A tough-on-crime measure California voters overwhelmingly approved last year promised to usher in an “era of mass treatment” for the tens of thousands of homeless drug users across the state. But so far in the Bay Area, Proposition 36 has only succeeded in compelling a few dozen people into addiction or mental health programs.
The early results are calling into question whether the stricter drug possession penalties imposed under the new law will propel users into care, and if the region’s already overburdened treatment centers can make enough space for even the limited number of people agreeing to programs.
A drug user lights a pipe in San Francisco in May of 2025. Many are in the Tenderloin District, but also in the SOMA and Mission districts near downtown. (Photo by Teun Voeten/Sipa USA via AP Images)Some of those directly involved in carrying out Prop 36 are skeptical that the measure can follow through on its pledge to address voters’ growing frustration over homelessness and public drug use.
“There’s simply not enough treatment capacity to accommodate the number of people referred into treatment,” said Robb Layne, executive director of the California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives, a group advocating for addiction care providers.
Robb Layne, executive director of the California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives, is photographed outside the State Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., on Thursday, Aug. 14, 2025. (Jose Carlos Fajardo/Bay Area News Group)Measure backers lay much of the blame for the Prop 36’s slow start at the feet of Gov. Gavin Newsom and state lawmakers, whom they contend have refused to put enough money toward treatment, courts and law enforcement to support the measure’s implementation.
“It’s kind of sad and disappointing that the governor and legislature opted not to provide the funding necessary to do what the voters want to see done,” said Jonathan Raven, assistant chief executive with the California District Attorneys Association, one of the measure’s main supporters.
Prop 36 empowers local prosecutors to bring felony charges against repeat petty drug and theft offenders, but drug defendants can have the charges dismissed if they complete a treatment program.
In the six months after the measure took effect in mid-December, Bay Area prosecutors filed roughly 600 felony drug possession cases, according to a county-by-county review of charging data requested by this news organization. As of last month, however, only about 60 homeless people and others had agreed to treatment under the law across the nine-county region, according to a survey of local officials.
Santa Clara County accounted for almost half of the new drug possession felonies filed in the Bay Area. Meanwhile, the district attorneys’ offices in Alameda County and San Francisco – two places at the heart of the region’s homelessness crisis – brought only a handful of cases, highlighting the discretion prosecutors have in charging decisions.
Some Southern California counties have been far more aggressive in prosecuting drug users, this news organization found. Still, only a minority of Prop 36 defendants there have chosen to enter treatment on drug possession charges, mirroring the trend locally.
In the Bay Area, judges have instead permitted many defendants to plead to lesser charges, often handing out relatively short jail sentences and allowing drug users to go on probation rather than wait sometimes weeks in custody for a treatment bed, prosecutors and public defenders said.
“Prop. 36 cases are procedurally complicated and take a lot of time and create great incentives for defendants to just plead out for a short sentence,” David Angel, an assistant district attorney in Santa Clara County, said in an email. “Of course, if there were no wait list and robust services, their decisions might be different.”
A new ‘treatment-mandated felony’
Prop 36 reversed a key facet of a 2014 crime reform measure that had reduced simple drug possession and low-level theft offenses to misdemeanors, which generally carry little jail time. It also added stricter punishments for those dealing fentanyl and other hard drugs, and for “smash-and-grab” robberies that cause significant damage or losses.
San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller speaks during a press conference supporting Proposition 36, in Redwood City, Calif., on Monday, Aug. 26, 2024. Other Bay Area officials, including San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, fourth from the left, also backed the law. (Dai Sugano/Bay Area News Group)Supporters say the stiffer penalties are needed to combat a recent surge of retail theft and reinstate a stronger incentive for drug users on the street to accept treatment. Measure backers point to a steep decline in defendants choosing to enter drug courts, which most counties already use to refer people to treatment.
Under the new law, anyone convicted of at least two prior drug possession offenses can now be charged with a “treatment-mandated felony.” The charge instructs local courts to work with addiction experts, generally in county health agencies, to assess and refer repeat drug offenders to treatment.
Those who decline to enter programs can face up to three years in jail or prison. However, the law allows prosecutors to enter plea deals with defendants and grants judges broad discretion in sentencing, including reducing felony charges to misdemeanors that can carry similar penalties as before Prop 36 took effect.
Local courts and district attorneys’ offices did not provide complete data on sentencing outcomes, saying the work would be cumbersome and the state’s public records law does not require them to do so.
In addition to a limit on beds and services, court officials and measure backers said judges’ sentencing decisions play a crucial role in determining whether more drug offenders agree to treatment.
“If the sentences aren’t lengthy, or a person is allowed to serve (their sentence) in the community, then they may not be as apt to accept an intensive treatment program,” said Sacramento County Judge Lawrence Brown. Brown is chair of the drug court advisory committee for the state court system’s policy-making arm, the California Judicial Council, which is tracking the law’s implementation statewide.
Among those swept up by the new law is Craig McClarnon, who is facing a drug possession felony after an officer found a half-ounce of methamphetamines during a search of the van he was living out of in the city of Santa Clara, according to a police report.
McClarnon, 42, first began using drugs as a teenager growing up in a tough neighborhood in Santa Clara. He’s agreed to enter treatment, hoping to get clean and build a new life together with his girlfriend, Rebekah Jessen, whom he met through a friend a few years ago when he was off the streets and working for a local homeless outreach group.
