Newsom’s Budget Snub of Prop 36 Raises Concerns Over Retail Crime and Property Management
Governor Gavin Newsom is leaving funding for Proposition 36 out of his revised state budget.
Prop 36, which voters strongly supported last year, boosts penalties for repeat retail theft and fentanyl dealers and requires drug treatment for some nonviolent drug offenders.
Even though law enforcement and the state’s attorney general want funding for Prop 36, Newsom’s budget doesn’t include any. This raises concerns about how effective Prop 36 will be in its implementation.
What You Need to Know
California is grappling with a $12 billion deficit, yet Attorney General Rob Bonta and local law enforcement leaders insist that Prop 36 must be funded to respect the will of the voters. Without resources, they warn, the law won’t deliver on its promise.
Retailers supported Prop 36 to fight rising retail crime, which has caused higher prices and store closures. Without funding, its tougher penalties and treatment requirements may not work.
How It Impacts You
Security and Tenants: Without Prop 36 funding, property managers may keep facing retail theft and vandalism. This affects ground-floor tenants and can hurt building occupancy and revenue.
Operational Costs: Retail theft can raise insurance costs, security needs, and property damage—hurting net income and making leases harder to negotiate.
If Prop 36 isn’t fully funded, theft problems may continue in your buildings.
Uncertainty about enforcement may make new tenants hesitant to sign leases, slowing recovery in high-theft areas.
Stay Connected
Newsom’s choice to leave Prop 36 unfunded leaves property professionals in limbo. Without proper funding, the state risks missing a crucial chance to reduce retail theft and protect building operations and tenant satisfaction.
Stay engaged with us on BOMA on the Frontline as we keep advocating for our members and sharing important news that affects you.
