il$$-"h".$.-3

,jit1,

.:,:ii

.,lLli:\. (.

'' i 'i' ;-'j-ir':i

; - l i t E . t L t ri ; ' t . i i i i r i i i l i
FY..***"-*,"

:

j

Ji
'

i

-!!i'i{:!l
;;i;i1ff

{

\

t.rl

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COTIRT

FOR THE EASTHRNDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEX ITODRIGUEZ,et al " , Plaintiffs,

No. CIV F*90-0601 EDP JFM P

vs.

;ITHE COUNTYOF STANISLAUS, I et aI. ,

ri

Defendants "

.FINDINGS AND RECQMME}IDATTqNS

Plaintiffs have requeste<l a prelimi.nar"y i-rrjunction and class

,icerti:Eication.
i ii ri

Argument on plaintiff rs request was hearcl regularly

iion No"rember 15, 1-990. On December 28, 1-990, a tour of the

ltj ii

il Stanir;laus County Jail was conducted by the und.ersignecl. Af,t,er:

iir) ;i

lireadirng the briefs supporting and opposing the requestu trearing t.h.e

:l1 ii

ilargumrents of counsel, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS

..it ,i

ii Hnnnev REcoMMENDEDthat:

;l:l ll i'

r. Plaintiff rs moti-on for class certification

of the class

?4 li

i

i

liof aII

p r i s- o n e r s

held

2!'r il,

iifggg, to the present,

.?ti ii

in the Stanislaus County Jail from June 23, and alL future prisoners, l:e Eranted, and

1tl n a t t h e c l a s s b e c e r t , i f i e d p u r s u a n t t o F e d . R " c i v " P " 2 3 ( b ) ( 2 ) ;

:i

nel

I

ii

/\

,,

^t

ri

1

Z. Defendant. be enjoined from bedding inmates r:n the floor

2 of ttre jail during the pendency of, this action;

3

3. Defendants be enjoined from adding inmate beds during

4 the pendency of this action;

5

4. Defendant Streriff he authorized hy this order to release

6 inrnates from the Stanisluas County JaiI whenever said jail i s

7 wibh:Ln ten percent of being fil"Ied, and that said clef,enclan'hshal--t-

rele6se inmates or shall refuse to accept newly-committerl :innates

I rarhenever al"I beds in said jail are filled;

10

5. The matters of access to the jail by plaintiff?s

'11 is

a discovery

question,

not a request for injr.lnctive

relief

counselai:rrL

t z will .13

be dealt with in a separate order; and 6. In all other respects it is recommended ttrat the request

1 4 forprelirninary

injunction }re denied.

15

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the

t o United States District Judge assigned to the case pur:suant to bhe

1-l provisions of Title 28 U.S"C" S 636(b) (l) ' Within ten (1.0) days

1 B after being served with these findinEs and recommendations' any

1 9 party rnay file ci on all parties.

written objecLions with the court and sarve a aopy Such a docunent should he caprtioned. n'Ohjee'Lj"ons to

21 Find.ings and Recommenclations." Any reply 22 bel srerved and filed within ten days after

to the objections service eif, 'hhe

shal-L

23 objerctions. The parties are advised that failure to file

24 objerctions witlrin the specified time may waive the righ'b t'o appeal

25 il //l

26 H l l l

AO 72 ( R e v8 i 8 2 )

ry"

clw

United States District Court

for the

Eastern Distrl-ct of California

rfanuary J-0, 1-991-

* * CERTIFICATEOF SERVICH* *

l-:90*cv-00601

REc

Rodrique:r v.
Stanislaus

County

Tt the under$ignecl, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California"
That on ,fanuary 1,0, l-991, I SERVEDa true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) j-n a postage paj-d envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, hy depositing said envelope in ib.heU.S. Maj.l, or by placing said copy(ies) into an j.nber-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Paul- Wayne Comiskey, Esq. Prisoners Rights Union L909 Sixth Street Sacramento, CA 95814
Richilrd P. Herman' Bsq. Richiard P. Herman' Law 0ffice-s 229 lY.arLne Ave F O lBox 328 Balboa Isl-and, CA 92662
Paul T. Persons, Esq. 1834 Arroyo Canyon Chlco, CA 95928
Dan lStormer, Esq" Stonmer & Litt 3550 Wilshire Boulevard Suitre 1200 Los ,Angeles, CA 90010
,fohn H. Hagar ilr", Esq. .Tohn Hagar PO Box 86935 Los ,Ange1es, CA 90086-0935
I{i-chael Harold Krausnick, Esq. Stanislaus County Counsel

SS/JFM REC

tl

ilack L. BY:

 
 ---ltEs

li
ii
'! i i ,}

I

1t

q:

il
ii

G' '

,l
ir
li

uNTTEDsrATEs DrsTRrcT couRT

ii
I ii
ii

EA'TERNDrsrRrcr oF cAJ'rFoRNrA

Bli

ii

q" i l ii*t*

R ' D R T G U E Ze' t ' a.l ' r

' l0

l' l
,,

P- rl^ali-n+t r' r" r '

11 I

l:

v'

1;i

'' ii
litrrs

couNTYoF

srANrsT'Aus'

\

i
\

cv-F-90-60i- EDp JFM p

I\

"o.

{

.RDER RE PREL'}'''rNARY

l\ iiiiiliicttoNANDclAss

'

nTnmTFTCATTON

), "u*TrrrcATrc

i3 :let al.r

)

1a

Defendanb' i

) 1 i::

lii
'r 'l
;relief t;:i
ristates

pP lrad ri nt rtuirfrf-s"

have fired this civil rights

u n d e r 4 2 u ' S ' c ' $ L 9 8 3 ' T h e -m- !as t^tt e' r rw^a' : qs

.- ^-^ lvlagistrate

Jr u, rdAgnea .JToohhnn F.

IM4oouurrddss purssuuaanntt

ac'Lion r eeffe r r e d
t(o 2 8

seeking
to united
u's"c' s

1i l
,,i, i',
'.)t
'1'

.636(b)(I)(b) and Local General Order No' 262' on January 10, 1991., Ivl.agistrate Moulds

Reconunendations. on January 18, 199r ' def enda

i
r i o bj e c t i o n s

to the Findings and Recommendation

i '

rn accordance with the provisions of 2

f
n' s ' 8

i-lecl Firrd Ls timery
u"s'c' s

i

n f

gs ile

d

a

n

c

l

! L t r ' \ ^

,

and Local Rule 305' this court has reviewed Lhe

itOlO(b)(f)(C)

'-: l-. . 'ii" i l r e , c o r d i n t h i s a c t i o n a n d t h e a r g u m e n t s o f t h e p a r t i e s . T h e

-- ,,'il;"-"""*r=

with rhe Magis*rare's Findings anclRecommendations

1

F,* ?? iflev Bi82i

3

F'

G

1 exceptthatthecourtispersuadedthattheohjectionstherefo

2 made}lydefendantsshallbeincorporatedintothecourt'sorder"

3
r+

ACCORDTNGLY'rT rs oRDERED:

1' Plaintiffs'

motion for class certification

of the

5 classofallprisonersheldintheStanis}ausCountyJai}from 6 June 23,1989, to the present' and al} future prisoners'

is

I
I

gra Fed

nted e:cal

.T Ru

he les

cl o

a f

ss Ci

isc vit

er P

t r

ified ocedu

pu re'

r

s

uan The

t c

toR lass

u

le ce

2 rt

3 if

(b) ied

(

2b)

y '

this

9 orde:rmaybereviseduponmotionintosubc}assesifnecessary.

'!0

2.Defendantsareenjclinedfrombedding.inmatesonthe

1',l floorofthestanislausCountyJailduringt.hependencyoft}ris

44 IL

action.

13

3.

Defendants are enioined

from adding inmate beds to

14 thestanislausCountyJailduringthependencyofthisaction.

'15

4.DefendantSheriffisauthorizedbyt.hisorderto

1 6 relreaseinmatesfromtheStani'slausCountyJailwheneversaid

17 18

j

a

i

l

i

s

w

i

t

h

i

n

t

e

n

percent inmates

of o

b r

ei s

ng hal

f r

i

l

ted, refu

an se

d

de to

f

enclan accept

tshe newl

riff y-co

m

mi

*+b. t

eadr l

";.;r;";""""

1S innrateswheneverallbedsinthestanislausCountyJailare

20 f il-Ied.

21

5 -

The f oregoing

paragraphs

do not ac't' as a ] imitabion

AL upondefendants,abi}ityordiscretiontoconsLructaddj-itiona}

23 24

jailhousingat.otherloca.bions,ortoutilizeprogralnssuchas public rnebriate centers as an arternaLive to jair incarceration"

25 26

6.ThemattersofaccesstottreStanis]-ausCountyJai].

bl, plai-ntiffs'

counsel is a discovery question' noL a request'

for

f*u""13,ut'

IFt

*-

-t-

I
hrnr:tive relief

and will be dealt with bY a separate order; and

7 . In all other resPects the request for preliminarY

Lnction is denied.
I

DATED: Februaty JJ ' 1991

E. COYLE District

r

-#

-

, -

'' 'F-un-lfed

'*.'-'* states
for

6 - - . s ' !' - * * '

Di'stricL

Court

tf:e

Eastern Pisirict
FebtuarY

of -California
27, 1991-

* * CERTIFICATEOF SERV]CE* *

1: 90-cv-00601

Rodriquez:

Stanislaus CountY

T, the

the Cl

e

und rk,

errsigned, U.S: Dis

t

herebl rict C

certif ourt,

y E

a

't'hat s'tern

I am an District

entPloYee i-n tlle of Cal-ifornia.

Office

of

true and correct coPY(ies; of

)' t i si nt e dal

P

ostage bY de

Paid en Posit-ing

v

eloP said

e

ng said copyliesl into an inter-office

rk's office.

Paul. WaYne ComiskeY Prisroners Rights Union 1909t Sixth Street Sacramento, CA 95814

Richard P Herman 229 MarLne Ave
P O Box 328 Ballroa Island, CA

92662

Pau.LT. Persons
183,1 Arroyo Canyon Chir:o, CA 95928

Dan Stormer Sto.rmer & Litt 3550 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90010

ilohn H Hagar Jr F O Box 86935 Los Anqeles, CA 90086-0935

Michael Harold Krausnick Stanislaus CountY Counsel l-100 H Street
Second Floor

Judge Coyle Magistrate Moulds Staff AttorneY

 
 Case: 1:90-cv-00601-REC -JFM As of: 06/21/2012 08:01 AM PDT 1 of 6
PRISONER_CIVIL_RIGHTS, CLOSED
U.S. District Court Eastern District of California − Live System (Fresno) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:90−cv−00601−REC −JFM

(PC) Rodriquez, et al v. Stanislaus County, et al Assigned to: Senior Judge Robert E. Coyle Referred to: Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds Demand: $0 Cause: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff
Alex Rodriquez

Date Filed: 09/26/1990 Date Terminated: 05/04/1992 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 550 Prisoner: Civil Rights Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by James F Goodfellow Pacific Gas and Electric Company Legal Counsel Mail Code B30A 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105−7442 415−972−5672 Fax: OK LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul Wayne Comiskey Prisoner Rights Union 900 G Street Suite 302 Sacramento, CA 95814−1019 916−442−6868 Email: paulcomiskey@hotmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Dan Lewis Stormer Hadsell and Stormer The Marine Building 128 North Fair Oaks Avenue Suite 204 Pasadena, CA 91103 626−585−9600 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul Turner Persons Law Offices of Paul T Persons 1834 Arroyo Canyon Chico, CA 95928 916−893−4710 Email: ptpersons@aol.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Richard P Herman Prisoner Rights Union PO Box 4108 Laguna Beach, CA 92652 949−494−9411 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff George Butler

represented by James F Goodfellow (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:90-cv-00601-REC -JFM
Plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine

As of: 06/21/2012 08:01 AM PDT 2 of 6
Paul Wayne Comiskey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dan Lewis Stormer (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul Turner Persons (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard P Herman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by James F Goodfellow (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul Wayne Comiskey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Dan Lewis Stormer (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul Turner Persons (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard P Herman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Stanislaus County
Defendant

represented by John Henry Hagar Law Office of John Hagar PMB 314 1819 Polk Street San Francisco, CA 94109 (415) 771−1911 Fax: (415) 552−4067 Email: hagarlaw09@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael Harold Krausnick Stanislaus County Counsel 1100 H Street Second Floor Modesto, CA 95353 209−525−6376 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:90-cv-00601-REC -JFM
Jim Trevena as Sheriff

As of: 06/21/2012 08:01 AM PDT 3 of 6
represented by John Henry Hagar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michael Harold Krausnick (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/26/1990
10/02/1990 10/12/1990
10/12/1990 10/12/1990
10/15/1990 11/01/1990
11/01/1990 11/01/1990 11/01/1990
11/01/1990 11/01/1990 11/01/1990
11/01/1990 11/09/1990 11/09/1990
11/09/1990

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT for Declaratory Relief and Injunctive Relief to Magistrate John F. Moulds Summons issued; fee status pd; Receipt # 130040; Notice re: Consent forms. (old) (Entered: 10/02/1990)
2 NOTICE of Transfer of action to Sacramento; case referred to Magistrate Moulds; case sent to Staff Attorney. (old) (Entered: 10/02/1990)
3 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 ; points and authorities and declarations in support thereof. (old) Modified on 10/16/1990 (Entered: 10/15/1990)
4 LODGED proposed preliminary injunction (old) (Entered: 10/15/1990)
5 PROOF OF SERVICE by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine of lodged [4−1], motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1], notice [2−1], complaint [1−1] (old) Modified on 10/16/1990 (Entered: 10/15/1990)
6 ANSWER by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena (old) (Entered: 10/30/1990)
7 MEMORANDUM by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification; motion for more definate statement set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
LODGED proposed order denying class certification. (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
8 OBJECTIONS to Evidence by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena to (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
9 MOTION by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena to strike portions of plaintiffs' points and authorities set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00. (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
LODGED proposed order granting defendatns' motion to strike. (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
10 APPENDIX OF DECLARATIONS re motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1] (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
11 MEMORANDUM by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena in opposition to motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1] (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
LODGED order denying plaintiffs' motion for Preliminary injunction (old) (Entered: 11/02/1990)
12 SUPPLEMENTAL Exhibits by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine (old) (Entered: 11/09/1990)
13 REPLY by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine to response to motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1] (old) (Entered: 11/09/1990)
14 EXHIBIT list of 1a Jail Roster including inamtes sleeping on floor by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine (old)

