⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 53 findings
F01
The JF was built in 2003 at a cost of $65 million, largely paid for by federal grants. The complex sits on a five-acre parcel in the community of El Rio. The facility is certified by the BSCC for a maximum rated capacity of 420 4 Annual Detention Report youth (240 in detention and 180 in commitment). Prior to completion, the commitment side was designed to house three special populations, including older juveniles in a work program. (Ref-03, Ref-04)
No recommendations for this finding
F02
In California, juvenile arrests decreased 62 percent between 2008 and 2014. (Ref-05)
No recommendations for this finding
F03
In Ventura County, juvenile arrests decreased 58 percent between 2008 and 2014 (from 7,329 arrests in 2008 to 3,058 in 2014). (Ref-06)
No recommendations for this finding
F04
The average daily population at the JF from 2014-2017 was 89.68. Average Daily Population Totals - Calendar Year Format Detention 2014 2015 2016 2017 Commitment 2014 2015 2016 2017 January 35 36 42 36 January 55 44 46 46 February 43 46 35 40 February 55 52 45 48 March 52 41 35 50 March 46 47 49 55 April 39 38 42 54 April 48 48 44 54 May 45 43 39 51 May 48 54 54 52 June 47 37 33 46 June 54 52 52 54 July 50 36 39 45 July 56 49 50 53 August 43 32 35 41 August 51 50 38 52 September 42 42 31 45 September 47 51 41 49 October 34 43 34 43 October 47 54 48 44 November 28 35 40 48 November 49 52 55 46 December 31 37 32 34 December 39 42 53 45 Annual Avg. 40.75 38.83 36.42 44.42 Annual Avg. 49.58 49.58 47.92 49.83 Facility Annual Average 2014-2017 4 Year Average 2014 2015 2016 2017 90.33 88.42 84.33 94.25 89.68
No recommendations for this finding
F05
On December 4, 2017, there were 88 youth in custody (50 in detention and 38 in commitment).
No recommendations for this finding
F06
The JF is budgeted for 275 staff (125 sworn staff and 150 support staff). However, on December 4, 2017, there were 13 unfilled positions. The Grand Jury was advised that due to the unfilled positions, all 88 youth were housed together in detention, with none in commitment.
No recommendations for this finding
F07
While the JF has three safety cells, they are rarely used. The Grand Jury was advised only one cell was used on one occasion in the last year.
No recommendations for this finding
F08
The JF does not currently have a PREA manual. VCPA does not have a PREA manual per County Counsel’s advice, however, it recognizes the importance of PREA and its concepts and strives to incorporate them into their practices and policies.” (Ref-01) Annual Detention Report 5
No recommendations for this finding
F09
Despite having no PREA manual, the JF staff follow the spirit of the act: All youth lodged in the JF are screened to assess their risk of sexual victimization. An orientation is completed with all hired staff including contractors and Community Based Organizations regarding the PREA Act. Upon booking, every youth detained in the facility is required to view a video about sexual victimization (available in both Spanish and English). The staff supervision ratio for sexual abuse victims has been reduced from 1:10 to 1:8.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, while local law enforcement agencies with a juvenile facility or lock-up are not mandated to comply with PREA, they may want to do so voluntarily to avoid liability. (Ref-07)
Related Recommendations (1)
R02
The Grand Jury recommends VCSO and VCPA consider seeking accreditation to become fully compliant with PREA standards in order to avoid potential liability and to qualify for federal and state grant monies. (C-02, C-12)
F11
Per the VCPA website, the agency mission is: “To promote community safety through a system of graduated sanctions that balance services to the victim, the offender, and the community.” (Ref-02)
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
The Grand Jury recommends VCPA consider reviewing its mission statement’s assertion regarding victim services, as it appears to be incongruent with current practices. (C-03, C-04)
F12
Historically, VCPA has had numerous resources that were purposely designed for offender accountability and victim reparation. Facilities and programs including Work Furlough for adults; Juvenile Restitution Project; and Work, Education, Restitution & Competency for juveniles have been eliminated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
The Grand Jury recommends VCPA consider reviewing its mission statement’s assertion regarding victim services, as it appears to be incongruent with current practices. (C-03, C-04)
F13
As of December 4, 2017, VCPA was not providing any programming involving victim reparation to adult or juvenile probationers, in custody or out of custody.
