DETENTION FACILITIES – SAN DIEGO COUNTY
California State Penal Code §919(b) mandates that each County Grand Jury inquire into
the condition and management of the detention facilities within its county. The
2015/2016 San Diego County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) visited seven adult detention
facilities operated by the San Diego County Sheriff and four juvenile facilities operated
by the San Diego County Probation Department. They also visited the city of Chula Vista
jail, and holding facilities run by the police departments of Carlsbad, Coronado, El Cajon,
Escondido, La Mesa, National City and Oceanside. Jurors also visited Sheriff’s Station
holding facilities and the holding facility maintained by the Harbor Police Department.
The Grand Jury was treated respectfully by all staff at each facility.

PROCEDURE
The Grand Jury reviewed Penal Code Titles 15 and 24, Assembly Bill 109, and
Proposition 47. During each site visit, the Grand Jury observed the physical condition
and management of the facility, noted the different programs available to inmates, and
evaluated the overall conditions. Grand Jury members interviewed both staff and inmates.
All detention center visits were scheduled. Afterward, the Grand Jury’s Law and Justice
Committee met to review the visit. Additional documents requested by jurors were
provided by the Sheriff’s Department and the Probation Department.
The Grand Jury toured the following adult detention facilities:
 San Diego Central Jail (SDCJ)
 Las Colinas Detention and Reentry Facility (LCDRF)
 George F. Bailey Detention Facility (GBDF)
 Facility 8
 South Bay Detention Facility (SBDF)
 East Mesa Reentry Facility (EMRF)
 Vista Detention Facility (VDF)
 Chula Vista City Jail (CVJ)
The Grand Jury toured the following juvenile detention facilities:
 Kearny Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility (KMDF)
 Kearny Mesa Girl’s Rehabilitation Facility (GRF)
 East Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility (EMJDF)
 Camp Barrett Juvenile Correctional Facility (BDF)

DISCUSSION
ADULT DETENTION FACILITIES
There are specific conditions/policies/issues that apply at all the jails, which we will
selectively detail here. At each facility, the commanders and staff gave a briefing to the
1
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

jury prior to the tour, and often at the end of visit. Jurors were allowed time for
questions, and the Sheriff’s Department provided the data referred to in this report.
The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) promulgates regulations for adult
and juvenile detention facilities and conducts regular inspections of those facilities. All Sheriff’s
Department facilities have both a housing capacity rating from the BSCC and a court ordered
capacity rating, which can differ. The BSCC rating is included in this report for each Sheriff’s
Department facility.

All county detention facilities appear to be well maintained. The jury did note rotting
support beams along a walkway in the East Mesa Reentry Facility.
The reentry facilities, LCDRF and EMRF, have open courtyards and unrestricted outdoor
walkways. The other facilities, however, are mostly enclosed and somewhat dreary, with
a lack of windows and fresh air in most of the housing units. In general, there are deputy
control stations in housing modules, with camera monitoring of dayroom and common
areas. Individual cells do not have camera monitors.
Kitchens at each institution appeared sanitary and functional. The Grand Jury was
provided with county inspection reports for all facilities, including food inspection
reports. Minor violations observed by county inspectors have been corrected by the
facility staff.
Excluding VDF, the command staff at all detention facilities reported staffing levels were
adequate. The command staff at VDF did report a need for assignment of twenty
dedicated deputy positions for medical transport and surveillance of inmates undergoing
medical procedures or hospitalization at Tri-City Medical Center. Currently, the deputies
being used for transport and/or surveillance are pulled from their regular duties.
All facilities visited by the Grand Jury have medical units that include physical exam
rooms and dental exam rooms staffed with RNs and LVNs, as well as rotating days for
visits with physicians and dentists. Psychiatric security units are located at the Central
Jail and Las Colinas. The Sheriff’s Department contracts with Tri-City Medical Center in
North County for specialized procedures or hospitalization for inmates in all facilities.
Inmates with life-threatening emergencies are taken to the nearest hospital.
The medical staff, in conjunction with the SDCJ and LCDRF commanders, has been
proactive in initiating policies and procedures for suicide prevention. Suicide prevention
policies begin at intake, when the risk is high for some inmates. Entry Observation
Housing is available at GBDF to provide further monitoring of recently transferred
inmates who exhibit suicidal tendencies. So far the program has not been entirely

