Proposition 47 achieved its goal of decreasing incarceration by reclassifying certain drug- and theft-related felony offenses as misdemeanors, but contributed to a rise in property crime as a result.

That’s the finding of a newly released Public Policy Institute of California report that looked at the impact of the ballot measure nearly a decade after it passed.

The findings come as California voters are preparing to decide the fate of Proposition 36, which would roll back many of Prop. 47’s reforms.

The report found that felony arrests for drug and property offenses dropped after Prop. 47 passed, though misdemeanor drug arrests rose significantly in that same time span.

The clearance rate — which measures how many crimes resulted in an arrest and referral for prosecution — also dropped for property crimes after Prop. 47 became law, dropping from 14% to 11% two years after and then dropping down to 7% in 2022, during the pandemic, according to PPIC, which looked at the data.

The report noted that the clearance rate for violent crimes remained steady until after the pandemic, when it dropped from around 45% in 2021 to 40% in 2022.

The report said that the drop in clearance rates may be attributable to a decline in police staffing.

The report found that those lower clearance rates for larceny (theft without force or threat of force) “led to a modest rise in property crime,” with a 2.9% increase in burglaries, a 1.7% increase in auto thefts and a 1.1% increase in larcenies. After the pandemic, those lower clearance rates led to a rise in car accessory thefts (73.%) and vehicle break-ins (3.9%), as well as commercial burglaries (3.2%).

The PPIC found that the post-pandemic drop in jail populations contributed to a rise in retail theft more than Prop. 47.

“Evidence is clearer that retail theft increased due to pandemic responses by the criminal justice system, and the increases were of greater magnitude than increases due to Prop. 47,” according to the report.

The report found that Prop. 47 led to a 30% drop in jail and prison populations with a “modest and limited” impact on crime, including a 3.9% rise in auto thefts and a 3.7% rise in car break-ins attributable to lower incarceration.

Finally, the report found that there is no evidence that changes in drug arrests after Prop. 47 or after the pandemic led to any increases in crime.

The report was unable to assess whether Prop. 47 led to changes in substance use and addiction, due to limitations in the data.

Will Matthews, speaking on behalf of Californians for Safety and Justice, which advocates for criminal justice reform and opposes Prop. 36, said of the report that “while there may have been a marginal impact in some particular crime categories, overall Prop. 47’s impact on crime has not been significant.”

He said that special emphasis should be paid to law enforcement’s “abysmal” clearance rate, saying that Proposition 47 didn’t decriminalize anything and there’s no reason why police shouldn’t still be arresting people for crimes.

“These are still crimes. These are still crimes that are punishable by up to a year in local jail,” he said.

California District Attorneys Association Assistant CEO Jonathan Raven told The Bee in an email that the PPIC report’s findings and conclusions are in line with the effort behind Prop. 36, whicch he said “focuses on the serial thieves and those who are ill with substance use disorders who are not getting the help they deserve and need. “

“As the report concludes, when this population has no fear of being arrested or prosecuted, they continue to commit crimes with impunity. And in California, for a host of reasons, misdemeanors go underreported, cases aren’t closed out by law enforcement, and mostly when cases are prosecuted, these individuals fail to appear in court and there are absolutely no consequences,” he said.

_____

©2024 The Sacramento Bee. Visit sacbee.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.