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
The Grand Jury recommends VCPA consider reviewing its mission statement’s assertion regarding victim services, as it appears to be incongruent with current practices. (C-03, C-04)
F14
Over the past several years, VCPA has reduced resources available to victims of minor crime, i.e., theft, vandalism, driving under the influence, etc., resulting in fewer services to victims, including those seeking restitution. The VCPA website refers all victims of crime to the Ventura County District Attorney (DA). The DA’s office prioritizes victim assistance based on the severity and nature of the crime and states that in some cases the court will proceed to sentencing without giving the DA’s office the opportunity to contact the victim. (Ref-02, Ref-08) Ventura Youth Correctional Facility (VYCF)
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
The Grand Jury recommends VCPA consider reviewing its mission statement’s assertion regarding victim services, as it appears to be incongruent with current practices. (C-03, C-04)
F15
The VYCF, located in Camarillo, was built in 1962. In 2011, VYCF housed 1,200 committed youth from various counties across the state. From 2012 to 2017, the population at VYCF declined dramatically. (Ref-05, Ref-09)
Related Recommendations (1)
R01
The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation -DJJ, investigate chronically unused space at the juvenile facilities and consider developing plans to re-purpose the facilities so that underutilized space is minimized. (C-01, C-05)
F16
On November 29, 2017, the facility housed 200 youth in seven of 12 housing units, leaving five units unoccupied. Of the 200 youth housed at VYCF on November 29, 2017, there were 38 youth in one general housing unit, despite the desired goal from the Farrell Decree of 32 per unit.
Related Recommendations (1)
R01
The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation -DJJ, investigate chronically unused space at the juvenile facilities and consider developing plans to re-purpose the facilities so that underutilized space is minimized. (C-01, C-05)
F17
Despite the decline in population at VYCF and throughout all DJJ institutions, costs are increasing. In March 2018, California’s governor 6 Annual Detention Report proposed a 1 percent increase in spending across adult prisons and the state’s youth correctional system. He also proposed an increase in the age of jurisdiction for DJJ from 23 to 25. (Ref-09, Ref-14)
No recommendations for this finding
F18
There are no safety cells in use at VYCF.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
The VYCF has a PREA manual, and the PREA Act has been integrated into its policies, procedures, and the Youth Rights Handbook. Additionally, it has a compliance manager on-site who reports to a PREA coordinator at the DJJ in Sacramento. (Ref-01)
No recommendations for this finding
F20
There are no working cameras used for surveillance at VYCF. When a use- of-force incident occurs, staff are required to video the incident with a hand-held video camera. All videos involving the use of force are reviewed and critiqued on-site and also sent to the DJJ in Sacramento for review.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
The VYCF failed to meet minimum standards pursuant to BSCC Title 15, Section 1280 and Section 1245. The general overall condition of the facility was in disrepair and appeared to lack years of routine janitorial maintenance, as exhibited by the following: • The ceiling in the visiting area was stained, presumably from water damage. • The roof in the school area was partially torn off. • There were missing ceiling tiles, inoperative lighting, stained carpet, and peeling paint in the conference room. • The toilet bowl in the conference restroom was stained brown. • Both the men’s and women’s public restrooms were filthy. • There were spider webs and grease in the kitchen, as well as dust strings on exhaust fans above the food prep area. • The tennis court was determined to be unsafe for use.
Related Recommendations (1)
R06
The Grand Jury recommends VYCF comply with BSCC Title 15, Section 1280 regarding minimum standards of cleanliness, repair, and safety. (C-06, C-09)
F22
On November 29, 2017, VYCF staff stated there were no plans to address the unkempt conditions of the facility.
Related Recommendations (1)
R06
The Grand Jury recommends VYCF comply with BSCC Title 15, Section 1280 regarding minimum standards of cleanliness, repair, and safety. (C-06, C-09)
F23
The VYCF failed to obtain accreditation for its on-site Mary B. Perry High School. The school is currently operating under a two-year probationary accreditation.
No recommendations for this finding
F24
According to the VYCF, Youth Rights Handbook contraband includes: Cell phones and pagers Cigarettes/tobacco Controlled substances Drugs and drug paraphernalia Gambling or lottery materials Gang writing or materials Annual Detention Report 7 Money Sexually explicit drawings, pictures, or prints Weapons or explosives. (Ref 10)
No recommendations for this finding
F25
On November 29, 2017, VYCF staff told the Grand Jury they used canines to conduct periodic searches of the facility and did not consider contraband to be a problem.