2
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

successful. Numbers for suicides in San Diego County detention facilities are still higher
than in other counties.1
The transfer of bacteria and viruses is a serious problem for persons housed in close
quarters. Jurors asked why there were so few hand sanitizer stations accessible to the
inmates; the response provided was that hand sanitizer contains alcohol. This jury was
able to locate commercially available alcohol-free products.2
Housing areas at every facility vary by inmates’ risk classification. Inmates in
segregation units have the most restrictive housing environment and are provided limited
opportunity for exercise, i.e., only what is required under Title 15 (60 minutes – 3 times
per week). Exercise areas vary in size and equipment at each facility, but most exercise
areas have very limited equipment and space. When asked why exercise equipment was
so meager, staff told jurors that finding acceptable equipment was difficult; jurors later
located such equipment on-line.3 In fact, additional exercise equipment is in place at the
Incentive Based Housing unit in SBDF.
Footwear for inmates conducive to exercise (athletic shoes instead of backless plastic
sandals) was seen only at the Vista Detention Facility. At several of the male detention
centers, staff told jurors that basketball hoops were eliminated because of potential ankle
injuries. Proper footwear would decrease the potential for injury.
Incentive Based Housing (IBH) is a program to motivate inmates to improve their
situation, available at each facility for inmates who qualify, pending space limitations. It
was created to reward good behavior by those inmates who have positive interactions
with others and agree to participate in self-improvement programs. Incentives include
more time in common areas, more weekly visitations, and more exercise opportunities.
Inmates are assigned a personal account which can be supplemented by family members
or by obtaining a job in the jail. If an inmate’s account balance falls below two dollars,
they receive a personal care package containing two stamped envelopes, a toothbrush,
toothpaste, pencil, deodorant and soap, funded through the Inmate Welfare Fund. All
facilities employ selected inmates for jobs including kitchen help, laundry duty, and
facility cleaning. Inmates earn $.50 per day, regardless of the length of shift or
complexity of the job. A tiered, incentive-based pay structure that promotes personal
effort and achievement should be considered. See Title 15, §3041.2, Inmate Pay Rates,

1

For example, in 2015, Los Angeles County jails, with a substantially larger number of inmates, had just
one suicide, compared to five in San Diego County jails.
(www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/dec/16/jail-suicides/)
2
http://gentlecare.us/store/) and http://www.cleanwelltoday.com/our-products/hand-sanitizer/
3
http://www.outdoor-fit.com/tamperproof-fitness-equipment-correctional-facilities and
http://www.keenejailequip.com/

3
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

Schedule and Exceptions, for payroll policies within the California Department of
Corrections, which could be used as a guide.
At all facilities, inmates may file grievances. Requests by inmates can also be submitted
with forms available in each housing area.
All booking areas (SDCJ, LCDRF and VDF) have body scanners. During the booking
process inmates are evaluated for their medical and behavioral needs, and protective
segregation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are present at every
intake/booking facility.
At the Central Jail, staff showed jurors weapons, of varying degrees of lethality, available
for emergencies; it appears that the officers are well-equipped to handle inmate
disturbances. Detention officers do not wear body cameras, but jurors were told that a
committee is evaluating different manufacturers in order to make a selection in 2016.
The database for inmate records, Jail Information Management System (JIMS), uses
eleven year old software. Staff reported that they have trouble sorting and retrieving
information from the database and expressed a need for a software update.
The Sheriff’s Department is not formally evaluating the success of most inmate programs
(the one program being evaluated is the Veterans Moving Forward module). Moreover,
there seems to be disagreement over what constitutes recidivism and how it should be
tracked. Staff spoke often of the importance of using Evidence-Based Practices, yet it
appears there is very little systematic gathering of evidence to determine which practices
are effective and deserve continuation.
Even with the significant amount of state funding provided since 2011 (in FY 2015-2016,
about $33,000,000) it appears to this jury that limited changes have been initiated to
accommodate ABl09 inmates, who serve longer sentences in county jails. While the
Sheriff’s Department is committed to re-entry programs, most of these opportunities are
available to inmates only in their last six months of confinement. Years spent
incarcerated with little mental or physical stimulation will undoubtedly have negative
consequences on long-term inmates, many of whom are housed at GBDF.
The male detention centers lack friendly family waiting areas, especially for young
children. Male inmates are not allowed contact visits with family members and are
limited to two thirty-minute visits per week. Family members must arrive an hour early
for a one-half hour non-contact visit through Plexiglas using a phone. While there may be
a need to monitor conversations for those inmates awaiting trial and sentencing, inmates
serving AB109 sentences do not have this issue. Interaction with family and the outside

4
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

community should be encouraged to ensure a successful transition back to society.
Significant research shows the importance of family contact and support for inmates.4
This jury strongly believes that the Sheriff’s Department should implement, as soon as
possible, weekly contact visits longer than thirty minutes for all qualifying inmates.
Very few educational opportunities exist for long-term inmates. Inmates housed at
GBDF have no educational or vocational options other than HiSet (formerly GED)
classes. Access limited to high school courses curtails job opportunities for inmates upon
leaving jail. Computer-based college-level courses are available at most higher education
institutions in the United States. Accredited colleges offer distance learning in both webbased and paper-based versions.5

