A divided county Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 Tuesday to direct the chief administrative officer to prepare a report on how Proposition 36 on the November statewide ballot might impact county homeless-services funding and other programs.
The board's action detoured from the original resolution backed by Supervisors Joel Anderson and Jim Desmond, and county District Attorney Summer Stephan that called on the board to put its support behind the measure.
Anderson and Desmond voted against the alternative motion by Board Chairwoman Nora Vargas, who was supported by colleagues Monica Montgomery Steppe and Terra Lawson-Remer.
According to a Lawson-Remer's office, the substitute motion directs CAO Ebony Shelton ``to work with relevant groups and departments to provide a thorough analysis of how the changes to Proposition 47 through the potential passage of Proposition 36 may impact funding for county services, with a specific focus on behavioral health services, housing and development services, and homelessness-related programs.''
The CAO was directed to return to the board Oct. 8 ``with a multiple-scenario analysis so the board can consider taking a position on Proposition 36.''
Backers say Proposition 36 is needed to correct unintended
consequences of Proposition 47, which voters passed in 2014 and reclassified some ``non-violent'' felonies as misdemeanors. Recent concerns about organized
retail thefts and burglaries have led some to rethink the measure.
That led to the development of Proposition 36, also known as the ``Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act,'' which is backed by a host of prosecutors and law enforcement leaders. If passed, the measure would:
-- classify repeat theft as a felony for people who steal less than $950 if they have two or more prior theft-related convictions, although a third theft charge could be reduced to a misdemeanor (and the fourth conviction would
remain a felony);
-- allow stolen property values from multiple thefts to be combined to warrant a felony charge, if the total exceeds $950;
-- allow for an enhanced penalty if an offender steals, damages or destroys property via organized theft (with two or more offenders) or by causing losses of $50,000 or greater;
-- add fentanyl to the list of hard drugs;
-- legalize stricter penalties for drug dealers whose actions result in death or serious injury, and warn them of potential murder charges if continued trafficking results in fatalities similar to the warnings issued in driving under the influence cases; and
-- establish a classification that gives those with two prior hard-drug possession convictions the option of entering drug and mental health treatment, instead of incarceration, and allow for the charge to be expunged.
Desmond said during the meeting that Proposition 36 is ``a tough item'' but needed, and he thanked Anderson and Stephan for teaming up with him to support the resolution.
``Government's number-one responsibility is to provide safe
communities where families and businesses can thrive,'' he said. ``Without safety we don't have a functioning society.''
``I do not want to put everybody in jail,'' he said, adding the intent is to help people.
``We can't continue to live this way,'' he added. ``There's gotta be consequences.''
Vargas said public safety and sentencing reform are top priorities for her, but she insisted Prop 36 isn't the solution.
She said the measure would target communities of color she represents, pushing them ``further into a cycle of incarceration and marginalization.''
In a statement after the vote, Vargas cited Gov. Gavin Newsom's recent signing of ``a landmark legislative package that cracks down on retail crime and property theft, demonstrating a targeted approach to addressing
serious crimes.''
``This is the type of focused and effective action we need,'' she said. ``We must be innovative in finding ways to protect our communities, prioritizing restorative justice over unduly severe approaches.''
Desmond in a statement said that Californians ``have made it clear: they're fed up with rising crime, businesses fleeing the state and everyday essentials locked behind (plastic glass).''
``It's disappointing that the majority of my colleagues refused to stand with us in prioritizing the safety and security of our community,'' said Desmond, who requested that Shelton submit the Prop 36 report in late September.
In a statement, Anderson said that while he has ``always supported restorative justice and giving people additional chances in life, Prop 36 simply reforms flaws in Prop 47 and allows district attorneys to encourage people to get the help they need.''
Those for and against Prop 36 resolution had their say during a public hearing. Stephan told supervisors that Prop 47 featured some good policies that Prop 36 would retain, while also fixing the features that harm business
owners, communities and employees.
She mentioned a perfume business owner whose security cameras were smashed numerous times by thieves, and had given up calling law enforcement about a suspect who stole under $950 worth of property.
Stephan also said she spoke with a 20-year-old Ulta store employee who doesn't feel comfortable at her job, because the workplace is not safe anymore.
Society speaks through its laws, and ``when our laws basically decriminalize activity that's harmful to these businesses small and large, it is no longer working,'' Stephan said.
Rather than being a ``three strikes'' law, Prop 36 is ``all common sense, it's all balanced,'' she added.
Arkan Somo, president and CEO of the Neighborhood Marketing Association, said Prop 36 ``will help stop the wave of theft and violence caused by Prop 47.''
``Neighborhood markets are the lifeblood of our communities, and small business owners are the backbone of our economy,'' Somo said. ``Prop 47 had
10 years, and it didn't work.''
Many opponents at the meeting echoed concerns about the measure unfairly penalizing communities of color, and said it simply didn't make sense in terms of crime prevention. Alexander Kraft, a county employee and Service Employees International Union member, said Prop 36 would affect a program that helps residents released from jail.
With the county facing a budget deficit, Kraft asked why the county should spend on systems that do not work in terms of rehabilitation for those convicted for minor crimes.
He added the county has seen a 21% decrease in shoplifting since 2019, and asked supervisors to ``not make the problem worse by criminalizing poverty.''
Montgomery Steppe said there were ``misconceptions and misguided narratives when it comes to Prop 36,'' as both cases of shoplifting and burglaries are down within the city of San Diego.
Montgomery Steppe called Prop 36 another short-term solution, because officials didn't do what they were supposed to when Prop 47 passed, by offering
better services to communities.
Given certain racist practices within the justice system, the passage of Prop 36 ``would represent a revival of such policy,'' Montgomery Steppe said.
Montgomery Steppe said she understands how crime victims feel -- but also understands the plight of those harmed by state policies, even though
they're not considered victims.
Lawson-Remer said her instinct was to let the laws that Newsom signed work before voters pass a law that doesn't help those struggling with a mental health condition or drug addiction.
Prop 36 would eliminate the Safe Neighborhood and Schools fund, which has reduced homelessness by 60% and unemployment by 50%, Lawson-Remer said.
``Let's be clear: Stealing is wrong, plain and simple -- that's what I've taught my pre-schooler, and what hard-working parents have taught their children,'' she added.
