OpenCampaign

Public Safety

Community Voice

Public safety, Prop 36, and sheriff staffing

The budget adds public safety funding including sheriff staffing to handle Proposition 36 felony reclassifications for certain drug and theft crimes, which increase jail and court costs. It intersects with wildfire prevention, firefighter needs, and broader debates over safety-net versus enforcement priorities on the Board of Supervisors.

How should San Diego County fund public safety and implement Proposition 36?

Tap a point along the line below to show where you stand.

How important is this to you?

Sources

County News Center — https://www.countynewscenter.com/county-adopts-balanced-9-16b-budget-investing-in-community-services-and-long-term-stability/
public safety (~$98 million more in some reports; Sheriff staffing; Prop 36 felony reclassifications for certain drug/theft crimes increasing jail/costs)
San Diego Union-Tribune — https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2026/06/25/san-diego-county-inks-9-2b-budget-with-support-for-social-programs-voters-will-get-a-say-on-taxes-in-november/
Spending priorities: Boosts for... public safety... Prop 36 implementation (public safety costs/staffing)
Voice of San Diego — https://voiceofsandiego.org/2026/10/05/voice-of-san-diegos-no-bs-2026-voter-guide/
Issues include public safety, affordability/opposing taxes, housing, climate, homelessness/mental health
Positions on this issue  ·  liberal → conservative
  1. Pair Prop 36 enforcement with major new investments in treatment and diversion programs
  2. Increase sheriff staffing and jail capacity while expanding behavioral health alternatives
  3. Fully fund Prop 36 implementation costs and moderate sheriff increases for public safety
  4. Maintain current public safety levels and evaluate Prop 36 impacts before more hiring
  5. Prioritize sheriff and firefighter staffing over additional social program expansions
  6. Focus strictly on enforcement and incarceration funding; limit treatment add-ons
  7. Maximize tough-on-crime staffing and reject any diversion that softens Prop 36 penalties