Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - #21Flores, Dora From: Bulmaro Vicente < boomer@chispaoc.org > Sent: Friday, September 13, 2024 3:19 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda Item 21: Oppose Resolution in Support of Prop 36 Attachments: Chispa Letter of Opposition Item 21 - 9.17.24 Santa Ana CC.docx.pdf Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Hello, Please find Chispa's Letter of Opposition to Item 21 In Solidarity, Boomer Policy and Political Director I Chispa e: boomer(@chispaoc.org c: 714-747.4271 1505 E 17th Street Suite 117 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Chispa is building a political home for young Latinxs in Orange County! Please consider making a donation to help us build our casita. Chispa is a project of Tides Advocacy, a 501c4 non-profit organization. Chispa � September 13, 2024 Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 ec omment(& Santa-ana. org Via Email RE: OPPOSE ITEM 21: Resolution in Support of Proposition 36 Dear Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, Chispa urges you to vote NO on Item 21, the resolution supporting Proposition 36. Approving this resolution will have harmful consequences for the City of Santa Ana's (City) most vulnerable communities and roll back years of progress in criminal justice reform. Proposition 36's punitive approach will not only lead to increased incarceration but will disproportionately affect communities of color and perpetuate racial inequities in our justice system. Proposition 36, which seeks to undo the gains of Proposition 47, is a misguided measure that emphasizes punishment over prevention. Proposition 47, passed by the voters in 2014, has saved the state over $800 million', reduced racial disparitieS2, and directed savings toward crucial services like drug treatment, mental health care, and homelessness prevention. The City has directly benefited from Proposition 47's programs, with organizations like Project Kinship and Neutral Ground providing essential re-entry services to help residents successfully reintegrate into the community after incarceration.' These services are critical to reducing recidivism and supporting public safety. ' Koseff, Alexei, Prop. 47's Impact on California's Criminal Justice System. KQED (2024), 2 Lofstrom, Magnus., Martin, Brandon., Raphael, Steven, Proposition 47's Impact on Racial Disparity in Criminal Justice Outcomes. Public Policy Institute of California (2020), hW2s://www.1212ic.or"/ s Courtney, Leigh., Reimal, Emily., Peterson, Brynce, Urban Institute: Evaluation of Orange County's Proposition 47 Grant -Related Services. Orange County Health Care Agency Report, Board of State and Community Corrections (2019), https://www.bscc.ca.goyLU-content/unloads/Orange-Coun -Health-Care-Agency.ndf By supporting Proposition 36, the City would be endorsing policies that take us back to the failed "tough on crime" era. Proposition 36 will reinstate harsh penalties, increase the prison population, and worsen racial disparities —without addressing the root causes of crime like poverty, mental health, and substance use.' In the City, we've seen firsthand the benefits of reform -focused policies, and we should be moving forward, not backward. Moreover, Proposition 36's provisions will be costly and ineffective. It will drain resources that could be better spent on education, housing, job training, and other community -based services that prevent crime and uplift vulnerable individuals.' At a time when California faces budget challenges, this proposition diverts funds from essential services, risking an increase in homelessness, recidivism, and economic instability. As a Sanctuary City, the City should continue its tradition of protecting immigrant and refugee residents by rejecting Proposition 36. The proposition would make more immigrants vulnerable to deportation and feed more of our community members into the detention and deportation pipeline. Proposition 47 reclassified six felony offenses to misdemeanors, including shoplifting and simple drug possession, funneling cost savings into public safety measures like drug and mental health treatment and victim services centers. Proposition 36 would not only undo these reforms but also impose new criminal penalties and sentencing enhancements, increasing the risk of deportation for immigrants and further destabilizing families.6 The City must reject Proposition 36 and focus on solutions that promote justice and rehabilitation. We urge you to vote NO on this resolution and continue to support evidence -based policies that foster safer, healthier communities. Sincerely, /", �1, 4 � Bulmaro Vicente Policy and Political Director CC: vamezcua(a.santa-ana.or PB acerra(a) Santa-ana. org TPhan&Santa-ana.org DPenaloza c&santa-ana.org JessieLopezkSanta-ana. org JRyanHernandez(a� Santa-ana. org bvazquez(c� Santa-ana. orb 'Prop 36: California's Ballot Proposition to Recall Prop 47 Explained. Vera Institute of Justice (2024), hW2s://www.vera.orLy/ealainers/prop-3 6-califomias-ballot-proposition-to-recall-prop-47-explained 'Title and Summary: Initiative 23-0017A1. California Attorney General (2023), h=s://oag`gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/Title%20and%20Summary%20%2823-0017A 1 %29.pdf 6 Vera Institute of Justice, Prop 36 Explained (2024). 