No recommendations for this finding
F26
In February 2017, a counselor employed at VYCF was sentenced to 36 months’ formal probation and 180 days in the Ventura County Jail for smuggling cell phones into the facility and selling them to youth for profit over a seven-month period. (Ref-11)
No recommendations for this finding
F27
In July 2017, VYCF purchased a full-body scanner for $300,000 that could be used to detect contraband. As of November 29, 2017, it had not been installed because of a disagreement with the correctional employees union over radiation exposure. Pre-Trial Detention Facility (PTDF)
No recommendations for this finding
F28
The BSCC states the PTDF has a rated capacity of 828 inmates.
No recommendations for this finding
F29
The PTDF website states the facility can house approximately 890 sentenced and un-sentenced inmates. (Ref-15)
No recommendations for this finding
F30
The PTDF deputies explained that the PTDF housing capacity can vary by more than 100 inmates per day in what is termed overflow housing. The facility has 113 dayroom bunks that are in designated housing sections and used when the population goes over the BSCC rated capacity. The number of inmates housed on the dayroom bunks, or overflow, is tracked daily by the Daily Overflow Report.
No recommendations for this finding
F31
On October 29, 2017, there were 831 inmates (815 males, 16 females) in custody at the PTDF. By October 30, 2017, the population had dropped to 818. Nonetheless, the Intake Unit was notably crowded, with at least 14 men and women waiting to be booked, and one inmate sleeping in one of the print/mugshot rooms.
No recommendations for this finding
F32
The PTDF staff estimate that 20 percent to 30 percent of inmates are classified as mentally ill.
No recommendations for this finding
F33
A large recreation area, or exercise yard, is located on the roof of the PTDF. It is enclosed by chain-link fencing and divided into separate compartments. Inmates are allowed out in the exercise yard for two 90- minute sessions per week. A drinking fountain is located outside the compartments; however, there is no free access to a toilet, as required by BSCC Title 24 Section 1231.2.10.
Related Recommendations (1)
R05
The Grand Jury recommends that the VCSO comply with BSCC Title 24, Section 1231.3 regarding free access to toilet facilities in the exercise yard. (C-11) 12 Annual Detention Report
F34
Many rival gang members are housed at the PTDF. They consist of not only local street gangs, but also active members of prison gangs as designated by the California Department of Corrections. One of the major challenges 8 Annual Detention Report with the inmate population at the PTDF is the number of different gangs that must be managed.
No recommendations for this finding
F35
In the past year the VCSO purchased six programming chairs, at a cost of $1,600 each. The purpose of programming, or security, chairs is to provide therapeutic programming and education to high-security offenders. Per PTDF staff, the programming chairs are used as a motivational tool to reward good behavior, i.e., used to watch movies, instead of the intended purpose of providing a safe environment for inmate programming. (Ref-16)
No recommendations for this finding
F36
The PTDF did not have a comprehensive PREA manual. (Ref-01, Ref-07, Ref-17) Todd Road Jail (TRJ)
No recommendations for this finding
F37
Per BSCC, the TRJ currently has a rated capacity of 796 inmates. On September 27, 2017, there were 815 inmates in custody (582 males, 233 females). Of the 815 inmates, 201 were housed in bunk beds set up in an open area of the facility for the overflow population.
No recommendations for this finding
F38
On a daily average the jail houses 30 to 40 inmates with serious psychiatric issues. (Ref-12)
No recommendations for this finding
F39
On September 27, 2017, the TRJ met the facility requirements of BSCC Title 24. The facility interior and exterior were well maintained. Each of the quads, cells, and showers appeared to be clean. Restrooms were in good repair. Particularly impressive was the jail’s 10,000-square-foot kitchen and bakery. The kitchen prepares more than 2,500 meals daily for staff and inmates, including those on dietary restrictions, yet still maintained cleanliness standards.
No recommendations for this finding
F40
Many rival gang members are housed at TRJ. They consist of not only local street gangs, but also active members of prison gangs designated by the California Department of Corrections.
