Loading...
CC – Item 6B – Request for Discussion of Negotiations Between Cal DOJ, Attorney General Rob Bonta, Los Angeles County, and LASDROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND ^CITY COUNCIL FROM: BEN KIM, CITY MANAGER DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2024 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION ON NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN CAL DOJ, ATTORNEY GENERAL ROB BONTA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, AND LASD SUMMARY At Council Member Armen&s request, she would like to address a recent issue raised by the Contract Cities Association, which is seeking letters from cities to express their concerns to Attorney General Rob Bonta regarding changes in enforcement related to penal and vehicle code violations across Los Angeles County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council discuss and provide staff direction. FISCAL IMPACT There is no financial impact to this item. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Prepared by: Ericka Hernandez City Clerk Attachment A: Contract Cities Association Letter AGENDA ITEM 6.11 Attachment A Contract Cities Association Letter Ben Kim Subject: FW: Advocacy Alert! - Letters to AG Bonta Needed ASAP! ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: California Contract Cities Association <info@contractcities.ore> Date: Thu, Oct 3, 2024, 4:23 PM Subject: Advocacy Alert! - Letters to AG Bonta Needed ASAP! To: <sandralarmenta@gmaiL.com> COCA Members, As you may be aware, there are ongoing negotiations between Cal DOJ, Attorney General Bonta, Los Angeles County, and LASD. I have had numerous conversations with Sheriff Luna, ALADS, and several Supervisor offices. We have been holding off on writing letters to not derail sensitive negotiations, but now is the time for action. COCA has sent the letter below to AG Bonta's office and has requested a meeting with him to voice our concerns. Our letter touches on a few issues as detailed below. • A disparate application of existing laws (PC and VC) would be imposed on our communities should restrictions be placed on LASD's ability to enforce certain laws. • We (CCCA) are supportive of progressive (Constitutional) policing policies. • The State and County should adequately fund these policy changes including required training and technology. • Cal DOJ should not hold LASD to a completely different set of policing standards than other law enforcement agencies in California. I have attached our letter to AG Bonta below and we are asking your city or organization to voice your concerns to AG Bonta on the impacts these restrictions would have on public safety. Even if your city has its own police department, the confusion created by dissimilar enforcement policies would create a nightmare for law enforcement. Please feel free to reach out to me anytime if you have any questions. Letters and correspndence should be sent to the contact below. Damon Michael Brown Damon.Brown @doi.ca.aov Yours in Service, Marcel Rodarte Executive Director 2024-2025 EXECUTIVE BOARD lennif¢r Perez Vresident Norwalk Brenda Olmos Vice President Paramount Dr. John Erickson secretn'Treosurer West Hollywood Dr. Julian Gold lmInediote Past President-Ement{!s Beverly Hills Gustavo Camacho Ambassador Pico Rivera Mark Waronek Associate Members Lomita Oralia Rebollo Budget & Audit Commerce Jeff Wood Bylaws Lakewood Jesus Gomez Cit Managers/ Administrators Norwalk Jose Gonzalez Director Cu�a�e Y Cedric Hicks Director-at-Largqe Cars6n Ed Reece Director at large Claremont Sal Melendez Legal&Controis Montebello Chris Ba a'as Le iso 've Jurup9a Va +ey Oscar Flores Morketin Lynwoog Victor Sanchez Mem rship Bel flower Jame solulRonrs Calabasas Margaretpprole SelectioX Duarte Yesenig De. La Rosa SpeaalEvents Avalon Marcel Rodarte Executive Director CALIFORNIA CONTRACT CITIES ASSOCIATION October 1, 2024 Attorney General Rob Bonta Office of the Attorney General 13001 Street Sacramento, CA 95814-2919 RE: Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department - Penal & Vehicle Code Enforcement Dear Attorney General Bonta, The California Contract Cities Association (CCCA) is a local government advocacy association currently representing 80 cities and nearly 8 million residents in Southern California. CCCA was founded in 1957 to represent the collective interests of all 42 cities that contract for law enforcement services with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD). We have recently been apprised of ongoing negotiations between your office and Los Angeles County that could severely limit LASD's ability to enforce penal (PC) and vehicle code (VC) violations throughout Los Angeles. We are deeply concerned the results of these negotiations would limit LASD's ability to enforce existing laws in our communities. As you may be aware, not every city in Los Angeles and Southern California contracts with LASD. These restrictions are very likely to adversely impact public safety in our cities and would create a disparate application of the law throughout Los Angeles County. This could potentially cause confusion among neighboring jurisdictions, as it could be difficult to ascertain which laws are enforceable across jurisdictions. Holding LASD to a different set of rules than all other law enforcement agencies in California is a disservice to deputies and to the communities they serve. Each of our 80 member cities place public safety as their highest priority, which is the primary reason these negotiations are so concerning. CCCA fully supports progressive policing policies in accordance with applicable constitutional guidelines and holding law enforcement accountable when these tenets are violated. A significant part of the move toward more progressive policies should include state funds for training and technology. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss our concerns further in Los Angeles or Sacramento at your convenience. We are certain our concerns are valid and appreciate your partnership in ensuring our residents and communities have the resources they need to uphold the highest levels of public safety. Yours in service, A.;-Qo Marcel Rodarte, Executive Director qLp nifer tez, resident MOTION BY SUPERVISOR HOLLY J. MITCHELL AGN. NO. September 24, 2024 On the November 5, 2024, California General Election ballot, voters will have the opportunity to vote on Proposition (Prop) 36, which, if passed, would change the California criminal code to allow certain drug possession and thefts under $950 to be charged as felonies, if a defendant has two prior drug or theft convictions. The Secretary of State's independent fiscal analysis estimates that passage of this proposition would result in costs ranging from several tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Moreover, the costs to Los Angeles County (County) are estimated to be in the tens of millions of dollars annually. Prop 36 would roll back the 2014 justice reform efforts of Prop 47, which changed some theft and drug crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. For example, shoplifting (stealing items worth $950 or less from a store) and drug possession generally became misdemeanors. Prop 36 seeks to roll back these reforms. As the governing body responsible for the welfare and administration of the County, the Board of Supervisors (Board) has a duty to advocate for policies that promote equity, public safety, and economic stability. Prop 36 poses a risk to these core values. This measure, while seemingly well-intentioned, undermines the social and economic interests of the County, disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, and threatens to reverse important gains in justice reform. The implementation of Prop 36 could place a significant financial burden on the MOTION SOLIS MITCHELL HAHN BARGER HORVATH MOTION BY SUPERVISOR HOLLY J. MITCHELL September 24, 2024 Page 2 County and its resources. Increased incarceration rates, higher court costs, and the enforcement of punitive measures will stretch an already thin County budget. These funds would be better used for housing, healthcare, and job training programs that actually reduce recidivism and crime. Prop 47 currently allows for the delivery of tens of millions of dollars in funding for services to County residents each year, including but not limited to, Reentry Intensive Case Management Services, Skills and Experience for the Careers of Tomorrow, Los Angeles Diversion, Outreach, and Opportunities for Recovery (City of Los Angeles) program, Project imPACT (City of Los Angeles), and many more. Prop 47 funding supports programs that provide housing services, mental health care, substance use disorder treatment, and job training for people who have been arrested or incarcerated, which makes our communities healthy and stable. Programs in the County have received more investments than anywhere else in the State. Over 10,000 individuals in the County have received Prop 47 funded services, and 90 percent of people who received diversion and reentry services funded by Prop 47 grants in the County from 2019 to 2023 were not convicted of any new crimes. To eliminate funding for these critical services through the passage of Prop 36 would have a devastating impact on the outcomes, infrastructure, and work that's already underway. Prop 36 risks harming low-income communities, immigrants, and other marginalized groups. Many of these individuals already face systemic challenges in accessing public services, employment opportunities, and affordable housing. Instead of addressing the root causes of crime, Prop 36 promotes punitive approaches that have been proven ineffective and costly. The Board must stay the course and champion alternatives to incarceration that focus on rehabilitation, restorative justice, and economic opportunity, rather than regressive policies that lead to further incarceration. THEREFORE MOVE that the Board of Supervisors take an official position to oppose Proposition 36, which would roll back 2014's Proposition 47 and add new penalties for drug use and a broad range of theft offenses, as well as add new sentencing enhancements that would apply to any type of crime, and result in a loss of funding for Los Angeles County programs that provide alternatives to incarceration and necessary supportive services to communities. MOTION BY SUPERVISOR HOLLY J. MITCHELL September 24, 2024 Page 3 (CT/NR)