After more than two-thirds of voters passed Proposition 36 last year, cracking down on drug and theft crimes, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and the legislature have been at odds over funding the measure’s enforcement.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office says the governor’s budget may overfund prison costs but underfund courts and treatment, though it says treatment for behavioral and substance abuse issues is available through Medi-Cal, the Behavioral Health Services Act and other state programs.
With Prop. 36 now in effect, serial thieves and drug criminals can be prosecuted with felonies for what, until Prop. 36 and after Prop. 47 in 2014, had often been unprosecuted misdemeanors. Prop. 36 also created a new crime class called a “treatment mandated felony” that allows convicted individuals to complete necessary substance abuse or mental health treatment as an alternative to prison.
Republicans contend that Newsom, who promised to fulfill voters’ wishes with Prop. 36 after opposing it, has not sufficiently funded the proposition’s enforcement.
“Voters passed the initiative, which means it’s up to Newsom and the Legislature to find the funding to implement it, not decide if they want to implement it,” said the California State Senate Republican Caucus in a statement before a public safety hearing on the measure’s funding.
For that hearing, the Legislative Analyst’s Office examined the governor’s proposal for the 2025-2026 budget. The office found it’s likely the governor’s budget provides more funding for prisons than it expects in prison population growth, while perhaps not providing enough funding for courts and treatment related to Prop. 36.
“We estimate that the impact of Proposition 36 could be less than half of the magnitude of the administration’s estimates, meaning the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) could be overbudgeted in the millions of dollars in 2024-25 and tens of millions of dollars in 2025-26,” wrote the LAO. “The Legislature could consider directing the judicial branch to report in spring budget hearings on implementation progress and the impacts of Proposition 36. This will allow the Legislature to determine what level of funding — if any — is needed. Any funding provided, however, would come at the cost of other budget priorities given the multiyear deficits facing the state.”
The LAO also noted drug addiction treatment can be funded via Medi-Cal, provides $1.2 billion in drug treatment funding — three-quarters of which comes from the federal government — and that $3.2 billion in mental illness funding from income taxes on top earners can also now be used for drug treatment, though it may not be enough.
“The state could choose to provide additional funding, such as to help support the behavioral health system,” continued the LAO. “Doing so, however, would likely come at the cost of other existing state programs.”
