California
Column: California voters are fed up with crime and, apparently, inaction by Democrats
Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders vehemently oppose an anti-retail theft measure on the November ballot. But they’re being ignored by California voters who support the proposal overwhelmingly.
Maybe voters don’t know about the governor’s and lawmakers’ strong opposition. Or maybe they do and don’t care. They’re following their own instincts and thinking that California — again — is too easy on bad guys.
The pendulum apparently is swinging back from left to center on crime and incarceration. Three decades ago California was over on the right with the war on drugs and tough three-strikes sentencing for repeat felons. Then we gradually moved left by dramatically reducing punishment. Opinions continue to sway.
The support numbers are stunning for Proposition 36, sponsored by the California District Attorneys Assn. It would increase punishment for theft and hard drug offenses and impose required treatment for repetitive criminal addicts.
The initiative is ahead by an astonishing 45 percentage points, according to a new poll of likely voters by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California: 71% to 26%, with only 3% undecided.
That’s unprecedented for a controversial ballot measure.
Well, controversial among politicians anyway. But seemingly not among voters.
“I was surprised by the level of support,” says Mark Baldassare, a pollster with the Public Policy Institute of California.
But he adds this caution: “Propositions aren’t like candidate races. The bottom can fall out of them. And the campaign for and against 36 really hasn’t started yet. It’s easy for people to say ‘no’ on a proposition rather than ‘yes.’ Especially if someone comes along and points out a fatal flaw.”
Sure. But don’t bet on it. Opponents have a very steep hill to climb to conquer Proposition 36.
It’s ahead among every demographic group, including Democrats by a landslide margin: 63% to 33%. Self-described liberals support it by 56% to 41%.
Baldassare notes that of the 10 state ballot measures, voters consider Proposition 36 the most important by far, his poll found.
Another independent survey last month by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies also showed the measure holding a huge lead: 56% to 23%, with 21% undecided.
IGS pollster Mark DiCamillo cited the “great visibility” of retail theft — caught on camera or witnessed personally by voters — as a reason for heavy support of Proposition 36.
“It’s kind of outrageous to voters, what they’re seeing,” DiCamillo told Times reporter Mackenzie Mays. “And they’re linking it to the approval of Proposition 47.”
That proposition swung California to the left on crime punishment 10 years ago. Federal court pressure had mounted to reduce prison and jail overcrowding. The measure passed lopsidedly, reducing some felony crimes to low-punishment misdemeanors–including shoplifting when the stolen goods were worth less than $950.
Misdemeanor arrests are harder to make because a cop must witness a crime or possess a judge’s warrant. Anyway, judges began freeing petty thieves. So, cops stopped responding to shoplifting complaints. Merchants ceased bothering to report the crimes. And smash-and-grab thefts increased.
PPIC researchers recently reported on a yearlong study of Proposition 47’s impact.
“Under Prop 47, prison and jail populations plummeted as did arrests for drug and property crimes after certain offenses were reclassified from felonies to misdemeanors,” the report stated.
But it said the pandemic also contributed to fewer apprehensions. As people stayed home to prevent the spread of COVID, there were “fewer encounters with police, resulting in fewer arrests,” the researchers contended.
At any rate, public pressure increased on Sacramento Democrats to do something — and they didn’t for several years. They probably thought the growing anti-47 pushback would just fade. It didn’t.
Newsom was one of Proposition 47’s most vocal original advocates and has been a staunch defender.
“We don’t need to go back to the broken policies of the last century,” he insisted. “Mass incarceration has been proven ineffective and is not the answer.”
Newsom’s initial answer included trying to strongarm Proposition 36 off the ballot. It failed awkwardly, leaving legislative leaders perturbed at the governor.
Proposition 36 would roll back parts of Proposition 47. The governor backed a legislative package aimed at curtailing retail theft without significantly altering Proposition 47. But he concocted a nutty “poison pill” that would have automatically killed the Democrats’ own anti-crime legislation if Proposition 36 was approved by voters.
The aim was to coerce Proposition 36’s sponsors into tossing in the towel and accepting the Legislature’s offering. But Democrats rebelled at the governor’s bizarre scheme and refused to insert the deadly pill into their package.