Case: 1:90-cv-00601-REC -JFM As of: 06/21/2012 08:01 AM PDT 4 of 6

11/13/1990 11/15/1990 11/19/1990 11/21/1990 11/28/1990 11/28/1990 12/13/1990 12/17/1990 12/26/1990 12/26/1990 12/26/1990 01/02/1991 01/04/1991 01/10/1991 01/10/1991
01/10/1991 01/18/1991 02/01/1991 02/19/1991

(Entered: 11/09/1990)
15 RESPONSE by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena to plaintiff's reply to motion to strike set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 (old) (Entered: 11/13/1990)
16 DECLARATION of John Hagar re prisoner characteristics in the Mens jail re motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1] (old) (Entered: 11/15/1990)
17 MINUTES of plaintiff's motion to certify Class, motion submitted; court to prepare order. (old) (Entered: 11/19/1990)
18 PLAINTIFFS'SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT IN SUPPORT by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine re motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1] (old) (Entered: 11/21/1990)
19 OBJECTIONS by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena to supplemental [18−1] made after motion submitted to court. (old) (Entered: 11/28/1990)
entry 20 was a duplicative entry of [19−1] (old) Modified on 04/01/1993 (Entered: 11/28/1990)
21 STATUS REPORT by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena (old) (Entered: 12/13/1990)
22 SUPPLEMENT declarations in support by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine re motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1] (old) (Entered: 12/17/1990)
23 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine to amend complaint set for 1/31/91 @ 9:00 (old) (Entered: 12/27/1990)
24 NOTICE by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena of non opposition to plaintiffs' motion to amend complaint. (old) (Entered: 12/27/1990)
LODGED First Amended complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief. (old) (Entered: 12/27/1990)
25 OBJECTIONS by defendant County of Stanislaus, defendant Jim Trevena to declaration [16−1] after motion was submitted. (old) (Entered: 01/03/1991)
26 LETTER to court from Mike Hagar regarding the request for status conference on two issues: Medical discovery and Law library. (old) (Entered: 01/08/1991)
27 ORDER by Magistrate John F. Moulds granting motion to amend complaint set for 1/31/91 @ 9:00 [23−1] (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 01/10/1991)
28 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION concerning motion for preliminary injunction set for 11/15/90 @ 9:00 [3−1]; recommending granting class certification, no prisoners will be bedded on the floor pending outcome of action, no beds will be added during action, Sheriff has permission to release prisoners when the prison is 90% full, all other respects to the injunctive relief motion will be denied. (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 01/10/1991)
29 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief [1−1] by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine (old) (Entered: 01/10/1991)
30 OBJECTIONS by defendant Stanislaus County, defendant Jim Trevena to Report and Recommendation [28−1] (old) (Entered: 01/18/1991)
31 MINUTES of status conference parties to meet and confer. (old) (Entered: 02/04/1991)
32 TRANSMITTAL of documents recd orig file from Sacto w/ord denying prelim for EDP; forward to EDP (old) (Entered: 02/20/1991)

Case: 1:90-cv-00601-REC -JFM As of: 06/21/2012 08:01 AM PDT 5 of 6

02/27/1991
02/28/1991 03/05/1991 03/28/1991 04/04/1991 05/13/1991 06/05/1991 06/06/1991 06/18/1991 08/13/1991 10/15/1991 11/15/1991
12/03/1991 12/04/1991 12/06/1991
04/27/1992 04/29/1992 05/04/1992 05/07/1992 07/20/1992

33 ORDER by Chief Judge Robert E. Coyle granting REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [28−1] &objections made by defendants shall be incorporated into courts order. In all other request for preliminary injunction is DENIED(cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 02/27/1991)
34 ORDER by Senior Judge Edward D. Price Case reassigned from EDP to Chief Judge Robert E. Coyle Case now is CVF 90−601−REC−JFM−P (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 02/28/1991)
35 RECEIPT of case file from Fresno for further consideration (old) (Entered: 03/06/1991)
36 ORDER Status conference set for Thursday 5/9/91 at 9:00 am before Magistrate John F Moulds (cc: all counsel) (kh) (Entered: 03/28/1991)
37 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine in support class notice. (old) (Entered: 04/04/1991)
38 MINUTE ORDER by Deputy Clerk: Scheduling conf CONTINUED to 6/6/91 at 9:00 am before JFM (cc: all counsel) (kh) (Entered: 05/13/1991)
39 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez re posting. support (old) (Entered: 06/06/1991)
40 MINUTES of status conference: Case to be set for settlement conference. (old) (Entered: 06/07/1991)
LODGED Notice of class action. (old) (Entered: 06/24/1991)
41 NOTICE by plaintiff Alex Rodriquez, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine of change of address of change of address for Paul Comiskey to 2310 J Street P.O. BOX 1019 Sacramento ca 95814 (old) (Entered: 08/13/1991)
42 ORDER by Magistrate John F. Moulds ; Settlement conference set for 12/4/91 @ 2:30 before GGH (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 10/15/1991)
43 ORDER by Magistrate John F. Moulds; settlement conference is set for 12/4/91 @ 2:30 before GGH; if the case settles, parties are directed to inform chambers ; Scheduling conf set for 12/4/91 @ 4:00 (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 11/15/1991)
44 NOTICE by plaintiff Lorraine Fountaine, plaintiff George Butler, plaintiff Alex Rodriquez of association of attorney James F Goodfellow (old) (Entered: 12/03/1991)
LODGED Stipulation for continuance of settlement conference and status conference to 2/5/92; proposed order thereon (old) Modified on 12/06/1991 (Entered: 12/04/1991)
45 STIPULATION and ORDER by Magistrate Gregory G. Hollows: granting lodged Stipulation of 12/4/91 Scheduling conf continued to 2/5/92 at 4:30 before JFM; Settlement conference continued to 2/5/92 at 2:30 before GGH (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 12/06/1991)
MAIL to Fresno Office: original case file in 2 volumes, docket sheet, transmittal letter and stipulation (old) (Entered: 04/27/1992)
46 TRANSMITTAL of documents recd orig file (2vols) from Sacto, forwarded to Judge Wanger ofc per note from Sacto (old) (Entered: 04/29/1992)
47 Order Re: Stipulated CONSENT JUDGMENT by Judge Wanger terminating case (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 05/05/1992)
48 ORDER by Magistrate John F Moulds ORDERING: defendants are directed to pay plaintiffs attorneys' fees in the agreed sum (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 05/07/1992)
49 LETTER to court from John Hagar RE: procedure for class approval of settlement (old) (Entered: 07/21/1992)

Case: 1:90-cv-00601-REC -JFM As of: 06/21/2012 08:01 AM PDT 6 of 6

11/12/1992 03/11/1993 03/15/1993 04/01/1993 04/08/1993 04/08/1993 04/19/1993
04/19/1993 04/21/1993
08/12/1993 04/21/1994 04/18/2008 05/16/2008
05/16/2008 06/18/2008

LODGED NOTICE of settlement of class action to Magistrate John F Moulds (old) (Entered: 11/12/1992)
MAIL to Sacramento Office case file in 2 vol to the attn: of Tim. Also certified copy of the docket sheet (lm) (Entered: 03/11/1993)
MAIL from Fresno Office CONSISTING of transmittal letter, docket sheet, case file in 2 volumes (docs 1−48) attn: Haven (old) (Entered: 03/15/1993)
MAIL to Fresno Office CONSISTING of transmittal letter, docket sheet, case file in 2 volumes (docs 1−49) and proposed DISPOSITIONAL order for Judge Oliver Wanger (old) (Entered: 04/01/1993)
MAIL from Sacramento Office: original case file (2 vols, doc's 1 − 49) and forwarded to chambers (old) (Entered: 04/09/1993)
MAIL from Sacramento Office: original case file (3 vols, doc's 1−118) and forwarded to chambers (old) (Entered: 04/09/1993)
50 ORDER by Judge Wanger: 10 days defendant shall post jdugment in accordance with secton VII of order filed 5/4/92. Within 30 days written objections may be file. If no objections judgment will become final. Case mgmt ddl 5/24/93, no objections to 50 , judgment becomes final (cc: all counsel) (old) (Entered: 04/19/1993)
MAIL to Sacramento Office: returned to Sacramento (2 vols, doc's 1 − 50) (old) (Entered: 04/19/1993)
MAIL from Fresno Office RECEIVED consisting of transmittal letter, docket sheet and case file in 2 volumes (docs 1−50) returned as defendants are to file judgment within 10 days; objections after 30 days and then final judgment (old) (Entered: 04/21/1993)
51 NOTICE of Completion of posting period by defendant Stanislaus County and deft Sheriff Les Weidman (old) (Entered: 08/13/1993)
MAIL from Sacramento Office; volumes 1 and 2 to Fresno file room (old) (Entered: 04/21/1994)
52 MOTION Seeking Enforcement of Settlement Agreement, (filed by non−party filer: Alvis Vernon Rhodes). (Martin, S) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
53 ORDER Disregarding 52 Motion for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement; ORDER Directing Clerk's Office to Send Rhodes a Civil Rights Complaint Form, and Serve a Copy of This Order on Rhodes signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 5/15/08. (Attachments: # 1 Complaint Form and Instructions) (Verduzco, M) (Entered: 05/16/2008)
SERVICE BY MAIL: 53 Order served on Paul Wayne Comiskey, James F Goodfellow, Richard P Herman, Michael Harold Krausnick, Dan Lewis Stormer, and Alvis Rhodes. (Verduzco, M) (Entered: 05/16/2008)
54 MAIL RETURNED as Undeliverable 53 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief. Mail sent to Richard P Herman; envelope reads "wrong address". (Esteves, C) (Entered: 06/19/2008)

 
 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION
CORRECTIONS STANDARDS AUTHORITY
2011 LOCAL JAIL CONSTRUCTION FINANCING PROGRAM
AB 900 ▪ PHASE II – APPLICATION FORM
This document is not to be reformatted.

SECTION 1: PROJECT INFORMATION

A: APPLICANT INFORMATION

COUNTY NAME

AMOUNT OF STATE FINANCING REQUESTED IN THIS APPLICATION

Stanislaus

$ 80,000,000

SMALL COUNTY (200,000 OR UNDER GENERAL COUNTY

MEDIUM COUNTY (200,001 - 700,000 GENERAL COUNTY

LARGE COUNTY (700,001 + GENERAL COUNTY

POPULATION)

POPULATION)

POPULATION)

IS THIS COUNTY RELINQUISHING A CURRENTLY HELD AB 900 PHASE I CONDITIONAL AWARD?

IS THIS COUNTY SUBMITTING MORE THAN ONE APPLICATION FOR PHASE II FINANCING?

YES

NO

YES

NO

B: BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION

FACILITY NAME

Stanislaus County Public Safety Center - Jail Extension Project

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Construct 384 maximum security detention beds, 72 medical/mental health beds, Health Services Unit, Security Administration/Central Control and Programs/Day Reporting Center

STREET ADDRESS
200 E. Hackett Road

CITY

STATE

ZIP CODE

Modesto

California

95358

C. SCOPE OF WORK – INDICATE FACILITY TYPE (II, III or IV) AND CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY.

FACILITY TYPE (II, III or IV)
II

NEW STAND-ALONE FACILITY

RENOVATION/ REMODELING

ADDING BEDS AT EXISTING FACILITY

D. BEDS ADDED. Provide the number of CSA-rated beds and non-rated special use beds that will be added as a result of the project. Provide the cumulative total number of beds added as a result of the project.

A. MINIMUM SECURITY BEDS ADDED

B. MEDIUM SECURITY BEDS ADDED

C. MAXIMUM SECURITY BEDS ADDED

D. SPECIAL USE BEDS

Number of beds added

384

72

TOTAL BEDS (A+B+C+D)

456

Application Form, 01.04.11;

1

SECTION 2: BUDGET SUMMARY

A. BUDGET SUMMARY

In the table on the next page, indicate the amount of state financing requested and the amount of cash and/or in-kind contribution (match) allotted to each budget line-item the county elects to identify in order to define the total eligible project cost for purposes of this application.

The total amount of state financing requested cannot exceed 90 percent of the total eligible project cost. Counties must contribute a minimum of 10 percent of the total eligible project cost (unless the applicant is a small county requesting a reduction in the county contribution amount). C ounty contributions can be any combination of cash and/or in-kind. Small counties that petition for a reduction in the contribution amount must provide a m inimum of five percent contribution of the total eligible project costs. S mall counties requesting a r eduction in county contribution must state so in the area below, and must specify the contribution percentage being requested.

State financing limits for all counties are shown below and include current Phase I awards (not being relinquished through this Phase II application process) plus the total amount a county is requesting in Phase II.

STATE FINANCING: May not exceed (Phases I and II combined): $100,000,000 for large counties; $80,000,000 for medium counties; and $33,000,000 for small counties.

SMALL COUNTIES REQUESTING REDUCTION IN COUNTY CONTRIBUTION: A small county may petition the CSA Board for a reduction in its county contribution. This application document will serve as the petition and the CSA Board’s acceptance of the county’s contribution reduction, provided the county abides by all terms and conditions of this Phase II RFA process. Small counties requesting the reduction must still provide a minimum of five percent contribution that may be any combination of allowable cash and/or in-kind. If requesting a reduction in match contribution, complete the following (check the box and fill in the percentage).