No recommendations for this finding
F41
The TRJ has 12 new programming chairs at a cost of $1,600 each. According to TRJ staff, the programming chairs have proven useful to both faculty and inmates, particularly when instructing rival gang members. Safety of both staff and inmates is increased, and the inmates learn how to socialize and assimilate with each other. (Ref-16) Port Hueneme Police Department (PHPD)
No recommendations for this finding
F42
On January 29, 2018, PHPD failed to meet minimum standards required by BSCC Title 15, Section 1280. The temporary holding cells had peeling paint and graffiti and lacked general cleanliness, with litter on the floor.
No recommendations for this finding
F43
On January 29, 2018, PHPD was understaffed by five of the 22 authorized sworn officers. The January 2018 calendar displayed numerous sign-ups for overtime shifts that month.
No recommendations for this finding
F44
On January 29, 2018 there was only one sworn officer at the PHPD holding facility. Annual Detention Report 9
No recommendations for this finding
F45
The PHPD separates juvenile offenders from adults in temporary detention by placing them in the sergeant’s office or the staff breakroom. The juvenile offenders have no direct access to toilet facilities. If a juvenile needs to use the toilet, he or she must be escorted either into the secure cell area where adults are kept, or to the toilets in the public lobby, where the juvenile’s confidentiality could be jeopardized. Santa Paula Police Department (SPPD)
No recommendations for this finding
F46
On February 12, 2018, SPPD failed to meet minimum standards required by BSCC Title 15, Section 1280. The building was in poor condition. The paint on the exterior and interior walls was chipped and peeling, and graffiti was found in the holding cells. Ceiling panels were missing, wiring in the evidence room was exposed, and fixtures did not provide sufficient light.
No recommendations for this finding
F47
Due to increased sales tax from the passage of Measure T, planning is now underway for Santa Paula officials to renovate the existing SPPD building and expand it from 7,123 square feet to 13,455 square feet.
No recommendations for this finding
F48
On February 12, 2018, SPPD was understaffed by eight of 34 authorized sworn officers. At times, sworn officers are required to work as dispatchers. In addition to regular dispatch duties, dispatchers may be assigned to monitor inmates in holding cells.
No recommendations for this finding
F49
On February 12, 2018, one cell at SPPD had a blind spot due to the angle of the camera. The inmate was not visible to any SPPD staff. Other Holding Facilities
No recommendations for this finding
F50
Of the 10 city holding facilities visited, only Oxnard Police Department (OPD), Simi Valley Police Department (SVPD), and Camarillo Police Department had up to date fire-life safety certificates available at the time of the Grand Jury inspection. Fire inspections are required once every two years. (BSCC Title 15, Section 13146.1(a)(b)).
Related Recommendations (1)
R07
The Grand Jury recommends that all adult jails and holding facilities incorporate biennial fire-life safety inspections into maintenance schedules. (C-18) Responses Responses Required From: Ventura County Board of Supervisors (C-01, C-13, R-01) Ventura County Sheriff (C-11, C-12, C-13, R-02, R-05, R-07) City Council, City of Port Hueneme (C-14, C-16, C-17, C-18, R-03, R-07) City Council, City of Santa Paula (C-15, C-16, C-17, C-18, R-03, R-07) City Council, City of Oxnard (R-03) City Council, City of Simi Valley (C-17, R-03, R-07) City Council, City of Ojai (C-18, R-07) City Council, City of Ventura (C-17, C-18, R-03, R-07) City Council, City of Camarillo (C-17) City Council, City of Thousand Oaks (C-17, C-18, R-07) City Council, City of Moorpark (C-17, C-18, R-07) City Council, City of Fillmore (C-17, C-18, R-07) Responses Requested From: Ventura County Probation Agency (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04, R-02, R-04) Ventura Youth Correctional Facility (C-05, C-06, C-07, C-08, C-09, R-06)
F51
The 10 city holding facilities visited did not have policies or procedures incorporating PREA standards.
Related Recommendations (1)
R03
The Grand Jury recommends that PHPD, SPPD, OPD, SVPD and VPD consider incorporating PREA standards into their policy and procedure manuals. (C-17)
F52
The SVPD is the only city police agency in the County that does not use body cameras. City officials state the city’s low crime rate does not justify the expense.
