SAN FRANCISCO, – March18, 2026 – Proposition 36, which took effect in late 2024, promised California voters a new era of “mass treatment” for people struggling with addiction. But early evidence suggests it has simply boosted incarceration, while failing to connect Californians to treatment. These failures reflect flaws in the initiative’s design, poor implementation, and counties’ refusal to redirect law enforcement dollars, particularly Public Safety Realignment funding, towards treatment.
A new report from CJCJ and Californians for Safety and Justice draws on data from the Judicial Council, the Board of State and Community Corrections, public defenders, and partner research organizations to assess Proposition 36’s performance in its first year. The data point to several key challenges:
- Incarceration is climbing. Nearly 900 Californians have already been sent to state prison on Proposition 36 charges. Jail populations have grown by nearly 3,000 since Proposition 36’s passage, driven by an increase in nonsentenced felony bookings. These 2025 data represent a reversal of yearslong declines in incarceration, and they are occurring amid all-time lows in California’s crime rate.
- Treatment offerings fall short of the need. Fewer than one in five people arrested on Proposition 36 drug charges have been ordered to treatment, and fewer than one in one hundred have completed a program. Long wait times for treatment beds, high costs, and the inherent limitations of court-mandated treatment, are contributing to this gap.
- Enforcement is arbitrary. Charging rates vary dramatically by county. Orange County alone accounts for nearly 20% of Proposition 36 charges and 40% of theft convictions, despite representing just 8% of the state’s population. Some prosecutors are charging far more Proposition 36 drug offenses, while others are opting for more theft offense charges. This inconsistency across counties exacerbates California’s longstanding problem of providing differing “justice by geography.”
- Communities of color bear the brunt. Black Californians are dramatically overrepresented in Proposition 36 charges. In Contra Costa County, for example, Black residents account for more than half of all Proposition 36 theft charges despite making up less than one-tenth of the population.
Prop 36 proponents have claimed that funding shortfalls explain these outcomes. But California already allocates $2 billion annually in Public Safety Realignment (AB 109) funds meant to serve people with low-level offenses. These dollars flow primarily to probation and sheriff’s departments whose caseloads have fallen sharply over the past several decades. Counties have the resources to address the demand for treatment beds created by Proposition 36. What they lack is a commitment to reinvesting them.