Unsuitable: 2024 – LA County Board of Supervisors vote on who to blame because probation’s main youth hall isn’t “suitable” to house young people

Here’s the deal.

On Tuesday, December 17, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted on a last minute motion 71A,  which was introduced by Supervisors Kathryn Barger and Hilda Solis.

The original motion, which you can find here, proclaimed a local emergency within the County of Los Angeles, due to “conditions of  extreme peril to the safety of persons and property caused by the efforts of the Board of State and Community Corrections [BSCC],” and others to shut down Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall, the county’s main juvenile detention facility, and to “release the youth who are alleged to have committed serious crimes into the public….”

The initial, pre-amendment draft of motion also instructed County Counsel, to “pursue all  legal strategies” to prevent the youth housed in Los Padrinos “from being  released into the public.”

Many among the long list of people who requested to speak at the Dec. 17 board meeting on the matter of Motion 71A, seemed perplexed by the motion’s language. 

“It sounds like the old super-predator days,” said several of the speakers, noting that no one in a position of power has credibly suggested releasing young people who have committed or may have committed serious crimes, including murder, “into the public.” the moment.

Before we get to the vote on Tuesday’s controversial motion it would help to review how and why Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall, which presently houses approximately 260 young people, has gotten to be point where it may or may not be shuttered. Here’s a summary:

About two months ago, on October 14, 2024, the entity known as the Board of State and Community Corrections—or BSCC— issued a formal notice to the County of Los Angeles informing  county officials that Los Padrinos was “unsuitable” to have youth in residence, although at the moment more than 260 youth are housed in the Downey facility.

The BSCC, as some WLA readers may remember, is the state’s independent statutory agency, which provides oversight for adult and juvenile criminal justice systems in California’s counties.

In mid October of this year, the BSCC informed LA County Probation, and also the board of supervisors, that if the county didn’t fix a list of things that are going wrong in LP—as Padrinos Juvenile Hall is known for short — in the next 60 days following the date of the notice, the unsuitable designation would kick-in, and any and all young people living there must be placed somewhere else that met the BSCC’s requirements.

The designation of “unsuitable,” was based on a number of issues having to do with what state law requires. One of the primary areas in which LP keeps failing to hit the needed marks, for example, is the chronic issue of inadequate staffing in the facility. 

Not having enough staff at work on any give day means, among other things, that there won’t enough adults to accompany youth in residence to get exercise, engage in outdoor recreation, perhaps go to school classes and, in some instances, to see their lawyers.  Not enough staff also means that the staff members who show up unfailingly, day after day, often find they must work double shifts, which is neither fair nor healthy for anyone.

The 60-day grace period for the county to bring Los Padrinos up to state standards, ended on December 12, 2024.

Interestingly, the BSCC didn’t lower the boom immediately last Thursday, Dec. 12.  Instead—evidently wishing to avoid issuing their final designation of “unsuitability”—the BSCC did one final inspection of LP on December 10, hoping they’d find enough improvement that the BSCC could feel comfortable changing LP’s designation back to suitability, meaning that Probation Chief Guillermo Viera Rosa would no longer need to find an alternate location for the 260 plus-or minus youth in residence.

Yet, the extra inspection produced no miraculous changes.

Resignation or no resignation

The LP situation became more confusing at last Tuesday’s board meeting when community members learned that Probation Chief Guillermo Viera Rosa was meeting behind closed doors with the supervisors to talk over his unexpected decision to resign by the end of the year.

Yet, although the board did indeed meet with Viera Rosa to discuss his exit, by day’s end on December 10, the department’s media representative emailed an announcement that Guillermo wasn’t quitting after all.

“Chief Guillermo Viera Rosa,” the email said, “has announced his decision to remain in his role as Chief of Probation for Los Angeles County, emphasizing his commitment to addressing the ongoing challenges within the county’s juvenile facilities.”

Alrighty then. 

Yet, the confusing I’m leaving, no I’m not leaving dance did not do anything to settle the question of what Chief Viera Rosa intended to do about the BSCC’s most recent unsuitable stamp.

Youth advocates, parents, and other interested parties got the answer to that question at the December 12 meeting of the county’s Probation Oversight Commission (POC).

Although he was invited, the chief did not show up to the POC meeting to deliver the news himself. Instead, he sent his second-in-command, Chief Deputy Kimberly Epps, to read a statement announcing that he and his team “respectfully disagree with the findings of the BSCC and firmly believe that Los Padrinos is in compliance with state regulations.”

The chief then assured everyone (via Chief Deputy Epps) that probation “will continue to provide a safe, secure, and rehabilitative environment for all the youth in our care while addressing the systemic issues that have persisted for far too long.”

The chief had lots more to say. But the bottom line of the chief’s message was a mainly that the BSCC and its unsuitable pronouncement could take a long walk off a high cliff, or words to that effect.  LA County would be keeping the LP youth at LP.  

At least for now.

When Chief Deputy Epps had finished her delivery of Viera Rosa’s message to the BSCC, the POC’s commissioners initially just looked stunned, then had a number of grim-faced comments and questions.   Unfortunately, it turned out that Epps couldn’t answer much of anything without the okay of LA County Probation’s attorneys, whose default position seemed to be Say Nothing.

“That statement, given the events of the last week, seems outrageous” said Commissioner Brooke Harris.

Harris, an attorney is the executive director of the Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, which is a statewide program to help young people have access to good legal representation.

“What I heard in the statement is that…the BSCC is in error?” Harris said, making sure she’d heard correctly.  “This is appalling.  I don’t know how else to say it. We are talking about minimum standards.  Minimum standards.”

And so now, said Harris to Epps, “the courts are going to be detaining kids in unlawful facilities. And you’re not taking any responsibility….?”

