Gov.
Gavin Newsom (D-CA) is being criticized for not including new funding in
his budget for an anti-crime ballot measure that he opposed but was overwhelmingly passed by voters last year.
The state's attorney general broke with the governor last week, saying he believes
Proposition 36, which increases penalties for repeated retail theft and fentanyl dealers, should be funded. It also mandates drug treatment for certain nonviolent drug offenders.
"The people of the state have spoken loud and clear," state
Attorney General Rob Bonta told
KCRA 3 at a fentanyl-related news conference last week in Sacramento. "And so, I think getting funding for a full implementation is critical."
Bonta added that despite the "difficult budget time," he believed "the will of the people should be delivered."
His comments came after Newsom left out funding for the crime initiative in his revised state spending plan. However, Newsom's budget includes extra funds for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in anticipation of more people being imprisoned because of Proposition 36.
Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper said it was time for the legislature and Newsom to "step up and fund it."
"If someone is addicted and needs treatment, we've got to make sure they get treatment, but the funding has to be there," he said. "The budget is tight; budgets are a priority. Priority for the voters, priority for us in law enforcement."
Newsom announced in May that California went from having a small surplus in January to being $12 billion in the red less than six months later, which he largely blamed on President Donald Trump's tariffs, instability in the stock market, and the Los Angeles wildfires. Newsom said California had to scale back on healthcare for illegal immigrants to help balance the budget, as well as cut back on other programs, such as one that gave prospective jurors $100 a day instead of $15 for participating in civic service.
While Newsom may be using California's budget woes as a cover for not funding Proposition 36, he has a history of not listening to the will of voters.
In 2012 and 2016, Californians rejected ballot measures to eliminate the death penalty. In 2016, they actually voted to expedite executions, but Newsom, who became governor in 2019, ignored their demands and instituted a moratorium on capital punishment.
Proposition 36 was no different.
The measure, which passed with 68.4% of the vote and the support of all 58 California counties, was seen as a major win for tough-on-crime advocates. Despite its passing, Newsom has shown no hurry in implementing it.
“To call it a mandate is an understatement,” Greg Totten, chief executive officer of the California District Attorneys Association, which sponsored the initiative,
told the Los Angeles Times. “It isn’t a red or blue issue ... It’s what’s compassionate and what’s right and what the public expects us to do.”
Proposition 36 supporters, which include major retail industry players such as Walmart and Home Depot, have argued that tougher consequences are the only way to close existing loopholes that have made it easier for shoplifters and drug pushers to skirt the law.
There was an explosion in retail theft across the state, which caused stores to raise prices, lock up items, and, in multiple cases, close shop. Proposition 36 increases penalties for smash-and-grab crimes when three or more people act together to commit theft. It also allows prosecutors to file felony charges if the person caught has two or more prior theft convictions.
Newsom, along with some of the state's Democratic leaders and human rights groups, has argued that Proposition 36 is too expensive, offers false hope, and isn't a real fix.
According to the state Legislative Analyst’s Office, the ballot measure would increase state criminal justice costs “likely ranging from several tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars each year.”
Critics have also said it would disproportionately imprison poor people and those with substance abuse problems rather than target ringleaders who take advantage of disenfranchised groups and hire them to steal goods or sell drugs.
“We don’t need to go back to the broken policies of the last century,” Newsom said. “Mass incarceration has been proven ineffective and is not the answer.”
Newsom tried to sink Proposition 36 by offering an alternative ballot measure, but abandoned the effort after failing to get the support of Democratic lawmakers.
The California legislature ultimately passed 13 anti-theft bills that Newsom and Democrats hoped would appease voters and get them to vote no on Proposition 36, but that did not happen.
While voters were on board with Proposition 36, the problem is that it lacks a funding mechanism, which has been left up to state lawmakers and the governor to hammer out.
As it currently stands, Proposition 36 won’t work without funding, said Graham Knaus, chief executive officer of the California State Association of Counties.
“We believe strongly that if it’s not properly funded, it’s going to fail,” Knaus told the Los Angeles Times. “Proposition 36 requires increased capacity for mental health and substance abuse treatment. And until that’s in place, there’s not really a way to make the sentencing work.”
