No on Prop. 6

Published online on Friday, Oct. 24, 2008

Sponsors of Proposition 6 call it the "Safe Neighborhoods Act," and we wish this measure were that simple. The intent is a good one -- fighting gangs and attacking gun crimes that turn communities into places of fear and misery -- but Proposition 6 locks almost $1 billion in crime funding into a state budget that's already in the red. And the measure offers no vehicle to pay for it, other than taking from other state programs.

We recommend a "no" vote on Proposition 6. This is ballot-box budgeting at a time when the state can't even pay for the programs it already has mandated. We already lock in too much funding, giving the Legislature little flexibility to balance the budget during poor economic times.

Proponents say Proposition 6 dedicates money to programs that are already being funded. But that's only part of the issue. The measure substantially increases money that will go to new anti-crime programs, and creates new crime categories and penalties.

That is one of the weaknesses of the initiative process. While the new crimes may be warranted, they should be vetted through a legislative process and dealt with on their individual merits. In a ballot proposition, voters must vote up or down on an entire package of crimes, penalties, funding mechanisms and new anti-crime programs.

At a time when the Legislature needs to be debating serious prison reform and how to deal with overcrowding, Proposition 6 would add to the problem without considering the ramifications.

There are some parts of the measure that we like, including tougher punishment for gang crimes, especially witness intimidation. There's early intervention and rehabilitation for at-risk youths. But other parts of Proposition 6 need to be debated before making them law in one fell swoop.