State board wants judge in receivership case to ‘intervene’ in LA County juvenile halls

A state regulatory board is wading into the California Department of Justice’s effort to have Los Angeles County’s juvenile halls placed under a receivership, with the board’s attorney arguing in a new court filing that judicial intervention is necessary due to the county’s failure to right its own ship.

The Board of State and Community Corrections, which oversees California’s jails and juvenile halls, filed a motion this week asking a judge to allow it to enter the fray as a “friend of the court,” so it can file briefs challenging witness testimony and provide direct information about its inspections of L.A. County’s facilities.

“The BSCC Board made the determination to provide the amicus briefing in the receivership case to urge the court to consider stronger judicial intervention,” said Jana Sanford-Miller, the BSCC’s spokesperson.

The California Department of Justice asked the court in July to transfer “full operational authority” over the county’s juvenile halls to a court-appointed receiver after finding that the county was still out of compliance with 75% of the terms of a 2021 settlement agreement. 

Judge Peter Hernandez preliminarily denied that request and has spent the last four months listening to expert testimony on the state of the facilities as he weighs the next step. Those hearings will continue through the end of March and do not currently have an end date.

Though the BSCC’s inspections of Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall and other facilities are at the heart of the case, it hasn’t participated in the hearings before now.

The BSCC’s “perspective is uniquely valuable to the Court in evaluating the evidence presented,” according to its motion.

“The State’s petition for receivership directly implicates the BSCC’s statutory mandate,” wrote Le-Mai Lyons, the BSCC’s attorney. “A receivership would necessarily affect how facilities are operated, how standards are enforced, and how youth are treated within the system.”

Hernandez is expected to rule on the BSCC’s request in late March.

A proposed copy of the amicus curiae brief, included as an exhibit along with several inspection reports, outlines the BSCC’s concerns with L.A. County’s continued stewardship of the facilities, but stops short of directly supporting a receivership.

Emails indicate the DOJ consents to the BSCC’s involvement, while L.A. County objects.

“We strongly disagree with any suggestion that Probation is unwilling to improve conditions or operate in compliance with standards,” said Vicky Waters, the spokesperson for the L.A. County Probation Department, which operates juvenile facilities. “Since the appointment of new leadership, significant reforms have been implemented, including strengthened supervision structures, enhanced training standards, improved documentation protocols, and expanded program oversight.”

The department is focused on the safety, well-being and rehabilitation of youth in its care and will “continue to address all oversight matters directly with the Court and the appropriate regulatory bodies,” Waters said.

In the proposed brief, the BSCC details a series of failed inspections at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall and Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall over the past 2 1/2 years. It describes lackluster safety checks, limited access to restrooms at night, allegedly falsified records, excessive room confinements and the ripple effects of an ongoing staffing shortage driven by call-outs, medical leaves and a high vacancy rate.

“The BSCC continues to have concerns with the County’s ability to develop long-term, sustainable solutions to address deficiencies with staffing,” Lyons wrote. “The County continues to rely on deployed staff to backfill positions and has relied on this short-term solution since 2022. Reliance on temporarily deployed staff who are not fully trained and serve irregularly contributes to required services not being provided and a less safe facility.”

The BSCC’s proposed filing states that “any judicial intervention the Court decides is necessary should include guidance on long-term staffing solutions and training to supervisors on appropriate staffing policies.”

Inspectors reportedly found instances where the Probation Department staff at Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall in Sylmar allegedly falsified documents to list activities, exercise and even fire drills that never occurred.

Among its accusations, the BSCC took issue with Chief Guillermo Viera Rosa’s testimony during earlier hearings in the case and indicated it is “inaccurate” to imply the BSCC had tacitly approved of the reopening of Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall, a facility forced to close by the BSCC nearly three years ago, or the repurposing of Campus Kilpatrick in the Santa Monica Mountains to house the county’s girls and gender-expansive youth.

Neither received the BSCC’s signoff before the county began moving youth into the facilities, according to the proposed brief.

“These most recent instances of Probation proceeding with activation of facilities that are either unsuitable or had not received proper clearances and approvals, coupled with the issues raised above, particularly representations by the County that conflict with other evidence, emphasize the need for judicial intervention in overseeing Los Angeles County’s operation of its juvenile facilities,” Lyons wrote.