San Diego supervisors unanimously urge state funding for Prop 36 implementation

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors on Nov. 4 voted unanimously to ask state leaders to provide ongoing funding to implement Proposition 36, the 2024 ballot measure described at the hearing as the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act.

Sheriff Kelly Martinez told the board that “Prop 36 created and turned some misdemeanors into felonies, which makes them now bookable. So we've had about 3,300 people booked in the county jails under Prop 36. We need to take care of those individuals while they're in our custody. We're keeping about 500 persons a day extra in our custody since last December. Their average length of stay is about 26 days.”

Why it matters: Supervisors said the change in state law has shifted behavioral health and treatment obligations onto county jails and partner agencies without matching state funding. The board motion asks county leadership to advocate to the governor and legislature for resources to support in‑custody behavioral health, substance‑use treatment, and related jail costs arising from Prop 36 implementation.

What the board approved: Supervisor Desmond moved the item to direct the county to advocate for state funding; Supervisor Paloma Aguirre proposed and the board accepted an amendment to explicitly include state support for law‑enforcement implementation and for bolstering public‑defender capacity, early legal counsel, case management and reentry supports. The clerk reported the motion passed unanimously with all supervisors present and voting aye.

Public comment: The public record on the item included 13 live speakers and multiple written comments with sharply divided views. Some speakers urged the county to press the state for funding because jail populations and lengths of stay have increased; others opposed expanding incarceration or argued the district attorney’s charging discretion could limit county costs. Community advocates warned that expanding custodial capacity without community‑based services risks deepening inequalities; law‑enforcement supporters emphasized obligations to care for people while jailed.

Next steps and limits: The board’s action is an advocacy direction to the chief administrative office and does not by itself create new county spending. The motion calls for coordination with the sheriff, district attorney, public defender and behavioral‑health partners in pursuing state resources. Any future allocation of county funds would require separate board action and budget authority.

Quotes and source: The sheriff’s description of bookings, daily custody impact and average length of stay came from her remarks during the item (see transcript excerpts). The board accepted Supervisor Aguirre’s amendment on the record, and the clerk recorded a unanimous vote.