Flanked by supporters, and pledging to “provide justice for all,” longtime Yolo County Deputy Public Defender Dean Johansson formally announced Thursday morning that he is running for Yolo County District Attorney against three-time incumbent Jeff Reisig. This will mark Mr. Reisig’s first electoral challenge since he was elected in 2006 against fellow Deputy DA Pat Lenzi by a 53-47 margin.
Mr. Johansson pulled no punches on Thursday. He said, “The US leads the world in incarceration and Yolo County leads the State of California in incarceration.”
He called this “the county of incarceration” and said “countless children and families pay the price.”
Mr. Johansson blamed this on “the oppressive backward policies of the Yolo District Attorney.
“The DA has his hands on the spigot. He decides which cases to file and has discretion to implement laws,” he continued. “He has used that discretion to file cases that should not have been filed, charge people that should not have been charged, and to overcharge cases.”
Here is the full text of Dean Johansson’s comments…
Good Morning. My name is Dean Johansson and I’m here today to announce my candidacy for Yolo County District Attorney. But this is not about “me,” it’s about “we.” This is a community effort.
More appropriately, I’m here to announce a movement. This is a movement that is tired of seeing tax dollars wasted on mass incarceration while schools are leveled. I watched while Willow Spring Elementary at Gibson and 113 was bulldozed and is now a vacant lot, while a few blocks away a large addition was recently built on juvenile hall. End the school-to-prison pipeline.
In the past 20 years, 22 prisons have been built while only one new University of California campus has been built. Schools not prisons.
The US leads the word in incarceration and Yolo County leads the State of California in incarceration. Out of 58 counties, Yolo is one of the top 6 counties for per capita prison population. It is number one for jury trials. This is the county of incarceration and countless children and families pay the price.
Why, because of the oppressive backward policies of the Yolo District Attorney. The DA has his hands on the spigot. He decides which cases to file and has discretion to implement laws. He has used that discretion to file cases that should not have been filed, charge people that should not have been charged, and to overcharge cases.
While the people of Yolo have consistently voted in favor of progress, the Yolo DA consistently worked against it. Proposition 36 (reformed the three strikes law), 74% of Yolo County voted in favor but the DA remained neutral; Proposition 47 (reduced nonviolent offenses), 61 % voted in favor while the DA opposed; Proposition 57 (increased Parole Chances), 68% of Yolo voted in favor while the DA opposed; and Proposition 64 (legalized adult use of marijuana), 60% voted in favor while the DA opposed.
And this is a movement that is tired of seeing a system that has systematically picked on poor people, primarily black and brown people. This is a movement that is loudly telling government what it wants, and what it wants is criminal justice reform in ways that require transformational reform within the Yolo County District Attorney’s office.
This is a movement that says that we are not just the voters but we are the bosses that pay the taxes. That fund the salaries of the county workers and we have every right to expect that we will get transformational change in criminal justice and in this district attorney’s office.
It’s not me, it’s we. Then it goes to transition. If you or anyone you know shares these values, shares this desire for things to get better, for people to not be divided, for society to unite and bring things together.
If you believe it’s time for a humane legal system that looks to end crime by addressing the root of the problem.
If you believe it’s time to end mass incarceration, believe it is time to end the death penalty, if you believe it’s time to stop making prisoners of poor people by using cash bail. If you are sick and tired of government stealing our futures and the futures of our children, and if you have no intention of helping Trump’s immigration agenda, then join with me.
So how are we going to do that? Well I’ll tell you how we are going to do that – it starts with an election on June 5.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I may be wrong but something tells me that Reisig has nothing to worry about. I think when you get to the bottom of it people will tend to vote for who they perceive as the law and order candidate.
For years now, the DA has systematically created people who hate him. Now the question is – how large a group is that.
Being that it’s only criminals and other people of your ilk I doubt the group is all that large. Add to that felons can’t vote.
I think that’s a rather presumptuous statement.
“Being that it’s only criminals and other people of your ilk I doubt the group is all that large”
I recommend that you recheck the percentages of voters in Yolo County vs the position taken by DA Reisig on those issues. While I believe that “hate” is to strong a word, I know many, many people who disapprove of the policies of DA Reisig and have been waiting for an opponent to emerge.
