📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 9 findings
F1
The condition and management of the Orange County Adult Jail facilities are acceptable and in overall compliance with state and local standards.
F2
The James A. Musick Facility offers a commendable and highly beneficial program called Canines Offering Life Lessons and Rewards (COLLAR).
F3
The OCSD is taking advantage of the recent decrease in jail population to perform needed maintenance and upgrades to a countywide aging facilities infrastructure.
F4
Although the jails still have outdated and inadequate video equipment, a viable upgrade plan with committed funding and priorities has been approved for implementation over the next five years. Juvenile Facility Findings
F5
The condition and management of the Orange County Juvenile Detention facilities are acceptable and in overall compliance with state and local standards
F6
The need for a gymnasium at Juvenile Hall/Youth Leadership Academy will be met, now that a State grant via Senate Bill 81 has been received to fund this project.
F7
Some deputy juvenile correctional officers do not wear uniforms, providing an overall appearance that is less than professional and making it difficult to differentiate deputy juvenile correctional officers from other staff.
F8
The reduction in population at the various Juvenile facilities provides opportunities to conduct maintenance, repairs, and upgrades.
F9
Two of the Juvenile facilities have inadequate video surveillance systems. The Joplin Youth Center and the Youth Guidance Center have no video surveillance systems. RECOMMENDATIONS: In accordance with California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the 2014- 2015 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “Annual Inquiry on Jail and Juvenile Detention Facilities,” the 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following three Adult Jail recommendations and four Juvenile detention facility recommendations: Adult Jail Recommendations
Recommendations 7
-
R1Consider expanding the Canines Offering Life Lessons and Rewards (COLLAR) program at James A. Musick facilty. (F.2.)
-
R2In the event of any future decrease in jail population, continue to utilize that time to conduct the needed maintenance work on the various facilities. (F.3.)
-
R3OCSD should closely monitor and expedite the five year plan for installing video surveillance system upgrades. (F.4.) Juvenile Facility Recommendations
-
R4The new facility at Juvenile Hall should serve multiple purposes, including a gymnasium, capability for vocational training, and a visitation center. (F.6.)
-
R5Deputy juvenile correctional officers working with juveniles should be required to dress uniformly in order to look more professional and to be more easily identifiable. (F.7.)
-
R6During periods of population reduction, the OCPD should conduct maintenance projects as done by the OCSD. (F.8.)
-
R7Upgrade the video surveillance system in all of the juvenile facilities by installing modern equipment and increase retention capacity to one year. (F.9.) REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code section 933.05, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), provides as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code section 933.05 are required from: Responses Required: Responses are required from the Orange County Sheriff-Coroner for Adult Jail Findings F.1., F.2., F.3., F.4., and Adult Jail Recommendations R.1., R.2., and R.3., Responses are required from the Orange County Board of Supervisors for Juvenile Facility Findings F.5., F.6., F.7., F.8., F.9 and Juvenile Facility Recommendations R.4., R.5., R.6., and R.7. Responses Requested: Responses are requested from the Orange County Probation Department for Juvenile Facility Findings F.5., F.6., F.7., F.8., F.9., and Juvenile Facility Recommendations R.4., R.5., R.6, and R.7.