SAN DIEGO CENTRAL JAIL (SDCJ)
The Grand Jury visited SDCJ on August 12, 2015. Located in downtown San Diego
adjacent to the county courthouse, the eleven-story building was constructed in 1998. It
is the main male booking facility in San Diego County, housing all classifications of
inmates. SDCJ has no outside exercise space, and the jury saw just one dip bar as
exercise equipment. Staff informed jurors that to exercise, inmates walk around the small
enclosed concrete area designated as the exercise yard.
SDCJ has a capacity rating of 944 by the BSCC; the population on September 30, 2015,
was 895. The facility averages 51,000 intake bookings annually.
An inmate-on-inmate death occurred in October 2015, in a holding cell at SDCJ.6
Policies and procedures for screening, placement, and monitoring of detainees were
obviously inadequate and need to be improved.
The medical staff at SDCJ provides a wide range of medical services, including on-site
dialysis for up to four patients. It serves as the main medical facility and psychiatric
hospital for inmates who cannot be adequately treated at other detention facilities. There
are two psychiatrists on staff, one for patients hospitalized in the psych unit and another
for outpatients.

LAS COLINAS DETENTION AND REENTRY FACILITY (LCDRF)
The Grand Jury visited LCDRF on August 21, 2015. Located in Santee, this facility
opened August 16, 2014, with a second phase scheduled to open in early 2016. LCDRF
serves all levels of incarceration for women and is the primary female booking facility in
the county. The only other facility to house women is the Vista Detention Facility.
Women in North County may be transferred to LCDRF after initial processing at Vista.
4

https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/74991/Hairston.pdf
http://www.prisoneducation.com/correspondence-programs/undergraduate-degree/
6
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/oct/13/county-jail-inmate-beaten-death-murder/
5

5
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

LCDRF has a BSCC bed capacity of 832; on September 30, 2015, the population was
744.
LCDRF resembles a school campus more than a jail. The grounds are clean and
landscaped, including an open area with concrete benches for inmate seating and
relaxation. Education, concerts and religious activities are held in this area. The housing
facilities the jury toured featured exercise areas larger and better equipped than those in
any men’s facility.
LCDRF has a dayroom for contact visits, a large, colorful room with ample windows. 8090% of the women at Las Colinas have children, and child visitation rooms along one
side of the room create a more welcoming space for mothers to meet with their children.
Inmates are allowed two additional visits per week with their children. A common dining
hall is also available for meals. Both these areas create a feeling of normalcy and
optimism lacking at the men’s facilities. A video visitation system (similar to Skype) is
available for inmates to see and talk with families unable to travel to LCDRF.
The staff includes males and females, but a female deputy is required to be present when
there is physical contact with an inmate. The site commander reported that it is more
difficult to recruit and retain female deputies, an issue being addressed by the Sheriff’s
Department Human Resources Division.
Drug and alcohol recovery programs offered to inmates are designed to improve social
and personal responsibility skills. Other programs focus on academic and vocational
training to prepare inmates for life after release. The jury visited the sewing classroom,
which has industrial machines. Students sew items for inmates at the jails. In addition to
learning sewing skills, the instructor said that all the students learn to trouble-shoot issues
with the machines. As there are very limited employment opportunities for seamstresses
in San Diego County, there is some question as to the value of this course (something
noted in the 2013/2014 San Diego County Grand Jury report). Additional programs will
be added on completion of the second phase of the facility.

GEORGE BAILEY DETENTION FACILITY (GBDF)
On September 2, 2015, the Grand Jury visited GBDF, located in Otay Mesa near the
international border on a campus that also houses the East Mesa Reentry Facility; Facility
8; the East Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility, and a county-owned prison currently leased
to the for-profit Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). The CCA facility lease is
expiring, and the facility will revert back to county control by 2017.
GBDF, which opened in 1993, is the largest county jail, with a BSCC capacity of 1,380;
on September 30, 2015, the population was 1,507. The facility houses the special
management inmates (Sexually Violent Predators, Transgender, and Protective Custody
inmates) for the entire jail system.
6
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

While GBDF offers some limited behavioral and self-help programs, it provides no
vocational training or educational opportunities other than HiSet (GED) classes, available
only to cooperative inmates.
Exercise yards for the general population were cages the size of a basketball court with
only a dip bar, and no protection from the sun. The Grand Jury viewed the exercise space
for inmates in administrative segregation; these were small, single-unit cement areas
resembling dog runs, with no equipment or shade. While the jury is aware of the risk
classification of these inmates and the need for safety of officers and other inmates, it was
discouraging to see that the exercise option for these inmates consists solely of time alone
in outside cement cages three times a week.

