fbpx

Dropping juvenile crime rate turns cells to community centers

Apache County youth explore the new community center in St. Johns, dubbed The LOFT to capitalize on the trendy, industrial styling. The space once housed the county's juvenile detention center. (Photo courtesy of Amy Love/Arizona Supreme Court)
Apache County youth explore the new community center in St. Johns, dubbed The LOFT to capitalize on the trendy, industrial styling. The space once housed the county’s juvenile detention center. (Photo courtesy of Amy Love/Arizona Supreme Court)

Apache County’s new community center in St. Johns is industrial chic right down to its name: The LOFT.

Anywhere else it might have been a hip apartment building. It has the exposed metal beams and minimalist lighting that would fit right in with downtown Phoenix.

You’d never know it was once a juvenile detention center.

Heather Murphy, director of communications for the Administrative Office of the Courts, said the idea of repurposing empty detention centers is catching on all over the state, including in Yuma County, as the rate of juvenile crime and subsequent detention populations continue to decline.

She called it an “inspired approach” to saving the counties money while reaching the kids who have more to gain from centers like this than they do from detention.

On opening day of The LOFT, nearly a third of the local high school's student body showed up to enjoy amenities like pool and ping-pong tables. Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Latham said the space would also offer proactive services to reach kids in need and provide educational resources. (Photo courtesy of Amy Love/Arizona Supreme Court)
On opening day of The LOFT, nearly a third of the local high school’s student body showed up to enjoy amenities like pool and ping-pong tables. Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Latham said the space would also offer proactive services to reach kids in need and provide educational resources. (Photo courtesy of Amy Love/Arizona Supreme Court)

“In rural Arizona, there just aren’t a lot of safe spaces for teens to gather, and this is really an inspired effort to create something new that the kids will value,” Murphy said. “It’s a special space made just for them.”

Unable to reconcile the $1.2 million annual cost to keep its doors open, Apache County closed its detention facility in 2015.

Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Latham said the county’s juvenile detention population had slowed to a trickle, amounting to an average of just 1.7 kids per day. It could go six, seven, eight weeks without a single kid, yet the center had to be staffed as a full-time facility just in case someone happened to come along.

That meant two detention officers at all times, and a full-time teacher and medical staff. It didn’t make fiscal sense.

The county instead contracted with Navajo County to hold its juvenile offenders for $90,000 a year, a drop in the bucket compared to the previous costs.

But officials had to find yet another alternative when Navajo, too, opted to close its detention center in June.

Pinal County has since been contracted to take both Apache and Navajo counties’ juveniles, charging per kid rather than a flat rate per year, according to Latham. Through that partnership, he said detention costs are expected to plummet below $20,000 per year.

That solves the fiscal problem but does nothing for the youth who remain in Latham’s community in need of services or simply somewhere safe to go after school.

For five months, Latham himself joined renovation efforts to transform the former detention center into a place where high schoolers can come and go freely.

Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Latham personally assisted with the renovations to this former juvenile detention center. He joked the county now has a surplus of ceiling tiles after clearing them away and painting the ceiling black to highlight the metal fixtures. (Photo courtesy of Amy Love/Arizona Supreme Court)
Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Latham personally assisted with the renovations to this former juvenile detention center. He joked the county now has a surplus of ceiling tiles after clearing them away and painting the ceiling black to highlight the metal fixtures. (Photo courtesy of Amy Love/Arizona Supreme Court)

The building was already there, so they made simple but effective changes, like knocking away boring ceiling tiles and painting the ceiling beneath black to set off the galvanized steel pipes.

And two cells were transformed into respite rooms apart from the center but always at the ready for a child trying to get away from a bad situation for the night.

“There’s nothing like this,” Latham said. “Everyone knows there’s a need for it. It’s just that nobody has done it.”

The LOFT is open to all kids who have graduated from the 8th grade but not yet graduated high schoolfrom 2:30 to 9 p.m on weekdays. They’re free to entertain themselves with ping pong and a music room equipped with guitars and an electric keyboard. They have access to Mac desktops and free internet. And adults are always around to offer guidance.

