The Los Angeles City Council on Sept. 12 voted to continue consideration of a city position on Proposition 36, a statewide ballot measure addressing diversion and treatment for certain drug possession offenses, for 30 days.

Judge Michael Tynan, supervising judge of the county drug courts, told the council he believes the initiative "is a thinly disguised attempt to decriminalize simple possession" and warned that the drug court graduates he oversees benefited from the threat of incarceration as a sanction. "None of these 12 people would have succeeded in their treatment program had there not been a threat of incarceration or prison behind the treatment program," Judge Tynan said.

Charlotte Kaufman, a registered nurse with the Department of Mental Health who works with treatment court populations, said treatment without strong sanctions is unlikely to succeed for many people. "We have to have teeth in any bill you have. The person ... has to be between a rock and a hard place," she told the council.

Supporters of Proposition 36 and of expanding treatment funding also spoke. Council Member Alex Padilla (speaker referenced as supporting expanded funding in committee testimony) and others said the measure could expand treatment resources to people who now receive little or no attention from drug courts. Council Member Mark Holden argued the initiative would channel state funds to large numbers of people who currently receive no services and described it as an opportunity to expand outreach.

Council Member Cindy Goldberg moved that the council take no position on the ballot measure; Council Member Zev Yaroslavsky (represented in transcript by Mister Wax and others) and others pressed for more time to gather information. After debate and several substitute motions, the council voted to continue the matter 30 days so the council could review additional analysis and allow broader public discussion. The continuance passed on a 14-0 vote.

The continuance preserves time for staff to compile research on the measure’s provisions, sanctioning structure and resource implications and for the council to hear additional proponents and opponents before adopting an official city position.