No recommendations for this finding
F53
The 2016-2017 Grand Jury found that body cameras have become a law enforcement best practice. (Ref-13) Conclusions Juvenile Facility (JF) C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that the JF has been seriously underutilized since 2008 due to its design limitations. (FA-01, FA-02, FA-03, FA-04, FA-05,
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 3
-
CL1 Page 12Juvenile Facility (JF) C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that the JF has been seriously underutilized since 2008 due to its design limitations. (FA-01, FA-02, FA-03, FA-04, FA-05, FA-06, FA-07) 10 Annual Detention Report
-
CL2 Page 13C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that the JF is lacking a formal PREA manual. However, the staff have undertaken numerous measures to become PREA compliant, including researching the issue with County Counsel and integrating PREA standards into their screening and intake policies. (FA- 08, FA-09) C-03. The Grand Jury concluded that VCPA no longer operates any facilities or has any active programs specific to victim reparation. (FA-12, FA-13) C-04. The Grand Jury concluded direct services to victims of crime once provided by VCPA have significantly diminished over time. While this may be consistent with VCPA’s current priorities, it may not be consistent with VCPA’s mission statement. (FA-11, FA-12, FA-13, FA-14) Ventura Youth Correctional Facility (VYCF) C-05. The Grand Jury concluded that the declining population of juvenile offenders at the state level has resulted in the VYCF’s having been seriously underutilized for its intended purpose since 2011. (FA-15, FA-16, FA-17, FA-18) C-06. The Grand Jury concluded that despite increased costs and more than a decade of changes, VYCF has not met and/or maintained goals set by the Farrell Decree, specifically regarding housing and education. (FA-16, FA- 17, FA-21, FA-22, FA-23) C-07. The Grand Jury concluded that contraband is a problem at VYCF. Furthermore, VYCF’s failure to activate the video cameras and the body scanner in the facility impedes efforts to control contraband and monitor offender violence in the facility. (FA-20, FA-24, FA-25, FA-26, FA-27) C-08. The Grand Jury concluded that VYCF’s $300,000 body scanner, which has remained inoperative since its purchase in 2017, has done nothing to improve conditions at the facility there by wasting taxpayer money. (FA-27) C-09. The Grand Jury concluded that VCYF has failed to meet minimum cleanliness and maintenance standards as defined in BSCC Title 15, Section 1280. (FA-21, FA-22) Pre-Trial Detention Facility (PTDF) C-10. The Grand Jury concluded that programming chairs at the PTDF are not being utilized for their intended purpose. (FA-34, FA-35, FA-40, FA-41) C-11. The Grand Jury concluded that the PTDF is not providing free access to toilet facilities in the exercise yard, as required by BSCC Title 24, Section 1231.3. (FA-33) C-12. The Grand Jury concluded that the PTDF is lacking a formal PREA manual and does not fully integrate PREA standards into its policies and procedures. (FA-10, FA-36) Todd Road Jail (TRJ) Annual Detention Report 11
-
CL3 Page 14C-13. The Grand Jury concluded that while the TRJ’s $61-million expansion will help with overcrowding, it will serve only a small fraction of the estimated mentally ill inmates when it is completed in 2020. (FA-31, FA-32, FA-37, FA-38) Port Hueneme Police Department (PHPD) C-14. The Grand Jury concluded that the PHPD holding cell was in disrepair and lacked cleanliness, failing to meet the requirements of BSCC Title 15, Section 1280. (FA-42) Santa Paula Police Department (SPPD) C-15. The Grand Jury concluded that SPPD failed to meet minimum maintenance standards as required by BSCC Title 15, Section 1280. In addition, the camera blind spot in the holding cell poses a safety risk to inmates and potential liability to SPPD staff and the city. (FA-46, FA-49) Other Holding Facilities C-16. The Grand Jury concluded PHPD and SPPD are significantly understaffed. This potentially compromises staff and public safety. (FA-43, FA-44, FA- 48, FA-49) C-17. The Grand Jury concluded the absence of PREA standards in the 10 city police departments’ policy and procedure manuals exposes the cities to potential liability. (FA-51) C-18. The Grand Jury concluded that it was unsatisfactory for safety and liability purposes that seven out of 10 holding facilities did not have current fire- life safety certifications available for inspection. (FA-50)
Commendations 3
-
