Elected officials in San Mateo County on Monday held a press conference ahead of what they hope is a vote by the county Board of Supervisors to accept a resolution voicing support for Proposition 36 this November.
The Proposition 36 ballot initiative would reform parts of 2014’s Proposition 47, which reduced some felony theft crimes to misdemeanors, among other changes.
According to San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller’s office, Proposition 36 would modify existing law related to punishment for theft and drug crimes by creating incentives for those suffering from addiction to enter treatment, treat fentanyl like other dangerous drugs and discourage retail theft.
Standing in front of county buildings in Redwood City, among the din of loud construction and overhead planes included District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe, San Mateo County Supervisor-elect and former U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, San Mateo Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash, Redwood City Mayor Jeff Gee and Mueller, author of the resolution.
Since its inception, Prop. 47 has faced sharp criticism, from being blamed for organized retail theft to the rise in deaths from fentanyl. Proponents of the law hoped that it would stave off mass incarceration in California by keeping low-level offenders out of jail. Most notably, Prop. 47 classifies theft crimes — such as shoplifting — of items under $950 a misdemeanor.
For Mueller, crime has indeed gone up in the wake of Prop. 47. The supervisor cited a rise in retail thefts in Daly City of 240% between 2019 and 2023. He said similar crimes have gone up in Redwood City by 50% during the same time period. San Mateo has had a 75% increase in thefts since 2020, he said.
“Now, notably, Proposition 36 makes amendments to Proposition 47 to go ahead and provide safeguards, both in penalty increases and also in rehabilitation,” Mueller said. “I believe that voting tomorrow to endorse Proposition 36, the San Mateo Board of Supervisors can send a clear message that San Mateo supervisors join San Francisco’s Mayor [London Breed] and San Jose’s mayor in supporting a brighter and safer future for this region.”
Prop. 36 would open the door for prosecutors to charge repeat offenders with felonies and to mete out harsher penalties for drug dealing.
Wagstaffe, the county district attorney, was quick to defend the role that prosecutors would take under an amended law, which he said needs to be changed.
“Not obliterated,” he clarified, “but changed.”
Recommended for you
Wagstaffe said Prop. 36 deals with the two “most horrific” problems in the state of California — fentanyl and theft.
“[Prop. 36] doesn’t overwhelmingly say, ‘Let’s lock people up,’” he said. “I know the opponents all say, all it’s going to do is lead to incredible incarceration, and I disagree.”
Wagstaffe said it will be up to district attorneys to decide who to prosecute, but that, ultimately, the final decision will be back in the hands of judges.
“It’s also to deal with our fentanyl problem,” he continued. “Put fentanyl not just as a simple drug, but to make it the hard drug that it is, the killer drug, the poison that it is.”
Prop. 36 increases prison time for some drug offenses but imposes mandated drug treatment in some cases as well.
Speier, making her first appearance as a supervisor-elect, said she had supported Prop. 47 at the time, but has seen the rise in retail theft and now supports Prop. 36, which she called “necessary and common sense.”
“Shoplifting is like walking down the sidewalk and stepping on a big wad of chewing gum,” she quipped. “It’s there, it’s messy and eventually you can get it cleaned up. But of course, that’s only one version of shoplifting. At other times, store clerks or customers get seriously injured or they die as the robberies and organized crime syndicates get involved.”
Mahan, the San Jose mayor, also spoke about the ravages of fentanyl and increased crime in San Jose, which he sees as easing under Prop. 36.
“This is not about going back to era of mass incarceration, far from it,” he said. “It’s about launching a new era of mass treatment.”
The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors meets Tuesday at 9 a.m. in the board chambers at 400 County Center in Redwood City.

(3) comments
I'd love to understand some of the arguments against Prop 36. Perhaps SMDJ could do a follow-up article talking to some of the local elected officials who are opposed?
Prop 47 was a nice experiment that didn't work. I'll be very happy to vote yes on Prop 36.
Now how many of the folks pictured above supported Proposition 47. Note that it’s been 10 years and they’re finally doing something? Seems they’re more interested in extending their political career and pandering to what the public wants. What these folks do remains to be seen, but look to their past for guidance and vote out the ones who originally supported Prop 47. Otherwise, don’t expect much change.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.