This application includes a petition for a county contribution

reduction request as reflected in the application budget. The county

is requesting to provide

percent county contribution (cash

and/or in-kind).

Application Form, 01.04.11;

3

B. BUDGET SUMMARY TABLE (Report to nearest $1000)

LINE ITEM 1. Construction

STATE REIMBURSED
$ 71,280,000

CASH MATCH
$ 0

IN-KIND MATCH

TOTAL $ 71,280,000

2. Additional Eligible Costs*

$ 0

$ 230,000

$ 230,000

3. Architectural

$ 7,650,000

$ 0

$ 7,650,000

4. Construction Management

$ 1,070,000 $ 4,070,000

$ 5,140,000

5. CEQA

$ 50,000

$ 50,000

6. Audit

$ 30,000

$ 30,000

7. Site Acquisition

$ 500,000

$ 500,000

8. Needs Assessment

$ 140,000

$ 140,000

9. County Administration

$ 3,745,000 $ 3,745,000

10. Transition Planning

$ 735,000

$ 735,000

11. Real Estate Due Diligence

$ 0

$ 0

TOTAL ELIGIBLE PROJECT COST

$ 80,000,000

$ 4,350,000

$ 5,150,000 $ 89,500,000

PERCENT OF TOTAL

89%

5%

6%

100 %

* This line item is limited to specified fees and moveable equipment and moveable furnishings (eligible for state reimbursement or cash match), and public art (eligible for cash match only).

Provide an explanation below of how the dollar figures were determined for each of the budget line items above that contain dollar amounts. Include how state financing and the match contribution dollar amounts have been determined and calculated (be specific), and how budget items are linked to scope of work.

1. Construction (includes fixed equipment and furnishings): $71,280,000 The estimated construction budget of $71,280,000 includes escalation and initiated changes. These funds will be spent on construction only and will not be used for any moveable equipment or furnishings. Cost models were prepared for each element of each facility by two independent professional cost estimating firms.
2. Additional Eligible Costs (be specific regarding the description of, and the costs for, each of the specified fees, moveable equipment and moveable furnishings, and public art): $230,000 The additional eligible costs of $230,000 is for the off-site cost including access and utility development outside of a reasonable buffer zone.
3. Architectural (describe specifically: a) the county’s current stage in the architectural process; and b) how this translates into the county’s intentions for state reimbursement and/or cash contribution for architectural services, given the approval requirements of the SPWB and associated state reimbursement parameters): $7,650,000 The County has not initiated professional architectural design services. The County intends to request State reimbursement for architectural design services after the State

Application Form, 01.04.11;

4

Public Works Board approves the project scope. The scope of work for this category will include the preparation of bid documents, support for construction bid and award, construction administration and contract close-out. 4. Construction Management: $5,140,000 Construction Management consists of the management of costs, time, quality and information for the project totaling $5,140,000. Of the total amount, $1,070,000 is for code inspection services to be performed by an independent inspection firm. The remaining $4,070,000 consists of management costs, time, quality and information for the project. 5. CEQA: $50,000 The Project will be circulated for a Mitigated Negative Declaration in March 2012, with the updated CEQA review process to be completed by Spring 2012. Possible issues to be evaluated may include traffic, air quality, noise, land use compatibility and safety, climate change, water supply, sewer service and the public concern. 6. Audit: $30,000 It is anticipated that the County will spend $30,000 to contract with a Certified Public Accountant to complete and prepare the financial audit of the project as required by the funding guidelines. 7. Site Acquisition: $500,000 The proposed plan will occupy approximately 5 acres. An independent appraisal of the land values the site at $500,000. 8. Needs Assessment: $140,000 The Updated Needs Assessment was performed by Crout and Sida Criminal Justice Consultants, Inc., in partnership with Rosser International. 9. County Administration: $3,745,000 This in-kind match is the estimated cost for staff salary and benefits related to the project beginning July 1, 2012, and for building permits. 10. Transition Planning: $735,000 The Sheriff's Department plans to assign one Transition Sergeant throughout programming, design, and construction of the new facilities. The Sheriff's Department will assign two deputies for two years and two additional deputies for one year to develop policies and procedures, arrange supplies and services, and manage the transition to the new facilities. The actual cost may be higher since estimated salaries are in today's dollars and do not include cost of living and step increases, and increased benefit costs. 11. Real Estate Due Diligence (may not exceed $16,000): $0 The County will not seek reimbursement for Real Estate Due Diligence performed by the Department of General Services. No significant additional due diligence costs are anticipated.

Application Form, 01.04.11;

5

SECTION 3: PROJECT TIMETABLE

Prior to completing this timetable, the county must consult with all appropriate county staff (e.g., county counsel, general services, public works, county administrator) to ensure that dates are achievable. Please consult the State Capital Outlay/Corrections Standards Authority Processes and Requirements section of the Request for Applications for further information. Complete the table below indicating start and completion dates for each key event, including comments if desired. Note the required timeframes for specific milestone activities in this Phase II process. (The CSA Board intends to make conditional awards at its March 8, 2012 meeting.)

KEY EVENTS
Site assurance/comparable longterm possession within 90 days of award
Real estate due diligence package submitted within 120 days of award
Begin CEQA process within 90 days of award
State Public Works Board meeting – Project Established within 12 months of award
Schematic Design with Operational Program Statement within 18 months of award (design-bid-build projects)
Performance criteria or performance criteria and concept drawings with Operational Program Statement within 18 months of award (design-build projects)
Design Development (Preliminary drawings) with Staffing Plan
Staffing/Operating Cost Analysis approved by the Board of Supervisors
Construction Documents (Working drawings)
Construction Bids
Notice to Proceed
Construction (maximum 3 years to complete)

START DATES 3/2/2012
3/2/2012
3/2/2012

COMPLETION DATES

COMMENTS

5/24/2012

County owns entire site free and clear. Carve out for AB 900 is master-planned.

5/9/2012

Property appraisal is complete. Land is free of any encumbrances.

Existing Use Permit for site allows for expansion.

6/15/2012 Earliest date is preferred.

6/16/2012

1/31/2013

The proposed design schedule reflects a design, bid, build approach. County may seek opportunity to pursue design build approach to save time.

2/1/2013

8/7/2013

1/15/2014 6/13/2014

9/5/2013 6/16/2014 10/4/2014 10/15/2014

6/13/2014 10/3/2014 10/14/2014 7/1/2016

Application Form, 01.04.11;

6

Staffing/Occupancy within 90 days of completion

9/1/2016

10/1/2016

Application Form, 01.04.11;

7

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
A. SUMMARY Stanislaus County is ready to partner with the State of California to expand local jail capacity,
improve public safety and to implement the State’s Public Safety Realignment programs. As the first County in the State to start construction of an SB81 Project, we are prepared to successfully implement the AB 900 Phase II effort as well. We have an unencumbered Public Safety Center site, the required cash matching funds, an updated Needs Assessment, a Master Plan and are ranked second among Medium Sized Counties on the one hard preference for the allocation of AB 900 Phase II Construction Funds—Stanislaus County is fully ready to proceed! The Stanislaus County Adult Detention Needs Assessment 2011 Update clearly demonstrates a “net” deficit of 433 detention beds and the need to add medical/mental health beds to support the detention operation and the high percentage of inmates who suffer from medical and mental health issues by the Year 2018. Appendix Page 1 is a highlighted excerpt from the Executive Summary of the Updated Needs Assessment, which identifies immediate and long-term jail facility needs. The total cost to construct the facilities needed now and in the future exceed the maximum $80 million in funding available. Consequently, Stanislaus County requests funding to construct two Maximum Security Housing Units with 192 beds each, the first component of a Medical/Mental Health Unit with 72 beds and necessary support facilities, including a Security Administration and Central Control, a Health Services Unit and a Programs/Day Reporting Facility. The total estimated project cost is $89.5 million. This request for $80 million in State Lease Revenue Funds will be matched with $9.5 million in local funds and land value. Stanislaus County will fund any additional costs beyond the State’s 90% contribution and the already committed 10% match needed to successfully deliver the Project. Stanislaus County is proud of our proven track record with the Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) and grateful for the CSA staff, advice and expertise. Our projects are delivered on time and under budget, and our past performance in the use of State funds for the successful and accountable delivery of Jail Construction Projects has been demonstrated.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 1

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
B. PROJECT NEED 1. State the conclusions of your Needs Assessment including expected increases in capacity. The current inmate population in the local Detention System requires a higher security classification
level, with more physically and mentally ill inmates than ever before and the outdated jail facilities are not designed to handle this situation. There is a significant lack of adequate bed space, especially for maximum-security inmates. In order to determine which inmates to release early due to this lack of beds, the Sheriff's Office must perform a risk assessment on all inmates. Those inmates believed to pose less risk to the community must be released early to bring the Average Daily Population (ADP) to a manageable level. Of particular concern is the fact that inmates that require maximum-security housing units to control and isolate them from more vulnerable inmates are housed in medium security, while medium security inmates are often housed in minimum-security housing units. This condition reflects a detention system that is out of balance with its inmate population, and Public Safety Realignment Program (AB 109) has exacerbated this already precarious situation. For example, between October 1 and November 1, intake has conservatively exceeded the State’s projections by three times, including new commitments under AB 109 and Parole Violators with holds or new charges.
One of the direct consequences of realignment is the increased demand for inmate programs. County detention facilities have historically been designed and operated to hold primarily non-sentenced and sentenced inmates for relatively short periods of time. With the enactment of AB 109, inmates may be housed at county detention facilities for three years or more. This longer period of detention time will require that different types and a wider variety of programs be provided. Currently, there is virtually no program space at the downtown Men’s Jail and the Public Safety Center (PSC) contains very limited space for providing programs to inmates. Additional program space must be constructed at the PSC site.
The final inmate population projection in the Needs Assessment is a conservative one. There are clearly numerous factors at work in the County that have artificially suppressed the inmate population in

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 2

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
recent years. Because a true projection can only rely on available statistics and quantifiable data and not on

the estimated calculation of the impact of external future factors, this projection cannot capture the full

magnitude of probable increases in the inmate population. What is evident, based on the current inmate

profile, is that even if the ADP were to grow only slightly, the County is facing a tremendously increasing

demand for maximum-security housing. The current shortage of this type of bed, as well as the projected

inmate increase and the impact of the State’s Realignment Plan, will present a serious operational challenge

as the County attempts to proactively manage its jail population in the future. The County must focus all

future planning on closing the gap in the need for this type of bed.

2. Provide information and statistical data to support the Needs Assessment conclusions.

In Stanislaus County, the Sheriff’s Staff manage three decentralized adult detention facilities within

a 14 mile radius from downtown Modesto (See Appendix Page 2): the downtown Men’s Jail (MJ), the

Public Safety Center (PSC) in suburban Modesto and the Men’s Honor Farm (HF) in rural western

Stanislaus County. The PSC is the newest constructed facility, opened initially in December 1992. The MJ

and HF are detention facilities that were opened and have operated since the late 1950’s and early 1960’s.

Although all three are recognized as Type II facilities by the Corrections Standard Authority, the inmate

classification designations and the current detention housing designs are primarily made up of minimum

and medium security beds. Much of the current maximum-security capacity exists within the downtown

MJ.

Public Safety Center Men's Jail ‐ Downtown Honor Farm TOTAL

Total Available Beds ‐ 2011 702 342 182 1,226

Minimum Security
192 0
182 374
30.5%

Medium Security
470 298
0 768
62.6%

Maximum Security
40 44 0 84
6.9%

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 3

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE

Two principal factors are contributing to the shift in inmate population to a greater percentage classified

as “maximum security”:

a. Current capacity limitations of the County detention system result in greater use of

alternatives to custody, such as early release, alternative work programs (AWP), electronic

monitoring and a Day Reporting Facility. Lesser risk “minimum security” inmates are the

best candidates for early release programs.

b. The enactment of AB 109- Public Safety Realignment of State prison inmate population will

divert a projected 215 sentenced inmates by June 2012 and ultimately 400-500 inmates from

custody in State prison to Stanislaus County detention facilities, resulting in an increased

need to release lower security risk inmates to detention alternative programs.

The resulting projected capacity requirements, when proper classification of inmates is factored,

result in a significant shortfall of maximum-security beds.

Minimum Security Medium Security Maximum Security

Existing Capacity
374 768 84

TOTAL Planned Honor Farm Replacement *

1,226 10

TOTAL (Net Change)

1,236

*County‐only funded project currently in design.

Projected Need 350 518 801

Addt'l Need / (Surplus) ‐24 ‐250 717

1,669

443

(Net increase in capacity)

1,669

433

The downtown MJ is experiencing significant deterioration as it ages, suggesting that the 342

“rated” bed facility be replaced at the PSC in future years (not funded in this application) and additional

County funds be allocated for its continuous repair and maintenance.