FACILITY 8
The Grand Jury visited Facility 8, adjacent to GBDF, on the same day (September 2,
2015). Facility 8 is a medium security facility, built in conjunction with GBDF, with a
BSCC capacity of 200; the population on September 30, 2015, was 135.
Facility 8 has three housing units; the Grand Jury toured a vacant unit equipped with
triple occupancy cells if the demand for beds increases. Triple-bunking inmates seemed
excessive given the size and layout of the cells: there is only one desk per cell and limited
floor space, a configuration likely to cause conflict. Facility 8 has video visitation
options for family and friends who have difficulty traveling to this facility.

SOUTH BAY DETENTION FACILITY (SBDF)
The Grand Jury visited SBDF on September 18, 2015. Part of the South Bay Regional
Justice Center in Chula Vista, SBDF is located underground, below the courthouse. The
facility houses all inmate classifications, with a BSCC capacity of 386 beds; the
population on September 30, 2015, was 401 inmates. SBDF houses no inmates with
serious mental or physical health needs; all inmates must be ambulatory. The infirmary is
not staffed 24/7; an inmate who becomes seriously ill will be transferred to SDCJ for
treatment.
SBDF has made a concerted effort to move toward rehabilitation, something this jury
applauds. The Grand Jury visited an IBH unit at SBDF which holds inmates previously
classified as high risk. Exercise equipment in the module’s common area facilitates both
cardiovascular health and stress reduction. When the jury visited, inmates were
socializing together, and, when queried, were respectful and forthcoming about their
experiences.
The major drawback to this facility is the lack of any outside space for inmates. There is
an indoor gym, with a pool table and handball wall, but it is windowless. Because
inmates serve their confinement inside, the Grand Jury is concerned about the long-term
impact on circadian rhythms. Staff informed the jury that in 2017 all SBDF inmates
7
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

would be moved to the Otay Mesa complex and SBDF will no longer be used for longterm inmate housing.

EAST MESA REENTRY FACILITY (EMRF)
The Grand Jury visited the EMRF on September 30, 2015. A Probation Department camp
transferred to the Sheriff’s Department in 1991, EMRF is the male reentry facility for the
county. An expansion completed in 2014 increased the BSCC capacity to 760; the
inmate population was 707 on September 30, 2015. Qualifying inmates are transferred to
EMRF to serve the last six months of their sentences. The Sheriff’s Department believes
that EMRF services and programs are most successful as an inmate’s release nears.
EMRF, a medium security facility, serves as a vocational training site, offering
certification programs in food handling, industrial laundry operations, and printing press
operations. A new non-certificate program sends qualifying inmates outside the jail to
support county operations, including park landscape maintenance and building cleaning
and maintenance. EMRF also has a print shop and a bicycle repair shop, each employing
a few inmates. All these programs have limited enrollment due to lack of funding,
instructors, and equipment. Since the Grand Jury’s visit, a Job Center has opened at the
EMRF facility to assist inmates with resumes and interviewing skills.
At EMRF, a recently updated industrial laundry handles all laundry for EMRF, Facility 8,
and GBDF, as well as some laundry from the other facilities. It employs numerous
inmate workers, as does the food processing facility there, which generates and ships the
meals for inmates in all county adult and juvenile facilities.
Meals are distributed one day in advance. Meals adhere to Title 15 requirements, and
though nutritious, are not particularly appetizing. In discussion with kitchen staff, the jury
inferred that keeping costs low is a major consideration in meal planning. Lunches are
cold meals, breakfasts and dinners are warmed. Two jurors ate inmate lunch during a
visit. One lunch was the standard meal – four slices of wheat bread, peanut butter and
jelly packets, and two cookies. The other was a diabetic/cardiac meal containing four
slices of wheat bread, sliced sandwich meat, one processed cheese slice, and a fruit cup.

