Did Tulare County find a way to reduce California jail deaths?

The number of people dying in California jails continues to increase even as the state’s elected officials urge greater transparency around inmate deaths. In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom called for more scrutiny of California’s 57 county jail systems and signed a law last year to require jails to disclose more information about deaths behind bars.

But as CalMatters criminal justice reporter Nigel Duara explains in his multipart series, death rates remain well above 2019 levels. In the first installment of his investigation, Nigel found that the state hit a record-high of 215 inmate deaths in 2022. Aside from natural causes, the two major causes of death were suicide and overdoses, particularly fentanyl-related drugs.

In part two, Nigel reported the roadblocks some local officials and advocates face when attempting to compel sheriff departments, which run the jail systems, to make changes. He chronicles how the head of a San Diego County review board abruptly quit after the board and sheriff rejected his recommendations to reduce jail deaths.

In his latest story, Nigel reports from San Joaquin Valley, where one sheriff hopes the small changes he implements will meaningfully help curb inmate death and suicide rates.

A year before Lt. Buddy Hirayama took charge of Tulare County jails, the jail system had one of the deadliest years in its history, with eight deaths in 2022, including four suicides. When Hirayama assumed his leadership role in June 2023, the death of a 32-year-old inmate named Ignacio Garcia marked the second death in Tulare County jails that year and the first death on Hirayama’s watch.

• Hirayama: “I was honestly completely overwhelmed. I just had a thousand questions about how the facility runs. I had a thousand questions about how the deputies are supposed to prevent this. I had a thousand questions about medical staff and what their roles and responsibility is in this.”

In response, Hirayama changed the process of inmate check-ins to be less predictable. Though deputies still have the same number of rotations, the times they make their rounds around the block are staggered to keep inmates guessing. Sometimes, a deputy will check on an at-risk inmate, then return back minutes later to ensure nothing has changed. 

In one incident in December, a deputy checked on an inmate then came back 10 minutes later instead of the usual 30 minutes or hour. According to Hirayama, the deputy found the inmate unconscious, with something around their neck, but was able to intervene before medical help arrived. 

In the past seven months, no inmate has died in the Tulare County jail, and Hirayama reports that his staff has prevented five suicides since his time taking over.

“Let’s just turn this place upside down, open doors that we haven’t opened for years, see what we can fix…” Hirayama said.

For more on this issue, read Nigel’s story.

From CalMatters health reporter Ana B. Ibarra:

California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Friday announced a $273 million multistate settlement with New Jersey-based Amneal Pharmaceuticals for the drug manufacturer’s alleged failure to report suspicious opioid orders, and as a consequence contributing to the opioid epidemic. 

If the name “Amneal Pharmaceuticals” rings a bell, it’s because just days earlier Gov. Newsom and state health officials announced a deal with the same company to procure naloxone, the overdose reversal medication, at a cheaper price than currently available. That agreement locks that state in as a long-term customer to the company.

Under the opioid settlement agreement that is yet to be finalized, Amneal will pay states a total of $92.5 million in cash and $180 million in naloxone products over a 10-year period. In a statement, Amneal said the settlement would resolve all pending lawsuits filed by states against the company.The company did not admit any wrongdoing. 

• Bonta, in a statement: The settlement “builds on our efforts to heal our communities and respond to this epidemic from all angles, from recovery services to resources on prevention and treatment.”

To date, California has secured $4.25 billion in opioid settlement funds that it uses on programs such as distributing naloxone and training substance use providers. Since 2018, the state has been purchasing the overdose reversal medication and distributing it to schools, law enforcement, county health departments and community harm reduction programs. 

Starting this month, California will be able to buy more naloxone because of the lower price it secured from Amneal: $24 for a two-unit nasal spray pack instead of the current price of $41.

The Department of Health Care Access and Information, which is overseeing the naloxone contract, said it learned that Amneal was named in opioid litigation as it vetted proposals, but prioritized price, production capacity and other factors. 

• Andrew DiLuccia, a department spokesperson, in an email: “Ultimately, the $24 CalRx naloxone price from Amneal represents a groundbreaking deal that will enable California to scale its naloxone distribution and save more lives. Addressing the opioid crisis demands all participants be part of the solution.”

Read more in the story.

A bill that would expand the list of California business owners’ information accessible to the public has a tough hill to climb. Not only have three similar attempts failed in recent years, but a hefty cost estimate may also prevent it from advancing through the Legislature, writes CalMatters housing reporter Ben Christopher.

Currently, California businesses must regularly submit documents with the Secretary of State that disclose the company’s name, address, top managers and the names of individuals who receive the company’s legal filings. Senate Bill 1201 would require an additional detail: The names and addresses of “beneficial owners” who own at least 25% of a company. 

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, implementing the measure would cost $9.3 million the first year and $3 million every year after. The bill’s supporters — which include anti-eviction advocates, unions, legal aid organizations and others — are mystified by the high price tag. A 2020 cost estimate for a law that requires the Secretary of State to add a different question to the same form, for example, was only $561,000 in the first year and $79,000 thereafter.

• Jyotswaroop Bawa with the progressive nonprofit Rise Economy: “This is an example of a good governance bill that will fail because of bad governance.”

In addition to citing privacy concerns, business and landlord groups oppose the proposal because they say it serves no obvious legal purpose. Lawsuits can already be served without the need to publicize an owner’s contact information.

• Debra Carlton, California Apartment Association spokesperson: “The point of the corporate veil is that you go after the corporation’s assets. You see lawsuits every day being brought against the industry.”

Learn more about the bill in Ben’s story.

CalMatters tech reporter Khari Johnson wrote about how the end of a federal subsidy could widen the digital divide in California. What’s going on in Congress and around the nation? Find out from our soon-to-be colleagues at The Markup.