The Legislature ultimately passed 13 bills that Newsom and Democratic lawmakers hope will satisfy voters’ demands that California do more to combat smash-and-grabs and shoplifting.
“The bills they passed do some good things, but by and large they’re half measures,” asserts Gregory Totten, chief executive of the California District Attorneys Assn. “Our law [36] says consequences of stealing have to be ratcheted up.”
The initiative also would impose tougher penalties for sales of deadly fentanyl and treat it similar to other hard drugs, such as heroin and cocaine. Some people possessing hard drugs could be sentenced merely to treatment.
Outside Sacramento, some major Democrats have heard the voters, read the polls and are supporting Proposition 36. They include Mayors London Breed of San Francisco, Todd Gloria of San Diego and Matt Mahan of San Jose.
But Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, a former state Senate leader who has spent his career trying to generate treatment for the drug-addicted homeless and mentally ill, opposes Proposition 36.
He contends that 36 offers a “false promise” of treatment. It’ll fall short because the emphasis will be on law enforcement, not treatment of addicts, Steinberg predicts.
But so far, Newsom and Sacramento Democrats haven’t been leading anyone away from Proposition 36. Voters are headed in the opposite direction.
California
Southern California teen whose home laboratory sparked FBI investigation speaks out
LOS ANGELES — The southern California teenager whose home laboratory sparked a nearly weeklong investigation from the FBI last week is speaking out, stating that he’s just a “kid who’s interested in science.”
Last Monday, Irvine Police Department officers were called to a home near Cartwheel and Iluna in a gated Irvine neighborhood after learning of “suspicious materials” discovered by the property’s landlord.
As the investigation continued, both Orange County Fire Authority and FBI investigators were called to the scene after it was determined that the materials were possible indications of chemical nerve agents, according to a source familiar with the investigation. They said that the substances, paired with writings found at the scene, were concerning.
While investigators say that 17-year-old Amalvin Fritz, a pre-medical student slated to graduate from Univeristy of California, Irvine, in the coming months, and his family have cooperated with their investigation, the family still hasn’t been able to return home.
“You know, it’s almost been a week since I’ve been out of my home, and I really want to go back,” Fritz said.
He says that he’s unsure exactly what investigators found that triggered such a chaotic series of events.
“I gave my full cooperation and gave them my phone, and I gave them as much information as possible, but I’m not sure exactly what materials inside the home they would be suspicious about,” Fritz said. “I hope that they can conclude their investigation and we can continue to put this behind us.”
As the investigation progressed, the National Guard’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team was deployed to the neighborhood to assist with the handling of the materials and ongoing probe, which continued over the weekend.
Video from the scene shows FBI personnel dressed in hazardous materials suits and breathing apparatus as they walk to and from the home through the garage. They still haven’t commented on exactly what they discovered as their investigation develops.
Fritz dreams of becoming a doctor one day, according to his attorney, who spoke with CBS LA on Monday. He has posted a few of his home experiments on his YouTube channel, which were also conducted at his home lab.
While he says that anyone can purchase chemicals like acetone online and that he was safe throughout the process, a chemistry professor from California State University, Long Beach, says that his YouTube videos also show his use of isopropylmagnesium chloride and other compounds in an unsafe and inappropriate setting.
“Those experiments needed to be done in a proper lab facility,” said professor Elaine Bernal. She says that acetone is highly flammable, and that the compounds Fritz used would require proper storage due to the risk of a fire or explosion. She also expressed concern over how the chemicals were disposed of, and the escape of gases during the experiments.
“There’s a big environmental and safety concern that I think was worth of investigation. I get that the FBI was there, hazmat was there. I think it’s also important to think of it as the safety of the local community since it’s tight quarters,” Bernal said. “The chemicals that he mentioned are very flammable. My concern is that whatever gases that are emitted, that folks with respiratory issues, sensitive respiratory issues, can be affected.”
Fritz said that his experiments are focused on new therapeutics for cancer and Alzheimers disease, and that he insists nothing he was doing was dangerous. He hopes to enroll in medical school after graduating from UC Irvine.
