Gov. seeks to transfer juvenile offenders

Two years ago, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger stood inside one of California’s most violent youth prisons and pledged to turn the state’s disgraced correctional system for the young into a national model. To reach that goal, the governor now wants to radically shrink the population, shipping about half the state’s inmates to county lockups.

That provocative policy shift, which must be approved by the Legislature, was unveiled as part of the governor’s budget last week.

Details are sketchy. But a summary provided by Schwarzenegger’s office shows that he wants to reserve state youth prisons, which now house 2,800 inmates, for violent male offenders only. By mid-2008, the governor would relocate about 1,340 youths -- nonviolent parole violators, all female offenders and virtually all those convicted of drug and property crimes -- making them the counties’ responsibility.

The plan has already raised concerns among corrections experts, county officials and others who have worked for years to improve the state’s floundering system, which has become the receptacle for California’s most violent and troubled youths.

For some, the idea signals a welcome shift -- an acknowledgment, proved through research in other states, that youths typically fare better when they are incarcerated close to their families, instead of in prisons hundreds of miles from home.

“The state system has become the dirty washbasin for every unmanageable kid in California, and by nearly every measure it’s a failure,” said David Steinhart, a veteran juvenile justice consultant. “It’s hard to see how pushing kids back to the counties can be any worse.”

State Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), who in the past has called for the outright closure of the state’s juvenile prisons, also endorsed the plan: “This is an excellent start, and I hope the counties will embrace it.... Most of the youths who wind up in state care would be better served in a less-violent setting in their own communities.”

Still, the proposal raises daunting questions -- among them, whether local governments have enough beds or suitable facilities for the extra offenders.

“One of my concerns is that you’ve got 58 counties and you’ll get 58 different levels of services, and they may not meet the standards we want,” said state Sen. Mike Machado (D-Linden), a critic of youth corrections.

In L.A. County, which houses about 4,000 juveniles in its 19 camps and three juvenile halls, the idea of taking on hundreds more is “intriguing” but a bit distressing as well, Chief Probation Officer Robert Taylor said.

“We don’t have many rooms left at the inn,” Taylor said, “so a move like this would definitely require some long-range planning.” Of perhaps greater concern, he said, is the state’s declaration that it will no longer accept certain types of offenders. Taylor said the administration’s plan to refuse to house any female youth lawbreakers -- 130 are currently incarcerated -- “does not seem like a good idea.”

“There are some young women -- not many, but some -- who do get involved in violent crimes, and that is not a person who would rehabilitate well at the county level,” he said.

Jerry Harper, the chief probation officer for San Bernardino County, agreed, noting that state facilities have tighter security and can more easily segregate offenders who attack others or constantly misbehave. Harper, who ran the state system from 2000 to 2003, said its prisons are also better equipped than some counties to deal with youths suffering from serious mental disorders.

“There are also some kids whose crimes may not be terrible but who have a 10-year record of delinquency and just need a different environment,” he said. “I would hope the state would still be open to taking those kids.”

As laid out in the governor’s budget summary, the state would pay for the population shift with block grants, beginning with $53 million next fiscal year. That would give counties about $94,000 to spend on each offender per year, officials said. That sum is significantly more than counties now spend. In Los Angeles, Taylor said, it costs the county about $36,000 per offender.

For the state, however, the shift would mean certain savings. The per-offender cost has risen steadily in recent years because of changes compelled by the courts: improvements in medical care, therapy, sex offender treatment, violence reduction and other areas. It now stands at $145,000 per inmate annually.

Experts such as Steinhart suggest that the rising cost of managing juvenile lawbreakers may be the driving force behind the governor’s plan. Bernard Warner, the man who runs the state’s youth prison system, acknowledged that saving money is a factor. But he said officials had long been mulling a shift of nonviolent offenders to the local level.

“The goal is finding the right program for the right youth, and from a treatment perspective it may be more effective to house some of them in the community, near their family, rather than a couple hundred miles away,” said Warner, chief deputy secretary for juvenile justice. Research shows that maintaining close family ties -- difficult when offenders from Los Angeles are housed in a prison in the Sierra foothills -- improves the odds that a youth will not reoffend.

Known until recently as the California Youth Authority, the state’s penal system for the young was founded in 1941 after activists decried the housing of young troublemakers alongside hardened criminals in adult lockups. For decades, the agency took a paternalistic approach. Inmates -- called wards -- took field trips to the beach, lived in “cottages” and were supervised by counselors in civilian clothes.

But though some of its wards ages 12 to 25 still live in open dorms, little else about the system resembles the agency of old. The growth of gangs has made violence, and the fear of violence, the dominant characteristic of life inside.

Meanwhile, the original focus on rehabilitation gave way over the years to a more punitive -- and sometimes brutal -- culture, according to state-hired experts who spent weeks studying the prisons. The system also delivers a poor return in public safety. Statistics have shown that three out of four wards wind up back in custody within three years of their release.

In November 2004, Schwarzenegger settled a lawsuit over conditions inside the prisons. Announcing the agreement during a visit to a youth lockup in Stockton, the governor vowed to restore the quality of California’s once-admired system, giving delinquents “a better chance to succeed in life.”

More than two years later, that makeover is only now beginning to take hold at the state’s eight prisons and two camps. The state has prepared detailed plans for a host of improvements, including adding counselors, reducing the size of living units, improving inmate education and managing gangs. But with the exception of substantial changes at one facility, in Stockton, most of the work remains on paper.

In a report last month, Donna Brorby, the special master overseeing the reform, praised the commitment of the system’s leaders but said problems persist. Most critically, the rate of violence increased by nearly 10% during the first six months of 2006, compared with the same period in 2005, Brorby said. Violence declined substantially, however, at two facilities, including the one in Stockton, where the population was cut nearly in half.

Machado said the governor’s proposal suggests “the state wants to get out of the juvenile custody business.” Though that might not be a problem philosophically, he added, it comes just as the state is launching its overhaul of the youth prisons, one that promises to dramatically improve rehabilitation.

Barry Krisberg of the National Council on Crime and Delinquency praised Schwarzenegger’s plan but urged caution: “Just shifting them from one bad situation to another is not a good idea. This is a fabulous proposal, and the research supports it. We just need to answer a million questions to pull it off.”

*

jenifer warren@latimes.com