Strong Voter Backing for Tough Crime Initiative Sends Clear Message to California Legislators

Highlighting the proposition’s substantial victory margin—over 68 percent of the votes—one Republican legislator remarked that this outcome sends a clear message to the Legislature emphasizing the importance of public safety.

“Clearly, California was over it,” Assemblyman Heath Flora expressed to The Epoch Times. “It’s a matter of checks and balances for us.”

The representative from the rural Central Valley noted that lawmakers are collaborating with the California State Sheriffs’ Association to prepare for implementing the new legislation.

Proposition 36 focuses on repeat offenders and aims to tackle the underlying factors of criminal behavior through rehabilitation efforts.

The new legislation also requires courts to issue a warning—termed Alexandra’s Law in memory of 20-year-old fentanyl poisoning victim Alexandra Capelouto—to anyone convicted of distributing fentanyl and other narcotics, informing them that they could face murder charges if someone dies as a consequence of their actions.

Related Stories

The initiative was designed to amend Proposition 47, which was passed by voters ten years ago to reduce prison numbers by reclassifying certain crimes—including fraud, larceny, grand theft, and personal possession of some serious drugs—from felonies to misdemeanors.

Prop. 36 permits prosecutors to charge repeated offenses as felonies, enabling judges to impose sentences of incarceration for up to three years.

However, the diversion programs will offer alternatives for some individuals facing jail time, allowing them to engage in drug and mental health treatment instead of serving prison sentences.

The question of how to finance these programs has become a contentious issue within the Capitol.

“I believe you’ll see legislation proposed to address funding concerns,” Flora commented.

Representing Newsom’s office, the state’s Department of Finance stated that efforts are ongoing to identify potential funding solutions.

“Any expenses linked to last month’s voter ratification of Prop. 36 will be included in the upcoming Governor’s Budget, which is still being finalized,” H.D. Palmer, the principal spokesperson for fiscal matters in Newsom’s administration and deputy director for external affairs at the finance department, stated in an email to The Epoch Times on December 4.

Further details are expected by January 10, the constitutional deadline by which the governor must submit the annual budget proposal.

Some advocates have suggested that the state could allocate funds from Proposition 1—approved by voters in March to authorize the sale of $6.4 billion in bonds meant for building mental health facilities and enhancing statewide services.

Newsom, who endorsed Prop. 1 and opposed Prop. 36, argued that the bond funds are earmarked for other uses and should not be diverted to support diversion programs mandated by the new law.

He also expressed concerns that Prop. 36 could represent a regression to previous War on Drugs strategies and highlighted the challenges in modifying the law after its approval.

“This is about mass incarceration … and it would exacerbate costs for taxpayers,” Newsom explained. “Moreover, any reform of this initiative would necessitate returning to the voters.”

Anne Marie Schubert, the former district attorney for Sacramento County, stated that local governments might have the capacity to finance the diversion initiatives using local revenue, rather than being entirely dependent on state funding.

“This is not about mass incarceration; it’s about mass treatment,” she asserted in a previous interview with The Epoch Times. “The design of this ballot measure was thoughtful and empathetic in addressing the challenges facing Californians.”

Critics of the new legislation have warned it could adversely affect the state’s budget, citing that funds previously saved through Prop. 47 will no longer be accessible to support other initiatives.

“It might take several years to recover from this,” Assemblywoman Mia Bonta remarked to The Epoch Times on December 4.

Since the passage of Prop. 47 in 2014, crime rates have escalated in seven of the past ten years.

The number of felonies charged has fallen by nearly 30 percent, whereas misdemeanor offenses have seen a slight uptick.

“The shift is significant because it suggests that crimes were more frequently reclassified than genuinely diminished: Crime rates aren’t declining; they’re just being re-labeled,” stated Hannah Meyers, a fellow and director of policing and public safety at the Manhattan Institute.

While opinions were divided in the Legislature, the measure garnered bipartisan backing.

She believes that the new regulations will aid in protecting businesses and minimizing instances of smash-and-grab theft.

Her Assembly colleague noted that emphasizing drug treatment programs could save lives and safeguard communities.

“As a family doctor and addiction specialist who has witnessed numerous lives lost to illegal drugs flooding our streets, it’s evident that the current approach is ineffective,” Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains stated in the press release.