How Prop 47 transformed California's once-safe streets
In a letter to the SF Examiner, SJ Mayor Matt Mahan rewinds the clock on Proposition 47 and explains just how we got here today. Since it passed in 2014, Prop 47 has downgraded the penalties for many theft/drug crimes, and made it difficult to mandate treatment for repeat offenders. The consequences for cities like San Jose—detailed below—have been widespread and detrimental.
Because in 2014, the rate of homelessness in California began to spike, and over the last decade, the count has surged by a staggering 50% — even while homeless populations in most other states are declining.
What happened?
Proposition 47 is a large part of what happened.
California voters passed the 2014 initiative measure to reduce prison populations and redirect the savings toward treatment and proven diversion programs. While prison populations have declined, the rate of homelessness, drug-overdose deaths and retail thefts have all dramatically increased.
Like most Californians, and the overwhelming majority of Democrats, I voted for Prop. 47 and support its goal of ending the era of mass incarceration. But after 10 years, it is time to face clear facts.
Prop. 47 has generated serious, costly, and sometimes deadly unintended consequences, and it is time for reform.
San Jose, the city where I serve as mayor, has a serious homelessness problem. So do most other towns and cities.
While we have been able to reduce homelessness in the past three years with innovative programs such as quick-build housing, hiring homeless neighbors to clean up trash so they can work their way off the streets, and regular abatements of encampments, our unsheltered population is still at crisis levels.
There are many reasons for this, but one key reason is that Prop. 47 limited the ability of judges to order those caught up in the criminal-justice system into drug and alcohol treatment. It also dramatically reduced the incentive for many in the criminal-justice system to enter and stay in treatment as an alternative to incarceration.
Homelessness is not a crime. But some studies show that in California, more than 50% of unsheltered homeless residents report a history of incarceration — and up to 45% report severe alcohol or drug use.
Before Prop. 47, many of those facing incarceration were prompted into treatment. Since its passage, this proven tool to help people off the streets and out of addiction was largely abandoned.
If we want to treat homelessness like the crisis it has become, as California Gov. Gavin Newsom is so strongly urging, we need to get more people into treatment. That’s what Proposition 36 will allow. But addressing the spike in homelessness is not the only reason we must reform Prop. 47 by supporting Prop. 36 on our November ballot.
This article originally appeared in the San Francisco Examiner. Read the whole thing here.
Related:
“Police are powerless”: Prop 47 revisited, critiqued by CA law enforcement analyst
Palo Alto mayor: Prop 47 unleashed destruction on small business, consumers, and—yes—drug addicts
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.