The Key Takeaways for this article were generated with the assistance of large language models and reviewed by our editorial team. The article, itself, is solely human-written.
California
Commentary: Culling the field for California governor? Don’t look at me, says Betty Yee
OAKLAND — Betty Yee knows what people are thinking. She’s heard what they’ve said and read the many emails she’s gotten.
The former state controller has been running for California governor longer than just about anybody in the cheek-by-jowl field. And yet the Democrat is bumping along near the bottom, a blip in polls and a laggard in the money chase.
But no, Yee said, she has no intention of quitting the race, as she’s been urged, and no fear that, by staying in, she’ll help two Republicans advance to November’s runoff, locking Democrats out of the governor’s office for the first time since George W. Bush was president.
“I just don’t see it,” Yee said, given the way Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton, the top GOP contenders, are smacking each other around, hoping to emerge as the undisputed Republican standard-bearer.
Beyond that, she said, it’s not as if anyone’s running away with the contest; most polls have shown the leading candidate — which depends on the survey — standing atop the pile with around 20% support.
That isn’t exactly landslide territory.
“The public is still shopping,” Yee said. “In the next month or so, we’re going to try to get [a TV ad] on the air, basically make our case and hope that can spread as voters are getting more focused on the race.”
Which is not to say Yee is delusional.
“As a candidate, I make that assessment every day about whether we’re going to be viable or not,” she said last week, just before stopping by the Alameda County voter registrar‘s office to file paperwork for the June 2 primary.
“Right now, it’s less than a 50-50 chance,” Yee said, suggesting it’s her job to boost those odds by getting voters to appreciate what she offers, which amounts to unvarnished talk about the challenges facing the next governor and the ways Sacramento — which has been run for years by fellow Democrats — isn’t working.
“ ‘Accountability’ has kind of become a dirty word … where it’s about who we’re going to throw under the bus, rather than stepping back and saying, ‘What have we gotten for the dollars that we spend and, if we’re not getting those outcomes, how do we do better?’ ”
Yee served two terms as controller, in effect the state’s chief financial officer, and 10 years before that on the Board of Equalization, which oversees property tax assessments. She’s isn’t trying to buy the governorship, like billionaire Tom Steyer, or leverage her political celebrity, like cable-TV fixtures Katie Porter and Eric Swalwell. Instead, Yee is running a grassroots campaign, visiting nearly all 58 California counties and holding as many face-to-face meetings as humanly possible.
“I’m in the trenches,” she said. “I knock on doors every election cycle because to me, that’s the reality check of where people really are in terms of their lives.”
Which is certainly an admirable approach, albeit a rather idealistic strategy in a state of nearly 23 million voters, spread over roughly 800 miles from north to south. It would take more than two years of round-the-clock campaigning just to give each and every one a quick handshake.
The most notable feature of Yee’s candidacy is her message. She’s not selling barn-burning populism or viral take-downs of President Trump — “I don’t have any gimmicks, I don’t swear, I don’t have a reality-TV show personality” — but rather practical know-how and a deep understanding of state government.
It’s almost quaint in today’s theatrical political environment.
Seated at a sidewalk table outside a coffee stand in downtown Oakland, Yee focused on California’s stretched-thin budget, which happens to be her area of expertise.
“People ask what would you do in your first days as governor, if you have the privilege of serving,” Yee said, as her butterscotch latte sat cooling. “I’d come clean with the voters about where we are fiscally.”
After years of surpluses, she said, the state is spending more than it can afford. Facing a structural deficit, the next governor will have to cut programs and raise taxes, not just one or the other, with corporations and California’s richest residents being forced to cough up more. (She’s dubious, however, of a proposed November ballot measure imposing a one-time 5% tax on billionaires, questioning whether it would stand up in court.)
Sacramento’s credibility, Yee suggested, is on the line.
Before any expansive new programs can be implemented — and she has some notions for how to make life more affordable, increase access to healthcare and create jobs — Californians have to be convinced their tax dollars are being well spent and delivering proven results. “I would really insist on and invite stricter accountability of what we do with our money,” Yee said.
She’s not beyond criticizing the current administration.