“I don’t talk to her for weeks or months at a time on the street,” McClarnon said. “She’s still with me no matter what.”
Craig McClarnon, with his girlfriend, Rebekah Jessen, in around 2023, during a period when he was off the street and not using drugs. (Photo courtesy of Rebekah Jessen)But with so few addiction beds available, McClarnon has been stuck behind bars for weeks, despite agreeing to treatment. He’s among about 200 other inmates booked on various charges and also waiting for a slot in a residential drug or mental health program.
For now, McClarnon, who is also facing a felony vandalism charge for allegedly damaging a fence while trespassing at an abandoned building, said he has no plans to ask a judge for probation or seek a quicker release.
But his patience is waning. If the wait proves much longer, he said he may consider declining treatment and instead serve out a full sentence.
“If I just sit for months, then I’m going back to the streets,” he said.
An overwhelming mandate
Officially titled the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act, Prop 36 reflects a growing demand for more forceful responses to rising homelessness and open-air drug use in nearly every corner of the state. The measure won nearly 70% of the vote and carried each of California’s 58 counties.
A pedestrian walks past a homeless encampment along 47th Avenue near San Leandro Street on Thursday, Aug. 15, 2024, in Oakland, Calif. The city's homeless population rose 9% last year. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group)It came as cities statewide began adopting new restrictions on public camping after a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision last summer made it easier to clear homeless camps. In the wake of the ruling, Newsom, citing boiling public frustration, has repeatedly pressured local governments to move faster to close unsafe encampments.
Additionally, Newsom has pushed for new laws and programs, such as CARE Court, that aim to compel homeless people into mental health or addiction programs through civil rather than criminal proceedings.
“It is time to take back the streets,” Newsom said at a news conference earlier this year urging cities to adopt camping bans.
California Governor Gavin Newsom signs legislation establishing CARE Court on Sept. 14, 2022, at Momentum for Health Crossroads Residential Village in San Jose, Calif. The new civil court aims to compel homeless people and others into mental health and addiction treatment. (Dai Sugano/Bay Area News Group)California has some 187,000 homeless residents, a more than 60% increase over the past decade, according to the most recent estimate. Roughly two in three live in encampments, tents or vehicles, while the rest stay in shelters.
So far, Prop 36 hasn’t put a meaningful dent in homelessness. And its slow start is raising doubt among court officials, health agencies and addiction providers that the law can succeed without more investment in treatment, as well as the court and administrative services to help people secure it.
While the state is now distributing billions of dollars in voter-approved bond money to potentially add thousands of treatment beds in the coming years and address a longstanding shortage, Prop 36 itself came without any dedicated funding.
Some state lawmakers and local officials have been pushing for the state to provide hundreds of millions of dollars to implement the law. But Newsom — who opposed Prop 36, describing it as an “unfunded mandate” — and the State Legislature agreed to just $100 million for the law in the state budget in June. The money will support local behavioral health agencies, courts, public defenders, pre-trial services and probation departments.
Many local officials and measure backers maintain it’s not nearly enough.
“This budget deal forces counties to implement Prop 36 for pennies on the dollar,” the California State Association of Counties said in a statement. “Californians deserve better.”
In an email, Newsom’s office responded to the funding criticisms by pointing to the $100 million approved for the law this summer.
‘Maybe that misdemeanor is the best thing for you?’
After more than a decade of using meth and bouncing between county jails, group homes and the street, McClarnon, a wiry redhead with a close-cropped buzz cut, said he’s ready to turn his life around for good.
McClarnon said he’s tried addiction programs before, which helped him stay clean for stretches, but they never quite stuck.
“When you’re around people, like-minded people, you achieve more,” he explained during a collect call from county jail. “If I’m around people in the streets, unfortunately, I turn to what most people on the streets do.”
McClarnon, however, is an outlier in his desire to return to treatment. In Santa Clara County, more than 270 people were charged with drug possession felonies under Prop 36 during the law’s first six months. But just 24 had agreed to enter treatment as of July.
Court officials in the county and elsewhere in the state said defendants often turn down treatment because they don’t want to wait for a bed, or simply wish to put the case behind them as quickly as possible.
It’s not uncommon for defendants to wait more than a month for a residential facility, officials said. Some are allowed to wait out of custody, typically depending on whether they have additional charges or recent bench warrants for missing court dates. Judges sometimes hold defendants in custody if they have nowhere else to wait but the streets.
In Santa Clara County, there are 187 addiction beds for patients who can’t afford treatment on their own. Most of the beds are managed by private companies and nonprofits, which receive state funding that could be at risk if more money is spent locking people up under Prop 36.
Hence then, the article about early results show prop 36 struggling with mass treatment pledge for homeless drug offenders was published today ( ) and is available on mercury news ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Early results show Prop 36 struggling with ‘mass treatment’ pledge for homeless drug offenders )
Also on site :
- What To Watch Sunday: The Night Manager And Industry Return, Fear Factor Reboot, Golden Globes, And More
- Pricer launches commercially ready Pricer Avenue™ at NRF, redefining the shelf edge for high-value retail zones
- High Wind Warning issued January 11 at 12:39AM PST until January 11 at 1:00PM PST by NWS Los Angeles/Oxnard CA