Some California Democrats want another approach on crime

From CalMatters politics reporter Yue Stella Yu:

To counter recent legislation that would step up penalties on petty crimes, a group of progressive state lawmakers on Tuesday offered a rival approach, focusing instead on more services for offenders and survivors of crimes.

They are backing a new legislative package — dubbed #SmartSolutions — to address retail theft, fentanyl abuse and support for crime survivors. 

The proposals come amid the ongoing tension among Democrats, who are split over how to address the growing public concern about crime, even though statistics paint a mixed picture. For example, retail theft rose in recent years but still remained below pre-pandemic levels in 2022, according to an analysis from the Public Policy Institute of California. 

Some Democratic legislators and local officials — eager to show they are taking action especially during an election year — have advocated for tougher sentences for retail theft or backed a ballot measure to roll back Proposition 47, a voter-approved measure in 2014 that raised the felony threshold for shoplifting to $950. 

Others, however, argue that raising penalties and undoing Prop. 47 could mean California is reverting back to the tough-on-crime policies in the 1980s and the 1990s that led to mass incarceration.

• Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, at a state Capitol press conference: “We will not rely on incarceration as a solution, but rather look for ways to build training, create career skills, build industry networks that drive our folks into contribution to our communities.”

The Los Angeles Democrat is sponsoring two bills that would require counties to set up diversion programs for theft-related offenses and increase staffing at grocery store checkout counters. 

Also Tuesday, two bills toughening state law around petty crimes, such as retail thefts and smash-and-grabs, cleared the Senate Public Safety Committee. They are part of the “Safer California Plan” championed by Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Santa Rosa Democrat. 

Under Senate Bill 1242, introduced by Sen. Dave Min, an Irvine Democrat who is running for Congress, those who set fire during organized retail theft might face harsher penalties for reckless arson at the discretion of the judge. 

Rachel Michelin, president of the California Retailers Association, which supports the bill, pointed to a September incident where a woman set fire in a Target to steal baby formula. 

• Michelin, during the committee meeting: “When these businesses fall victim to arson, it not only results in financial loss but disrupts the local economy, leading to job losses and decline in community morale.”

Read more on Democratic crime bills in Stella’s story.

Budget update: Speaking of Democrats disagreeing, as expected, Assembly Democratic leaders are not on board with some of the “early action” budget cuts being proposed by the state Senate and Gov. Gavin Newsom. 

Specifically, the Assembly plan rejects, as part of early action, cuts in housing and homelessness programs put forward by Newsom in January. They total more than $1 billion in the current budget and include $300 million to regional planning, $250 million to multifamily housing and $50 million for veterans. 

The plan — circulated to Assembly Democrats on Tuesday and first reported by Politico — also calls for a freeze on one-time funding that has not yet been spent. It’s a move designed to give leaders more flexibility during final negotiations in June.

• Cynthia Moreno, press secretary for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, in an emailed statement: “This reflects member feedback and the Assembly’s careful, deliberative process, and the Speaker looks forward to refining this plan further in conversation with the Senate and administration.”

The Assembly plan does agree with much of the $17 billion in other spending delays and actions proposed last month by Senate Democrats to help shrink the state budget deficit, pegged at between $38 billion and $73 billion for the fiscal year that starts July 1. The Assembly Democratic caucus could vote on its early budget plan as soon as April 11.

Over the last year or so, a decades-old California law known as the builder’s remedy has drawn praise by developers and pro-housing advocates — but ire from some local officials who say their power is being unfairly stripped away. But how impactful has the controversial law been in terms of developing more housing?

When cities and counties fail to get their housing development plans certified by the state in time, the builder’s remedy enables developers to build, essentially, whatever they want — as long as they set aside some units for low-income housing, writes CalMatters housing reporter Ben Christopher. Since late 2022, however, when a developer first invoked the law to propose a Santa Monica apartment complex, no project has broken ground under the policy. 

Part of the reason is because the law is confusing, which some legislators are attempting to address. Tuesday, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks promoted the latest version of AB 1893, which seeks to clear up some of the law’s language, while allowing developers, who make use of other state laws that let them to bypass environmental review and public hearing requirements, to make use of builder’s remedy guarantees, too.

The measure would also cap the size of builder’s remedy projects; allow cities to impose some rules on development; and prohibit the use of builder’s remedy in industrial zoned areas.

• Wicks, a Democrat from Oakland: “The ‘builder’s remedy’ has sort of lived in the Twitterverse, but actually making it a clear law, so that everyone is following the same rules of engagement and we know what the rules are… (that) is really what we’re aiming to do here.”

Supporters of the builder’s remedy say the law already motivates cities into complying with housing requirements. But critics, such as Menlo Park city council member Jen Wolosin, say the law can be too extreme and “can turn off people who would otherwise want to help solve the housing crisis.”

Wicks’ bill is backed by Attorney General Rob Bonta and is expected to be debated on April 17 before the Assembly’s Housing and Community Development committee.

Learn more about the builder’s remedy in Ben’s story.

A full month after voting ended in California’s primary, the count still isn’t done.

As of late Tuesday, more than 12,000 votes still needed to be processed and election offices in 22 of 58 counties reported that they still hadn’t completed their work (though some also said they didn’t have any more votes to count).

Meanwhile, the dust is still settling from the March 5 primary results.  

For instance, Rep. Katie Porter failed to advance in the U.S. Senate contest and later apologized for complaining that the race was “rigged.” Now, Porter has made clear she is endorsing fellow Democrat Adam Schiff, whom she criticized for boosting Republican Steve Garvey.

• Porter, in an interview with Fox LA: “I strongly support him. He’s the right choice for Californians.” 

She also said she will return to teaching at UC Irvine when her term in Congress ends in January and has not thought about any future political run.

Speaking of unresolved election issues: Assemblymember Vince Fong finished first in both the March 5 primary for a full two-year term and in the March 19 special election to fill the remainder of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s term.

Fong faces a fellow Republican, Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux, in the Nov. 5 general election and in the May 21 runoff for the unexpired term. If Fong wins in May, he would get to take office right away and get to appear as an incumbent on the November ballot. And if he prevails in November, he’d have built up seniority, giving him a leg up over the rest of the new U.S. House members.

But there’s still one hurdle to that scenario: Secretary of State Shirley Weber is appealing a December court ruling that allowed Fong to run in the primary for both the congressional seat and in his Assembly district, where he was uncontested other than write-in candidates. 

That case is to be heard by a state appeals court on Thursday. Weber wants a ruling by April 12, when she is supposed to certify the primary election results. If she wins, Fong would be kicked off the November ballot. But it wouldn’t affect the special election, so it’s possible that Fong could serve in Congress for only several months, until the new House takes office in January.

Voters in the Bakersfield-centered 20th District could be excused for being confused by it all. That includes Boudreaux, who told Politico that he agrees with Weber that Fong should be disqualified.

• Boudreaux: “It is so confusing. You’ve got double elections; triple elections. Voters are confused. I was confused.”

California’s water fate depends in large measure on how much gets stored in the Sierra snowpack over the winter. Gov. Newsom joined the crucial snow survey on Tuesday. So how are things looking? Find out from CalMatters’ tracker. And get a detailed look at how California might increase its water supply.