3. Identify security, safety or health needs (if any).

Of the three adult detention facilities in Stanislaus County, the MJ in downtown Modesto is the

oldest and houses the most violent and highest security risk inmates within the system. To compound the

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 4

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
security challenges experienced in this old and overcrowded facility, the MJ is also the central booking location for all adult males arrested or transferred through the detention system in Stanislaus County and acts as the only downtown Court Holding Facility. On average, 175 persons are processed daily and approximately 120 inmates or detainees are delivered daily to court from all three facilities through the MJ stairwells, tiers and sally ports Another security challenge is its antiquated and linear design, with numerous blind spots and a varied and diverse classification of inmates in custody. Sheriff’s custodial staff work hard at managing this population with the limitations created by an aging and out-of-date facility. Likewise, the HF is an increasing security, safety and health risk. In addition to the need to house unsentenced and less desirable inmates due to their more elevated classification level and projected AB 109 population increases, the HF remote location approximately 14 miles from downtown Modesto makes response time from custodial facilities and other law enforcement agencies problematic. The June 2010 fire that devastated the HF compound resulted in reducing the potential available beds from 370 to 158 which, when compounded with an already deteriorating facility and housing type, begs consideration for replacement beds to be constructed at an alternate site. Like the MJ, the HF is in need of extensive maintenance and creates additional costs for operating systems.
Today, the PSC (“the new Jail”) is nearly twenty years old and some systems are outdated. There is no more room within the facility’s rapidly aging Central Control to monitor any new housing areas or security administrative services. Alarm systems are becoming obsolete and in need of replacement or repair. We have an urgent need to upgrade the security and construction of inmate housing units and staging areas to house today’s more criminally sophisticated and dangerous inmates. Finally, mental health and substance abuse issues are very difficult to manage and treat within our jail system, as it exists today. The Needs Assessment reports that up to 11% of the inmate population suffers from mental health related issues, while 80% suffer substance abuse related problems.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 5

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
4. Identify program and service needs (if any). Stanislaus County recognizes there are critical needs for seamless inmate programs and the continued development of viable job or career building service alternatives such as vocational education, parenting skills and financial planning. AB 109, Public Safety Realignment, dictates that there will be increased programs available to what were previously state inmates well beyond what counties are currently providing in existing and outdated jail facilities. This includes the addition of a Programs/Day Reporting Facility at the PSC that will focus on probationers/parolees/early detention releases. While there is limited programming space at the PSC and the HF, the MJ lacks adequate space to conduct meaningful programs to reduce recidivism. Overcrowded conditions and facility construction restrictions make it difficult to conduct the most basic programs (e.g. religious services, counseling, basic mental health programs, AA/NA classes, etc.) at that location. 5. Describe litigation, court ordered caps or consent decrees related to crowding or conditions of confinement. In March 1992, a stipulated judgment processed through the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California was issued to Stanislaus County and targeted specifically the jail facilities operated by the Sheriff's Department. The Federal Court Order in Rodriguez vs. Stanislaus County directed the County to ensure that specific conditions, practices and policies for the Sheriff's jail facilities be closely monitored. In short, Rodriguez vs. Stanislaus County requires at least the following orders:
• The judgment encompassed the MJ, HF, Female Facility (Closed in 1993) and the PSC (opened first phase December 1992).
• The Sheriff shall not house any inmate in a facility encompassed by this Judgment who is not given an assigned housing bed.
• The Sheriff of Stanislaus County is authorized by this Judgment to release or refuse to accept inmates into the jail facilities affected by this Judgment beginning whenever said facilities,

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 6

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
individually, are within ten percent of being filled to maximum capacity as defined in this Judgment. • Sheriff shall not increase bed capacity without prior notification to counsel representing
plaintiffs. • Finally, other areas falling under the responsibility of Rodriguez vs. Stanislaus County
include: providing inmates access to a law library and ensuring that the inmate population is provided access to proper medical, dental and psychiatric/psychological treatment.
6. List non-compliance findings or recommendations from state and local authorities such as CSA, Health Department, Fire Marshal, Grand Jury and Building Inspections or others.
Record-keeping and compliance requirements within Stanislaus County Sheriff's Detention Facilities have been quite detailed. The Sheriff's Bureau of Administrative Services (BAS) Unit is responsible for ensuring that compliance issues and inspections are kept up-to-date, addressed or corrected in a timely manner and recorded for the various entities to review. A review of the most recent inspections or reviews revealed the following:
• CSA Bi-annual Inspection: On April 13-15, 2011, the Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) conducted the 2010-2012 biennial inspection of the MJ, PSC and the HF facilities, managed and operated by Sheriff's Department. The facilities were inspected for compliance with physical plant and operational requirements in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Titles 15 and 24, Minimum Standards for Local Detention Facilities. Men's Jail – Type II –The following item of non-compliance is noted: Title 24 Section 470A.2.6: Single Occupancy Cell – This regulation limits the occupancy of a single occupancy cell to a maximum of one inmate. During the inspection, two inmates occupied 29 single occupancy cells. These cells were double-bunked prior to 1989. Public Safety Center – Type II - No areas of non-compliance were noted in

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 7

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
the physical plant inspections of the PSC. Honor Farm – Type II - No areas of non-compliance were noted in the physical plant inspections of the Honor Farm.
• Fire Marshal: Health and Safety Code Section 13146.1 requires an inspection for fire and life safety every two years. All of the Stanislaus County Adult Detention facilities have a current inspection and fire clearance.
• Environmental Health Standards (CSA biennial inspection): Staff from the County Department of Environmental Resources conducted Environmental Health inspections. No significant issues of non-compliance were noted. Inspectors were complimentary of the agency’s automated tracing system for maintenance repairs.
• Grand Jury Inspection: The 2010/2011 Grand Jury findings for Stanislaus County Detention facilities were as follows:
 Shut down the HF operations and use the two vacated housing units at the PSC to house the remaining inmates. Current custodial staff can also be placed at the PSC. Insurance settlements can be placed into the public facilities fund for future expansion of the PSC. (Note: These vacated PSC housing units are currently occupied with AB 109 inmates)
 Custodial staff must remain mindful of complying with the federal consent decree.  Staffing levels are well below what is appropriate for the community members of Stanislaus County. Stanislaus County shall adhere to the standards contained within the U.C. Irvine report of one custodial deputy for every 6.46 inmates.  Increase staffing levels to ensure the safety of staff, inmates and the public.  The Sheriff’s Department shall be part of the site selection planning authority for the location of the new courthouse and conduct a needs assessment to see if a new men’s jail can be constructed at this location.  Staffing level updates need to be upgraded to ensure public safety.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 8

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
 Enhance the monitoring/video technology for safety/security.  County health care officials will ensure compliance, accreditation, and satisfactory service and closely monitor CCS. 7. Discuss your Average Daily Population (ADP) as compared to system capacity. As detailed in Section C of the Stanislaus County Adult Detention Needs Assessment 2011 Update, the average daily population (ADP) in Stanislaus County’s adult detention facilities reached its peak in September 2007, when it averaged 1,429 for the month. The population declined from an average of 1,384 in 2007 to 1,130 in 2010, a decrease of 18.4%. Most of this decline, however, occurred from 2009 to 2010. From January through July 2011, the population continued to run below 2010 population levels, in part due to artificial suppression of the population in response to unprecedented local budget reductions to the Sheriff’s Department and the resulting undesirable placement of inmates into jail alternative programs. Despite the drops in average daily population, there have been increases within the length of stay and the type of crime and inmate classification level. Housing assignments are made based on classification criteria, within the limitations of the number and type of beds available. As witnessed throughout California jails, the number of maximum security, administrative segregation, and segregation beds – single or double beds – is limited. In Stanislaus County, Adult Detention housing assignments are constantly challenged to follow classification guidelines. For example: Stanislaus County is forced to house higher classification inmates in lower security settings; serious and violent offenders and gang affiliates are currently housed in dorm cells instead of single or double bunked cells for better segregation efficiency and Protective Custody inmates are housed in the same unit, which poses a security risk. The conditions existing in these facilities pose a threat to the safety and security of the staff, inmates and visitors. The following chart displays the percentage of inmates within the inmate population who are classified as Maximum Security, regardless of actual assignment to less secure housing units. The 2011 Needs Assessment specifically points out that the inmate population statistics, which speak to the impact of

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 9

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
the lower ADP on future facility planning, is simply an indication of inmate quantity, not inmate “quality.” The current and emerging inmate profile is one that will largely require a higher security setting and proper supervision. The majority of the current detention beds do not meet the safety and security needs for the inmates housed today in our jails and are woefully inadequate to meet the increasingly serious offenders in the County Jail.

Section F of the Stanislaus County Adult Detention Needs Assessment 2011 Update further details that even though the population trends for incarcerated inmates drop from 2007 to 2011, a certain percentage of this drop in population can no doubt be attributed to other forces, such as significant budget reductions resulting in closure of detention beds, an increase in numbers and higher custody levels of inmates assigned to the Alternative Work Program and Departmental policy changes, such as an aggressive

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 10

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
cite and release policy by the Sheriff’s Department. Based on the current inmate profile, if the ADP were to grow only slightly, we are facing a tremendous demand for maximum-security housing.
8. To the degree possible, provide the latest available demographic data (enumerated below), including trend data, if applicable, and relate the data to facility needs:
a. County population estimates; Population growth statistics from the California Department of Finance are depicted on Appendix Page 3, which shows the County’s population has continued to grow since the 1940s, ranging from a low of 17.16% population growth from 1990 to 2000 to a high of 41.16% between 1940 and 1950. The growth rate has averaged 25.36% per decade since the 1940s, and the median growth rate over the last six decades was 19.67 %. The California Department of Finance projects the County population to increase by 19.32 between 2000 and 2010 (Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, November 2006).
b. County crime statistics; The 2011 Needs Assessment updated report indicates that it is important to note that while the crime rates are dropping in California, the drop has not been across the board for all crimes in Stanislaus County and the other Northern San Joaquin Valley counties of Merced and San Joaquin. Several crimes rate differences are exhibited in Appendix Page 4.
c. Crowding and bed need estimates; Changes have occurred in policy decisions and incarceration practices in Stanislaus County, as well as across the State, and there are several major forces at work outside the County’s control. Projections provided within the Needs Assessment cannot incorporate these types of future occurrences. This approach to planning should be considered a conservative one. The Chart on the following page illustrates the existing inventory of beds, the projected needs through the year 2018 and the impact of the proposed AB 900 Phase II project on the jail inventory.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 11

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE

Note: Given efficient podular design for typical construction and staffing , the 1,669 total beds needed equate to 1,692 beds to be constructed.

d. includes:

Detention facility population data as reported to CSA in the latest Profile Survey that

1) Inmates with felony versus misdemeanor charges;

The County’s detention population was analyzed ba sed on the seriousness of the charge for which

the person was detained. Both felo ny and m isdemeanor populations h ave declined in recen t years. Th e

number of inmates in detention fo r a felony charge has decreased overa ll since 2007, while the num ber of

inmates with a misdemeanor charge has declined since 2008.

Felony Inmate ADP

Misdemean

or Inmate ADP

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 12

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
a) Inmates with violent versus non-violent charges Data pulled from the “Inmates Today” report, which is a one-day snapshot of the Stanislaus County adult detention facilities, indicates that there were 1,057 inmates in custody on October 17, 2011. Of these, 611 were for violent charges, as defined in Penal Code Sections 667.5 and 446 for non-violent charges.
2) Pre-trial/pre adjudicated versus convicted/adjudicated offenders; Categorizing inmates by court status (un-sentenced or sentenced) reveals that the downward trend in the overall detention population is being driven by the decline in the number of sentenced offenders in the population. While the number of un-sentenced inmates held in detention has fluctuated over the last four years, the number of sentenced inmates fell 44% from 2007 to 2010.
Average Daily Population (ADP) of Un-sentenced and Sentenced Inmates

3) Any additional data to support your application. In Stanislaus County, inmate-housing assignments are currently made based on a classification evaluation, within the limitations of the number and type of beds available. Since the number of maximum security, administrative segregation, and segregation beds – whether single or double beds – is limited within the existing facilities operated by the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department, housing assignment cannot follow classification guidelines. The County is forced to house higher classifications of inmates in

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 13

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE

lower security settings. This poses a threat to the safety and security of the staff, visitors and inmates in

these facilities. Appendix Page 5 clearly displays the percentage of inmates within the inmate population

who are classified as Maximum Security, regardless of actual assignment to less secure housing units.

Additional Maximum Security Beds are urgently needed.

9. Provide any additional information needed to support the size and complexity of the proposed project.

In June 2010, the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department was enormously impacted by a Reduction

in Force (RIF) precipitated, in part, by difficult economic times and unprecedented reductions in local

property tax revenues. About the same time as the RIF at the HF, a fire destroyed 172 beds (Barracks 1 and

2). It should also be noted that in 2008, sections of Barracks 4 at the HF were closed due to dilapidated

living conditions. Since 2007, there are still 268 fewer beds available. The fire that destroyed Barracks 1

and 2 created an even more significant challenge to provide jail beds to house inmates in Stanislaus

County.

The chart below illustrates the total bed capacity since 2007 for the Stanislaus County Detention

Facilities and the changes proposed with the construction of the AB 900 Phase II project.

HISTORICAL / EXISTING

Year 2007
2008 2010 2011 2011
2012
2018

Historical and Proposed Detention Bed Availability 2007-2018

Men's Jail 396
396 396 -52 = 344 -2 = 342
342
342

Public Safety Center
726
726
726 726
-24 = 702
702 +192
894 + 384
+72 456

Honor Farm
370
-32 = 338 -140 = 198
-16 = 182 182
-182 = 0
-

TOTAL CAPACITY Notes
1,492 Numbers reflect the design capacity for the detention system plus non-Title 24 CCR compliant beds.
1,460 Honor Farm Barracks 4 closure due to conditions.
1,320 Honor Farm fire destroyed Barracks 1 and 2
1,252 Adjustment to exclude 'non-compliant' beds. This is the Design Capacity.
1,226 Adjustment to exclude non-rated, Title 24 compliant beds. This is the Rated Capacity.

