California’s new crime-fighting measure, Proposition 36, passed by overwhelming margins amid news of theft sprees, “smash-and-grab” robberies and drugstores with razors and toothpaste locked behind glass. The new law tackles that by turning some misdemeanor thefts and robberies into felonies.
But there’s another part of the initiative aimed at addiction, and San Diego District Attorney Summer Stephan wants to use it to get more people into drug court. I looked at how that will work in a new story. You can read it here.
Proposition 36 introduces a category of “treatment-mandated felony” that lets judges order defendants into drug programs. Under this provision, defendants with non-violent drug charges have a choice: go to treatment or go to prison. Stephan thinks that’s one of the most important features of Proposition 36, and said it gives her office more tools to get drug users the help they need.
“The system has almost decriminalized everything because there isn’t any real incentive to engage in treatment,” Stephan told me. “My goal is to begin to not see more people in jail, but more people in treatment.”
Here’s how it works: Participants in drug court meet with a judge on a weekly to monthly basis and work with case managers who coordinate their services and requirements. They have to take drug tests and participate in activities such as detox, residential treatment, therapy, job training and education.
“We want to incentivize these offramps away from crime and addiction and self-destruction, which also leads to destroying our communities,” Stephan said.
Critics maintain that drug treatment doesn’t work unless people want to do it. They say forcing people into sobriety is a step toward the failed “war on drugs” that crowded California prisons with low-level offenders. And there aren’t enough treatment beds for people who want them now, let alone for people forced to participate.
“All of the actual research that I’ve seen is that mandated treatment doesn’t work,” Khalid Alexander, president of Pillars of the Community, told me. “Even if that did work, there’s no money to fund those programs.”
There’s lots we don’t know about how Proposition 36 will roll out. Here’s some things we’ll be watching.
How much will it cost? A county analysis concluded the new measure could cost tens of millions of dollars in new law enforcement expenses. And it could cut funding for drug treatment and other services established under Proposition 47, a previous measure that lowered the threshold for felony crimes. We’ll be following those numbers, looking at how much San Diego spends on tougher enforcement and what it can recoup through the state bond measure.
How many more people will be arrested or go to prison? By all accounts Proposition 36 will lead to more prosecutions. In some cases it won’t be new or additional charges, but harsher ones as misdemeanor thefts become felonies. Stephan said her office expects to prosecute at least 600 felony thefts each year and the county projects thousands of new field arrests and bookings each year. Alexander told me he thinks it will lead to overzealous policing and “exponentially more arrests.”
How will San Diego County meet the demand? An earlier bond measure, Proposition 1 will raise bond money and redirect some taxes to build more beds for mental health and drug treatment services. But some officials say it will strip support for existing programs and reduce local control. We’ll follow how those grants are awarded and see how San Diego County uses its share to meet the increased need for drug treatment under Proposition 36.
School Bond Winners Favor Big, Urban Districts
Voters approved numerous school bond measures in San Diego County, but the winners skewed toward larger, urban districts, Kristen Taketa with the San Diego Union-Tribune reports.
A number of smaller, rural districts in areas including Bonsall, Fallbrook, Valley Center and Santee fell short of the 55 percent majority needed to pass the bonds, with more than 70 percent of the vote counted, the San Diego County Registrar of Voters reported.
School officials said that reflects voters’ concerns about inflation and cost of living. There’s also a structural problem. Large districts with higher property values get more bang for their buck, and are able to raise much more money than smaller districts can with the same property tax increase.
California schools rely on local or state bond money to build new schools or fix older, dilapidated ones. Voters passed a state school bond measure, Proposition 2, which will raise $10 billion for K-12 schools and community colleges. But districts have to put up matching funds from their own local bonds to get a share of that. So the ones that failed may miss out on that opportunity.
Governor Issues Report Card on California Schools
Gov. Gavin Newsom reported on the status of K-12 schools last week, noting incremental progress on language and math proficiency.
The percentage of California students who met or exceeded standards grew from 46.7 percent to 47.0 percent in English language, from 34.6 percent to 35.5 percent in math, and from 30.2 percent to 30.7 percent in science, the governor reported. Black and Latino students showed improved scores in all grades, the report stated.
Republican lawmakers protested the sunny forecast. Despite the progress, they pointed out that most students didn’t make the mark, with more than half below grade in English, and nearly two-thirds behind expectations in math and science.
The Sacramento Report runs every Friday and is part of a partnership with CalMatters. Do you have tips, ideas or questions? Send them to me at deborah@voiceofsandiego.org