Board members had previously requested staff to analyze the seventeen qualified November 2016 ballot initiatives for potential impacts on County operations and services. A chart of the qualified ballot initiatives with a description, comments from the Legislative Analyst's Office and Department of Finance, positions from RCRC and CSAC, and staff notes is attached for the Board's reference (Att. A). Also attached is the Board adopted 2016 Intergovernmental Advocacy Policy for the Board's reference as well (Att. B).
From this analysis, staff has concluded that only Propositions 57 (Criminal Sentencing Reform) and 64 (Marijuana Legalization) will likely have direct impacts on County operations and services.
Proposition 57
The summary of Proposition 57, per the Attorney General is as follows:
Allows parole consideration for persons convicted of nonviolent felonies upon completion of full prison term for primary offense, as defined. Authorizes Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to award sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior, or educational achievements. Requires Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to adopt regulations to implement new parole and sentence credit provisions and certify they enhance public safety. Provides juvenile court judges shall make determination, upon prosecutor motion, whether juveniles age 14 and older should be prosecuted and sentenced as adults. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Net state savings that could range from the tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars annually primarily due to a reduction in the prison population from additional paroles granted and credits earned. Net county costs that could range from the millions to tens of millions of dollars annually, declining to a few million dollars after initial implementation of the measure.
The District Attorney and Sheriff oppose the measure given potential for this measure to affect AB 109 prisoners and effectively create an unfunded mandate to hold parole hearings; staff has similar concerns. The County’s 2016 Advocacy Policy includes support for adequate AB109 and public safety funding and as stated in the analysis this measure could push new unfunded public safety costs to counties. That being said, the state prison system is under a federal court-ordered population cap and without additional releases, a court appointed officer could be instated to unilaterally release prisons.
Proposition 64
The summary of Proposition 64, per the Attorney General is as follows:
Legalizes marijuana and hemp under state law. Designates state agencies to license and regulate marijuana industry. Imposes state excise tax on retail sales of marijuana equal to 15% of sales price, and state cultivation taxes on marijuana of $9.25 per ounce of flowers and $2.75 per ounce of leaves. Exempts medical marijuana from some taxation. Establishes packaging, labeling, advertising, and marketing standards and restrictions for marijuana products. Allows local regulation and taxation of marijuana. Prohibits marketing and advertising marijuana to minors. Authorizes resentencing and destruction of records for prior marijuana convictions. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Net reduced costs ranging from tens of millions of dollars to potentially exceeding $100 million annually to state and local governments related to enforcing certain marijuana-related offenses, handling the related criminal cases in the court system, and incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders. Net additional state and local tax revenues potentially ranging from the high hundreds of millions of dollars to over $1 billion annually related to the production and sale of marijuana. Most of these funds would be required to be spent for specific purposes such as substance use disorder education, prevention, and treatment.
The District Attorney opposes the measure. The County’s forthcoming permanent marijuana ordinance is not dependent on the measure’s success or failure. The legalization of non-medical marijuana is not included in Advocacy Policy and there is no Board policy on this issue. However, the legalization of non-medical marijuana does stand to impact County law enforcement, code enforcement, agricultural inspections and regulations, and public health services. The measure does allow for local regulation and taxation of marijuana, however calibrating such regulations to cover County enforcement and regulatory costs will likely be an iterative process.
Proposition 52
Staff would like to note that while Proposition 56 ($2 per pack cigarette tax) will likely not have a direct impact on County operations and services, the measure is consistent with the Board’s prior efforts to discourage tobacco use. The Public Health Officer recommends a support position. |