2 Flores, Dora From: Michael Diaz <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 9:58 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. 1AIC•7ITMIDIM Costa Mesa, California 92627 Flores, Dora From: Bryan Zamudio <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:08 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Bryan Zamudio Santa Ana , California 92701 Flores, Dora From: Noel Palacios <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:10 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Noel Palacios Santa Ana, California 92702 Flores, Dora From: Veronica Palacios <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:10 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Veronica Palacios Santa Ana, California 92701 Flores, Dora From: Ivy Hang <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:15 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Ivy Hang Santa Ana, California 92704 10 Flores, Dora From: Christina Ruiz <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:21 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Christina Ruiz 11 Santa Ana, California 92704 12 Flores, Dora From: Cynthia Cambero <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:41 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Cynthia Cambero 13 Santa Ana , California 92706 14 Flores, Dora From: Ashley Vu <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:42 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Ashley Vu 15 Santa Ana, California 92704 16 Flores, Dora From: Tanya Navarro <tanya@chispaoc.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:46 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Tanya Navarro 17 Santa Ana , California 92707 18 Flores, Dora From: Rania Khater <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:46 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Rania Khater 19 Irvine, California 92602 20 Flores, Dora From: Walter Afable <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 10:49 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. DJF1[MUMP"ICT 21 Santa Ana, California 92705 22 Flores, Dora From: Rachel Pozos <rpozos@alianzatranslatinx.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 11:18 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Rachel Pozos Santa Ana, California 92701 Flores, Dora From: Chelsea Barona <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 11:18 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Chelsea Barona Santa Ana, California 92701 Flores, Dora From: Maria Ceja <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 11:33 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Maria Ceja Santa Ana , California 92706 Flores, Dora From: Katie Newman <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 11:47 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident and homeowner of Ward 4 in Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Katie Newman Santa Ana, California 92704 Flores, Dora From: Penelope Lopez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 11:50 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Penelope Lopez Anaheim, California 92804 Flores, Dora From: Sandra De Anda <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 12:26 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. 615 it'.P 1OTNTA i5E1 Santa Ana, California 92707 Flores, Dora From: Jennifer Vasquez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 12:34 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Jennifer Vasquez North Hollywood , California 91601 Flores, Dora From: Patricia Boe <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 12:46 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. As a gun violence prevention advocate, I know that public safety outcomes depend so much on support services and NOT on incarceration. Mass incarceration programs have never worked in the past and won't work now Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Patricia Boe SANTA ANA, California 92706 Flores, Dora From: Paola Ruiz <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 12:52 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Paola Ruiz Garden Grove, California 92843 Flores, Dora From: Karen Hernandez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 1:10 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, My name is Karen Hernandez, and as a person who works in Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. We all want to live in safe and stable neighborhoods. But instead of fixing homelessness, drug use, and crime, Prop 36 will make these issues worse by eliminating programs proven to turn people's lives around and wasting millions of dollars on mass incarceration instead. The big corporations, prison lobby, and right-wing interests behind Prop 36 are putting profit over the health of Santa Ana's and California's communities. Santanerxs deserve real solutions that prevent crime and improve everyone's quality of life —like affordable housing, good jobs, and access to mental health and drug treatment. Don't fall for Prop 36's false promises. Let's get on the right track by voting no on Prop 36 and investing our tax dollars in real solutions for health, safety, and stability instead. