Santa Clara District Attorney Supports Proposition 47 Despite Rollback Efforts

SAN JOSE — Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen says he continues to support Proposition 47, the groundbreaking reform law credited with keeping low-level crimes out of overcrowded jails. But the law could soon be undermined by a ballot bill that accuses the law of enabling widespread serial theft and related crimes.

Rosen was one of only three California district attorneys to support Proposition 47, which was approved by voters in 2014. This November, Proposition 36 will go before voters to amend the existing law. The bill would eliminate the $950 threshold at which theft can be charged as a felony and increase penalties for drug trafficking, which has fueled the fentanyl and opioid crises.

“I supported Prop. 47. I still support it and I think it did a lot of good,” Rosen said in an interview with the Bay Area News Group. “Prop. 47 was a response to a number of things that were happening at the time, including the massive overcrowding in prisons. We don't want to build more prisons. We should move theft and drug addiction out of prison and create other forms of accountability instead.”

Rosen said he understands public frustration over viral videos of shoplifting and shoplifting and the fentanyl scourge, but is not convinced Proposition 36 represents a responsive solution. He pointed out that organized shoplifting, in which large groups overwhelm store security and make off with stolen merchandise, is almost always above $950 and can therefore be charged as a felony.

“The legislature has taken on the problem and allocated millions of dollars to law enforcement to hire more personnel to combat organized shoplifting,” Rosen said. “It's happening and it's working.”

A week ago, Governor Gavin Newsom traveled to San Jose, where he signed 10 anti-theft bills, including Assembly Bill 2943, which addresses one of the pillars of Proposition 36. The ballot proposal would classify any theft, regardless of value, as a felony if committed by a person who has already been convicted of theft twice. AB 2943 allows prosecutors to charge someone with a felony by adding multiple thefts together to reach the $950 threshold.

The Yes on Proposition 36 campaign stated that the signed bills were “half-measures that do not address the fundamental problems of repeat theft, the fentanyl epidemic, and the ongoing homelessness crisis that remains unresolved due to a lack of incentives for drug treatment.”

Rosen's stance faces strong political headwinds: An August 16 poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times and UC Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies found that 56 percent of likely California voters intend to vote for Proposition 36, giving them a two-point lead over their opponents.

The ballot bill would also charge possession of certain drugs, such as fentanyl, as a “treatment-requiring” offense, giving offenders the choice of entering rehab — and having the charges dropped upon completion — or facing up to three years in prison. Proposition 36 would also mandate prison time for selling fentanyl and other hard drugs, and make it easier to charge dealers with murder when their drugs lead to an overdose death.

Rosen said any expansion of mandated treatments will push actual capacity, especially in the state's largest counties.

“Everyone wants drug addicts to get treatment. What this initiative does not do is provide more money for drug treatment,” he said. “If there is no bed available, the problem will not be solved.”

“We're not going to punish our way out of drug addiction. We've tried, but it hasn't worked. Santa Clara County is a relatively well-resourced county, and we don't have enough drug treatment, and I can't imagine it would be the same anywhere else,” Rosen added. “And threatening people with jail? That's not a threat to them. There are illegal drugs in jail.”

Jeff Reisig, Yolo County district attorney and one of the architects of Proposition 36, said if the measure passes, he expects it to be supported by Proposition 1, a $6.8 billion bond measure that voters narrowly passed in March to fund 6,800 treatment beds.

“From our point of view, the money is there and the beds are there or can be brought into play quickly when the money is there,” Reisig said in an interview.

The statistical case for Proposition 36 is mixed. According to figures from the U.S. Department of Justice, property crime in the nine Bay Area counties, excluding Alameda County, has continued to decline over the past decade through the end of 2023. Nationally, the property crime rate has fallen by more than 14 percent.

But an analysis of California Department of Justice figures by the Public Policy Institute of California shows that shoplifting increased 28 percent between 2019 and 2023, with 90 percent of that increase occurring in Alameda, San Mateo, Los Angeles and Sacramento counties.

In addition, supporters of Proposition 36 claim that shoplifting continues to be underreported due to the low priority of police response. In an August 2 blog post, PPIC reiterated this view, stating that “these incidents – particularly low-value thefts – are likely underreported.”

Reisig said that while Proposition 47 was effective in reducing the prison population, “it was implemented incorrectly, and we have paid a price for that over the last decade.”

“All the stores are closed, and then you see store closures, viral videos,” he said. “All of that leads to no consequences.”

Reisig said he understands the plight of drug addicts and speaks openly about his nephew, who lives on the streets and steals to fund his opioid addiction. He argues that charging someone with two prior theft convictions with a felony is a means of bolstering the state's response when it's obvious that interventions aren't working.

“We can use all the harm reduction models we know. Every now and then it works. But the third conviction is when the treatment-requiring crime is triggered,” Reisig said. “That's what's needed to motivate them to choose treatment. Will people fail and reoffend? Yes … but as long as they re-engage, the whole model is designed to take that into account.”

He also stressed that Proposition 36 expands the scope for charging criminals, but does not represent an obligation: “If Jeff (Rosen) wants to continue to charge criminal offenses, then he should do so.”

Tinisch Hollins, executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice, said she was “grateful” to Rosen for his stance in the face of strong opposition — including San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and San Francisco Mayor London Breed, the state associations of police chiefs, sheriffs and prosecutors, and businesses from small Bay Area restaurants to Walmart, Target and Home Depot. She says the tougher penalties that Proposition 36 proposes “create further barriers for vulnerable populations.”

“This takes us back to the war on drugs and forcing people to undergo treatment when we don't have the capacity and access is limited. Prop. 47 is being scapegoated, even though millions of dollars have been diverted to effective mental health and treatment programs,” Hollins said. “From the moment Prop. 47 was passed, there has been an attempt to blame criminal justice reform for everything from the rise in certain types of crime to global warming.”