1,236
1,692 1,692

Addition of Honor Farm Replacement Facility Closure of the Existing Honor Farm Facility
New AB900-II Maximum Security Beds New Unrated Medical/Mental Health Facility Total Proposed Bed Capacity Total Proposed Bed Capacity

PROPOSED

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 14

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
At the HF, located approximately 14 miles from downtown Modesto, the classification type of the inmate housed has changed significantly over the past fifty years. This dramatic shift in the classification type of inmate currently housed at the HF directly impacted the type of replacement facility to be considered for reconstruction and the site location of that reconstruction or replacement of space. Both the original 1988/1989 Master Plan and its most current 2011 Needs Assessment update recommend the eventual closure of the HF. On December 13, 2011, the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors (BOS) approved the Updated Needs Assessment and Master Plan, which details inmate bed and housing needs through year 2018. At the same December 13, 2011 BOS Meeting, the BOS unanimously approved the submission of this application for the 2011 AB 900 Phase II Construction or Expansion Of County Jails Program and is prepared to commit to an overall total project cost of $89.5 million. C. DETENTION ALTERNATIVES
1. Demonstrate all appropriate steps to reduce overcrowding have been undertaken. Rodriguez vs. Stanislaus County places a maximum inmate housing capacity on Stanislaus County jail facilities. As detailed in the Sheriff's Adult Detention Division Policy, the Sheriff will establish a "flexible capacity" (Flex Cap) schedule or list of release criteria to assist detention. When “flex cap” is reached at any facility, Sheriff’s staff initiate a number of steps until the population is manageable and at acceptable levels, some described as follows: release sentenced inmates (3 day pass) per section 4019 PC; invoke accelerated release per 4024.1 PC; release low level misdemeanants; sentenced inmates will be released to ICE 120 days prior to release date; other agencies will be notified 90 days in advance to arrange transportation of their inmates; eligible sentenced inmates (365 days) transferred to Jail Alternatives Program; pre-trial misdemeanor remands will be released by citation per 853.6 PC; all pre-trial felony arrests certified as pre-trial misdemeanors will be released by citation per 853.6; most misdemeanor arrests are refused at booking and release qualifying felony/misdemeanor inmates to the Day Reporting Facility (DRF) for supervision and programs delivered by County Probation.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 15

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
Recent public budget challenges have had a significant impact on the County jails. As a result of the economic downturn, Stanislaus County's operating budget has been significantly reduced, and the Sheriff’s Department has been forced to reduce the staffing levels within the jail system. Consequently, several housing units were closed and inmates released in order to sustain a safe minimum staffing level working and housing environment. On June 26, 2010, a fire occurred at the HF, which destroyed 172 beds (Barracks 1 and 2), and these beds were permanently lost in addition to other beds deemed no longer useable, overall resulting in a reduction of the current inventory of beds from 1,492 to 1,226. Partnering with the Sheriff’s Department, the Stanislaus County Capital Projects team is currently designing a partial replacement of the 172 HF beds lost in the fire with an updated and compliant 192-bed type II facility, to be relocated at the PSC site but not within the proposed AB 900 carved out project area.
2. Describe programs, existing or new, designed to reduce recidivism. Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Program -Stanislaus County has developed collaborative approaches to the identification of mentally ill offe nders and some pre-release planning for their ongoing care after custody. Although State gran t funding has been elim inated, programs continue to challenge the provision of these critical services. This program continues to pr ovide services by partnering with th e Probation Department, Stanislaus County Superior Court, District Attorney, Public Defender, local Mental Health Professionals and the Sheriff’s Department. Stanislaus County has an ex tensive array of program s and services addressing the m ental health needs of adult offenders . Among others, program s include the Behavioral Health and Recovery Services Adult System of Care (ASOC); Adult Drug Court ; Restorative Policing and The In tegrated Forensic Team (IFT.); Friend’s Outside provides in-custody program s and services for the inmate population, including Breaking Barriers, job development workshops, Parenting and T.A.L.K (Teaching and Loving Kids), Sto ry Time Video and anger m anagement courses; Stanislaus Literacy Center provides two m ajor programs, GED Pr eparation and Literacy Instruction; Chaplain Services provides Chaplain Services for the inmate population; AIDS Testing and Sexually T ransmitted

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 16

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
Disease Awareness is provided by the County Health Services Ag ency, with the primary task of the Local Implementation Group to develop a com prehensive HIV plan based on scientific evidence and community values and in response to the local epid emic; Men in Recovery & Wom en of Wisdom is managed by Stanislaus County Behavioral Hea lth Services to provide extensiv e alcohol and narcotic awareness programs in the detention faci lities and the W elding Program is sponsored by Modesto City Schools to provide a welding program at the PSC and is re stricted to sentenced, in-custody inm ates who qualify and Jail Alternative participants, as assigned.
3. Demonstrate efforts to implement a risk-based detention system (or other appropriate model) related to the decision to incarcerate or not incarcerate offenders.
The BAS is the centralized authority responsible for the classification of inmates in Stanislaus County. The proper classification of inmates is critical in the county jail system, particularly due to the age of the MJ and the lack of single and double cells at the HF to properly separate and segregate inmates. Mixed classifications, along with insufficient holding cells for inmates being transported to court, present a number of challenges for staff and security. The overcrowded conditions at the existing adult detention facilities and lack of sufficient beds to hold the number of inmates that should be in custody further exacerbates the difficulty in classification.
Despite these challenges, the Sheriff’s classification deputies are doing a remarkable job of properly classifying and separating inmates according to classification criteria. The primary purposes of the classification system in the Stanislaus County Adult Detention facilities are to properly assign inmates to housing units and activities according to specific categories/criteria and make objective classification decisions to provide for the safety and security of the staff and prisoners. All newly received inmates are initially classified to determine their level of security and immediate needs in terms of personal, criminal, medical and social history. All classification deputies use the Offense Charge Scale during the initial custody assessment. The inmate’s classification is reviewed 30 days after the initial custody assessment to determine if re-classification is needed. The classification status of inmates is identified by Hazard Codes.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 17

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
4. Provide a history of actions taken to alleviate crowding. A “Flex Cap” was determined as a result of the Rodriguez vs. Stanislaus County class action lawsuit and is generally initiated when a facility reaches or exceeds a specific inmate population. When the Flex Cap maximum is reached at any detention facility, Sheriff’s shift sergeants are authorized to initiate a number of steps or consider initiation of specific early release mechanisms until the population is manageable and at acceptable levels. Some of these steps are described below:
• Invoke accelerated release orders; • Ensure early release order is invoked as authorized by California Penal Code Section 4024.1 (inmates may be release who are within 10% of their total sentence, not to exceed 5 days) • Release sentenced inmates per Penal Code Section 4018.6 (3-day pass); • Some un-sentenced m isdemeanor inmates are tr ansferred to anothe r facility or cita tion released; • Some misdemeanor arrests found to be not in compliance are refused at booking; and • Eligible sentenced inm ates in their last 365 da ys are transferred to the Alternative Work Program. 5. Identify how long various programs have been in place and how successful they have been in reducing reliance on confinement. Stanislaus County offers a variety of detention alternatives to ensure detention is used as a sanction only when absolutely necessary. These jail alternative programs resulted in an average of 799 inmates released or on programs every day in 2010: Alternative Work Program - This program, started in October 1987 is fee-supported, pursuant to Penal Code Section 4024.2, and has a daily participant average of 725 for 2011. The maximum sentence for participation in this program is 365 days. Work Furlough, School Furlough and Job Training Program This is a fee-supported process where length of commitment is not an issue. The original program was

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 18

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
started in 1972 and the job training programs were initiated in February 1996. Electronic Monitoring Program - This is another fee-supported process where length of commitment is not an issue. The program, with authorization from the Board of Supervisors, was started in May 1992 and had an average daily population of 80 in 2011. Sheriff’s Parole - This program was started pursuant to Penal Code Section 3074. Sheriff’s Parole is open to any sentenced inmate who has completed one-third of their commitment. There were no inmates placed on this program in 2010. Day Reporting Facility (DRF) – On October 11, 2009, Senate Bill 678 provided funding for Probation Departments throughout California to provide program services. The DRF serves as a “one stop shop” for offenders to report to their Probation Office, make payments to victims and the probation department, drug/alcohol testing and access to a myriad of services, including Drug/Alcohol/Cognitive Behavioral Courses, GED Courses, Anger Management Counseling, Property Crimes Workshop, Cognitive Life Skills Maturity Courses, Probation Services Meetings and Chaplain Services. The center also provides an alternative to incarceration or a split sentence between incarceration and DRF. A temporary location is being used currently for the DRF.
6. Describe current population management measures and how effective they have been. The Flex Cap policy and practice is monitored daily; however, the demands on the facilities are ever changing and growing. Between the last new jail construction in 1998 and October 2006, average length of stay has risen since 1996 from 16.15 days to 170 days in 2011. This change, combined with the increased population, has caused the Sheriff's Department to respond with several options and practices as follows: • Increased Cite and Release, going further down the Sheriff’s release criteria list; • More adjudication pushed into the future as people fail to appear after being cited out; • 100 beds were double bunked in late 2007, increasing the total system capacity from 1,392 to
1,492; • Double Bunking started as a replacement for beds at the HF to house more serious offenders at
the PSC as a short-term relief to overall population. However, population pressure necessitated

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 19

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
use of the HF beds and the majority of the population are un-sentenced inmates, increasing the overall population housed by 100. The Sheriff modified the citing and release policy and modified the Emergency Release Process to Alternative Work Program (AWP) for sentenced inmates to provide some level of structure to their “early release.” In October 2006, as authorized in Sheriff’s policy, staff engaged in an emergency release mechanism to release sentenced inmates who otherwise might not meet eligibility requirements to the Jail Alternatives Unit for placement into the AWP. Participant populations nearly doubled since the engagement of this release mechanism. In February 2007, the County authorized the Sheriff to increase the sentence eligibility for AWP participants from 45 days to 90 days. This program received authorization again in 2010 to increase the eligibility to 365 days. The Home Detention Program has increased its level of supervision and the number of Electronic Monitoring units available to allow placement of higher risk inmates, including AB 109 cases, back into the community as another necessary release method. Subsequently, program participant failures have increased as well as the number of warrants for arrest due to failure to appear and other program rule violations. There are options to consider instead of releasing inmates early, but that would mean that staff would be required to focus on the other end of the Booking/Housing/Releasing process and thereby attempt to ascertain which types of arrests should no longer be accepted for booking into the detention facilities. On June 16, 2010, the Sheriff made notification to local agencies related to only booking a limited number of qualifying misdemeanors. Changes have been made to accelerate the release of inmates who have holds/warrants from other agencies. D. SCOPE OF WORK AND PROJECT IMPACT 1. Describe the proposed scope of work specifically payable from state funds, cash and in-kind contribution and other county borne costs. • Two Maximum Security Housing Units (192 beds each) – Each housing unit includes: secure sally port entry, unit control room for six 32 cell sections -“double bunked”, video visitation cubicles, showers, secure dayroom and outdoor recreation space, retherm kitchen and multipurpose and

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 20

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
interview rooms. A conceptual rendering of a proposed Maximum Security Housing Unit as depicted in our 2008 Master Plan can be seen on Appendix Page 6.
• One Medical/Mental Housing Unit (72 beds) – 72 beds are a mixture of single and double bunks combined with several special needs and handling holding areas. Also included are secure sally port entry, secure staff and unit control space, retherm kitchen, showers and video visitation cubicles, secure dayroom and outdoor recreation area and multipurpose and interview rooms. A conceptual rendering of the Medical Housing Unit and Health Services space as detailed in our 2008 Master Plan can be seen on Appendix Page 7.
• Health Services – includes medical staff offices, secure records space, holding cell, dental services, equipment room and workstation, pharmacy, conference room, laboratory, exam rooms, sheltered housing, anteroom and officer and nurse workstations.
• Security Administration (Control) Facility – Includes; central control, sally port entry, armory and key control, staff briefing, facility commander and other shift and watch office space, multipurpose and interview rooms.
• Programs/Day Reporting Facility – facility includes public lobby and reception area, administration space, processing area, classrooms, multipurpose room, counseling rooms.
• Off-Site Costs – Includes access to the AB 900 Phase II project site development outside of a reasonable buffer zone
• Site Work – Includes security fencing, employee parking and project driveway. These facilities will meet part of the projected population needs identified in the Stanislaus County Adult Detention Needs Assessment 2011 Update, together with the anticipated housing needs generated from the Public Safety Realignment legislation. Stanislaus County proposes to use a unique opportunity of funding options available to use as cash and in-kind match. With these unique and available funding opportunities and the combined state funding, Stanislaus County will be better able to adhere to inmate classification

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 21

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
housing issues and compliant rated bed needs for the future. Appendix Pages 8 and 9 provide the Proposed Project Summary and Highlights for the AB 900 Phase II Project.
2. Define whether the project expands an existing facility or if it creates a new one. The project expands the existing PSC Detention Facilities. The existing bed capacity of 726 beds at the PSC will be increased by 384 maximum security beds and 72 medical/mental health beds, totaling 1,182 beds at the Public Safety Center. 3. Indicate if the County already owns the site. Stanislaus County wholly owns the property on which the PSC sits and the site for the AB 900 Project. Current Title Reports were obtained in November 2011 and the land identified for the Project Scope is unencumbered from any other financing and can be dedicated to the lease revenue State Financing. Approximately 100 acres, targeted for Jail Expansion, is surrounded by existing and planned County facilities acting as buffer and will serve as the County’s detention location for generations to come. The AB 900 funded construction portion of the expansion project will be located in a carved-out section, which will provide access and separation from existing and future construction during the grant authorized time period. Examples of improvements outside the carved-out section of the AB 900 proposed project include improvements to project entryway and related utility connections for water, sewer, and electric lines. 4. Describe how the scope of work will meet identified needs, or mitigate/remedy/improve conditions to address the described need. The AB 900 project will provide state-of-the-art, new generation, direct visual supervision podular designed adult detention facilities, which will meet Title 15 & 24 of the California Code of Regulations; Provide a safe and secure environment for staff, visitors, volunteers and adults with a well defined secure perimeter that includes fencing, pedestrian and vehicular sally ports; Include a new central control and security administration space that controls the secure perimeter and has visual supervision of the housing units and recreation areas as well as other secure areas and a Program / Day Reporting Facility.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 22

