PROP. 5: A THREAT TO COMMUNITY SAFETY

Members of the San Luis Obispo County Criminal Justice Administrators
Association urge you to vote "no" on Proposition 5, misleadingly
called the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act.

Proposition 5 purports to expand treatment for people convicted of
drug possession as an alternative to jail. But the reality of this
60-page proposition is that it would allow dangerous and violent
criminals to go free, with no accountability for their crimes or for
successfully completing treatment.

We believe defendants who commit, for example, arson of a structure
or forest land, commercial burglary, vandalism, sell drugs, steal our
cars and our identities, traffic in child pornography, drive under
the influence of drugs or alcohol, sexually exploit teenagers and the
mentally disabled deserve incarceration. Under Proposition 5, if
these criminals appear to have a problem with substance abuse or
addiction, they will get probation and treatment, not jail. Thus, the
real beneficiaries of Proposition 5 are those who would escape jail
time for their criminal acts by claiming they weren't responsible -
the-drugs-made-me-do-it defense.

As Sen. Diane Feinstein, who opposes Prop. 5, said in a press release
last week, "Not only would Prop 5 reduce accountability, it would
allow gang members and other criminals accused of identity theft,
domestic violence, child abuse, car theft, killing someone while
driving under the influence and a host of other serious crimes to
effectively escape prosecution."

In addition, qualification criteria for drug treatment programs
outlined in Prop. 5 are so slack as to make any sort of meaningful
accountability virtually non-existent. For example, a drug offender
who has had as many as 10 prior felony convictions during the
previous 2-1/2 years for anything from auto burglary, to felony drunk
driving with injury, to multiple convictions involving possession of
methamphetamine or heroin, is eligible to go to drug treatment, not
jail. In fact, a criminal who is in treatment under Prop. 5 instead
of being incarcerated, can continue to use drugs without fear of
being incarcerated.

For all practical purposes, Proposition 5 would virtually
decriminalize illegal drug use in California.

As law enforcement leaders, we wholeheartedly support treatment for
drug offenders, such as those associated with drug courts that have
proven results and success. However, Proposition 5 is poorly drafted,
deeply flawed and fiscally irresponsible. It will cost up to a
billion dollars annually out of the state's ailing General Fund to
fund a massive new bureaucracy and mandate a program for criminal
offenders that provides no accountability and little likelihood of
successful rehabilitation. Prop. 5 doesn't create any new streams of
funding, it just redirects the money while depriving other human
service programs of the funding they need to care for the people who
aren't committing crimes and getting arrested, and it makes drug
treatment funding for criminal defendants a state priority almost on
par with education funding.

Please join organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the
California Police Chiefs Association, the California State Sheriffs
Association, the California District Attorneys Association, the L.A.
Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle, along with Sen. Feinstein,
California Attorney General Jerry Brown and your local law
enforcement leaders, in keeping our community safe by voting "no" on
Proposition 5.