VISTA DETENTION FACILITY (VDF)
The Grand Jury visited VDF on October 9, 2015. Opened in 1978, VDF is physically
connected to the Vista Superior Court, the Vista Sheriff’s Station, and the North County
Law Library. This proximity enables inmates to attend court proceedings without the
need for transportation. VDF is the only facility that houses both male and female pretrial arrestees.
VDF houses inmates pending arraignment, during trial, or serving sentences. VDF has a
BSCC capacity of 825; the population was 749 on September 30, 2015. 30% of the VDF
8
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

population has special housing classification, i.e., Administrative Segregation, Medical,
or Protective Custody.
The Grand Jury toured both male and female booking areas and housing units. Jurors
learned that an inmate had obtained permission from the VDF command to take a
correspondence course, though until recently his enrollment had been delayed by the
need for jail staff to approve hardcover books. The jury applauds the command staff’s
decision and encourages them to give more inmates similar options and to streamline the
process.
VDF houses the Veterans Moving Forward Program, unique in county jails, and
frequently cited by staff as a successful model. Sixty-four incarcerated US military
veterans share a dedicated Veterans Module, which is decorated with patriotic murals
depicting different armed services branches. Inmates can obtain help from onsite
Veterans Affairs counselors. Daily self-help classes cover such topics as substance abuse,
stress management, career planning, mentoring and financial planning. At the time of
release, inmates are fitted with business suits donated from the Second Chance Program
and photographed, and jail staff and counselors participate in a release celebration.
The module apparently fosters a sense of community and respect among the inmates, for
since its establishment; there have been no violent incidents. Local government and
military officials and community and non-profit organizations have all lauded this
program and support its continuation. In 2014, the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG) obtained a $334,360 grant from the National Institutes of
Justice to evaluate the Veterans Moving Forward Program’s practices, outcomes and
cost-effectiveness. This evaluation has not yet been completed.

FACTS AND FINDINGS
Fact:

Excluding the Veterans Moving Forward initiative, the Sheriff’s
Department does not evaluate inmate programs for effectiveness.

Fact:

The Sheriff’s Department has established no consistent methodology or
metrics for evaluating programs’ effectiveness.

Fact:

In particular, the crucial term “recidivism” has no consensus definition.

Finding 01:

It cannot be determined which inmate programs should be expanded and
which should be discontinued.

Finding 02:

The Sheriff’s Department has difficulty producing unified, comprehensive
statistics on recidivism.

Fact:

Inmates at most facilities have no access to shoes appropriate for exercise.
9
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

Fact:

Exercising in plastic, backless sandals is extremely difficult and increases
the potential for physical injury.

Finding 03:

Inmates need access to appropriate shoes in order to maintain health and
well-being.

Fact:

Inmates perform several jobs in the jails; their pay is fixed at $.50 per day.

Finding 04:

Inmates have no financial incentive to learn or perform more challenging
and complex jobs.

Fact:

Visits at male facilities are non-contact, excluding court ordered visits
with children.

Fact:

Visits with adult family and friends are limited to thirty minutes twice
weekly at all facilities.

Finding 05:

Policies and procedures for family visits are too restrictive and
counterproductive to rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

Fact:

Other than HiSet, the Sheriff’s Department offers no educational
opportunities to inmates.

Finding 06:

Computer-based educational programs exist that could be offered to
inmates.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The 2015/2016 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the San Diego
Sheriff’s Department:
16-42:

Establish metrics to evaluate programs offered to inmates and begin
tracking outcomes.

16-43:

Make shoes appropriate for recreation and exercise available to all
inmates.

16-44:

Establish an hourly pay system that recognizes inmate effort and
achievement (possibly modeled after the California Department of
Corrections tiered system).

16-45:

Establish a consensus definition of recidivism in order to begin
tracking outcomes.
10
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

16-46:

Revise policies and procedures for visitation with inmates. Initiate
contact visits and increase the time allowed for weekly visits.

16-47:

Allow all inmates access to computer-based educational and training
programs.

HOLDING FACILTIES
SHERIFF STATIONS
Grand Jurors visited the following Sheriff’s Station holding facilities in late 2015 and
early 2016:
 Alpine
 Encinitas
 Fallbrook
 Imperial Beach
 Lemon Grove
 Poway
 Rancho Bernardo
 Rancho San Diego
 San Marcos
 Santee
 Valley Center
The Sheriff’s Department uses standardized booking procedures at every holding facility.
All the visited facilities had at least two monitored cells, and some had separate space for
juveniles. Inmates are processed for booking and then transported to the Central Jail
within a few hours of arrest. All facilities appeared well maintained and adequately
staffed.

CARLSBAD POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members visited the City of Carlsbad Police Station on January 26, 2016.
Built in 1986, the facility serves the City of Carlsbad and La Costa. It consists of four
holding cells and a separate secured area for juveniles. Due to lack of space, one holding
cell is being used to store processing equipment. Detainees are typically held four to five
hours. The Department has plans to remodel and upgrade the facility. There is a small
evidence room; jurors were told that most evidence is transported along with arrestees.
Overall the facility appeared well maintained.