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
5. Contrast pre-construction conditions with post-construction conditions, including, if applicable, construction project impact on: a) law; b) compliance with regulations; c) conditions of confinement; d) facility programming; e) continuum of community care; f) safety; g) security; h) health issues and i) program space intended for rehabilitative programs and services designed to reduce recidivism.
a. Law There are not enough beds to meet adult detention inmate classification requirements in the near future. This situation is exacerbated by the AB 109 Public Safety Realignment, which will require counties to house what were previously state inmates sentenced to prison for specified non-violent, non-serious and non-sex offenders and the bulk of state parole violators. If additional beds are not constructed, local criminals who should serve detention time will not serve any time, while other felons may continue to be released early and risk violation of current State and Federal compliance or restrictions. With the AB 900 construction funding, the newly added /reclassified beds will ensure that Stanislaus County could maintain state and federal compliances and reduce the overcrowding/early release of its own local inmates.
b. Compliance with regulations All new beds will be constructed at the PSC. The PSC will remain a Type II Facility (i.e. a local detention facility used, based on classification and security level, for the detention of persons pending arraignment, during trial and upon sentence of commitment as defined in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations). Current housing areas at the MJ and HF are not sufficient for security and housing needs of current and anticipated inmate populations. The AB 900 Phase II financing program will assist in improving these conditions by constructing higher-level security and modern facilities at the Central Public Safety Center.
c. Conditions of confinement Currently there are 1,226 beds at three jail locations. The proposed AB 900 Phase II construction project will add 384 rated maximum-security detention beds within a cell configuration of at least six double bunked sections within each housing pod at the PSC. As a result of this Project, the County’s total

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 23

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
capacity will increase by 384 Maximum Security Beds for a total of 1,610 beds. In addition, the County has specific plans and is currently designing a partial replacement of the HF beds lost in the fire of June 2010, which will result in the closure of the HF, and a net increase overall of 10 additional beds, for a total of 1,620 beds at two locations, the MJ and the PSC. In addition, the Project will provide for 72 medical/mental health beds. The conditions of confinement will improve dramatically as a result of the Project and provide modern and more secure and classification appropriate detention facilities.
d. Facility programming The Program and Master Plan provide future design options for detention facilities where housing cells will be positioned around the perimeter of a common dayroom, forming a housing/living unit. Expansion of this design concept will allow more opportunities for secure surroundings, while providing the majority of services for each housing/living unit (such as dining, medical exam/sick call, programming, school, etc.) to occur in a self contained space. In short, more inmate services with less inmate movement in the facility.
e. Continuum of community care All male inmate booking and intake processing occurs at the MJ and is located in a space that is overcrowded, unsafe and in need of replacement. Located adjacent to the existing PSC and outside of the proposed carve-out for AB 900 Phase II, a new intake/release/processing center (to be built at the County’s sole expense) will be constructed at the PSC site. This new facility, again to be constructed separately in the future by the County, will serve as the hub and central point of activity for the addition of any new beds at the PSC site. Key services located within portions of the Administrative and Staff Support may include, but not be limited to holding cells, safety cells, sobering cells, showers for inmates, toilet facilities for staff and inmates, inmate property storage areas, medical and mental health triage rooms, processing areas, administrative office spaces and interview rooms and pedestrian and vehicular sally ports.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 24

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
f. Safety The configuration of the current detention facilities requires extraordinary effort to ensure safety and compliance. In the new plan, all staff stations will be ergonomically designed and all work areas or access ways will meet County, State and Federal safety regulations. Sheriff's staff will ensure that all safety manuals are kept current and are compliant with all guidelines. As stated earlier, all housing and other inmate areas will be located appropriately and according to federal and state standards.
g. Security Due to its linear design, the MJ provides insufficient security and response access for staff. The HF has been devastated by fire and continues to require repair and maintenance. The PSC is nearly 20 years old and requires security system upgrades, detention bed and housing unit reconditioning and numerous other evaluations to ensure support services remain sufficient for the increased population. In the new construction, staff stations will be located within a distance sufficient to respond to emergencies or to conduct day-to-day security rounds and checks. A double fenced secure perimeter will be added at the PSC site. The two fences will be separated by at least twenty feet. Closed Circuit Television coverage monitored by Sheriff Staff in the Central Control area will be provided for the fence line.
h. Health issues Currently, there are limited or shared areas used for medical services and storage. Often times, medical equipment is stored in exam rooms. Also, records require additional space for more secure storage. Once new construction is completed, additional medical examination rooms and secure pharmaceutical storage will be provided for medical screening and routine medical care. More advanced care, which cannot be provided at existing Stanislaus County detention facilities will be provided outside of the facility. Mental health professionals will evaluate inmates and provide mental health programs as necessary. Interview rooms and program space will be provided for this purpose.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 25

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
i. Program space intended for rehabilitative programs and services designed to reduce recidivism.
Stanislaus County has long been at the leading edge of program delivery. This is due, in part, to being awarded and managing successful grants and State/National recognition awards. As detailed earlier in the narrative, Stanislaus County obtained approval from our Board of Supervisors to establish an AB 109/AB 900 required Community Corrections Partnership Committee, which identified various programming and alternative means of housing for the purpose of assisting with inmate rehabilitation and recidivism. With additional space added and continued funding; the County can continue to deliver excellent program services. The proposed program rooms will be provided at each housing unit within the Public Safety Center – Construction /Expansion project. Activities that will occur in these spaces include adult education, religious services and counseling, AA and NA classes, mental health evaluations and classes, along with other life-skill and job/career preparatory programs to reduce recidivism. E. ADMINISTRATIVE WORK PLAN
1. Describe the current stage of the planning process including the current status of addressing CEQA requirements.
On January 10, 2008, the Board of Supervisors authorized the issuance of a request for proposals for the PSC Jail Expansion Project – Programming Phase. The contracted consultant (Crout & Sida Criminal Consultants with Rosser International) worked closely with the Project Team to develop an architectural program with a comprehensive list of interior and exterior space requirements. This jail Master Planning effort identifies characteristics and operations for each space and adjacency requirements with workflow considerations and diagrams. The master plan document was completed in December 2008. Brought on, in part, by concerns regarding the effects of AB 109 – Public Safety Realignment, the Needs Assessment and Master Plan were updated in the Fall, 2011. The Project will be circulated for a Mitigated Negative Declaration in December 2011. The updated CEQA review process will be complete by Spring 2012.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 26

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
2. Describe the plan for the project design. In April 2011, a set of goals and objectives were adopted by the Board of Supervisors to ensure that current philosophy and facility design will assist general facility operation. The new set of goals and objectives further ensure that staff and those remanded to the custody of the Stanislaus County Sheriff are provided with safe, secure, and humane treatment, consistent with applicable standards, laws and judicial decisions. Medical and mental health care, nutritious meals and a hygienic clean environment will be provided to inmates in the custody of the Stanislaus County Sheriff. Religious materials and counseling as well as educational opportunities shall be provided to inmates where security permits. The continuity of family and community contact will be encouraged by appropriate policies governing visiting, telephone usage, volunteer involvement and mail. 3. Provide the project timeline and milestones. Stanislaus County’s PSC – Jail Expansion project team has been vigorously engaged in the planning for additional detention beds and future support services needs at the PSC site since June 2007. The County’s Public Safety Center’s Use Permit allows for the recommended expansion. The County intends, at its own expense, to initiate Program Verification prior to the award of the AB 900 funds in order to aggressively seek State Public Works Board approval of the Project Scope prior to June 2012 if allowed. The Project is projected for completion in 2016 (see Section Three of this Application for full schedule). The County is interested in considering a Design Build approach for the project to accelerate the completion of these critically needed facilities. 4. Describe the plan for project management (including key staff names and titles). The PSC – Jail Bed Expansion project will be managed by the County’s Chief Operations Officer and a collaborative team from the Stanislaus County Chief Executive Office, including professional Capital Projects staff and Construction Management professionals, working in a team environment with Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson and his Detention Executive Leadership Team. The team is organized to

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 27

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
provide an executive level of involvement in the project. Decision-making includes key individuals from the Chief Executive Office Leadership Team, as well as the Sheriff’s Department Executive Team. Community input will be sought as expansion plans are developed. The core project management team will primarily consist of the following:
• Patricia Hill Thomas - Chief Operations Officer; Don Phemister - Senior Construction Manager; Tim Fedorchak - Senior Management Consultant; Mark Loeser, Associate Management Consultant; Darrell Long - Sheriff’s Liaison / Management Consultant
• Adam Christianson - Sheriff-Coroner; Captain Bill Duncan; Lieutenant Gregg Clifton, Public Safety Center; Sergeant Jim Jacobs, Transition Sergeant
5. Describe the plan for project administration (including key staff names and titles). The actions recommended and later approved by the Board of Supervisors for the PSC – Jail Bed Expansion project are intended to address the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors priorities of A Safe Community, A Healthy Community, Effective Partnerships and Efficient Delivery of Public Services by creatively and effectively addressing local detention needs. This capital projects effort will be administered by the Chief Executive Office in a team environment working directly with the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department along with other county and public agencies as needed. Governing Board Representation and Policy Guidance will be provided by the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors : William O’Brien Supervisor, District 1; Vito Chiesa - Supervisor, District 2; Terry Withrow - Supervisor, District 3; Dick Monteith - Supervisor, District 4; Jim DeMartini - Supervisor, District 5 6. Describe what the County will do to demonstrate their readiness to precede with the Project. As stated earlier, Stanislaus County’s PSC – Jail Expansion project team has been aggressively engaged in preparation for the potential construction of additional beds and future support services needs at the Public Safety Center site since June 2007, well before the passage of AB 109-Public Safety Realignment Laws. We are proud of our track record and working relationship with the Corrections

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 28

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
Standard Authority and the California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitations. On December 13, 2011 Stanislaus County CEO and Sheriff’s Department staff presented to the BOS the following recommendations for approval:
• Approval of the Needs Assessment and Public Safety Center Expansion Master Plan; Approval of the Financing Plan as recommended by the Debt Advisory Committee, including the commitment of $9.5 million in required matching funds; Authorize the submission of the Application to the Corrections Standards Authority for $80 million in State Lease Revenue Bond Financing; Approve the Formal Resolutions as required by the State Financing Program; Direct Staff to proceed to initiate current CEQA Compliance for the Project and Issue Request for Qualifications for a Program Validation Phase to be funded by the County.
The record is clear; Stanislaus County is prepared to proceed immediately to construct the AB 900 Phase II Construction Project, if awarded funds by the State. Our Sheriff and his team and our dedicated Capital Projects Division of the CEO’s Office is experienced and prepared to deliver a successful project for the State and the County and demonstrate a successful partnership for corrections realignment.
Stanislaus County meets the one hard preference for the allocation of Phase II funding as the second ranked County in the Medium Sized Counties Category. This ranking demonstrates the need for the detention facilities and the related support services required. The required cash match is dedicated to the project by Board of Supervisors Resolution 2011-745. Programming, Master Planning and Needs Assessment updates are complete. These documents are included with this Application, as well as 2011 updated Needs Assessment, which specifically details and confirms the most recent and current needs for the projected inmate growth in Stanislaus County. Appendix Page 10 depicts the Planned Site Configuration for the Project. Preparation is well under way to begin to meet all remaining CEQA and Due Diligence requirements. Our Community Corrections Partnership Committee has been authorized by the

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 29

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
BOS and is operational. Finally we have our BOS Resolutions in hand and ready for delivery as required by the AB 900 Jail Construction Financing RFA. The County is ready to proceed.
7. Describe the functions and responsibilities of project staff/contractors. The Chief Executive Office will manage the Project, and County staff will comprise the Project Team. Professional Design and Construction Management services will be contracted as well as legal resources. The General Contractor will be sought in accordance with the State Public Works Contracts Code, Public Bidding Requirements. 8. Describe the monitoring/control protocols that will ensure successful project completion.
Stanislaus County has completed several successful construction projects in partnership with the State, as well as private and community partnerships. Historically, these projects have come in on time and under budget. A talented, experienced and dedicated project team approach will be used for the AB 900 Project. Regular public reporting and strict adherence to Project and Construction Management Protocols will ensure our success. This team has completed successfully hundreds of millions of dollars of public construction projects together. The Board of Supervisors commitment is demonstrated by Board Resolution, which accompanies this application. F. PLAN FOR ADEQUATE STAFFING OF THE FACILITY
1. Describe the County’s plan for staffing the Facility within 90 days of its completion The County's long-range plan calls for the closure of the aging MJ and HF Facilities. The AB 900 Phase II project will provide funding for the construction of the additional 384 Maximum Security Beds needed but not for the full closure of the older facilities. Upon completion of the AB 900 Phase II Project, with the construction of 384 Maximum Security Beds, the County commits to incrementally staff and operate the additional facilities through a phased process that will ensure adequate staffing is provided for the population detained. A phased opening of the new facilities will occur based on the housing demands

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 30

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
faced by the Sheriff's Department, the local economic recovery and by the transition of staffing from the MJ at the Sheriff's discretion. It is the County's goal to fully open the new facilities as soon as possible
2. Describe the cost-efficiency or other measures the County is intending in order to minimize the staffing impact on the long-term operation costs of the facility to be constructed.
The existing, antiquated type of jail beds focuses special attention by Jail Administrators and Watch Sergeants to constantly review reevaluate and determine housing locations for inmates, who are placed into housing areas or cells that normally would be intended for a lower classification level individual. First, the County Detention locations will be reduced from three to two with the partial replacement of the beds lost from the Honor Farm fire. The programmed housing units are less staff intensive due to their higher level of security construction requiring fewer fixed posts than the existing facilities. Finally, remote visiting will minimize the staffing impact as the “in-housing unit” visiting technology and remote location for visitors will reduce staffing needs. G. EFFECTS OF REALIGNMENT
1. Describe the anticipated effects that AB 109, Criminal Justice Realignment, will have on the County’s Adult Detention System
The Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department anticipates that the enactment of AB 109, Public Safety Realignment, has clearly exacerbated local efforts to provide viable public safety and retain dangerous criminals in custody due to a shortage of available detention beds. When AB 109 was implemented on October 1, 2011, all three local detention facilities were already operating at or near maximum capacity, except for 150 beds at the PSC and 72 beds at the HF that were left vacant due to a mandated reduction in work force related to dire economic conditions in this county. On October 1st, the 150 beds at the PSC were reactivated as Phase I of the county’s plan to implement AB 109. As of November 15, 2011, we had already received 108 parole violators from the state prison system and 64 newly sentenced inmates under AB 109. In essence, the newly activated beds were filled immediately, necessitating a release of inmates early to our Jail Alternatives Program, which includes both the Alternate

