Contra Costa administrator: Underage sex trafficking victims not housed in juvenile hall

MARTINEZ -- Contra Costa County officials this week pushed back against a civil grand jury report that found underage sex trafficking victims are occasionally housed in juvenile hall because of a lack of transitional housing in the county.

The report, released in May, criticized nearly every aspect of the county's handling of underage sex trafficking cases; it found that not enough law enforcement officials were trained to properly handle victims, that the District Attorney's Office prosecuted fewer human trafficking cases in 2015 than in previous years; and that children exploited by the sex trade are sometimes housed in juvenile hall "as a pragmatic measure," and to keep them "away from their exploiters."

But in his official rebuttal to the report, approved unanimously by the county Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, County Administrator David Twa denied the finding related to housing exploited children in juvenile hall and disagreed with the grand jury's recommendation that a transitional home for trafficking victims be built in the county. In disagreeing with the jury's findings, Twa acknowledged that sometimes human trafficking victims commit other crimes, and are inadvertently arrested and taken to juvenile hall, then later discovered to be sex workers.

"At that point, it'll be determined that that person is actually a victim of sexual exploitation, and then they are dealt with accordingly, so they are not just brought to juvenile hall as a result of being a victim," Twa said.

But the county's leading prosecutor, Aron DeFerrari, said in June he could think of "once or twice" that a victim of human trafficking was held in juvenile hall until "some type of placement" could be found. He called the tactic "really rare," and added, "Given the pros and the cons -- the cons being putting that juvenile back in danger or jeopardy -- I think it makes sense for them to spend a short time in juvenile hall."

But he agreed with Twa that any minor found to be a sex worker is treated as a victim, as a matter of policy.

"To my knowledge, no police agencies are arresting minors for prostitution in this county and taking them to juvenile hall for the crime of prostitution," DeFerrari said.

In recent years, the county has formed an anti-human trafficking coalition and launched an ad campaign designed to remove the "prostitute" label from minors in the sex trade, who can't legally consent and are automatically considered victims under state law. But the rate of sex-trafficking victims who come forward to testify remains low, and many end up back with their pimps even when they're released to their families.

"(Underage sex trafficking victims) run away, I've even seen one cut through a GPS ankle bracelet and go back to her pimp," said Elizabeth Harrigan, who oversees juvenile cases at the Public Defender's Office. She later added, "What they need is to build a facility somewhere outside of a city where it's closed off."

Devorah Levine, chairwoman of the county's Zero Tolerance for Human Trafficking Coalition, told the board Tuesday that no funding exists to build such a housing center, pointing out that housing is one of the most costly items facing those tasked with stopping human trafficking. Twa's rebuttal to the grand jury report says that no federal or state funding exists for a new transitional housing facility, and argued that such housing is not an "optimal choice" compared with reuniting sex trafficking victims with their families.

July 21, 2016

East Bay Times

By Nate Gartrell

[Tehama County] Grand jury report investigates parks, jail

Among the Tehama County 2015-16 grand jury's final report was inquiries into Corning city parks and the Tehama County Jail. In all, the grand jury filed 18 inquiries made of local government agencies in its annual report.

The grand jury, consisting of 19 citizens of the county, is administered by the county Superior Court and is part of the judicial branch of the county government. Its functions are investigatory and fall into two basic categories, civil and criminal, and the jury is at time referred to as serving in a "watchdog" oversight capacity.

Grand jury inquiries are initiated with the jury itself, or through complaints from citizens alleging misconduct or irregularities in the functions of government within its jurisdiction.

Tehama County Judge Jonathan Skillman supervises the grand jury and approves its final report, which is then submitted and approved by the Tehama County Board of Supervisors.

According to grand jury foreperson Thomas Moulton, "everyone we (the grand jury) met was gracious, professional, knowledgeable and willing to answer our questions.

"As a result, we received an eye-opening education about the inner workings of our local government," he added.

The jury made its inquiry into Corning's city parks in November 2015, meeting with public work staff and viewing each of the town's nine parks. "The parks are starting to experience a homeless population impacting the parks; however, a strong police presence is helping maintain safety," the report said.

It goes on to state Salt Creek inmates are used to work on the parks, at a fee, as well as church groups in the community, free of charge.

The city contracts with an outside business to clean the parks' restrooms.

"They (the city of Corning) have been successful in generating grant money for some the newer parks, but have been unsuccessful in getting grant money for their older parks," reported the grand jury.

The report mentioned the town's two newest parks, Lennox Field, which opened in June 2015, and the Skate Park, which opened in March 2014.

In the report's findings it states, "City of Corning parks is understaffed with one full-time employee and one part-time employee," and recommends "City of Corning parks needs to increase staff."

The grand jury requested a response from Corning's City Council concerning the recommendation.

Tehama County Jail

In its inquiry into the Tehama County Jail, operated by the Tehama County Sheriff's Office, the grand jury found the jail to be within its legal limits for the number of inmates housed, but also found the jail is housing inmates for longer sentences than for which it was designed.

In addition, the grand jury found the jail was providing inmates with the option to participate in online GED programs as recommended in a previous report.

The grand jury investigation found the jail to be "well kept and clean."

There being only one sobering cell and one safety cell was reported to be an ongoing issue at the jail, according to the report.