Probation commissioner Milinda Kakani (another attorney, and the Director of Youth Justice at Children’s Defense Fund) also had questions about the chief “disagreeing” with the BSCC, and his suggestion that probation was not breaking the law by keeping the youth there. 

To further illuminate her point, Kakani read from elements in the BSCC report, such as their observations about staffing.

“‘We found in the 45 shifts reviewed, 24 percent did not meet minimum required staffing numbers.’ Kakani read, then stared at Epps.  “You say we disagree with this determination, when the BSCC reports are simply factual. How do we get to just ignore this?  It’s appalling, it’s disgusting.  It’s horrific.”

Then, after a pause. “We knew this was coming,” said Kakani

Yep.

Also on Thursday, LA County Supervisor Janice Hahn, sent out her own take on the issue via an email in which she wrote that at Los Padrinos, the county was “facing staffing challenges,”  not facility challenges.

“Contrary to what the union is claiming, we have adequate numbers of staff on payroll,” Hahn wrote. 

“But the reality is that many probation officers are not showing up to work and that puts an unfair burden on those who do and undermines the rehabilitation of the youth.”

A long time Coming

As WitnessLA readers may remember, even before this past October’s “unsuitable” rating, in mid-February of this year, the BSCC found Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall to be “unsuitable” for youth and young adults, then affixed the same designation on Barry J Nidorf Juvenile hall, located in Sylmar, CA 

On that day, as if to illustrate the perilous nature of the conditions addressed by the mid-February unsuitable vote—at Barry J, as the Sylmar facility is known, two kids overdosed on fentanyl, causing a general freak-out among some of the other young people in residence at the same unit where the overdoses took place, who were spooked by the life-threatening condition of their two unit mates, in part because the new overdoses brought back memories of the fatal overdose of 18-year-old Bryan Diaz the spring before.

Then, three months later,  in May 2024, LA County Probation Chief Viera Rosa announced that the department he leads had put 66 sworn probation officers on administrative leave since the beginning of 2024. The list of 66 leaves were pending internal affairs investigations into allegations of official misconduct, including at the county’s youth facilities.

Of the 66 officers placed on leave, said Viera Rosa in his announcement, 39 were relieved of duty for issues of general misconduct, which includes suspected use of excessive force, child endangerment or abuse, possession of contraband, and negligent supervision.

Another 18 of the 66, were put on leave for suspected sexual misconduct, and nine more were on leave for arrests unrelated to employment.

The number of those placed on leave for general misconduct included 14 officers, who were reportedly involved in some way to a particular incident of “youth-on-youth violence at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall,” during which staff members stood around as various youth in residence took turns beating another youth.

(WitnessLA reported on the “gladiator fights” issue here.)

This brings us back to Tuesday’s vote on Motion 71A.

Finally, after a long and generally very articulate list of commenters got to speak in person or virtually, the motion was amended twice, a vote was called, and motion 71A passed without a hitch.

As for the two amendments to the motion, the first  directed County Counsel to “pursue all legal strategies to prevent the youth with serious and violent offenses housed in Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall from being released into the public or being placed in alternate housing that fails to protect the public and provide the youth with the appropriate services, including County adult jail facilities.

This shall not hinder current efforts by the Chief Probation Officer, Public Defender, Alternate Public Defender, and Department of Youth Development to continue to evaluate youth who can be safely released into community-based step-down facilities or home with terms of probation. 

The other amendment directs Probation Chief Viera Rosa,  to be on-site at LP “as much as possible, but no less than once per week, until suitability is achieved.”

The supervisors also want Viera Rosa to “attend Probation Oversight Commission meetings.”   

(Good luck with that one.  For whatever reason, the chief simply doesn’t show up at the POC, a repeated non-action that the commission members are not fond of.

Finally the motion directed Probation Chief Guillermo Viera Rosa to “attend board meetings when Probation Department items are on the agenda.”  And the chief should attend “in person, absent extraordinary circumstances.”

Last but not least, the amendments stipulated that the chief should provide weekly updates by email to the Board, with daily population numbers for Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall.

There are a few more points covered by the amendments,  but those are the high points. (We are grateful to Kathryn Barger’s office for the text of the amendments.)

A short while after the vote, the AFSCME Local 685, sent out an email stating their commitment to collaborating with the Probation Department to implement “immediate and practical” solutions. “These measures are essential to stabilize Los Padrinos, enhance operations, and restore public confidence in the County’s juvenile justice system.” 

Sounds good. 

In another post-vote email WitnessLA received, a group of community-based providers and advocates from across LA County co-wrote a 29-page letter outlining for the board of a list of suggested strategies that they and other county officials might use to “safely reduce the population inside Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall.”

The letter also pointed out that, good intentions notwithstanding, earlier this year, the supes passed two motions “aiming to end incarceration” of girls and gender expansive youth—“a commitment,” the letter stated, “which remains unfulfilled.”

Yet, despite the passage of these two motions, the groups wrote, little to no progress has been made in reducing the number of youth incarcerated in the girls’ facilities.

There is, of course, much more to this story.

Yet, although the BSCC will be meeting on Wednesday, December 18, as they note on their agenda, unless Los Angeles County Juvenile Hall can demonstrate, “following a reinspection,” that the “elements that rendered it unsuitable have been remedied and the facility is a suitable place for the confinement of juveniles, there will be no discussion,” pertaining to Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall, and related topics.

Yet the BSCC advises any and all to check back, presumably to see if any changes have surfaced.

So….watch this space.

PS: The photo at the top of the story is a screen shot of Probation Chief Guillermo Viera Rosa taken when he was speaking to the board during the live broadcast of the supes Dec. 17, 2024, meeting.