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Karen Hernandez Anaheim, California 92805 10 Flores, Dora From: Gilbert Sanchez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 1:26 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Gilbert Sanchez 11 Santa ana, California 92703 12 Flores, Dora From: Flor Tena <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 1:28 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Flor Tena 13 Santa Ana , California 92706 14 Flores, Dora From: Maria Valencia <mariaevalencia@ymail.com> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 1:38 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Maria Valencia 15 Santa Ana , California 92701 16 Flores, Dora From: Susana Ventura <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 1:41 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Susana Ventura 17 Santa Ana, California 92704 18 Flores, Dora From: Johanna Perez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 1:44 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Johanna Perez 19 ANAHEIM, California 92805 20 Flores, Dora From: Evelyn Garcia <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 2:12 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Evelyn Garcia 21 ANAHEIM, California 92801 22 Flores, Dora From: Joseph Saladino <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 2:20 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Joseph Saladino Santa Ana, California 92706 Flores, Dora From: Lauren Heidbrink <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 2:43 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Lauren Heidbrink Santa ana, California 92705 Flores, Dora From: Chetkagnchana Keo <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 4:15 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Chetkagnchana Keo Santa Ana , California 92701 Flores, Dora From: Pat Davis <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 5:02 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Orange County and a frequent shopper in Santa Ana, our county seat, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. As a leader in our county, your approval city's approval of such is also NOT a good example for other cities in our county. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Pat Davis Anaheim, California 92801 Flores, Dora From: Jennifer Lopez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 5:39 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Jennifer Lopez Garden Grove , California 92843 Flores, Dora From: Mia Verdin <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 5:42 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Mia Verdin Santa Ana, California 92705 Flores, Dora From: Kelli Corona <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 7:02 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Kelli Corona Santa Ana , California 92701 10 Flores, Dora From: Roxzel Soto <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 7:55 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Roxzel Soto 11 Santa ana, California 92705 12 Flores, Dora From: Alexis Serrato <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 8:06 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Alexis Serrato 13 Santa Ana, California 92703 14 Flores, Dora From: Bulmaro Vicente < boomer@chispaoc.org > Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 9:25 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Bulmaro Vicente 15 Santa Ana , California 92707 16 Flores, Dora From: Felicity Figueroa < noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 12:35 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Felicity Figueroa 17 Irvine, California 92604 18 Flores, Dora From: Tiffany Bakthy <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 1:11 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Tiffany Bakthy 19 Santa Ana , California 92704 20 Flores, Dora From: Antares Rahman <arahman@conncoll.edu> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 2:08 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Antares Rahman 21 Santa Ana, California 92706 22 Flores, Dora From: Grecia Romero <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 6:14 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Grecia Romero 23 Santa Ana , California 92706 24 Flores, Dora From: Karen Hernandez < Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 9:15 PM To: eComment Cc: Amezcua, Valerie; Bacerra, Phil; Phan, Thai; Penaloza, David; Lopez, Jessie; Hernandez, Johnathan; Vazquez, Benjamin Subject: Agenda Item 21: Oppose Resolution in Support of Prop 36 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. September 16, 2024 Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 ecomment(o)-santa-ana.org Via Email RE: OPPOSE ITEM 21: Resolution in Support of Proposition 36 Dear Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, Decarcerate Orange County (formerly Transforming Justice Orange County) urges you to vote NO on Item 21, the resolution supporting Proposition 36. Decarcerate Orange County is committed to reimagining justice, safety, and accountability, through ending individual, collective, and systemic oppression by carceral systems. Our work is centered around righting the social wrongs