"This is a continuing problem during rodeo times as there may be up to 10 persons in the one sobering cell at a time," said the jury report. "These cells are video monitored with physical check each hour."

Most inmate complaints are due to the jail's food and medical care, said the grand jury.

However, the grand jury in its findings stated, "jail administration has remained within its legal requirements related to inmate meals and inmate medical care."

The findings also state additional sobering and safety cells are "hoped to be constructed at a new facility." The county is in the process of expanding the jail facilities to a building across the street from the current location which will include 64 additional beds.

In its recommendations, the grand jury stated the sheriff's office "shall continue to report outlining any changes to the facility that will be required to maintain the health and safety of the inmates and the staff at the Tehama County Jail as a result of incarcerating inmates for longer sentences and more serious offenses than the jail was designed. The findings of this report shall be considered in the planning of any proposed additions to the facility."

July 20, 2016

Appeal-Democrat

By Julie R. Johnson

[San Mateo County] Report: Youth mental health care lacking: Locals frequently transported outside county for treatment, said grand jury

A majority of local youth experiencing a psychiatric crisis who need to be hospitalized are shipped to a medical facility beyond county borders, complicating their treatment and presenting an issue which must be addressed, according to the civil grand jury.

The 13 hospital beds dedicated to serving local kids and teens suffering a mental health emergency may be inadequate, according to an investigation by San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury, but insufficient data tracking makes a definitive conclusion impossible.

Mills-Peninsula Health Services and the county’s Behavioral Health and Recovery Services, which work in conjunction to provide inpatient psychiatric care, should beef up their record keeping practices to offer greater insight regarding how local youth mental services can be improved, according to the grand jury’s report published Monday, July 18.

Most county youth who need inpatient psychiatric care are taken to hospitals in other cities such as San Francisco or Santa Rosa, despite the 13 beds reserved for such patients in San Mateo at Mills Health Center, 100 S. San Mateo Drive.

Studies show the teens and young adults experiencing a mental health crisis are less receptive to treatment when it is administered far from home, according to the report, making it imperative all is done to ensure the necessary accommodations are available inside the county’s borders.

“An already stressful situation worsens when an anxious and distressed patient is strapped down and driven by strangers for an indeterminate length of time to an unfamiliar facility,” according to the report. “In addition to the stress added by the actual transfer, the ultimate location of the facility can itself result in more problems for the youth and his support system.”

The county Board of Supervisors authorized contracting with Mills-Peninsula Health Systems to offer inpatient mental health care to youth and adults who use Medi-Cal, and the agreement is overseen by the San Mateo County Behavioral Health and Recovery Services division.

Under the agreement, when a patient needing psychiatric care is picked up north of State Route 92, they are taken to the Mills-Peninsula Medical Center in Burlingame. If they are coming from an area south of the boundary, they are taken to the San Mateo Medical Center, 222 W. 39th Ave. in San Mateo.

Should a child need inpatient care, and space is available, they are taken from their appointed referral site to one of the 13 beds at the Mills Health Center. If space is not available, they are transported to one of the other nearby facilities in San Francisco, Concord, Berkeley or other Bay Area cities.

But judging whether the existing beds are sufficient to meet the local demand is made more difficult due to the lack of pertinent data made available by either the county or officials with Mills-Peninsula, according to the report.

“The grand jury was unable to answer its original inquiry as to whether 13 inpatient beds for youth were adequate, as critical information was not available,” according to the report. “The grand jury could not determine if the information existed and was simply inaccessible, or if the information was never collected.”

It is clear, however, that those referred to by Mills-Peninsula Medical Center to the Mills Health Center are more likely to get a bed than those referred by the San Mateo Medical Center, according to the report.

The report shows slightly more than half, 52 percent, of the youth patients referred by the Mills-Peninsula Medical Center to the Mills Health Center for psychiatric care were admitted last year, a considerable disparity from the 29 percent of patients referred by the San Mateo Medical Center who were admitted locally.

“No matter which way the data is viewed, in 2015, [San Mateo Medical Center] referred the vast majority of its youth [psychiatric emergency services] patients to hospital facilities outside San Mateo County,” according to the report.

Though the discrepancy is obvious, the justification is not, according to the report, because the available data is insufficient.

“Mills-Peninsula Hospitals were unable to explain the disparity in the admissions rates for youth patients from [San Mateo Medical Center] vs. [Mills-Peninsula Medical Center],” according to the report. “Mills-Peninsula Hospitals also were unable to provide the grand jury with requested data relating to the provision of its services to the county generally.”

To remedy the issue, the report suggests the county Board of Supervisors should direct the Behavioral Health and Recovery Services department to focus on regularly tracking data which could better allow officials to understand the process leading toward ensuring local teens can get the psychiatric care near their homes.

Warren Slocum, president of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, and Supervisor Dave Pine both withheld public comment on the findings of the grand jury via email because they had not yet read the report. 

The grand jury has called to for the department to present a report on the issue to the county Board of Supervisors by the end of the year. The watchdog organization has no legal authority to implement policy change, but elected officials are required to respond to a report’s findings and recommendations within two months and governing bodies must respond within three months.

July 20, 2016

San Mateo Journal

By Austin Walsh