{"id":373657,"date":"2025-11-12T12:22:15","date_gmt":"2025-11-12T12:22:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/373657\/"},"modified":"2025-11-12T12:22:15","modified_gmt":"2025-11-12T12:22:15","slug":"proposition-36-hits-county-budget-hard","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/373657\/","title":{"rendered":"Proposition 36 Hits County Budget Hard"},"content":{"rendered":"

San Diego County is spending tens of millions of dollars implementing a statewide voter-approved crackdown on repeat drug and theft offenders as it faces drastic federal cuts<\/a> expected to rock the county\u2019s budget.\u00a0<\/p>\n

County officials predicted before Proposition 36 passed that they\u2019d see at least a $58 million spike in annual criminal-justice system costs alone. They now say that projection has borne out since the measure took effect in December.\u00a0<\/p>\n

For now, lacking state cash for implementation, county departments have absorbed costs in their existing budgets. It\u2019s unclear how they\u2019ll tackle them going forward \u2013 and how steady new costs will be over the long haul.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Already, the Sheriff\u2019s Office reports it\u2019s pulled funds it planned to use to back crucial jail infrastructure projects and $16 million it had directed toward a new helicopter.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cAt its core, Proposition 36 shifted the cost to the county without shifting resources and funding,\u201d said Assistant Sheriff Dustin Lopez, who oversees aging county jails that have been inundated with additional bookings<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

A state budget deal reached this summer means counties across the state will eventually receive $100 million<\/a> for behavioral health, court and public defender costs tied to the measure. Those funds will be spread across the state, diluting their impact.\u00a0<\/p>\n

San Diego County leaders are in lockstep on the need for more state cash to support new costs tied to Proposition 36. Supervisors voted unanimously<\/a> last week to lobby the state for more money.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Opponents of Proposition 36 have seized on the tab<\/a> it\u2019s created for counties while supporters argue state and local governments should direct more cash<\/a> toward implementing the initiative that won 68 percent of the vote statewide.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s a rundown of how Proposition 36 is hitting San Diego County\u2019s budget.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Sheriff\u2019s Office<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"A person walks by the San Diego Central Jail in downtown San Diego on Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2025. \/ Vito Di Stefano for Voice of San Diego<\/p>\n

The tab:<\/strong> As of early September, the Sheriff\u2019s Office estimated it had already spent about $32 million accommodating bookings tied to Proposition 36.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What it\u2019s meant:<\/strong> The number of people held in county jails has spiked<\/a> since Proposition 36 took effect last December. The Sheriff\u2019s Office says this influx has also led to a spike in people with significant physical and behavioral health challenges who need more oversight and medical care.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Lopez of the Sheriff\u2019s Office said that\u2019s also meant deputies are more often forced to take people in jails to hospitals and to court for hearings. Both dynamics have led to an uptick in fuel costs \u2013 and more overtime. The sheriff\u2019s office also reports increased bills tied to food, supplies and re-entry initiatives.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Lopez said his agency has for now covered the increased demands on jail staff with overtime and postponed some infrastructure upgrades. He argued postponing projects isn\u2019t sustainable as the larger jail population increases strain on the county\u2019s aging facilities.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cOur staff and the incarcerated people in our care experience the stress and consequences of obsolete infrastructure daily,\u201d Lopez said. \u201cWe regularly have emergency repairs to plumbing and HVAC.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Public Defender\u2019s Office<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

The tab:<\/strong> The Public Defender\u2019s Office projected last year it would see about $6 million in costs for every 1,000 Proposition 36 cases. It expects to handle double that by the end of the year, which by its own estimates would mean at least $12.2 million in new costs.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What it\u2019s meant:<\/strong> County spokespeople say the Public Defender\u2019s Office has seen a substantial hike in its workload that is \u201cnot sustainable.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Based on its experiences over the past several months, the office said every 1,000 Proposition 36 cases require 14 attorneys and four support workers at a cost of $4.6 million for staff and $1.5 million for supplies and services such as psychological evaluations.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

The office reports it\u2019s already taken on more than 1,000 additional cases. By the end of 2025, public defenders expect to handle more than 2,000 Proposition 36-related cases. \u00a0<\/p>\n

The office reports that its Holistic Defense Team, which helps clients connect with treatment, housing and other supports, is also \u201cincreasingly strained\u201d as it tries to handle an increased caseload.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In a Sept. 29 memo, county officials noted that the Public Defender\u2019s Office is seeing more clients express interest in accessing treatment to avoid jail time under Proposition 36 and suggested trial rates could rise for misdemeanor offenders it represents who are concerned about drug or theft charges that could qualify them as repeat offenders under new state laws.\u00a0<\/p>\n

County officials wrote that budget increases are likely needed.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile the Public Defender\u2019s Office is temporarily absorbing these caseloads by prioritizing mandated services and redistributing workloads, the current staffing model is not sustainable as Proposition 36 caseloads continue to rise,\u201d officials wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Probation Department<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