carried out by the carceral system through social -systemic transformation, while at the same time working to meet the immediate needs of incarcerated and system -impacted individuals and communities. We do this by working locally to build alternatives through community engagement and mobilization; public education; public advocacy; and leadership development. We, along with our community members, strongly believe that approving this resolution will have harmful consequences for the City of Santa Ana's (City) most vulnerable communities and roll back years of progress in criminal justice reform. Proposition 36's punitive approach will not only lead to increased incarceration but will disproportionately affect communities of color and perpetuate racial inequities in our justice system. Proposition 36, which seeks to undo the gains of Proposition 47, is a misguided measure that emphasizes punishment over prevention. Proposition 47, passed by the voters in 2014, has saved the state over $800 million, reduced racial disparities, and directed savings toward crucial services like drug treatment, mental health care, and homelessness prevention. The City has directly benefited from Proposition 47's programs, with organizations like Project Kinship and Neutral Ground providing essential re-entry services to help residents successfully reintegrate into the community after incarceration. These services are critical to reducing recidivism and supporting public safety. By supporting Proposition 36, the City would be endorsing policies that take us back to the failed "tough on crime" era. Proposition 36 will reinstate harsh penalties, increase the prison population, and worsen racial disparities —without addressing the root causes of crime like poverty, mental health, and substance use. In the City, we've seen firsthand the benefits of reform -focused policies, and we should be moving forward, not backward. Moreover, Proposition 36's provisions will be costly and ineffective. It will drain resources that could be better spent on education, housing, job training, and other community -based services that prevent crime and uplift vulnerable individuals. At a time when California faces budget challenges, this proposition diverts funds from essential services, risking an increase in homelessness, recidivism, and economic instability. Additionally, we welcome you to read California Budget and Policy Center's report on Why Prop. 36 Fails Californians: Escalatina Costs. Deeaenina Disaarities. and Ineffective Solutions. As a Sanctuary City, the City should continue its tradition of protecting immigrant and refugee residents by rejecting Proposition 36. The proposition would make more immigrants vulnerable to deportation and feed more of our community members into the detention and deportation pipeline. Proposition 47 reclassified six felony offenses to misdemeanors, including shoplifting and simple drug possession, funneling cost savings into public safety measures like drug and mental health treatment and victim services centers. Proposition 36 would not only undo these reforms but also impose new criminal penalties and sentencing enhancements, increasing the risk of deportation for immigrants and further destabilizing families. The City must reject Proposition 36 and focus on solutions that promote justice and rehabilitation. We urge you to vote NO on this resolution and continue to support evidence -based policies that foster safer, healthier communities. Sincerely, Karen G. Hernandez Member, Decarcerate Orange County CC: vamezcua&santa-ana.or PBacerra(c)-santa-ana.orq TPhan _santa-ana.orq DPenaloza(o)-santa-ana.orq JessieLopez(o-)-santa-ana.orq JRyan Hernandez(o)-santa-ana.orq bvazq uez(o)-santa-ana.orq Flores, Dora From: OC Rapid Response Network <info@ocrapidresponse.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 10:52 AM To: eComment Cc: Amezcua, Valerie; Bacerra, Phil; Phan, Thai; Penaloza, David; Lopez, Jessie; Hernandez, Johnathan; Vazquez, Benjamin Subject: RE: Agenda Item 21 - Opposition to Prop 36 Attachments: Prop 36 Opposition Letter .docx.pdf Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Good morning Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, I have attached my organization's opposition letter to the Prop 36 resolution. Best, Sandra De Anda Network Coordinator Pronouns: (She/Her/Hers) Orange County Rapid Response Network 3 September 17th, 2024 Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 ecommentna ,santa-ana. org Via Email RE: OPPOSE ITEM 21: Resolution in Support of Proposition 36 Dear Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, The Orange County Rapid Response Network urges you to vote NO on Item 21, the resolution supporting Proposition 36. Approving this resolution will have harmful consequences for the City of Santa Ana's (City) most vulnerable communities and roll back years of progress in criminal justice reform. Proposition 36's punitive approach will not only lead to increased incarceration but will disproportionately affect communities of color and perpetuate racial inequities in our justice system. Proposition 36, which seeks to undo the gains of Proposition 47, is a misguided measure that emphasizes punishment over prevention. Proposition 47, passed