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 31

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
Work Program and Electronic Monitoring. Should this pace continue until June 30, 2012, it is safe to assume the Jail Alternative Program will have nearly as many participants as are confined in the three detention facilities. Adding to our local dilemma is a severe shortage in the number and types of beds available to accommodate a higher security level of inmate. The classification unit makes all housing assignments. Since the number of maximum security, administrative segregation, and mental health and segregation beds is limited in the existing facilities, housing assignments cannot follow classification guidelines.
2. Describe any anticipated changes in your detained population (e.g., percentage of sentenced inmates, average length of stay).
Even before the enactment of AB 109, Stanislaus County Jails were facing the challenge of housing more than half of the inmates below their required level of security classification because they simply did not have sufficient medium and maximum-security beds. As referenced above and clearly outlined in the Needs Assessment Report, serious and violent offenders are housed in dorm cells, in proximity with other inmates who are gang dropouts and in need of Protective Custody. With the enactment of AB 109, these challenges have become even more pervasive. The housing of the so-called “non-non-nons” and the retention of parole violators in local jails are unprecedented: consequently, it is challenging to benchmark the impact on who exactly will be retained in custody. The simplistic answer is that the “worst of the worst” will be retained in custody, without regard to whether or not they are sentenced or un-sentenced. Clearly, misdemeanants will not be retained in custody at all, and we believe most of the sentenced inmates will be amongst those subject to early release because they are a known quantity. In fact, it is highly doubtful most sentenced inmates will even serve their sentences despite applied sentence credits.
3. Describe the impact that realignment has had on the design of the new project The enactment of AB 109 alone has not changed the county’s plan to construct high-medium or maximum-security beds. This need was clearly evident even before October 1, 2011, and Realignment further demonstrates reinforces this need. With the passage of Realignment, the need to accelerate the

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 32

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
construction of new additional higher security beds is even more urgent. Realignment does highlight the need for more program space, which is included in the plan.
4. Describe the extent to which realignment is related to the need for the project. Public Safety Realignment has exacerbated an already dire need to construct new, higher security inmate beds in Stanislaus County. In the first six weeks since the enactment of AB 109, this county is struggling mightily to retain those criminals in custody who pose the most significant risk to public safety. It has taken less than six weeks since the implementation of the new law to not only fill the 150 beds reactivated as part of the County Phase I Plan to accommodate AB 109, but increase the number of participants significantly in the Jail Alternatives Program, particularly Electronic Monitoring. The Jail Alternatives Program now has in excess of 700 participants, conservatively half of which should still be in custody due to the risk to public safety. The Programs/Day Reporting Facility is urgently needed to further implement realignment. This county is experiencing an escalation of crime in the community, as well as a significant increase in serious and assaultive behavior by inmates in the jails. H. BUDGET 1. Describe how the project budget is determined to be reasonable as it relates to Section 2, Budget Summary. As detailed in Section D of this Narrative, Stanislaus County is proposing a scope of work for the Stanislaus County PSC – Jail Expansion Project, which includes two 192-bed medium/maximum bed housing units, one 72-bed Medical/Mental Health housing unit, a Health Services Facility, Security Administration/Central Control Center, and a Programs/Day Reporting Facility for a total cost of $89.5 million. In addition to the updated Master Plan and Needs Assessment work which included the Architectural Program prepared by Crout and Sida / Rosser International team, the Project Manager retained the services of an independent Professional Cost Estimator to obtain a second opinion of cost for the Proposed Project. An entire Project Budget has been prepared, identifying Eligible Project Costs in strict accordance with the Phase II Guidelines and the State Fund Requirements and Local Match

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 33

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE

Requirements. These costs have been escalated to the mid-point of construction to ensure that the entire

project scope can be delivered within the state and local funds dedicated to the AB 900 Project.

2. Describe what measures the County has taken thus far to promote a cost effective planning and design process and a cost effective construction project

a. How the County is planning minimizing the impact to the State dollar resources as well as County’s resources?

In June 2011, Stanislaus County, working with the Crout and Sida / Rosser International team,

updated the PSC Expansion Operational and Architectural Program and Site Master Plan. The County’s

stated objectives of the updated Master Plan included the following:

•

Update the detailed pre-architectural facility program based upon the approved

Needs Assessment.

•

Review an operational analysis of the program and develop a planning concept to

include the staff analysis, security and safety considerations and other pertinent functional considerations.

•

Revise the Master Plan cost estimate and schedule to reflect current thinking.

•

Align project priorities with funding sources.

•

Explore alternatives and recommend new facilities for housing Return to Custody

(RTC) prisoners compliant with the state of California Corrections Standards Authority’s Construction or

Expansion of County Jails RFP and AB 109.

•

Develop a set of recommendations to present to the Board of Supervisors regarding

project delivery systems, project budgets and implementation schedule.

b. What are the County’s plans to promote cost effectiveness in its facility design and long term costs?

The County will procure professional services through a competitive process to manage the design

and construction of the facility under the management of County Staff. The professional services will be

contractually obligated to design and construct the facility in accordance with the scope and the project

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 34

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE
budget as approved by the County’s Board of Supervisors and the State Public Works Board. According to the County process for the management of major Capital Projects, plans will be reviewed at the Schematic, Design Development and Construction Document phases of design. The reviews will include at a minimum, user reviews, constructability reviews, cost reviews, and code reviews to ensure the design is in accordance with the approved scope, approved schedule, and approved budget. Staff will make any corrections necessary.
Specific to the State capital outlay process, the County will submit plans to the CDCR and SPWB staff for review. The CDCR and SPWB staff will review preliminary plans (design development) and working drawings (construction documents) for consistency with the SPWB’s previously approved project scope and cost.
The Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors’ top priority of “A Safe Community” is demonstrated by the submission of this application and their unanimous commitment toward this effort.
On behalf of the citizens of Stanislaus County, we are grateful for this opportunity to partner with the State of California and model the successful implementation of the State Public Safety Realignment and the AB 900 2011 Local Jail Construction Financing Program. Thank you for your consideration.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Page 35

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application
Excerpt from Needs Assessment

Appendix Page 1

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 2

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 3

County Population Last 10 Years

Year

County Population

2001

466,128

2002

478,399

2003

489,178

2004

497,981

2005

508,161

2006

514,792

2007

520,202

2008

524,450

2009

527,704

2010

531,364

County Population Projected to 2050

Year

County Population

2010

599,708

2020

699,144

2030

857,893

2040

1,014,365

2050

1,119,344

Source: State of California, Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population with Age and Sex Detail, 2000–2050. Sacramento, CA, July 2007

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 4

5 & 6 - Modesto Bee, September 13, 2011. 7 & 8 - “Crime in California 2010 report.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 5

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 6

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 7

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 8

Proposed Project Summary and Highlights

The Stanislaus County Proposed AB900 Phase II Construction Plan will provide for urgently needed additional detention facilities, higher level security detention beds and medical/mental health special needs beds and related facilities as follows:

AB 900 Phase II Project

Bed Capacity

Gross Sq. Ft.

Security Control Program Services Health Services Unit Maximum Security Housing Unit 1 Maximum Security Housing Unit 2 Medical Housing Unit Programs/Day Reporting Facility Circulation/Common Space Area

192 Beds 192 Beds 72 Beds

6,020 GSF 2,335 GSF 10,864 GSF 38,544 GSF 38,544 GSF 21,010 GSF 14,000 GSF 17,598 GSF

Total – AB 900 Phase II Project

456 Beds

148,915 GSF

Estimated Project Cost AB 900-Phase II Funding

$89,500,000 $80,000,000 Total County Match Funding $ 9,500,000

Following are key highlights and objectives of the Project Plan: • This plan specifically addresses the urgent needs for additional and higher level security beds; a Day Reporting/Programs facility at the PSC for implementation of the realignment between the State and County jurisdictions; and meet the needs for the current and future profile of jail inmates. • Critically needed program and support space will be provided with the expansion to provide functional, security, and safety enhancements to accommodate both the need for additional bed space and also address the need for additional capacity for housing special needs and higher security inmates. • The architectural program and space requirements for each space of each component meet all requirements as set forth by the California Standards Authority, American

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 9

Correctional Association Standards, the Needs Assessment and Master Plan of 2007,

and/or the use of standard space requirements based on numerous other similar facilities.

• The following operational and design objectives were used to guide program

development: Expansion shall provide flexibility for operations and be expandable for

future growth; shall serve the County as the primary criminal justice complex; will

recognize the goal to house all offenders in one location as soon as feasible; will reflect

the need to house more violent offenders with higher security requirement; will provide a

mix of housing and supervision levels appropriate for the types of inmates to be

detained; shall be creative and cost effective; will be safe for all staff, visitors, and

inmates, must be operationally and staff efficient; and will enhance services to inmates

with medical or mental health needs.

• This project expands the County’s Public Safety Center consistent with the Stanislaus

County Public Safety Center Expansion Operational and Architectural Program and Site

Master Plan 2011 Update and will dramatically improve public protection in our

Community.

Stanislaus County AB 900 Phase II Application

Appendix Page 10

SECTION 5: FUNDING PREFERENCES
Phase II legislation (AB 111 and AB 94) contains two funding preferences as detailed below. Every application is subject to one or the other preference (A or B). E ach preference is a hard preference. Further information about the preferences and how they are applied is available within the Detail and Background, Funding Preferences section of this RFA.
Check one of the boxes below (A or B) to indicate which preference is being applied to this application submittal.
A. ADMISSIONS PREFERENCE
The legislation states that “The CDCR and CSA shall give funding preference to counties that committed the largest percentage of inmates to state custody in relation to the total inmate population of CDCR in 2010.” This is a hard preference, meaning that the CDCR 2010 a dmissions data, as provided in the Detail and Background section to this RFA, will be used to determine a potential rank-ordering of funding for the counties submitting applications under this preference criterion.

B. RELINQUISHING PREFERENCE
The legislation states in part “A participating county that has received a [Phase I] conditional award…may relinquish its conditional award... and may reapply for a [Phase II] conditional award….” and “ The CDCR and C SA shall give funding preference to counties that relinquish their [Phase I] conditional awards …, provided that those counties agree to continue to assist the state in siting reentry facilities….” This is a hard preference meaning that the counties meeting the relinquishing criteria as specified in this RFA will receive a pr eference for a conditional funding award, once the Phase I funding authority amount associated with the relinquishing county is legislatively moved to the Phase II funding authority.
If a Phase I county wishes to relinquish a Phase I award and reapply for a greater amount of funding in one application under Phase II, the county would be required to reapply without the benefit of this preference. Also, a Phase I county that wishes to relinquish a P hase I award and r eapply for a Phase II award without continuing to assist the state with siting reentry facilities, must reapply without the benefit of this preference. In each of these cases, the county would apply under the admissions preference in A above.

Application Form, 01.04.11;

12

 
 Ll r< i [l.rr;rnT -8.

P A U L w . C O M f S K E Y( S t a t e B a r # 6 5 5 1 0 )

P R I S O N E R SR T G H T SU N T O N

rt
A

I9O9 Sixth Street

lsacramento, CA 958L4

s (916) 325-27OL

&t

R'2T2C9

H A R DP . Nlarine

H E R M A N( S t a t e Avenue

Bar #53743

u ll. O. Box 328

Ilalboa Island, CA 92662

( 7 L 4 ) 6 73 - 7 6 7O

F?l!
Jtl
ll
r iI lI l lt ll

I P A U LT . P E R S O N S( S t a t e :1834 Arroyo Canyon tlhico, CA 95928 (916) Be3-4710

Bar ++92289)

{ : : ' f ; t[ ; l ]
{ 3 il.sr B,'::t t-g

,.j/lt\

:r:i]l

i . l . . i ; , ; iti-. '

'iiYll.ii:i.t-r.

il' ijl
-. .-'

:

,

., il?

i i

li:l tl I

iiiii i.lt i

!"i:.'i : lAi l:r ;iiriij'
;'. i''

-
,ll'

ilil
ii-i
"ln)i
,{ ..J I
I
I
I
1 dI
I
"fii' i
'lr:l
.{(}l
i
Ltl
I I .i {) ti -{r} r

I D A NS T O R M E R( S t a t e B a r # 1 0 1 9 5 7 ) LITT 6( STORMER 3550 Wilshire Blvd. #r200 Los Angeles, CA 90010 (213) 386"43O3
, R A M O NM A G A N A( S t a t e B a r # 6 4 3 5 3 ) 948 llth Street, Suite 10 Modesto, CA 95354 (2oe) 524-56L6
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

:l: :; ,'"'ir

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR'I EASTERN DTSTRICT OF CAI,TFORNIA

t{r),,rt

I' i

I

22i I

2l]

'i4

ALEX RODRIGUEZ, GEORGE BUTLER') LORRAINE FOUNTATNEI DARREL E D W A R DW A S H f N G T O N , a n d a l l others sinilarl-y situat-ed,
Plaintiffs,
vs"
THE COUNTY OF STANISLAUS and JIM TREVENA AS ShETiff,

CASE NO" CV-F 90 601 HDP JFM P
FTRST AMENDET) COMPI,AINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
CI,ASS ACTION

.?5

Defendants.

zt)

4.I Y 3t
r*l{{ ),

21

1

JTIRISDICTION

2 3 4 5 6
P'
t
I I 10 11 !2
x3
T4
x5 x6
l'l 18
t9 20

l.Thisisaclassaetionbroughtbytheprisonersin

the stanislaus county Jails to redress the deprivation by defendants, county of stanislaus and sheriff Jim Trevena, of

plaintiff's

rights, privileges and immunities arising under

the constitution

and Laws of the united st'ates and 'L'he

deprivation under color of law by the individual- defendan'bs

of these rights

(First,

Fourth, Ei"ghth and Fourteenth

Amendments of the constitution

of the united states, 42 USC

section 1983) through overcrowding, inadequate staff and

inadequate procedures, by faiting to provide beds, adequate

food, clothes, underwear, rnedical ancl mental health caref a

decent clean and adequately rit. jail,

a safe jai-l '

reasonable visitation,

rnail not read or copied or taken by

defendants, local police or the D'A', prompt' probahle cause

for detention and bail hearings, and pri"vate coltact vi'sits

for conversations with attorneys, and unequa)- access for

women prisoners.