The tab:<\/strong> The county\u2019s Probation Department estimates $2.6 million in staffing costs tied to Proposition 36.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

What it\u2019s meant:<\/strong> The department reports that about 15 deputy probation officers and aides who primarily work in the agency\u2019s Pretrial Services and Supervision units are seeing a dramatic uptick in their workloads. That\u2019s led to increased salary and benefit costs.\u00a0<\/p>\n

County spokespeople say those workers are doing more pretrial assessments, reports to the court, treatment verifications and supervision-related work for people released after initial court hearings.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Through August, the Probation Department reported working with more than 900 people with Proposition 36-related offenses. The Probation Department also reported having 535 active clients tied to Proposition 36 case as of earlier this month, a number that\u2019s expected to rise.\u00a0<\/p>\n

For now, lacking dedicated funding tied to Proposition 36, the department says it\u2019s managing the new strain by reallocating resources when it can.\u00a0 In the September memo, the Probation Department reported that line items including staffing needs and contracted treatment services could increase its Proposition 36-related costs in the future.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Behavioral Health Services<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

The tab:<\/strong> The county behavioral health department reports it initially budgeted $670,000 for staffing costs directly tied to Proposition 36. It expects spending to rise in coming months.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What it\u2019s meant:<\/strong> A few months after Proposition 36 took effect, the county\u2019s behavioral health department reassigned three clinicians to evaluate the needs of Proposition 36 offenders who express interest in treatment. The county reports that those three clinicians handled evaluations for all detention facilities and four courts throughout the region. They also juggled logistical challenges working with criminal justice system players and linking Proposition 36 defendants with treatment.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The county decided to shift these new responsibilities to contractors in 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n

County spokesperson Tim McClain said the county expects this \u201cmore sustainable approach\u201d will increase costs. Officials are still assessing how much.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The county\u2019s initial way of handling referrals means Proposition 36 defendants are now often left to find treatment on their own. \u00a0<\/p>\n

In a September memo to the county\u2019s Behavioral Health Advisory Board, acting Behavioral Health Services Director Nadia Privara Brahams wrote that county clinicians recommended outpatient treatment in 77 percent of cases they evaluated through Sept. 12. Thirteen percent of referrals were for residential treatment and another 10 percent for other options.\u00a0<\/p>\n

A deputy director in the county\u2019s Behavioral Health Services Department recently told the Union-Tribune<\/a> that when clinicians recommend outpatient treatment, they simply give defendants contacts for two treatment providers, an information hotline number and a QR code with a list of all county providers. Proposition 36 defendants then must call programs hoping to get in, a less-than-ideal burden for a population that\u2019s disproportionately homeless and grappling with a longtime addiction.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Increased treatment demand?<\/strong> McClain wrote that Proposition 36 is just one recent policy change that increased demand for addiction treatment services<\/a>. He noted that the county in August outlined its vision for needed treatment options.<\/a> The county has detailed plans to open new facilities that provide more slots and beds. It\u2019s won some state funding<\/a> for the cause and is seeking more<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cBoth the need and demand remain high, and the county is committed to continuing to expand substance use disorder treatment across all levels of care as funding becomes available to support that growth,\u201d McClain wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

District Attorney\u2019s Office<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"San Diego District Attorney Summer Stephan in her office in downtown on April 17, 2025. \/ Ariana Drehsler for Voice of San Diego<\/p>\n

The tab:<\/strong> District Attorney Summer Stephan\u2019s office says it has thus far tackled Proposition 36 costs within its existing budget. Last year, her office projected more cases could create up to $1.5 million in additional staffing charges.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What it\u2019s meant:<\/strong> Stephan\u2019s office acknowledged its workload has increased. Proposition 36 cases are procedurally complex and require more tracking and coordination with other legal and behavioral health players.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But Stephan\u2019s office has reported that criminal case filings haven\u2019t shifted dramatically because many Proposition 36 cases would have been filed as misdemeanors or as part of other cases.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

In response to questions from Voice of San Diego, Stephan\u2019s office said has thus far been able to handle the additional workload.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cOur office did not add new resources and rather relied on a dedicated team to absorb the impact with existing staff,\u201d Stephan spokesperson Steve Walker wrote in an email. \u201cWe will continue to monitor but believe that there is more of a pressing need to expand treatment resources in the jail and in the community.\u201d\u202f\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"San Diego County is spending tens of millions of dollars implementing a statewide voter-approved crackdown on repeat drug…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":373658,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5134],"tags":[5229,1582,276,140983,3549,7264,51785,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":{"0":"post-373657","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-san-diego","8":"tag-america","9":"tag-ca","10":"tag-california","11":"tag-county-of-san-diego","12":"tag-san-diego","13":"tag-sandiego","14":"tag-sheriffs-department","15":"tag-united-states","16":"tag-united-states-of-america","17":"tag-unitedstates","18":"tag-unitedstatesofamerica","19":"tag-us","20":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115536707172637111","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373657","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=373657"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373657\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/373658"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=373657"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=373657"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=373657"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}