Latham said the renovations cost $65,000, and staffing The LOFT comes at no extra cost to the county because it utilizes court staff.

Another Legacy Teen Center will follow in the mountainous Round Valley, where the styling will again influence the facility’s moniker: The LODGE.

Juvenile crime plummets — experts at a loss to explain

Before its closure in 2015, Apache County’s juvenile detention center would sit a month, six weeks, maybe more without housing a single kid.

The fully staffed facility was left waiting for the occasional drop-off. According to the Associated Press, the operation cost $800,000 a year, yet it averaged only 1.7 children in its custody at any given time.

The detention center was shut down, and a partnership was formed with Navajo County to house Apache’s juvenile offenders.

But on June 30, Navajo County closed its detention center, too. So did Gila County. And Graham County’s numbers are so low, its leadership is considering using just one detention area, leaving three more vacant and another open for a community program growing in popularity.

Arizona’s juvenile detention centers are closing because juvenile offender populations are plummeting, and juvenile offender populations are plummeting because kids these days are committing crimes at a rate far below generations before them.

According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, in the past two decades, the juvenile arrest rate for all offenses nationwide reached its peak in 1996 when nearly 8,500 arrests were made per 100,000 kids between 10 and 17. By 2015, that arrest rate had fallen 68 percent.

Property Crimes
Source: Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Between 1980 and 2012, property crime arrests among juveniles between the ages of 15 and 17 fell 57 percent, and violent crime arrest rates in that group dropped 68 percent.

Those trends are representative of what is happening in Arizona, going well beyond juvenile arrests and detention.

According to data from the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections, from 2007 to 2014, the number of juvenile offenders referred to the courts dropped by about 45 percent, and the number of juvenile offenders who were ultimately committed to corrections fell 49 percent.

It’s not a bad problem to have – too few kids getting into trouble with the law – but it has left Arizona to rethink its approach to juvenile detention.

Joseph Kelroy, director of Arizona’s Juvenile Justice Services Division, said all counties in the state are using risk and needs assessments to determine whether a juvenile offender belongs in detention and what the child needs to move forward. Eight counties are actively engaged in the rollout of the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative, an effort to develop statewide detention screening guidelines, and all counties have received training from Kids at Hope, a program that turns away from the concept of “bad kids.”

Kelroy said communities have more programs available to keep young people out of trouble and identify those who are struggling early on, leaving detention as a last resort.

“If we can keep them out on the front end and deal with it from a preventative standpoint, I think we’re going to have better results,” he said. “If we can work with people in their communities, in their homes with the families engaged, we’re going to have better opportunities to be successful more often.”

But while services geared toward working out a juvenile’s past traumas, substance abuse or family challenges may help prevent a history of crime, Kelroy said a percentage of young offenders will still require detention for their own safety and that of the public.

As detention populations remain low, the state is looking to the Detention Center Regionalization Task Force to develop solutions by this fall.

Kelroy said developing regional detention centers is an option, though the locations of such facilities raises questions for juveniles coming from more remote parts of the state. The juvenile detention center in Pinal County has already taken on the kids coming from Apache, Gila and Navajo counties.

The task force will also make recommendations for repurposing entire facilities or vacant sections, creating youth centers in their place where kids can move freely as they cool down after a fight with parents or await screening in more severe cases.

Ultimately, Kelroy said the system shouldn’t hurt people. Detention should be a short-term solution, if it is necessary at all. And when a kid does come into contact with the justice system, he said that’s an opportunity to help.

Unfortunately, while the state can restructure detention, no one knows exactly what is behind the drop in juvenile crime.

Dave Byers, director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, said people started joking that kids today are spending far more time on social media than they are out on the streets, but he’s not so sure that’s entirely far-fetched anymore.

Melissa Sickmund, director of the National Center for Juvenile Justice, said there might be something to that theory.

Take violent crimes, for example. Causing physical harm to someone is awfully difficult if you are not face to face, Sickmund pointed out.

