New York County Defender Services

Testimony of

Natalie Fiorenzo

Senior Corrections Specialist

New York County Defender Services

Before the New York City Board of Correction

February 10, 2026

I. Power Outage

On January 23, 2026, one of our attorneys received an email from the “P.M.A / T.E.A.M.S. unit”

in the Department of Correction indicating that video conferencing services were unavailable

because Rikers Island was “experiencing an island wide power outage.” This power emergency

coincided with the record-breaking winter storm that beset our city days later.

This notification prompted immediate concern and a flurry of activity among defender offices to

determine the scope and consequences of the power outage, particularly with respect to heat.

Some defender offices were informed that blankets and thermal clothing were being distributed

to mitigate a loss of heat, while others were told that these items were being provided merely as a

precautionary measure related to the storm. An NYCDS corrections specialist who was on Rikers

Island on January 23rd observed officers bringing in boxes of flashlights for distribution in the

facility, suggesting a possible lighting failure as well. Defender offices attempted to

communicate with one another to gain clarity, but ultimately received conflicting and incomplete

information from the Department of Correction and other public safety officials.

This incident underscores the extreme vulnerability of those in the custody of New York City’s

Department of Corrections. Physically isolated from the rest of the city, and relying on archaic,

analog systems and infrastructure, those incarcerated on Rikers are in constant danger of

suffering in silence when the city faces extreme circumstances. With phone and

videoconferencing services unavailable, there was no way to know what our clients wereexperiencing on this day, and no way to corroborate any limited information that came from the

Department. It is no secret that the Department likes to conceal the worst of what occurs in their

facilities, and on this day this was eerily apparent when an officer on the island told staff from

our office who were visiting “we like it quiet”.

This incident highlights the urgent need for a formal notification procedure to public defender

offices whenever an emergency affects persons in custody. Such a procedure must include clear

and timely information regarding the nature and cause of the emergency, the remediation plan

and anticipated timeline, and most critically, which housing units are impacted. When

information is communicated by the Department of Correction, it is often described in overly

broad terms, such as affecting the entire island or an entire building. But our clients

individualized needs vary significantly from housing unit to housing unit, depending on physical

and mental health vulnerabilities and assigned levels of supervision. More specificity regarding

the facilities impacted would allow our staff to better triage and deliver support to the individuals

who are affected.

In addition to posting information about the nature of an emergency on the Department’s website

in the interest of transparency, the Department of Correction should designate an individual

liaison responsible for communicating directly with a point of contact at each defender office,

and for responding promptly to all relevant inquiries.

II. Chronic heat failures

This winter has been marked by sustained, severe cold across New York City, with temperatures

remaining far below seasonal norms for weeks on end. This enduring cold front has laid bare the

fundamentally faulty, inadequate heating system that people in custody and advocates have

complained about for years. City agencies have issued repeated advisories to the public warning

them that extreme cold can be life-threatening and urging people to seek warmth and shelter.

1 For

people in custody, who cannot control or regulate their environment or take basic steps to protect

themselves from the cold, the failures in heating systems and building conditions have immediate

and serious health consequences.

Throughout this period, our office has received a continuous stream of reports of heating failures

at nearly every facility on Rikers Island. The frequency and consistency of these reports indicate

systemic problems with immediate health implications. Not dissimilar to DOC’s failure at

1 As of February 9, 2026, 18 people have died in New York City from the extreme cold. This demonstrates

the need for appropriate heat to be provided for our clients. Erica Brosnan, Outdoor death toll in NYC

rises to 18 amid extreme cold, Spectrum News NY 1 (Feb. 9 2026) at

https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2026/02/09/death-toll-in-new-york-city-rises-to-18-after-extreme-co

ld#:~:text=Outdoor%20death%20toll%20in%20New%20York%20City%20rises%20to%2018%20amid%20

extreme%20cold&text=Another%20person%20was%20found%20dead,Seymour%20Avenue%20in%20th

e%20Bronxtemperature regulation every summer, the absence of reliable and effective heat constitutes a

serious threat to the health and well-being of people in custody.

At the North Infirmary Command (NIC), a client reported that there was no heat at all in the

housing area and that he was freezing. NIC is designed to house individuals with significant

medical needs, including those receiving treatment, recovering from illness or injury, or

requiring heightened medical supervision for long-term conditions, and this client was no

exception. For this vulnerable population, prolonged exposure to cold temperatures is

particularly dangerous and can exacerbate existing medical issues, interfere with recovery, and

pose a serious and possibly fatal threat to health and safety.

At the Robert N. Davoren Center (RNDC), a client reported a different but equally troubling

pattern: when individuals complain about the cold, corrections officers turn the heat on

temporarily, but then turn it back off shortly thereafter. Another client observed that even when

the heat is on in their housing area, the wind coming in through the poorly insulated windows

leaves cells frigid. These risks are compounded by an inexplicable recent restriction on sending

thermal garments to people in custody, an issue discussed in greater detail below.

These failures are not isolated or resolved incidents, but part of a persistent and ongoing problem

that persists today. Yesterday, Monday, February 9, our organization received reports that the

West Facility was lacking heat. This morning, we reported complaints that OBCC’s windows

were broken, leading to freezing temperatures in the 3 upper housing area.

We have raised these concerns directly with DOC’s legal department, the Office of Constituent

and Grievance Services, facility leadership, and Board staff, yet the reports of inadequate heat

continue pouring in. The continued receipt of such reports after DOC has been notified raises

serious concerns about the adequacy of corrective measures and the ability of existing systems to

ensure safe housing conditions during extreme cold.