“I mean, I’ve been termed out as controller since January 2023. I still get calls from companies in the [European Union], Canada, even Mexico about how we want to do business with California. Who do we talk to?” Yee said. “So I’ll send them over to the governor’s Office of Business Development and they tell me, ‘Well, we try to call people, but nobody’s answering our call.’ ”
(In response, a spokesman for the Office of Business and Economic Development touted California as “a premier hub for international business” and described foreign trade and investment as major drivers of the state economy.)
As for Gov. Gavin Newsom, while she supports his teenaged trolling of Trump, she said it shouldn’t be done through official channels, , or on the taxpayers’ dime.
“We have to focus on making the state work,” Yee said, “and that’s where I’m more focused on because people … want service delivery. They want government to be responsive to their needs. Somebody just pick up the damn phone on the other line to help them.”
Tough medicine, as she described it, and “stabilization” — which is “kind of my theme” — won’t make a great many hearts go pit-a-pat. But Yee hopes that straight talk and her distinct lack of ornamentation will count for something with California voters.
“The climate now is that people are very drawn by the performative approaches,” she said. “However, I think that will change. I want to give [voters] credit, because I do think they are very discerning when they’re ready to mark their ballot.”
The coming weeks will test that premise. And Yee is staying put.
California
Laurel Canyon home burns as Santa Ana winds gust through Greater L.A.
A house fire amid stiff winds brought more than 100 firefighters onto the narrow streets and steep slopes of Laurel Canyon Saturday morning. Firefighters said the three-story house at 8522 West Oak Court was heavily damaged, but the flames did not spread and the blaze was extinguished in a little over an hour with no injuries reported.
L.A. City Fire Battalion Chief Nick Ferrari said “it started on a balcony and caught a whole house on fire. The wind definitely added to its acceleration.”
The first firefighters arrived by 9:45 a.m. as neighbors watched flames rise 10 to 15 feet above the roofline, surrounded by trees bending in the wind. Though the house’s location on a steep slope at the end of a cul-de-sac posed a challenge, the L.A. Fire Department incident report said firefighters were able to knock down the fire in 73 minutes.
Neighbors said the house, a 960-square-foot, three-story residence built in 1961, has its own minor celebrity status in the area. To reach the structure, visitors had to climb a long set of stairs or ride a private tram up the slope. The home was owned by radio personality and John Lennon publicist Elliot Mintz in the 1970s and 1980s, then later by Olympic gold medalist Ian Thorpe (who swam for Australia in the early 2000s). It was featured in Dwell magazine when it was offered for sale in 2024.
“I was told, when I moved in 40 years ago, that John Lennon was there [often], during what was described as his dark years. My neighbor said John Lennon used to come out in the morning and pee off the balcony,” said architect Andew Ratzsch, 68, who lives a few doors down the street.
Wary of winds on Saturday morning, firefighters responded in force.
“We’ve probably got between 20 and 25 pieces of equipment here, counting L.A. County Fire,” L.A. City firefighter Jose Perez said.
Ferrari said firefighters were paying close attention to neighboring structures and vegetation on the slope, with a “structure defense group” remaining on site to monitor areas made vulnerable by the wind. The site would remain on “patrol status through the night and into the morning,” Ferrari said. The Fire Department incident report said that ”crews will be on scene for an extended duration [conducting] overhaul on any hotspots and monitoring the area.”
In January 2025, the Palisades fire was caused by a small arson fire that was handled by firefighters Jan. 1 but rekindled during severe wind conditions six days later. The firestorm plowed through the Pacific Palisades and into Malibu, burning 23,400 acres and leveling more than 6,800 structures, including many homes. Twelve people died.
-
Wisconsin1 week agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMassachusetts man awaits word from family in Iran after attacks
-
Maryland1 week agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Florida1 week agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Pennsylvania4 days agoPa. man found guilty of raping teen girl who he took to Mexico
-
Oregon1 week ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
-
News1 week ago2 Survivors Describe the Terror and Tragedy of the Tahoe Avalanche
-
Sports4 days agoKeith Olbermann under fire for calling Lou Holtz a ‘scumbag’ after legendary coach’s death