The California Legislature is back in session, and lawmakers are making quick work of passing a multitude of bills to target rising retail crime in the Golden State.
A total of 10 mostly bipartisan proposals addressing retail theft and property-related offenses passed through the state Assembly and Senate on Thursday, receiving final votes on Monday. By the end of the day, they were sent to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk for final sign-off.
The package of legislation orbits around the California Retail Theft Reduction Act (AB 2943), which was introduced in February by select committee on retail theft chair and Assemblymember Rick Zbur (D-L.A.).
Watch on FN
One of the most multi-faceted proposals to come out of the State Assembly this year, the law solidifies a new crime classification for possessing stolen merchandise worth over $950 with the intent to resell, carrying a prison sentence of up to three years. Evidence may include repeat offenses or the possession of large volumes of stolen property. The law also stipulates that the value of thefts from different retailers can be tallied up and prosecuted as grand theft—a felony charge.
AB 2943 foists some responsibility onto online marketplaces, as sellers would be required to maintain records proving their products were obtained legally. Larger retail businesses would also be required to provide data to law enforcement to help strengthen crime laws and prevent stolen stuff from being sold on the web.
The bill package, which operates under the header of “Californians Against Retail Theft,” also includes AB 1779, which allows California district attorneys to prosecute theft cases across multiple jurisdictions at once, AB 1802, which removes the sunset provision for the state’s organized retail crime statute, making a statewide California Highway Patrol (CHP) criminal task force permanent, and AB 1972, which expands that CHP task force to include cargo theft.
Passed in the State Senate on Monday was SB 1144, which would require online marketplaces to establish and maintain policies for prohibiting the sale of stolen goods. Meanwhile, SB 1242 imposes longer sentences on individuals convicted of setting reckless fire to a retailer’s property in order to commit organized retail crime, and SB 1416 beefs up sentences for those convicted of selling, exchanging or returning stolen goods. SB 982 eliminates the statute of limitations for prosecuting organized retail theft.
The lawmakers behind the bundle of bills have been chomping at the bit to get the proposals passed as a means of thwarting the advancement of a ballot initiative that would imperil one of the state’s most controversial laws: Prop. 47. But despite the crime reduction proposals’ rapid advancement in recent days, Prop. 36, the Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act, is still headed to the polls.
If passed, the petition will most notably revise the 2014 law that established $950 as the felony threshold for theft. “Currently, [under Prop. 47] theft of items worth $950 or less is generally a misdemeanor,” according to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office. “Proposition 36 makes this crime a felony if the person has two or more past convictions for certain theft crimes (such as shoplifting, burglary, or carjacking).” The resulting sentence could be up to three years in a county jail or state prison.
Prop. 36 would also lengthen certain felony sentences for theft or property damage by up to three years if three or more people committed the crime together—a move that the authoring advocacy group, Californians for Safer Communities, believes will deter organized retail theft.
The petition is backed by Mayor London Breed of San Francisco, Mayor Matt Mahan of San Jose and Assemblymember James Ramos of San Bernadino, as well as dozens of other policymakers and law enforcement groups. It has reportedly received signatures from hundreds of thousands of California voters, sealing the deal for its inclusion on the November ballot.
The lawmakers behind the Californians Against Retail Theft package, as well as Governor Newsom, don’t want to see Prop. 47 repealed or picked apart, as they believe the 10-year-old law has been an instrumental element of the state’s prison reform strategy.
In 2010 when it passed—also as a ballot initiative decided by voters—Prop. 47 was billed as a way to reduce prison overcrowding. Reducing the charges for certain non-violent drug- or property-related crimes has saved the state more than $800 million in funds that would have been spent on housing prisoners, Newsom’s office said.
“What’s happening in our neighborhoods is unacceptable and we must act expeditiously, but we must also look at facts and find solutions that will actually work,” Assemblymember Zbur said on the Assembly floor Monday.
“We need to make sure we’re pursuing reforms that are effective at targeting retail crime while avoiding a rollback of criminal justice reforms that have been successful at keeping our communities safe and reduce the human cost of imprisoning people for minor infractions.”
The governor is reportedly planning to sign the bills quickly, though this office has not indicated a timeline.