CHULA VISTA POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members visited the Chula Vista Jail, the only city-owned and operated jail in
the county, on January 15, 2016. The jail, with a BSCC capacity of 46, has two functions.
One, it serves as a holding facility for juvenile and adult arrestees being processed by the
Chula Vista Police Department before booking. Two, it houses longer-term adult female
11
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

inmates through a contract with the U.S. Marshals Service (twenty-four inmates the day
of the visit). Overall the facility appeared well maintained.
The Chula Vista Jail contracts for most of its inmate services, including meals,
transportation, medical care, phone service and commissary. Inmates currently do not
receive psychiatric care or counseling and have no opportunities for educational
enrichment or vocational training. This jury believes that education, training, and
psychiatric care should be offered to these federal inmates.

CORONADO POLICE DEPARTMENT
The Grand Jury visited the Coronado Police Department on December 23, 2015. The City
of Coronado maintains three holding cells for adults at the police station. There is no
designated area for juveniles. Overall the facility appeared well maintained.

EL CAJON POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members toured the El Cajon Police Department booking and holding facility
on January 7, 2016. The facility, opened in 2011, is located in the basement of the Police
Department building in downtown El Cajon. Police officers access the holding cells and
booking area through a vehicle sally-port. The booking station is fully equipped with
computers and access to Live Scan for fingerprint searches. There is substantial space for
processing and detaining arrestees, though on the date of the tour the facility was
unstaffed and empty. The holding cell space is divided so that males, females and
juveniles can be detained in separate areas. There are several single-person cells with
beds, though they are not in use and have no mattresses. A space exists for a kitchen but
no meals are provided and no appliances are installed; arrestees are transported for
booking prior to requiring meals. Jurors were told that the El Cajon Police Department
does not have the staffing to keep the facility open 24/7, so its only use has been as a
holding facility. Overall the facility appeared well maintained.

ESCONDIDO POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members toured the Escondido Police Department (EPD) on February 26,
2016, to inspect the holding facility. EPD shares a building with the Escondido Fire
Department and the 911 Dispatch Center. The Dispatch Center serves as the main hub of
communication for all major first responders in North County, including the Amber Alert
System. Overall the facility appeared well maintained.
The facility has four male holding cells and three female holding cells, with two separate
booking cells, and five holding cells for juveniles. An evidence room appeared organized.
Overall the facility appeared well maintained.

LA MESA POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members toured the La Mesa Police Department on January 28, 2016. There
is a separate detainees’ entrance to the holding area. There are four holding cells in the
12
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

adult area under visual surveillance. None of the cells are Americans with Disabilities
Act compliant. Unsecured juveniles are held in another part of the structure, and secured
juveniles are kept in a separate cell to the side within the adult area. Overall the facility
appeared well maintained.

NATIONAL CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members visited the National City Police Department on December 30, 2015.
National City maintains a five cell holding facility for adults at the main police station. A
juvenile holding area has one cell. Overall the facility appeared well maintained.

OCEANSIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT
Grand Jury members toured the Oceanside Police Department on January 26, 2016. The
facility has four adult holding cells and two secured areas for juveniles. Overall the
facility appeared well maintained

HARBOR POLICE STATION
Grand Jurors visited the Harbor Police holding facility on Harbor Drive on December 23,
2015. The Harbor Police has jurisdiction over all land under management by the Port of
San Diego, as well as San Diego Bay. There is a small designated area for processing of
arrestees; juveniles are processed in a conference room apart from adults. Overall the
facility appeared well maintained.

JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITIES
At each juvenile facility tour, the commanders and staff first gave a briefing to the Grand
Jury, including the data on inmates and incidents presented in this report. The staff
appeared dedicated and forthcoming, and staffing levels seemed adequate at all four
facilities.
For many reasons, there has been a decrease in the number of incarcerated juveniles.7
Each juvenile detention facility has unused space. Though fewer in number, the juveniles
now in custody are the most serious offenders and require close supervision Staff in the
juvenile facilities is equipped with pepper spray, or OC spray (oleoresin capsicum). Large
wall signs outline when pepper spray can be used. Included in the list of allowable uses
of OC spray are:
 to disperse fights
 to quell unit disturbances
 to remove threatening persons from rooms
7

One factor has been a shift in philosophy to promoting restorative justice over punishment. Restorative
justice views crime as harming both the victim and the community. Restorative justice insists on offender
accountability, addresses the victim’s needs, attempts to repair the harm, and seeks to bring both parties
together for mutually agreeable restitution (http://www.sdrjmp.org/).