by the voters in 2014, has saved the state over $800 million', reduced racial disparities2, and directed savings toward crucial services like drug treatment, mental health care, and homelessness prevention. The City has directly benefited from Proposition 47's programs, with organizations like Project Kinship and Neutral Ground providing essential re-entry services to help residents successfully reintegrate into the community after incarceration.' These services are critical to reducing recidivism and supporting public safety. ' Koseff, Alexei, Prop. 47's Impact on California's Criminal Justice System. KQED (2024), hUs://www.kqed.org/news/I1975692/prop-47s-impact-on-califomias-criminal-justice-system 2 Lofstrom, Magnus., Martin, Brandon., Raphael, Steven, Proposition 47's Impact on Racial Disparity in Criminal Justice Outcomes. Public Policy Institute of California (2020), https://www.ppic. ore/publication/prol2osition-47 s-impact-on-racial-disparity-in-criminal-justice-outcomes/ s Courtney, Leigh., Reimal, Emily., Peterson, Brynce, Urban Institute: Evaluation of Orange County's Proposition 47 Grant -Related Services. Orange County Health Care Agency Report, Board of State and Community Corrections (2019), https://www.bscc.ca.goy/wp-content/uploads/Orange-County-Health-Care-Agency.pdf By supporting Proposition 36, the City would be endorsing policies that take us back to the failed "tough on crime" era. Proposition 36 will reinstate harsh penalties, increase the prison population, and worsen racial disparities —without addressing the root causes of crime like poverty, mental health, and substance use.' In the City, we've seen firsthand the benefits of reform -focused policies, and we should be moving forward, not backward. Moreover, Proposition 36's provisions will be costly and ineffective. It will drain resources that could be better spent on education, housing, job training, and other community -based services that prevent crime and uplift vulnerable individuals.' At a time when California faces budget challenges, this proposition diverts funds from essential services, risking an increase in homelessness, recidivism, and economic instability. As a Sanctuary City, the City should continue its tradition of protecting immigrant and refugee residents by rejecting Proposition 36. The proposition would make more immigrants vulnerable to deportation and feed more of our community members into the detention and deportation pipeline. Proposition 47 reclassified six felony offenses to misdemeanors, including shoplifting and simple drug possession, funneling cost savings into public safety measures like drug and mental health treatment and victim services centers. Proposition 36 would not only undo these reforms but also impose new criminal penalties and sentencing enhancements, increasing the risk of deportation for immigrants and further destabilizing families.6 The City must reject Proposition 36 and focus on solutions that promote justice and rehabilitation. We urge you to vote NO on this resolution and continue to support evidence -based policies that foster safer, healthier communities. Sincerely, Sandra De Anda Network Coordinator 4 Prop 36: California's Ballot Proposition to Recall Prop 47 Explained. Vera Institute of Justice (2024), http s: //www.vera. org/explainers/prop-3 6-califomias-ballot-1ropo sition-to-recall-prop-47-explained s Title and Summary: Initiative 23-0017A1. California Attorney General (2023), htips://oag.ca.2ov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/Title%20and%20Summary%20%2823-0017A 1 %29.pdf 6 Vera Institute of Justice, Prop 36 Explained (2024). Ibarra, Evelyn From: Anita Mercado <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 12:16 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution wnen opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Anita Mercado Ibarra, Evelyn From: Ramon Campos <ramon@undergroundgrit.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 12:32 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda Item 21: A Resolution in Support of Proposition 36 Attachments: Letter Of Opposition Agenda Item 21_ A Resolution in Support of Proposition 36.docx-2.pdf Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Hello, I am submitting this for today's City Council meeting. Thank you Ramon Campos I Case Manager Underground GRIT 1914 West Orangewood Avenue, Suite 101 Orange Ca, 92868 C: 714-867-3338 www.undergroundgrit.org "The information contained in this electronic message is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the content of this information is strictly prohibited." "If you have received this copy in error, immediately notify the sender by e-mail and delete the information from your system." (Welfare and Institutions Code, Section 5328) 1 9/1/2024 Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 ecommentaa .santa-ana. org Via Email RE: OPPOSE ITEM 21: Resolution in Support of Proposition 36 Dear Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, Underground GRIT promotes change in prisons, jails, and juvenile institutions through innovative in -reach and transformative re-entry services. Underground GRIT provides a voice to men, women, and youth who have been system impacted and who are breaking cycles