CM1 Page 15The Grand Jury commends VCPA and all law enforcement agencies identified in this report for their excellent collaboration with County, State, and national firefighters in keeping Ventura County citizens safe and informed during the Thomas Fire in December 2017. The Grand Jury also commends the VCPA and all law enforcement agencies for their courtesy and cooperation with the Grand Jury inspections conducted during this unprecedented disaster. References Ref-01. Prison Rape Elimination Act. National PREA Resource Center. https://www.prearesourcecenter.org/about/prison-rape-elimination-act- prea Accessed April 16, 2018 Ref-02. Ventura County Probation Agency, Mission Statement. http://public.venturaprobation.org/ Annual Detention Report 13
-
CM2 Page 16Accessed May 14, 2018 Ref-03. Ventura County Probation Agency, Juvenile Facilities. http://venturaprobation.org/index.php/facilities/juvenile-facilities Accessed April 20, 2018 Ref-04. Ragland, Jenifer. Ventura County Juvenile Hall Project Begins. Los Angeles Times, June 23, 2001. http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jun/23/local/me-13858 Accessed April 11, 2018 Ref-05. Goldstein, Brian. California’s Local Juvenile Facility Populations Continue to Decline in 2017. Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, March 8, 2018. http://www.cjcj.org/news/11989 Accessed April 11, 2018 Ref-06. Ventura County Probation Agency. Ventura County Juvenile Justice Plan. National Council on Crime & Delinquency, April 2017. http://venturaprobation.org/images/vcpa/documents/plans/Ventura%20 County%20Juvenile%20Justice%20Plan%202017.pdf Accessed April 11, 2018 Ref-07. International Association of Chiefs of Police. Elimination of Sexual Abuse in Confinement Initiative – PREA. http://www.theiacp.org/Elimination-of-Sexual-Abuse-in-Confinement- Initiative Accessed April 11, 2018 Ref-08. Ventura County District Attorney, Helping Victims. https://www.vcdistrictattorney.com/victims/ Accessed April 11, 2018 Ref-09. Washburn, Maureen. Costs rise amid falling populations at California's Division of Juvenile Justice. Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, February 2018. http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/costs_rise_amid_falling_po pulations_at_californias_division_of_juvenile_justice.pdf Accessed May 14, 2018 Ref-10. Division of Juvenile Justice Youth Rights Handbook, April 2016. https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Juvenile_Justice/docs/Linked/Youth_Rights_Ha ndbook.pdf Accessed April 9, 2018 Ref-11. Martinez, Christian. Youth corrections worker pleads no contest to smuggling cell phones. Ventura County Star, January 23, 2017. https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/crime/2017/01/23/youth- corrections-worker-pleads-no-contest-smuggling-cell-phones/96956180/ 14 Annual Detention Report
-
CM3 Page 17Accessed April 11, 2018 Ref-12. Hernandez, Marjorie. Plans move forward for multimillion-dollar Todd Road Jail expansion. Ventura County Star, August 17, 2017. https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/2017/08/18/plans-move-forward- multimillion-dollar-todd-road-jail- expansion/553646001/https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/2017/08/18 /plans-move-forward-multimillion-dollar-todd-road-jail- expansion/553646001/ Accessed April 29, 2018 Ref-13. Feeney, Matthew. Watching the Watchmen: Best Practices for Policy Body Cameras. Cato Institute, October 27, 2015. https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/watching-watchmen- best-practices-police-body-cameras Accessed April 13, 2018 Ref-14. Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2018-2019 Budget Proposal Would Expand California’s Youth Correctional System at a Time of Falling Proportions, January 16, 2018. http://www.cjcj.org/news/11909 Accessed April 29, 2018 Ref-15. Ventura County Sheriff’s Office, Pre-Trial Detention Facility. http://www.vcsd.org/sub-pre-trial-detention.php Accessed April 23, 2018 Ref-16. Washington State Correctional Industries, Programming Security Chair. https://www.washingtonci.com/skin/frontend/WACI/primary/docs/conte nt/products-services/furniture/detention/security-chair-sell-sheet.pdf Accessed April 27, 2018 Ref-17. Lau, Maya. L.A. County women’s jail lags behind national standards on preventing sexual abuse, report finds. Los Angeles Times, April 1, 2018. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-lasd-prea-20180401- story.html Accessed May 4, 2018 Annual Detention Report 15
Agency Responses 9
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No Responses Found 5
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Oxnard
City
Port Hueneme
City
San Buenaventura
City
Simi Valley
City
Ventura County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office