Heat is a basic necessity, not a discretionary comfort. The continued failure to provide consistent,

adequate heating across Rikers facilities, whether due to outright system failure or structural

deficiencies, reflects a systemic problem that demands immediate and sustained intervention.

III. Continued chaos in package rules

In January, the Department updated its online list of “permissible items.” This list narrowed what

families and organizations are allowed to send to people in custody and, as discussed above, now

prevents the sending of thermal clothing. In practice, these policy shifts have been accompanied

by widespread confusion and inconsistent implementation across facilities. DOC’s new package

policy, and its conflicting implementation have completely undermined the ability of families

and service providers to meet even basic needs.One area of concern with the new permissible items list is footwear. The updated policy lists two

specific styles of name-brand Vans as the only permissible shoe option. These shoes are

expensive and cost-prohibitive for many families and organizations providing these items.

Notably, they are not available for purchase on Amazon, adding to the difficulties of mailing

compliant shoes. Despite repeated efforts, we have not received clear guidance on whether

generic or equivalent shoes in the same style are permissible, and some facilities do not even

seem aware that the policy has been changed to Vans only.

This specific change has had direct and harmful consequences for individual clients. In one

instance, an individual injured his foot months ago and was placed in a medical boot. His injury

has since healed, but DOC has inexplicably not given him a second shoe, despite requests from

our office and the client himself. We cannot remedy the situation ourselves, due to our packages

being rejected. As a result, he has been forced to keep the medical boot on continuously, not

because it is medically required but because he has no other footwear available.

In another case, a client reported that he has only sandals and has been unable to attend

recreation for months because his footwear is inadequate for colder weather. We have also not

been able to send him a replacement pair of shoes due to the new policy. In both instances, the

inability to access basic, permissible footwear has resulted in prolonged discomfort and basic

human indignity.

Notably, since the updated permissible items list was published, our office has observed that

items have consistently been rejected in nearly every package we have attempted to send, often

without any discernible explanation or citation to the posted policy. The shoes our clients need

are only one example of the types of packages being rejected. These rejections vary widely

across facilities or even within the same facility, depending on who is working, suggesting that

the package rules are not being uniformly understood or consistently applied in practice.

The consequences of these rejections are significant. Rejected items are not automatically

returned to our organization, or to whomever sent the package, as DOC requires that people in

custody use their commissary funds to pay for return shipping. Many of our clients lack

sufficient commissary funds to do so, and our office does not have the budget to continually

replace lost items. As a result, essential items are effectively destroyed or permanently withheld,

further depriving people in custody of basic necessities.

In response to this uncertainty, our correction specialists have spent hours contacting individual

facilities to determine which items can and cannot be sent. We have documented these efforts,

which reveal stark inconsistencies not only between facilities, but also between the guidance

provided by staff and DOC’s own posted policy. This information has been sent to the Board for

your awareness. This lack of uniformity has created delays, wasted resources, and preventable

hardships for people in custody and those attempting to support them.IV . Response to Deaths in Custody Report

The Board’s Second Deaths in Custody Report reveals the unacceptable care provided to

vulnerable populations at Rikers Island. We hope this harrowing report, which documents an

unconscionable number of preventable deaths of people suffering from acute mental health and

substance use challenges, prompts a reckoning within the Department. There must be a serious

assessment of how much oversight in custody settings is exercised by correction officers as

opposed to clinicians, and whether there is sufficient capacity for clinicians to be onsite more

consistently. The report reflects a troubling reluctance to transfer individuals to the PACE unit,

where access to clinical care is significantly greater. Instead, people with mental health

challenges often experience repeated interactions with correction officers rather than medical

professionals, even when there is a well documented history of severe and intractable mental

illness and multiple prior incidents.

The case of Mr. Benjamin Kelly is disturbingly illustrative of this failure. While in custody, he

experienced what was clearly a severe mental health episode that resulted in a use of force

response. Although the Department has invested in specialized training programs such as

Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics (ICAT) and Crisis Intervention Teams

(CIT) to better equip officers to respond to mental health crises, officers should be a last resort

when dealing with individuals with mental health challenges. Experience both inside and outside

of jails consistently demonstrates that the fewer interactions between correction officers and

people experiencing mental health crises, the better the outcomes. Yet, of the five individuals

with mental health issues identified in the deaths in custody report, only one was housed in a

PACE unit.

The report also reveals systemic failures in required touring and staffing practices. Not only were

tours frequently not conducted as required, but when they did occur, they were often cursory and

superficial. In one alarming instance, officers repeatedly passed by an individual without

realizing he was deceased. Meaningful touring would have prevented the majority of the seven

deaths listed in this report. Officers must be required to visually confirm breathing and

movement and to engage in brief verbal interaction to assess an individual’s condition,

particularly when staff are already on notice that the person has mental health challenges.

Officers must also be properly trained to recognize warning signs and should err on the side of

caution by escalating to a medical professional. Instead, the report documents repeated failures to

report concerns when red flags were present.

BOC places significant reliance on the Video Monitoring Unit (VMU) as an oversight

mechanism to compensate for negligent staff practices. The Board notes that real timemonitoring can be “a crucial tool in identifying poor touring practices, deficient supervision,

unsecured and covered cell doors, as well as other incidents that pose a risk to individuals in

custody and staff alike.” But this assumes that the VMU teams are not impacted by the pervasive

culture of indifference and lax accountability among corrections staff.

There must be a systemic evaluation of what drives this persistent failure to perform the most

basic responsibilities of a correction officer’s job, and what must be done to change it. The

failure to conduct tours, to secure cell doors, and to maintain accurate logbooks has resulted in an

unconscionable number of deaths, and continues to put lives at risk at this very moment.