Breaking down the ballot: California’s Prop 36

The Long Beach City Council voiced their support and opposition for a number of California propositions that voters will decide on in November at Tuesday night’s meeting. 

Many city councils formally vote to support or oppose their state issues. The Long Beach City Council often takes into account the recommendations of the Intergovernmental Affairs Committee (IAC). 

The council was split on their opinions of Proposition 36, which aims to amend laws related to retail theft, drug use and “smash and grab” crimes. This proposition is part of the Safer California Plan, a package of 15 laws aimed at drug use, retail theft and community-based crimes. 

The IAC decided on Aug. 6 to support the law and sent a letter of support to the State Senate. They recommended that the Long Beach City Council send a similar letter of support, but councilmembers were split on whether to provide a recommendation at all. 

Some councilmembers such as Kristina Duggan wanted to send a letter supporting Proposition 36, while others like Roberto Uranga and Al Austin wanted to pass a “no recommendation.”

The motion to send a letter of support failed, so while each councilmember voiced their opinion on Proposition 36, the City does not have an official stance on it. 

Details on Proposition 36

Proposition 36 is an amendment of Proposition 47, which voters passed in 2014. This law reclassified all drug possessions including cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, and methamphetamine, as well as thefts under $950, as misdemeanors. Proposition 47 also created the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund to support rehab programs and fund drug and mental health treatments. 

Part of the goal of Proposition 36 is to include language on the selling and possession of fentanyl, which has been declared an epidemic by multiple states and cities. According to City documents, Long Beach saw a rapid rise in fentanyl overdose deaths from 2018 to 2021, then a slight decrease in 2022: 

Long Beach City Prosecutor Doug Haubert said that Proposition 47, passed in 2014, resulted in county jails being overcrowded and Proposition 36 attempts to amend this issue by requiring some of these crimes result in state prison time instead of a county jail. However, City staff shared the results of a Local Impacts Analysis, and one of the impacts identified was a net increase in the county jail population in the thousands.

The Local Impact Analysis also predicts an increase in criminal justice costs, “likely by tens of millions of dollars annually.”

Some of the main actions Proposition 36 proposes includes: 

• Turns some misdemeanors into felonies: Currently, theft of items worth $950 or less is generally a misdemeanor. Proposition 36 would make this crime a felony if the person has two or more past convictions for certain theft crimes such as shoplifting, burglary, or carjacking. Sentence would be up to three years in county jail or state prison. 
• Lengthens some felony sentences: Proposition 36 allows felony sentences for theft or damage of property to be lengthened by up to three years if three or more people committed the crime together. 
• Requires some felonies be served in prison: Sentences for selling certain drugs such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine or methamphetamine can be lengthened based on the amount sold. Currently, some of these sentences are served in county jail or state prison, depending on the person’s criminal history. Proposition 36 generally requires these sentences be served in prison. 
• Creates new court process for some drug possession crimes: Allows people who possess illegal drugs to be charged with a “treatment-mandated” felony instead of a misdemeanor if they either possess certain drugs (fentanyl, heroin, cocaine or methamphetamine) and have two or more past convictions for some drug crimes such as possessing or selling drugs. These people would generally get treatment such as mental health or drug treatment, and those who finish treatment would have their charges dismissed. Those who do not finish treatment could serve up to three years in state prison. This particular part of the proposition undoes punishment reductions made through Proposition 47 in 2014. 
• Requires courts to warn people that they could possibly be charged for murder for selling or providing drugs that kill someone: This warning would be given to people convicted of selling or providing certain drugs (fentanyl, heroin, cocaine or methamphetamine) and this would make it more likely for them to be convicted of murder if they later sell or provide illegal drugs to someone who dies. 

If Proposition 36 were to pass, it would be applied retroactively. Prior charges would likely be counted toward the three charges that would increase someone’s sentence or result in them going to prison.  

Some of the cities that have formally supported this proposition include Covina, Huntington Beach, La Puente, La Verne, Lawndale, Whittier and Alameda. Also supported by Target, Walgreens, Walmart, the California District Attorneys Association, California Police Chiefs Association, California Retailers Association, California State Sheriffs’ Association. Other organizations that have supported the prop include American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association, California Business Roundtable, California Grocers Association and more. 

People and organizations opposed to the proposition include Governor Gavin Newsom, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, ACLU of Northern California, Action for Safety and Justice, Anti-Recidivism Coalition, Civil Rights Corps, Disability Rights California and the League of Women Voters of California. 

A local impacts analysis was done and identified these possible impacts: 

• A net increase in county jail and community supervision population: The increase could be around a few thousand people. There are about 250,000 people at the county level right now. 
• An increase in local court-related workload: It would also increase the workload for local prosecutors and public defenders since felonies take more time to resolve than misdemeanors. Treatment-mandated felonies would create workload for some county agencies such as probation or behavioral health departments. 
• A total increase in local criminal justice cost: This cost was estimated to likely increase by tens of millions of dollars annually. 

Residents who spoke at the meeting were split on their opinions on Proposition 36. Those against it cited mass incarceration due to drug possession, which historically has disproportionately impacted Black communities. 

“Prop 36 fails to address the root causes of crimes such as mental health, addiction and income inequality,” said Long Beach resident Yvonne Figeroua. “We’ve done mass incarceration before and it didn’t work. We can’t go back to policies that don’t actually make us safer.”

People voicing support for the proposition said that harsher punishments are needed to incentivize people to use drug rehabilitation services. Multiple residents cited homelessness as their reason for supporting the proposition. 

“Let’s all look to provide incentives for addicts to be choosing drug and mental health treatment instead of returning to the streets and sidewalks of our city,” said Long Beach resident Ginny Holbrook. “Let’s support harsher penalties for dealers who are trafficking in death, illness and crippling disability. What we’re doing now just isn’t working.”