed to corrections.
Major Allen stated that he jumped ahead a little bit. He stated that we’re going to come to a standard that talks about isolation, use of isolation. From sitting in court last week, he can state that the position of Southern Poverty Law Center at the time was “don’t isolate kids” because there is a detriment to isolating them. Don’t put them in isolation, even if they commit offenses, don’t put them in isolation. Major Allen advised that what he is hearing right now is “let’s put them in isolation.” Let’s build a facility where all the kids are put into single cells. That’s isolation. He is not sure in which direction this is headed. Either we are going to put them in isolation, or we’re not. He is sure that facilities would love to have the funding to do what you’re asking. But unfortunately, the agencies don’t have that deep of a pocket. We need to look at what exactly what we need to do. Do we need to isolate them, do we not need to isolate them. Major Allen stated he would disagree with isolating the juveniles. Not only because he does not think it’s a good idea, and not only because Commander McGowan so artfully stated that juveniles commit suicide when they come to jail; not because their telling us, but because they are left to their own devices and they think they are hopeless, helpless and the next thing you know, someone has committed suicide. Furthermore, maybe this is earthshattering news, but Major Allen agrees with SPLC. Isolating kids is not the best option if there are other options out there. To follow the standard, privacy is the best policy, so let’s put them in singles cells and he disagrees.
Sgt. Dreschnak, Hernando County Sheriff’s Office. He stated that he he has a problem with letter E. He stated that he is in the middle of new construction of a new medical building. They have the walls up and everything up. Most of them are two man cells. A juvenile who has to go to medical would then have to go to an isolation cell, which goes against what we’re talking about here. The way this stands, since we are neither at Hernando ACA or FCAC accredited, they cannot take juveniles.
Mr. Utter just wanted to point out that this discussion can also cover Chapter 16, which they submitted, which goes to the renovation and construction of a facility. So if we insert American Correctional Association Juvenile Standards so we can take care of two things. He wanted to clarify on the isolation versus a child having their own room. The ideal juvenile detention situation is where you have a kid who sleeps in his or her room and then spends every minute of the rest of the day outside of the room in education, recreation, in counseling, at work, cleaning up the cells, but constantly engaged and then they go to their room. Isolation, solitary confinement, the literature that shows that this hurts kids, and Major Allen is right, should be limited as a punishment. When we talk about isolation here, or solitary, if you put a kid in isolation for the limited purpose for them getting ahold of themselves if they are out of control, you have to limit it for a specific amount of time. They have to be told someone is going to get them in a certain amount of time, for whatever amount of time that is. It’s not where they live, it’s where they live, but where they go as a punishment to get ahold of themselves. Those are two very distinct things. What we are talking about here is where the child sleeps and the idea is that besides sleeping, they are out and about all day, doing something productive, programming.
Commander McGowan stated that in this particular chapter we are talking about housing and did not believe that Section E would apply. If one wants to discuss new construction and renovation in Chapter 16, that is where it is applicable, but not under housing. Housing is more about light and heat and appropriate restrooms. It belongs in Chapter 16 under renovations and new construction. When one is planning the facility, that is where these ideas need to be brought out where they are doable, instead of trying to put them in place where you’re not trying to do a retrofit, so he is not inclined to change this.
Lt. Owens asked for discussion by the Subcommittee. Mr. Dennard asked to bring up one point. Mr. Utter referenced ACA. When we first talked about SB 2112 and ACA came up. ACA came up under the guise of Adult Local Detention. FCAC, they accredit based on adult facilities. Yes, ACA has separate standards for juvenile detention facilities, but those mostly are by residential and juvenile detention centers. That’s not what we’re running here. When we look at ACA standards, based on what we deal with is the adult standards.
Ms. White stated that her agency would because of the cost it is unlikely that her agency would ever go for ACA. They are FCAC accredited and they will maintain that. This would be a problem for her agency and is sure there are many other agencies in Florida who would be in the same situation.
Lt. Owens stated he agreed that it would be prohibitive in many cases, not only here but in Chapter 16, for an agency to come close to compliance. Based on recommendations, we will consider 12.06 and Chapter 16 one the same note.
Motion: No motion to change the language. Language stays the same.
Standards Review Subcommittee – Presenter – David Utter
Standard: Chapter 16- Minimum Construction Standards
Proposal: Any county or municipal government contemplating renovating or constructing a facility to house juveniles shall design the facility according to the American Correction Association’s juvenile standards.
Rationale: The chapter was clearly designed for adult prisoners. The FMJS should require that any construction of facilities for juveniles in the juvenile justice
Discussion: See discussion for 12.06.
Motion: No motion to change the language. Standard remains the same.
Lt. Owens stated that while they were having this discussion, he counted ahead. He stated we are at the 1500 hours mark. Tomorrow they have 14 more standards to cover. He anticipates that Chapter 20, which is coming up among the 14 is more near and dear and has been along this process. He stated his fear is that if he tried to finish it, it would not come close. So, we can resume tomorrow morning as planned at 0900 hours. We may or may not be able to finish early. We are looking at 14 more revisions and other business. If anyone in the audience knows Mr. Paul Liles if someone could contact him and he could be here or send a representative, otherwise those revisions will have to be tabled until next time.
Ms. White made motion to adjourn, which was seconded by Commander McGowan.
Lt. Owens stated the meeting would resume tomorrow, 09/21/12, at 0900 hours.
Meeting adjourned. 1506 hours.
-----------------------
FLORIDA MODEL JAIL STANDARDS REVIEW
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES (Unadopted)
Thursday, September 20, 2012
09: 00 A.M.
Marion County Sheriff’s Office
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- business review agenda sample
- powerpoint agenda template
- management review agenda examples
- introduction meeting agenda sample
- printable weekly agenda 2020
- agenda for introductory business meeting
- free agenda templates in word
- free meeting agenda templates printable
- free blank meeting agenda template
- word meeting agenda template
- democratic agenda for socialist america
- new world order agenda stages