Keith
“Law and order” is not synonymous with mass incarceration. As taxpayers, we pay a heavy price for incarceration when other management options would be more appropriate. We have a DA who favors incarceration and over charging over alternative management. The comparison between charging patterns, trials, and sentencing in Yolo County compared to other counties is testament to the practices of DA Reisig as an outlier, not only in comparison to the majority opinion in this county but also with regard to prosecutors in other counties.
Ha, ha,” perceive as the law and order candidate.”
You assume your perception is the most common.
Damn… wish we had a third choice… hate choosing between lesser of two evils…
Howard
“hate choosing between lesser of two evils”
Honest question. What do you perceive of as “evil” in either of these choices ?
It appears they each pander to the extremes… right and left… political, not professional. My opinion.
Howard
Fair enough and thanks for response. My only quibble is with the choice of the word “pander”. Is it pandering, on either side, if your positions reflect your true beliefs ?
BTW since when is “of your ilk” acceptable? Anonymous posters’ privilege?
As in people who think or agree alike with the same views.
John, even though I’m flattered that you like to troll me aren’t you being a little oversensitive here?
John
Back up moderator comment. Using the following definition, while “ilk” is often used in a pejorative sense, there are more neutral interpretations. I looked it up prior to your comment to decide whether or not to use my vast moderators powers and decided to let it slide.
I would not have posted in forum, except for the fact I have to log out to see the content, because the “ignore” function has no “restore” capability, if you hit “ignore” accidentally. Something I would imagine that could be easily remedied by a good web master.
“Troll” would also seem to be pejorative in this context, even when used as a verb.
There is a “fix”… David, Don, and/or Tia can probably assist you (re: resetting the “ignore” feature)… had the same ‘problem’ (inadvertent, in my case), and got “healed”. I suggest you ask them, “off-line”…
As to the ‘pejoratives’, think the fable about the scorpion and the frog… particularly the ‘moral’…
“There is a “fix””
Yeah, have an “un-ignore” button pop up on commenters you’ve blocked accidentally or otherwise.
I’ve got one that I got from David/Don… pretty sure they’ll share… separate link… part of a ‘dash-board’…
So John Hobbs, are you saying that you have me on ignore and have to go to all the trouble to sign out in order to read my comments then sign back in to respond?
Now I’m really flattered.
“you have me on ignore”
Yup. I meant to report one of your off topic and insipid posts, but clicked the other button by mistake. Don’t be too flattered, I do the same for Ken A. “Ignore” is the root of ignorant, more up your line.
LOL, for someone you consider ignorant you sure do go through a lot of effort to follow my every post?
Just think about that John, you say I’m ignorant but you hang on my every word.
I’m flattered.
The comment section of the Vanguard would be much more useful and productive if various participants would stop sniping at each other. Please focus on the issues at hand and avoid the personal conflicts.
“Honest” questions: What are the alternatives, while still ensuring public safety? Are such practices already/effectively in place, elsewhere?
As a side note, isn’t (most) of the bail returned?
Think “insurance” Ron… cash bail can happen, but is not the norm… if you have $1 million in liquid assets, do you need life insurance?
Normal is bail bonds… “insurance”… ‘normal rate’ is 10%… cost of ‘doing business’… so, a defendant pays a non-refundable 10% “premium” for the bail amount.
On cash bail, am pretty damn sure there are admin fees from the County, but probably “fixed” not %-age…
Ron: read up on the bail reform movement
I affirm… David and others are right… either no bail (incarceration from the get-go), or ROR…
That is more just, but will cost the legal jurisdictions more… for the ones on the cusp, as it relates to ‘flight risk’… the jurisdiction will have to come up with food, board, supervision… “trade-offs”… we do not have a mechanism for charging folk for room, board, incarceration, court costs, etc. for folk found guilty… with no bail, that will also increase for the ‘not guilty’, but they won’t have to pay the 10% premium (for those who are deemed a flight risk).
Ex. a DUI with injury/damage… if a member of a prominent Davis family, ROR… otherwise, no bail if they are not a member or the community (like a UCD student from Fresno, for example)…
Bail is just wrong… just cheaper for taxpayers… clearly abhorrent…