West Sacramento, CA – Yolo County DA Jeff Reisig on Wednesday was one of many statewide leaders who held a press conference at the Raley’s in West Sacramento to urge Californians to vote yes on Proposition 36.
Supporters of the bill once again trumpeted what they called “overwhelming bipartisan support from public polls” and argued, “Proposition 36 will enact stricter penalties for repeat theft offenders; drug dealers whose trafficking causes death or serious injury, allowing potential murder charges if it results in fatalities; ensure fentanyl is treated like heroin, cocaine, PCP and methamphetamine when offenders possess a firearm; and toughens penalties for selling large quantities of fentanyl.”
“Californians are clear: the status quo is unacceptable and it’s time for change. With rising crime and the devastating impact of drug addiction, Proposition 36 responds to voters’ concerns and gives us the tools to address these issues head-on. It strengthens accountability for repeat offenders while offering meaningful support for those struggling with addiction. Prop 36 is a smart, balanced reform that prioritizes the safety of our communities,” said Jeff Reisig, District Attorney, Yolo County.
During his comments at the press conference, Reisig likened the current laws to receiving a ticket.
“California is currently in a state of crisis. We have a retail theft crisis that leads the nation, whereas you just heard people are going into stores and stealing every day, multiple times a day, every day of the week, every day of the year – and it’s a ticket,” Reisig said.
He noted, “It’s a misdemeanor in California, and that means no accountability.”
He said, “As a result of that type of behavior, stores are being forced to lock up product. Some stores are having to shut down completely, especially in communities of color and underserved communities, thereby creating food deserts.”
Reisig also noted the “massive explosion” of drug use in California, particularly Fentanyl in the last 10 years in California since Prop. 47 passed.
He said “that’s associated also with a massive increase in homelessness. Homelessness in California has gone up 51% in California since 2014, while it’s gone down 11% in the rest of the country combined.”
While he acknowledged, “There are lots of reasons for people being homeless, but one of the reasons we know very well is serious addiction. And what we are seeing across our communities is people who are very sick, many are dying on the streets, they need help, they need treatment, and because of Prop. 47, they can use fentanyl and heroin every single day, multiple times a day, and it’s a ticket.”
He added, “There’s literally no incentive for them to get help.”
West Sacramento Councilmember Quirina Orozco, herself a prosecutor in Sacramento County, added, “I am proud to join local elected leaders from across California in endorsing Proposition 36. As local officials, we are on the frontlines of rising theft and drug addiction and need comprehensive solutions. By holding serial offenders accountable and offering pathways to recovery, Prop. 36 will help protect West Sacramento and communities across the state.”
Sacramento Sheriff Jim Cooper said, “Sacramento County, like much of California, faces significant public safety challenges—from rising thefts affecting our local businesses to increasing drug addiction. Prop. 36 is essential for addressing the repeat offenders and organized crime behind many of these issues. By holding serial criminal accountable and offering treatment for those struggling with addiction, Prop. 36 provides the balanced approach that Sacramento County needs to make our communities safer.”
According to supporters, “Proposition 36 will restore the incentives and accountability needed for individuals to enter drug treatment and job training programs, helping them begin new lives. Currently, repeat drug offenders have no incentive to choose treatment. By leveraging federally funded Medi-Cal programs, which help keep state costs manageable, California can address public health needs affordably.”
They added, “With the ongoing implementation of Cal-AIM, a more integrated system for treating substance use and mental illness is being built. Prop. 1 also expands mental health and substance abuse facilities, including those for the homeless, ensuring offenders receive the care and support needed for rehabilitation under Proposition 36, further strengthening California’s capacity to address these critical issues.”
While the campaign emphasized its bipartisan nature, the LA Times last week reported that the campaign donated $1 million to state Republicans.
The California GOP endorsed Prop. 36 and has spent more than $1 million in favor of the measure. On the other hand, the California Democratic Party and Governor Gavin Newsom, along with the California Legislature’s Democratic leadership, have opposed the measure.
“This initiative has been categorized by a lot of bipartisan support,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at the University of California, San Diego in an interview with the LA Times. “You have local support from Democratic mayors. So the fact that the campaign would give money directly to the party could be eyebrow-raising.”
The Times noted that Becky Warren, campaign spokesperson for the Yes on 36 campaign, told them “the donations are part of an outreach effort to voters across all political parties.
“Our voter contact plan allocates resources to educate Democrats, Republicans and independent voters about Proposition 36 in proportion to their representation in the electorate,” Warren told The Times.
Attempts by the Vanguard to get a response to the LA Times articles were not successful.
But the Times noted the contributions were the only donations made by the committee.
Meanwhile, State Senator Nancy Skinner, a leading Democrat in the Senate, and Alameda County Public Defender Brendon Woods warned in an op-ed in the Sacramento Bee that, rather than addressing homelessness or addiction, Prop. 36 could exacerbate the state’s prison crisis by redirecting resources away from treatment programs and back toward punitive incarceration.
They argue that “the proposition, if enacted this November, will send people with drug problems to prison or jail rather than treatment, increasing jail and prison costs by hundreds of millions of dollars a year at a time when the state already has a significant budget deficit.”
For decades, they argue, “California and the rest of the nation tried to solve the problem of drug addiction by locking people up. But not only did the War on Drugs fail to reduce drug addiction, it led to the inhumane overcrowding of California prisons, forcing the federal government to step in.”
So where does DA Gascon stand on Prop 36 or is he too busy trying to make up the 30 point deficit he finds himself in with the coming election?
The voters are about to be heard loud and clear about their views on retail theft. I know it pains some of you, but the current situation is unacceptable to most reasonable people.
Yes Matt, the voters are going to speak out finally slowing down the progressive justice agenda.
DA Gascon for sure and possibly DA Price going down to defeat.
Retail theft has been vastly overblown by conservatives that have little else to run on in California.
Mercury News: “Editorial: Recall Alameda County DA Pamela Price. Here’s why.
Retribution, nepotism, unqualified hires, prosecutorial bias, undue leniency and allegations of racism and extortion”
https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/10/25/alameda-county-district-attorney-recall-pamela-price-editorial/
“The Public Policy Institute of California found that nearly three quarters (73%) of likely voters are a yes on Prop. 36. A UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies survey found a more modest 60% in favor.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/polls-show-california-proposition-36-115500372.html