Instead named plaintiffs

ALEX RODRIGUEZ'

GEORGE BUTLER, LORRAINE T'OUNTAINE ANd DARREL EDWARD

WASHINGTON,are prisoners in the stanislaus cor'rnty Jaj'ls whr:

21 were arrested without a warrant and taken to the stanislaus

22 c o u n t y J a i I s ,

located in Modesto, california.

Many

?3 warrantless arrestees, and sentenced prisoners, are de'tair"red

f|l
A*

in the stanisl-aus

county Jails

in such overcrowded

25 conditions that they are denie'd a constitutionally

adequate

26 place of detention, including failure to provide a bed to

27 sleep on.

28

*w-
ls

1

2. The jurisciictj-on

of this Court is invoked under 2a

2

USC 733L, this

being an action

arising

under the

3

,constitution

and Laws of the united states and under 42 USC

4

.L343, this being an action authorized by law to redress I'he

5

deprivation

s ordinance,

under color

of

regulation,

custom

ttre State and usage

law, of

statute ' a r j - < ; h t'

Ft
{

privilege and immurrity secured to plain'Eiffs by tlre Firstn

X

l lou rth, E i g h th a n d Four teenth Am endm entsof the Constitutj on

q

of the United States.

It t' i
I
111 i
,I {;.

3 . D e f e n d a n t C O U N T YO F S T A N I S L A U S( h e r e i n a f t e r c a l l - e d nCounty'r) is a unit of local government, duly formed and iauthorized under the laws of the State of Calif ornia ' As

t:iii 1i
1 4ti :i
ii
' nr i l
ti:|ll
*,.''
i 1 : fr .

part of its duties, defendant County provides local jaj-l

facilities,

specifically

the stanislaus county "Taifs in

Modesto, and other County agencies, defendant County also

provides supervision to persons in the Stanislaus County

' ,

t* t

. r i

i i

$rrii ii $f i l '

J a i I s ( M a i n J a i l - , W o m e n ' sJ a i l , H o n o r F a r m )'

4.

Jim Trevena is the sherif f of t.he cor-rnty of

Stanislaus, responsible for t,he Sbanislaus Coun'byJaiIs and

ii
ilft | ,
;l
?ttl

the inmates. 5" At aII

times pertinent

bo this complaint, the

i.) r; AA

defendants and their employees anci agents were acting under

clq l^to

the color of tireir official capacity aud the ordinances anrl

''t .4,

Alr

regulations of Stanislaus County, and the l"aws of Lhe State

A'J o f C a l i f o r n i a "

9{;

6.

The named plaintiffs

ur ' j
*t

residing in the United States '

rlu

at()

///

are citizens nr persons

F

1

7. During all times mentioned herein, the defenclants,

2 and each of them, separately and in concertn acted under

3 color and pretense of Iaw, to wit, under color of ttre

4 statutes, ordi-nances, regulations, customs and usage of the

5 State of California and the County. Each of the defendants

tf

herein, separately and in concert engaged and conspired i-n

I

the illegal conduct herein mentioned Lo the injury of

I

plaintif f s, and deprivecl the plaintif f of the rigbts,

o privileges and inmunities secured to plaintiff by the First,

tt) Fourth, Ei-ghth and Fourteenth Arnendments to the Constitutj.orr
'tx of the United States and the laws of the United States,
II
'19 pursuant to the practice and policy of defendant County.

"i9 .[ rl

B.

At all relevant times, the plainti-ffs,

were

1"4 prisoners and held in the Stanislaus County Jails"

lLr

Plaint.if f s Rodriguez and Butler are held in the Main .Iail"

TS Plaintiff

Fountaine is held in the Women's FaciJ-ity,

.eq
Lt

Plaintiff

x8 Farm.

Darrel Edward Washington is held at the Honor

19

9 " The deprivations suffered by plaintiffs

were and

20 are the result of onqoing patterns of conducL and practices

2 T o f d e f e n d a n t s , i n c l u d i n g d e f e n d a n t C O U N T YO F S T A N I S L A U S a n c l

22 d e f e n d a n t S h e r i f f J i m T r e v e n a , a n d u n l e s s a n d u n t i l o r d e : : e c l

?3 b y t h i s c o u r t , o v e r c r o w d e d c o n d i t i o n s

resulti.nq .in

2,4 j - n a d e q u a t e f o o d , c l o t h i n g , s l e e p i n g a r r a n q e m e n t s , m e d i c a l

25 and mental health, safety, access to attorneys and excess-ive

26 detention of warrantless arrestees before probable cause

27 hearings and bail hearings wilI continue to deprive inmates

28 o f t h e S t a n i s l a u s C o u n t y J a i l s o f t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a - L

It

1

rights.

2

s

CI"ASSACTION ALLEGATIONS

4

10. The named plaintiffs are representatives of a cLass

i)

rrithin the meaning of Rule 23 (a) and 23 (b) (2) of the Federal

6 lRules of Civil Procedure.

T

11" The members of the class are so numerous thaL

R 'joinder of alr of them is impracticar, ttrere being more than

fJ

1500 prisoners in the stanislaus county Jairs at any one

10 1time.

{. t{r

12. The members of the class are readily identifiabl-e

?c)l
idr;

:Eromthe defendantsr records "

iJ

1.3. There are questions of law and fact, conmon to the

14 class; their class clairns predorninate over any individual

Ii)

claim.

trtil I
'lr'ii i \ t l
ll t
I
1si
'19

14. qrounds provide
15.

The defendants have acted or refused to act on generally applicable to the class by failing to constitutiorrally adequate facilities and hearings.
The named plaintiffs wilI fairly and adequately

2iJ p r o t e c t t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e c l a s s ; h a v i n g n o o t h e r

:individual interests.

16r The class consists of alr prisoners held in t.tre

*3

{itanislaus County Jails from June 23, 1989 to the present,

24 a n d a l l f u t u r e p r i s o n e r s .

25

I7 " Plair"rtif f s do not propose notice at this time,

2{i c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i r p r a c t i c b i n s i n i l a r c a s e s .

27

28 ///

Il

t-

W I { E R E F O R Ep,J l a i n t i f f s P r a Y :

1. For an order and judgment requiring defendants

;provide adequate eonditions of confinement -Lncluding a bed : fo r e v e r y p r i s o n e r , a d e q u a t e f o o d , a d e q u a t e m e d i c a l a n d

mental health care, Sdfetyr access to attorneys, provide in*

custody arrestees,

arrested witltout warrants, prompt

probable cause determinations and bail hearings;

2" For reasonable att,orneys fees and costs of suib;

3 " For such other rel ief as nay be necessal:y and proper to effect the purposes of' this titigation.

IDATED: December L9, 1990

PAI]L W. COM]SKEY RTCHARD P. HERMAN PAUI. PERSONS DAN STORMER RAMON MAGANA Attorneys for: Plaintiffs

d-r; ,
{,! i
{lr}
4a.t.
d?) t,t,
'14

itf: .!"-i
:i,s

fl'l i;1

I
i

,.oj t.)

sr.{rE oF 'a\LIFoR.vr4. couY-rY oF

J , h e r e , . e . : ,I tl i 1 ' , t ; e 8 o i n . e

and know its contents'

D

m CHECK .\PPLICA;LE pOn^CnOpH I - i r . na p a r t r t i ' t i i ; i a c t i o r tT. h em a t t e r s t a t e di n t h ef o r e g o i n gd o c u m e nat r el r u e o f r n vo w n k n o r v l e d geex c e pat st o

n i i : o s cn r u t t e r s ' * h r ci;i:r rs t a t e do n i n i b r m a t i o na n db e l i e fa, n d a st o t h o s em a t t e r sI b e l i e v er h e mr o b e t r u e

I r r n [ . r n r - ) f f i c efr a p a r t n e r

-fla- ----.,-

_ , _ - _ . ._ .o f _ _

a p a f t . Yt o. - t h r s , t c t i o n .a n d a n t d u t h o r l z e di b m a k e t h i s v e r i f i c a t r o ni o r a n d o n i t s b e h a l f . ; r n dI r n a k et h i s v e r i f i c a t i o nf o r t h a t

r e a s o n .I l a r n -fhe

i n l b r r n c c ia n d b e i i e v ea n d o n t h a t g r o u n d a i l e g er h a t r h e m a t t e r ss t a r e r ]i n t h e f o r e g o i n gd o c u r n e n ta r e

true. l

n a t t e r s s t a t e ci n t h e f o r e g o i n qd o c u m e n ta r e t r u e o f n r y c w n k n o w l e d q ee . \ c e p ta s t o t h o s em a t t e r sr v h i c ha r e

n s t a t e do n i n l o r m a t i o n a n d b e l i e i .a n d . i s t o t h o s em a t t e r st b e l i e v et h e m r o b e r r u e . I arn one of the attornevs I'or

a party to thrs rction. Such party is absentfrom the countv of ajoresaidwhere suchattorneyshave their offices,ancl I makc this verificatrortfor and on behalf of that party ior that reason.I am informed and believearrd on that ground allegethat the mattersstated in the foregoingdocuntentare true.

Executed L1r--.---..-----.--

-- , 19 .-.- aL------

.-.___Califbrnra.

I d e c l a r eu n d e r p e n a l t v o f p e r i t l r v u n d e r t h e l a w s o f t h e S t a t eo f C a l i f o r n i a t h a t t h e i o r e g o i n gi s t r u e a ' 6 c o r r e c t .

- I 1 p eo r P r i n rN a m s
A C K N O W L E D C M E N ' I O I . -R E C E I P l 'O F D O C L J M E N l ^ ( o t h e rt h a ns u m m o n as n dc o m o l a i n t )

Signature

R e c e i v e dc o p v o f d o c u m e n t d e s c r . i b eads

on

-[vpe or PrintName

P R O O FO F S E R V I ( . l . :

S T , { T E( . ) t ri ,: , \ L l [ : O R N I A .C O U N T Y O F o l r , \ N ( ; L I arnt:nrpltrvcidn the countyof .--_.(J.irll'lq !rr_

il:-Y, ']'l*,""',Ji tlllf,,f,':'"iel'tdi:d|,1"'; I arn over thee ;.rgeo^frr1f 8.and not a party ro the within acrionqnry busi

: :' lv]alrfII(] l\VOlltl(i,

IJallj_)O;.t I S l,lllrj,

o"

i

i.
_

Z_--F_I{_.r_-iIll-Ity-st_-g9r:-r:lt-f-:e,ta-j-ufA: lfN,iQlilI\iIIt;LDs;eeEtrvDve_eqcd!o:t,nQhh]ee\I1-lPlroop*r1rte.ee,,g;g.g4o;foI1Q,l;nl!"lIniq,g'gI.'rpd*r''o"]c9"'uy.(m..,m)f"ei,n3n-ttD.n-ddre.;g*(sislcr.rp.i,bqAeIi tdAasr.'_()-i_l'_

-

,

A I . i D I N . ] L I I \ C I] I V I i R E L ] I - ] F

Signature Stateof California.

i n t h i sa c t r o rbt v p l a c i n ga t r u ec o p vt h e r e o l ' e n c l o sienda s e a l e de n v e l o paed d r e s s eadsl n l l o w s

.IOlil', rl,\(liii{ l ) . O . i l , ( ) ) i8 6 ! j i , l-,cls,-\]l'l1ellt,:s,i'ir 900tJ(r-()!)-l'j

\

1 t

t

.

l:

t

;

i

t

' r

l

: , r , i , r : :j ri r . i

i ) , , . , ' l t r. J r r ; l t r

. i l , : i l l ] , s l , - t l l s1:.r:t , r t l ' , ) , i i l t

I).1\" ijr:'l:'"il

r l ( J { i ( - . : i l ( ) ,. " :

r, l:,

tr aL-

(BY lvlAtL) I
rl ): q) - rl ul .L, r-l._. _ TI ^i

c a u s e ds u c h e n v e l o p ew i t h
Il . _ , t l a l i i o r n i a .

p o s t a g et h e r e o 0f u U t

p r e p a i r Jr o

be

p l a c e r Ji n

t h e U n i r e dS t a t e sm a i l

tr Executeodn-. -..-- Dec;et-rll5t:__{tl .___

_ rsi !L . u, . !1il,l_1:i! r_i:! l:l_i, ____*__., Lralifornra.

( B Y P E R S ' O N A LS E R V I C E )I c a u s e ds u c he n v e l o pteo b e d e l i v e r ebc iy h a n ctl c -t h eo f f i c e so f t h ea d 6 r e s s e e .

E x e c u t e do r r
tr (State) I
E (Federal) I

-.*---d e c l a r eu n d e declarethat I

rp e n a l am ern

t yo f p e r j p l o y e di n

_ u r yu n d e rt h t h e o i f - r coef

, l9-_*,- ar--_-_. _ c l a w so f t h e S t a t eo i C a a membcrof the bar of t,

li h

forni i sr : o u

at h a t t h ea b rrat whosed

o v ei irec

s ti

.._, Calil.ornia. t r u ea n d c o r r e c r . o nt h e s e r v i c ew a s

rnade.

fr \' ll il. I- , -I- c. l

..1:

-i l

, . 1I l l . C - 1

T v J r eo r P r i n tN a m c

STUARTS EXBFOOKTiMESA!EFrBEV'SED6/83! lMay N usoo'n CallorfraSlarecr Fgoor6lCourtsr

. t J i g n autr e

tt

L1.

d