Can Tough-on-Crime Proposition 36 solve theft, drug use and homelessness, despite the lack of new funding?

At a Sept. 10 hearing at the Capitol, Haley identified these problems as rising homelessness and shoplifting and “a surprising increase in opioid-related deaths.”

“Pres. 36 encourages the treatment of addicts by giving them choices, by giving them decisive freedom of choice in their own lives. … It allows prosecutors to treat an offender with a single theft differently than someone who is a serial offender,” she said. “And it allows prosecutors to treat fentanyl like the scourge that it is.”

But experts say these promises could be difficult to fulfill without a massive influx of resources, given the state’s limited capacity for drug treatment, the shortage of police officers and the ongoing housing crisis. Meanwhile, the ballot measure will likely increase jail and prison spending. according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Office.

The LAO estimates that Proposition 36 would cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars a year, in part by increasing the state prison population “by about a few thousand people,” roughly the capacity of one state prison. It would also increase the number of people in local jails and on supervised probation and cut Proposition 47 money for treatment programs by tens of millions of dollars a year.

All of this is what the state, as well as many local governments, are facing budget deficits. San Diego County supervisors recently declined to endorse Proposition 36 after conducting an analysis that found the ballot measure would cost the county $58 million a year, could push the jail population beyond system capacity and cut funding for Proposition 47 programs reduce.

Law enforcement personnel

Proponents of Proposition 36 argue that making shoplifting and other low-level thefts crimes will undermine police officers’ ability to hold people accountable for these crimes. But nothing now stops police from arresting perpetrators of crimes — except, according to many in law enforcement, their own resources.

Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper, a former lawmaker and longtime critic of criminal justice reform, told lawmakers at the September hearing that his department “does not have the resources to catch every misdemeanor offender” — and that when confronted with a decision between responding In the event of a violent crime or a property crime, they will choose the more serious incident.

“We don’t have the resources for the crime cases, the day-to-day things because of Prop. 47,” he said. “We only have a limited capacity.”

Cooper blamed Proposition 47 for limiting police response to minor crimes. However, this measure had no direct consequences for police personnel. which hit a 30-year low in CaliforniaAccording to the Police Officers Research Association of California, 3,600 officers were lost between 2020 and 2022.

Proposition 36 would not change that staffing crisis, said Tom Hoffman, who headed the state’s probation department from 2006 to 2009 and worked as a police officer for more than 30 years. The measure does not include any new money for police departments – and in most cases, officers will have no way of knowing if a shoplifting case has occurred when a shoplifting case comes in.

“These cases are the lowest priority,” he said, adding that they should be. “There are 35,000 warrants for people’s arrest for violations of these crimes in Sacramento County alone. And the sheriff openly admits that he won’t go looking for them, he won’t arrest them, and he won’t accept having them locked up in his jail. And (Proposition) 36 is not going to change that.”

San Joaquin Probation Chief Steve Jackson supports Proposition 36, saying it would “restore balance” to the criminal justice system by allowing harsher sentences for repeat offenders. But he acknowledged that some of the promises may not be easy to achieve.

“There’s no money in it to finance all this,” he said.

A solution to fentanyl and homelessness?

Proponents of Proposition 36 lean heavily on the ballot measure’s provisions regarding drug possession and use — and what they see as a link to homelessness.

They note that since Proposition 47 was passed, there has been a sharp decline in participation in drug courts and other diversion programs, which offer someone facing a criminal charge the opportunity to participate in treatment and have those charges dropped. They connect that decline to the increase in homelessness.

“We in California have spent the last ten years since the passage of Prop. 47 had a massive explosion of drug addiction, especially fentanyl. And that also comes with a huge increase in homelessness,” Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig, who helped draft Proposition 36, said at an Oct. 23 news conference.