13
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)




for personal defense against violent persons
on juveniles who fail to respond to the cover command

Staff informed the jury that juveniles with sensitivity to OC spray wear yellow wrist
bands, though the jury questions how well these wrist bands work and who takes the time
to check a juvenile’s wrist during the heightened atmosphere of a disturbance.
Controversy continues over the acceptability of OC spray, and whether staff members use
it appropriately. The Grand Jury acknowledges that most juvenile detainees are high risk
and can be violent towards staff and other inmates. Nevertheless, the use of OC spray on
juveniles, while allowable under Probation Department policy, remains a concern. A
recent UCSD study noted some issues concerning OC spray.8 And the Center for
Children’s Law and Policy has raised a number of issues regarding the use of OC spray.9
There has also been controversy about twenty-four hour room confinement punishment.
Inmates given room confinement have no free outside time or group time. They must eat
alone in their cells but do continue to attend school and are allowed to shower.
Schools administered by the San Diego County Office of Education exist at each facility.
Enrollment in school takes place within twenty-four hours of incarceration. All teachers
are credentialed, and the schools meet all standards for State of California accreditation.
The faculty provides access to both traditional analog (printed texts) and digital tools,
including limited internet access.
Juveniles attend class from 8:00 am to 2:00 pm Monday through Friday, with an hour
break for lunch. Kearny Mesa Detention Facility (KMDF) educators estimated that
approximately half of their students are one-and-a-half to two years below grade level in
English and four years in math.
All facilities have medical clinics (including exam rooms and dental suites), staffed by
RNs and LVNs, with physicians and dentists rotating through the facilities. The staff is
gradually transitioning to electronic health records.
The medical staff is justifiably proud of the recent diagnosis and treatment arrangements
made for a juvenile at the East Mesa Facility diagnosed with lymphoma. The Grand Jury
applauds the efforts taken by the staff to ensure that this juvenile’s cancer treatment was
not compromised by his incarceration.
Juveniles have access to a variety of programs, including anger management, Alcoholics
Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous, social awareness training, and the Second
8

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/188069.pdf
http://www.cclp.org/documents/Conditions/Fact%20Sheet%20-%20Chemical%20Agents%20%20Final%20-%205-14-12.pdf
9

14
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

Chance Program. Because recidivism is not tracked, it is impossible to assess the
effectiveness of self-help or vocational programs.
The Grand Jury shared lunch with juveniles at all four facilities.The meals are clearly not
designed with juvenile taste preferences in mind. Several juveniles complained they
aren’t provided enough to eat, though staff emphasized that the meals comply with the
nutritional requirements of Title 15 and Federal Child Nutrition Guidelines.

KEARNY MESA JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY (KMDF)
The Grand Jury visited KMDF on October 14, 2015. Built in 1952 and renovated in 1994
and 2002, it functions as the intake facility for all juveniles in San Diego County. It
houses both males and females awaiting adjudication. Juveniles must appear before a
judge within seventy-two hours of being admitted. If required by the courts, they remain
at KMDF until disposition of their case.
A significant percentage of incoming juveniles at KMDF have substance abuse and/or
poorly treated or untreated mental health issues. There are detox areas for juveniles who
appear to be under the influence of illegal drugs.
KMDF is adjacent to the juvenile courthouse and one-half mile from Rady Children’s
Hospital. Due to its age, KMDF has continuous maintenance issues: poorly functioning
laundry and kitchen equipment, old windows, leaks in the roof, and much more.
The Probation Department has developed a five year plan for replacement of KMDF and
GRF. As there is adequate unused space in other facilities, it should be possible to
temporarily close both facilities and move juveniles to EMJDF and BDF during
construction.

KEARNY MESA GIRLS REHABILIATION FACILITY (GRF)
The Grand Jury toured GRF and KMDF (separate facilities under one roof) on the same
day. GRF serves as the long-term placement for juvenile girls with sentences requiring
incarceration. The jury visited the housing unit and exercise areas and observed girls at a
dance exercise class. At both facilities, juveniles are housed one to a cell, except for one
three-girl room at GRF (by personal preference; girls are not required to double up).
While the staff emphasized being pro-active in preventing suicides, the probation
department did settle a lawsuit in 2015 resulting from the suicide of a girl in custody at
GRF in 2013.10 This jury encourages increased staff training in all facilities so that a
similar situation is never repeated.

EAST MESA JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY (EMJDF)
The Grand Jury visited EMJDF on October 30, 2015. This facility houses males from
thirteen to twenty years old who have been sentenced under the juvenile court system. If
10

http://triblive.com/usworld/nation/9487859-74/county-facility-summers#axzz3xjX8B1r4

15
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

a juvenile is sentenced in adult court, they are moved to an adult facility when they turn
eighteen.
EMJDF was built in 2004. The facility was clean and well maintained. Of the ten
housing units in the facility, only five are in use. There is an outside recreation area with
basketball hoops, and a garden maintained by the juveniles. Juveniles are housed one to
a cell. Classrooms are located within each housing unit. There is one young man at
EMJDF who is now taking computer-based college courses.
With funding through SB81, the Probation Department is building a ten thousand square
foot therapeutic and rehabilitative facility adjacent to EMJDF that will include exercise
areas and space for vocational training. Completion of this building is scheduled for
2018.