She said most violent crimes committed by juveniles fall under assault, the elevated pushing and shoving that may be found in school brawls. It could be that kids are simply taking that violence and projecting it online, something Sickmund said is not being measured well, but it is disappearing from the streets even if communities are not entirely aware of the shift.

Violent Crimes
Source: Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Sickmund said young people are also self-correcting – they may not be great decision-makers, but it doesn’t take much to scare them back in line. And the justice system today is more cognizant of how best to do that.

They start thinking about college, about their career goals, about the places they want to go and things they want to do. And they know those things won’t happen if they continuously get into trouble.

They “outgrow that risk-taking behavior” and “grow into being able to see the consequences of our actions,” Sickmund said.

“It’s kind of their job to rebel,”she said. “We don’t want to make that a crime. We just want to train them away from that.”

juvenile-crime

Juveniles in Maricopa County adult jail don’t receive accredited education

Maricopa County Jail (Photo by Rachel Leingang/Arizona Capitol Times)
Maricopa County Jail (Photo by Rachel Leingang/Arizona Capitol Times)

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office is not providing accredited educational services to the juveniles held in its adult jail.

During last week’s meeting of the ad hoc committee on juvenile justice, MCSO Deputy Chief of Custody Brian Lee said 27 civilian Sheriff’s Office employees oversee the program. MCSO has considered outsourcing the job to the Maricopa County Educational Service Agency, which provides educational services at the Durango Juvenile Detention Facility, but ultimately, chose not to use the accredited program.

“I can’t speak to exactly what that means in the education world,” Lee told the committee.

But Rep. Heather Carter, R-Cave Creek, could.

“That’s a problem,” she told Lee.

Carter told the Arizona Capitol Times it means the credits juveniles earn while in MCSO’s custody at the adult facility will not necessarily be transferable upon returning to an accredited institution. Accommodations could be made to do so, but there is no guarantee.

And Carter said that’s obviously problematic when the state is trying to help those kids get back on track.

Glenn Young, MCSO’s Custody Support Division commander, said the program is not accredited because it is not a diploma-granting institution but rather offers only a GED. The curriculum is provided by Edmentum, a computer program that assesses the juveniles’ education levels.

He could not speak to why the program was not transferred to an accredited provider, whether that was because of cost or logistical issues.

While Young said he wouldn’t say this does not pose a disadvantage to the students the program serves, he noted the short periods of time juveniles typically spend at the facility.

Most are awaiting trial, he said, and the time it would take to progress to the GED level is much the same it would be on the outside – students would still need years to achieve a GED, which is “extremely uncommon” when the average jail sentence is 28 days, he said.

And after the juveniles are sentenced, the facilities they might go to for longer periods are geared toward meeting long-term educational needs.

The adult facility is currently housing 92 juveniles, most of whom have been charged with violent crimes as adults. Lee said five juveniles are being held for federal authorities because the nature of their alleged crimes prevented other juvenile facilities from accepting them.

Young said MCSO’s civilian staff in charge of their education includes:

  • 14 teachers, all of whom are qualified, and all but one have classroom experience outside of MCSO’s jail
  • Five teacher assistants, who are selected using the county’s human resource department and most of whom hold advanced degrees
  • Two education supervisors, including the principal, who has 30 years of public school experience
  • A behavioral specialist
  • A social worker
  • An administrative assistant
  • Three detention officers

Lee told the committee that educating the young inmates has been a challenge for the staff, and he noted significant differences between that program and the one at Durango.

At the Durango facility, Lee said the kids are provided a more open, “learning-focused environment.

But at the adult facility, he described a far more bleak “security-focused environment” where the juvenile inmates are handcuffed to their desks in tight, dimly lit quarters.  

Young said some students are handcuffed by their non-writing hands to prevent fights among the sometimes volatile group, and there is an “open classroom” they can work toward with good behavior.

Still, at the committee hearing, Lee was concerned by the conditions.

“Obviously, we have to be mindful of security,” he said, “but I think a lot gets lost in that.”