Sacramento – After last year's passage of Proposition 36 — a ballot measure that would allow more theft and drug offenses to be charged as felonies — some opponents warned it would trigger steep funding cuts to both programs that help state inmates and services for crime victims.
But a new spending plan from the governor's office for the upcoming fiscal year has relatively little impact on key programs — at least initially.
Today it costs $133,000 per year In California, there is a figure for jailing a person increased dramatically In recent years. when Voters passed Proposition 47 In 2014, fewer people served time in prison for low-level, nonviolent theft and drug offenses, saving the state more than $100 million annually as a result. Those savings were distributed to counties for inmate reentry and victim support — the same programs that are now being cut.
Proposition 36 — a comprehensive overhaul of Proposition 47 — is projected to extend prison sentences and, as a result, reduce funding for programs created under the old measure.
According to records reviewed by The Times, Gov. Gavin Newsom's proposed budget earmarks $88 million this fiscal year for mental health and re-entry programs for victims and ex-prisoners. That number is $6 million less than the governor's office initially projected last year.
Proposition 36, which took effect in December, received overwhelming voter support despite warnings from opponents. Reinvigorating mass incarceration It started in the 1980s when the government declared a war on drugs.
While some counties have already begun treating more theft and drug cases as felonies than misdemeanors under Proposition 36, experts and lawyers believe the long-term effects won't be felt for at least a year.
The governor's projection shows savings under Proposition 47 could shrink to $24 million in the 2026-27 fiscal year as the prison burden is reduced — a result of 2,700 inmates coming into state custody under tougher new sentences.
Those figures from the governor's office show far bigger cuts in state savings than nonpartisan legislative analysts predicted before the election. Projects will be reduced By “low million dollars annually”.
Caitlin O'Neill, a representative of the Legislative Examiner's Office, said the full extent of the new law's impact is difficult to gauge because Proposition 36 is only a month away from implementation.
“The administration appears to be proposing a somewhat larger cut at this time,” O'Neill said in an email to The Times. “Any projections at this time are subject to significant uncertainty due to the limited amount of actual data. Additionally, projections are typically revised by management in May.
Los Angeles County's chief executive office similarly told The Times that the county is in the early stages of the annual budget process and “it's too early to tell what the impacts will be.”
Dinish Hollins, California's executive director for safety and justice, who opposed Proposition 36, expressed “deep concern” that the measure would “erode” crime prevention programs for years to come.
Isa Borgeson, campaign manager for the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, echoed the sentiment.
“We know Prop. 36 will eliminate funding for critical programs, and we're already seeing that in action,” Borgeson said. “California is on track to lock up our neighbors for low-level drug and theft crimes, and we'll remove money to keep those same people from getting back on their feet or avoiding the criminal justice system.”
Newsom's office estimates that while sentences for some crimes are now being lengthened, other reforms enacted by the state in recent years could lead to an overall decline in the prison population.
“Even with the expected increase from Proposition 36, the population is still expected to continue its overall long-term downward trend,” the budget states.