Criminal justice reform advocates spent the summer warning that efforts to oust California’s progressive district attorneys and undo sentencing reforms would undermine a decade of work aimed at reducing mass incarceration, prioritizing rehabilitation and holding police accountable for excessive force.

Come November, voters didn’t listen.

In Los Angeles County, Nathan Hochman, a former federal prosecutor and onetime Republican, unseated George Gascón as district attorney. Progressive firebrand Pamela Price was recalled in Alameda County. And Proposition 36, which will lengthen jail and prison sentences for some drug and theft charges, passed by double-digit margins in all but one of the state’s 58 counties.

After those resounding election defeats, some political strategists wonder whether reform-minded candidates need to readjust their messaging. Many reform movement leaders and progressive prosecutors, however, have shown no signs of backing down.

Roy Behr, a longtime consultant to Democratic campaigns in Los Angeles, warned that a perceived failure to find middle ground on criminal justice issues risks further alienating voters who want answers to visible signs of unrest — like smash-and-grab robberies and open-air drug use on city streets.

“The choices have basically been crackdown or it’s time for reform, and there’s been very little nuance in the back-and-forth,” said Behr. “Voters want police to behave fairly and justly. They also want to be able to go to a store and not worry if someone is going to come running through and do a smash and grab.”

In the L.A. County district attorney race, Gascón held tight to his vision of restorative justice and alternatives to prison, standing against Proposition 36 while polls showed broad public support for the measure.

Following his victory, Hochman told The Times he thinks his opponent and other progressives offered the public a false binary between reform and safety.

Although he spent much of his campaign positioning himself as someone who could restore justice in a version of Los Angeles County that he likened to “Gotham City” under Gascón, Hochman rejects the idea that he was a mere “tough on crime” candidate. Criminal justice, he argues, is more complex than that.

“For the first time in a very long time, a centrist running as an independent won a race where the media and my opponent were trying to hyper-politicize the race into different political camps,” Hochman said. “I think what will end up happening is that the idea that you don’t have to choose between prioritizing safety and instituting real and effective criminal justice reform will be proven over the next four years.”

Hochman said he thinks progressives have lost touch with the average California voter. He argued that Gascón excelled at highlighting problems — such as the need to prosecute police officers when they break the law and the over-incarceration of low-level criminals and nonviolent drug users — but did little to effect change in those areas.

“Gascón said it was very progressive not to charge people who were engaged in drug use, use of meth, heroin and fentanyl … but he had no answer for the fact that roughly six homeless people were dying every day from overdoses,” Hochman said.

Gascón declined an interview request. Other California reform advocates, however, rejected the idea that the election results were a repudiation of progressive policies.

Cristine Soto DeBerry — executive director of the Prosecutors Alliance, which advocates for progressive district attorneys in California — argued that frustrations over property crime and homelessness that drove voters to support Proposition 36 represented dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system at large, including the police.

Critics often say prosecutors like Gascón and Price — who often declined to file low-level misdemeanors and sought to keep most defendants out of jail before trial — can cause surges in petty crimes such as shoplifting and car burglaries. But DeBerry and others contend that it is the failure of police to make arrests that emboldens criminals.

According to California Department of Justice records, more than 9 million property crimes were reported in the state between 2014 and 2023. Police statewide solved approximately 711,000 of them, less than 1%, records show.

“These measures passed across the board, and most of the counties in this state are run by very traditional, regressive prosecutors, and their voters said you’re not doing enough,” DeBerry said.

Tinisch Hollins, the executive director of the reform-focused nonprofit Californians for Safety and Justice, said Proposition 36 “disguised itself” as a way to offer treatment for substance use disorders. The measure was presented to voters as rehabilitation-focused by including a tenet that offered defendants a choice between treatment and prison if convicted of an addiction-related felony for a third time.

Hollins said her biggest fear is that those in need of treatment still won’t receive it under the new measure.

“County jail will just become a holding tank for people who desperately need treatment,” she said.

Hollins said the reform movement “doesn’t need a rebrand” and will continue to focus on reducing California’s “reliance on incarceration” even as the state enters a “totally new environment” postelection.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and others have expressed similar concerns over the lack of funding needed in about a third of the 58 counties to carry out Proposition 36, specifically that there are not enough inpatient treatment beds.

A recent report from a nonpartisan research institute found that there was a statewide shortage of treatment beds for those with substance use disorder and that some facilities exclude those with prior involvement in the criminal justice system.

Greg Totten, who heads the California District Attorneys Assn. and was one of the main architects of Proposition 36, said the funding concerns are overblown. He said there are “significant funds” in behavioral health services that are available from Proposition 1, which is a $6.4-billion mental health bond measure voters passed earlier this year. He also said outpatient treatment could be an option if beds in inpatient facilities are full.

Some observers noted that progressive prosecutors elsewhere have had many successes, and said that while there are lessons to be learned from November’s results, ups and downs are also inevitable for long-term political movements.

Anne Irwin — the executive director of Smart Justice, an organization that educates policymakers on criminal justice reform — considers this election only “one step back.”

Irwin pointed to a study from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll from October that found a majority of voters who supported Proposition 36 also said they want to prioritize understanding the root causes of crime.

She also noted that many successful candidates this year ran their campaigns around the economy — a topic that intersected with Proposition 36. Retail chains including Walmart and Target were major donors, whose support largely came from a profit-loss standpoint.

Hochman successfully courted the support of business leaders, including L.A. mall magnate Rick Caruso and small-bakery owners, highlighting the economic effects of property crime. His “hard middle” approach, which focused on prioritizing public safety and working with police to crack down on violent criminals without completely eschewing reform-minded policies, also worked well, Irwin said.

“The newly evolved Nathan Hochman touted support for criminal justice reform,” she said. “We shall see if that pans out in the policies and practices he implements in the district attorney’s office.”

Hochman’s campaign aside, Totten and other proponents of Proposition 36 said that voters simply rejected “bad policy” that hurt public safety.

Voters “didn’t feel safe,” Totten said. “They wanted change. I think the problem was Californians see products locked up, they see thieves coming into stores and stealing.”

The dramatic shift in California voter behavior on criminal justice is borne out by data. A decade ago, 59% of Californians voted yes on Proposition 47, California’s landmark resentencing measure. This year, 68% of voters supported Proposition 36, which in effect repealed the 2014 measure.

Higher turnout also led to a huge increase in raw voter support this year. More than 10 million Californians cast a ballot to pass Proposition 36, as opposed to just 3.7 million who voted in support of the 2014 measure, according to secretary of state records.

The voters may have spoken, but DeBerry said progressive prosecutors’ “values do not change” because of election results. She challenged Californians to keep an eye on crime data in the coming years and hold policies and politicians to account if their methods don’t have an impact.

“After this election cycle, they own it all,” she said. “So if we don’t see drug use subside and we see prison populations exploding and we see crime continue to exist, I hope that voters and the media and everybody will say, ‘You promised this as the solution, and it’s not better.’”