CAMP BARRETT (BDF)
The Grand Jury visited BDF on November 18, 2015. Located approximately 35 miles
from downtown San Diego in a rural area south of Alpine, it is the dedicated
rehabilitation facility for male juveniles. In 2015, the Probation Department closed the
other male juvenile ranch facility, in Campo, and moved all the juveniles to BDF.
Excluding the razor wire perimeter fencing, BDF differs radically from the other juvenile
detention facilities, resembling a Boy Scout camp. It has multiple out-buildings,
courtyards, trees and recreation spaces. The school is housed in a modern brick building.
The other buildings are older wooden structures, most of which need significant
maintenance and/or repair. Jurors noted rotted walkway support beams, termite damage
to overhangs, and bathrooms needing renovation. Staff informed the jury that two trailers
are being added that will enlarge the medical facility and increase administrative office
space. One dorm building was under renovation and unoccupied. A construction worker
was onsite making improvements including an additional staff bathroom. While the
setting is bucolic, many buildings at BDF are in need of structural upgrades that may not
be cost-effective given the unused space in EMJDF and KMDF.
Juveniles remain at BDF for up to one year. Boys are housed in dormitories with bunk
beds lining both sides, and a central bathroom and shower room. Guards are stationed at
the each end of a dorm and a central front desk. Meals are eaten cafeteria style in the
building that houses the kitchen. In order to avoid congestion and possible incidents,
juveniles go to the cafeteria one dorm wing at a time. Juveniles are housed by age, with
boys sixteen and older separated from younger boys.
Family visitation is allowed weekly, though the staff readily admitted that many juveniles
do not have frequent visitors, due to the camp’s remote location, issues with border patrol
and immigration for boys whose parents are undocumented, and parents who have
difficulty remaining supportive given their child’s history. The installation of video
visitation equipment should be strongly considered.
16
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

Numerous vocational programs are offered at BDF. Fire safety, automotive repair,
culinary arts, and graphic design are available, though the automotive repair program
appeared to consist of one semi-dismantled vehicle. Self-improvement courses are also
offered. Psychological support services, including psychologists and counselors onsite,
appeared highly supportive.

FACTS AND FINDINGS
Fact:

The Probation Department does not evaluate the effectiveness of
behavioral and vocational programs they provide.

Finding 07:

The Probation Department cannot make evidence-based conclusions on
which programs should be expanded or discontinued.

Fact:

The laundry facility at KMDF is old and has maintenance issues.

Fact:

There is an industrial-grade laundry facility at EMRF with unused
capacity.

Finding 08:

The probation department should consider outsourcing laundry for the
juvenile facilities.

Fact:

The number of incarcerated juveniles has decreased.

Fact:

KMDF, GRF and EMJDF have unused wings and beds.

Finding 09:

Closing a juvenile facility may be warranted.

Fact:

Many of the juveniles have no visits from family.

Finding 10:

Issues including distance to facilities make visiting juveniles difficult for
some family members.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The 2015/2016 San Diego County Grand Jury recommends that the San Diego
County Probation Department:
16-48:

Establish metrics to evaluate programs and then initiate evaluations.

16-49:

Pursue an agreement with EMRF for most juvenile facility laundry
services to improve laundry efficiency and reduce costs.

17
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

16-50:

Develop a long-range plan to determine the feasibility and advisability
of consolidation of facilities.

16-51:

Evaluate the options for establishing video visitation equipment
similar to that provided in adult detention facilities.

REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS
The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has
reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge
of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under
the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the
Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case
of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or
agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such
comment shall be made within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy
sent to the Board of Supervisors.
Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in
which such comment(s) are to be made:
(a) As to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate
one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding,
in which case the response shall specify the portion of the
finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of
the reasons therefor.
(b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall
report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary
regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be
implemented in the future, with a time frame for
implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an
explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or
study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for
discussion by the officer or head of the agency or
department being investigated or reviewed, including the
governing body of the public agency when applicable. This
time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of
publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not
warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation
therefor.
18
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)

(c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or
personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected
officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors
shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board
of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters
over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the
elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings
or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal
Code §933.05 are required from the:
Responding Agency
Sheriff, County of San Diego

Recommendations
16-42 through 16-47

Date
8/1/16

San Diego County Probation
Department

16-48 through 16-51

8/30/16

19
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GRAND JURY 2015/2016 (filed June 1, 2016)