ALAMEDA COUNTY, CA — California voters passed Proposition 36 last November, toughening penalties for certain theft and drug offenses. Supporters say the new law gives prosecutors and law enforcement the tools to address persistent criminal behavior, while critics argue that its promises of treatment and rehabilitation are likely to fall short due to inadequate funding and systemic inequities.
Although the law has been in effect for only five months, its impact is already being felt in Alameda County’s courts, according to a May 22 report in The Oaklandside by Roselyn Romero.
More than 160 Prop. 36-related criminal cases have already been filed in Alameda County Superior Court, reflecting the district attorney’s office’s swift integration of the new law into its prosecution strategies. The data, gathered from public records and interviews with prosecutors, public defenders, and the sheriff’s office, points to an aggressive early application of the statute.
Alameda County District Attorney Ursula Jones Dickson declined to speak with The Oaklandside about the law’s rollout. “We sent the DA’s office a request for Prop. 36-related records and will report on those when we receive them,” the article noted.
The Alameda County Sheriff’s Office stated that the new law has not yet led to an increase in the county’s jail population. However, The Oaklandside cautions that most cases are still pending, and it remains unclear what the long-term impact on incarceration rates will be.
Equity concerns are already surfacing. According to The Oaklandside, the majority of people charged under Prop. 36 in Alameda County are Black, even though Black residents comprise only about 10% of the county population. Public defenders have also raised concerns about the county’s lack of infrastructure to track available treatment beds for substance use and mental health services—resources that are central to the law’s promise of rehabilitation.
Crime trends remain difficult to tie directly to Prop. 36. While some property crimes such as shoplifting and car break-ins have risen since 2020, The Oaklandside notes that California property crime rates overall are near 40-year lows.
Prop. 36, formally titled the “Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act,” created a new felony charge for individuals who commit theft two or more times. It also mandates court-ordered treatment for individuals convicted of possessing hard drugs, such as fentanyl and heroin, if they have prior drug offenses. Those who complete treatment may have their charges dismissed, while those who do not could face up to three years in prison.
The law classifies these charges as “wobblers,” meaning they can be prosecuted as either felonies or misdemeanors at the discretion of the district attorney.
Between January and April, the Alameda County DA’s office filed 160 felony theft charges and eight drug-related felony charges under Prop. 36. Many of these cases, according to The Oaklandside, would have previously been treated as misdemeanors.
Public Defender Brendon Woods told The Oaklandside that nearly all of his clients charged under the law are low-income people of color. In north Alameda County, 79% of those represented by the public defender’s office in Prop. 36 cases were Black—despite Black residents accounting for only 15% of the area’s population.
“I think Prop. 36 may be one of the most punitive and racist laws we’ve seen come across our books in a long time,” Woods said. His office is currently handling 99 Prop. 36-related cases.
In an op-ed for Oakland Voices, co-authored with Yoel Haile of the ACLU of Northern California, Woods criticized the law’s application of decades-old convictions to justify harsher charges today. “People who have long since left behind their unlawful behavior are still subject to the full force of this problematic law,” they wrote.
“This law is just the latest tool that police and DAs have to disappear unhoused people from public sight,” Haile told The Oaklandside. He also warned that by turning drug possession charges into felonies, the law increases the risk of deportation for immigrants.
Census data shows that nearly 36% of Alameda County residents were born outside the U.S., and approximately 45%—about 268,000 people—were noncitizens in 2023.
Despite the increase in felony charges, The Oaklandside confirms that Santa Rita Jail has not yet seen a rise in population since the law’s passage.
Still, the advocacy group Californians for Safety and Justice estimates that Prop. 36 could result in an additional 101,000 jail admissions each year and more than 32,000 additional state prison incarcerations over the next seven years.
The law’s success hinges on adequate treatment infrastructure, yet access to healthcare remains limited for many charged individuals, who are often homeless or unemployed. Alameda Health System spokesperson Nicole Perez told The Oaklandside, “AHS does not keep track of patients receiving Prop. 36-related treatment.” The Alameda County Behavioral Health Department declined to comment.
Prop. 36 was drafted in response to growing public concern over visible crime, particularly in retail spaces, and was backed by prosecutors and major retailers. One of the most vocal proponents of the measure has been Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig, who played a key role in shaping the narrative around its necessity.
“Because of Prop. 47, they can use fentanyl and heroin every single day,” Reisig told The Oaklandside, referring to the 2014 measure that downgraded many drug and theft offenses to misdemeanors. His comments underscore a broader effort among district attorneys to reverse what they perceive as overly lenient policies.
Jonathan Raven, representing the California District Attorneys Association, also defended the law in an interview with The Oaklandside. “The law is not about sending people to prison, but rather targeting repeat offenders and trying to help people get well,” he said. Raven described his experience in Yolo County, where he witnessed successful treatment outcomes.
Still, Raven admitted that the law’s success is contingent on proper funding. “If you have a good program […] people succeed,” he said.
But Woods pushed back, saying coerced treatment often fails without multiple chances. “Clients will fail. They will mess up. Prop. 36 isn’t designed to give people multiple chances,” he said.
Cynthia Nunes of the Urban Peace Movement, who helps lead the Alameda County District Attorney Accountability Table, emphasized the need for public safety rooted in equity. “I would love to see a world where everybody feels safe, not just the people in power or rich people,” she told The Oaklandside. “We all deserve that.”