perpetuated by trauma. Through our personal and professional experiences, we recognize the gaps in our system, and the needs of our most vulnerable individuals and families. we realize the importance of working with each member to create independent, empowering care solutions that fits their unique needs. Underground GRIT urges you to vote NO on Item 21, the resolution supporting Proposition 36. Approving this resolution will have harmful consequences for the City of Santa Ana's (City) most vulnerable communities and roll back years of progress in criminal justice reform. Proposition 36's punitive approach will not only lead to increased incarceration but will disproportionately affect communities of color and perpetuate racial inequities in our justice system. Proposition 36, which seeks to undo the gains of Proposition 47, is a misguided measure that emphasizes punishment over prevention. Proposition 47, passed by the voters in 2014, has saved the state over $800 million', reduced racial disparities2, and directed savings toward crucial services like drug treatment, mental health care, and homelessness prevention. The City has directly benefited from Proposition 47's programs, with organizations like Project Kinship and Neutral Ground providing essential re-entry services to help residents successfully reintegrate 1 Koseff, Alexei, Prop. 47's Impact on California's Criminal Justice System. KQED (2024), https://www.kQed.org/news/11975692/prob-47s-impact-on-californias-criminal justice -system 2 Lofstrom, Magnus., Martin, Brandon., Raphael, Steven, Proposition 47's Impact on Racial Disparity in Criminal Justice Outcomes. Public Policy Institute of California (2020), https://www.ppic.or�,Y/publication/proposition-47s-impact-on-racial-disparity-in-criminal justice -outcomes/ 1914 W. Orangewood Ave Suite 101, Orange, CA 92$68 (714) 345- 2299 i nfo a@u ndergrou ndgrit. org www.undergroundgrit.org GROWING DAILY REGAINING INDEPENDENCE. INVESTING IN FUTURE GENERATIONS. TRANSFORMING COMMUNITY into the community after incarceration.' These services are critical to reducing recidivism and supporting public safety. By supporting Proposition 36, the City would be endorsing policies that take us back to the failed "tough on crime" era. Proposition 36 will reinstate harsh penalties, increase the prison population, and worsen racial disparities without addressing the root causes of crime like poverty, mental health, and substance use.' In the City, we've seen firsthand the benefits of reform -focused policies, and we should be moving forward, not backward. Moreover, Proposition 36's provisions will be costly and ineffective. It will drain resources that could be better spent on education, housing, job training, and other community -based services that prevent crime and uplift vulnerable individuals.' At a time when California faces budget challenges, this proposition diverts funds from essential services, risking an increase in homelessness, recidivism, and economic instability. As a Sanctuary City, the City should continue its tradition of protecting immigrant and refugee residents by rejecting Proposition 36. The proposition would make more immigrants vulnerable to deportation and feed more of our community members into the detention and deportation pipeline. Proposition 47 reclassified six felony offenses to misdemeanors, including shoplifting and simple drug possession, funneling cost savings into public safety measures like drug and mental health treatment and victim services centers. Proposition 36 would not only undo these reforms but also impose new criminal penalties and sentencing enhancements, increasing the risk of deportation for immigrants and further destabilizing families.6 The City must reject Proposition 36 and focus on solutions that promote justice and rehabilitation. We urge you to vote NO on this resolution and continue to support evidence -based policies that foster safer, healthier communities. Sincerely, 3 Courtney, Leigh., Reimal, Emily., Peterson, Brynce, Urban Institute: Evaluation of Orange County's Proposition 47 Grant -Related Services. Orange County Health Care Agency Report, Board of State and Community Corrections (2019), https://www.bscc.ca.�,yov/wp-content/uploads/Orange-County-Health-Care-Agency 4 Prop 36: California's Ballot Proposition to Recall Prop 47 Explained. Vera Institute of Justice (2024), h=s://www.vera.or�,Y/explainers/prop-3 6-califomias-ballot-proposition-to-recall-prop-47-explained s Title and Summary: Initiative 23 -0017A 1. California Attorney General (2023), https://�oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/Vdfs/Title%20and%2OSummarv%20%2823-0017A 1 %29.adf 6 Vera Institute of Justice, Prop 36 Explained (2024). 1914 W. Orangewood Ave Suite 101, Orange, CA 92$68 (714) 345- 2299 i nfo a@u ndergrou ndgrit. org www.undergroundgrit.org GROWING DAILY REGAINING INDEPENDENCE. INVESTING IN FUTURE GENERATIONS. TRANSFORMING COMMUNITY z '�V� a4vs"'� Ramon Campos Program Coordinator Underground GRIT CC: vamezcuaa santa-ana. or PB acerrg& santa-ana. org TPhanksanta-ana.org DPenaloza2santa-ana. org Jessi&obeza santa-ana. org JRvanHernandeza santa-ana. org bvazg uezna ,santa-ana. org 1914 W. Orangewood Ave Suite 101, Orange, CA 92$68 (714) 345- 2299 i nfo a@u ndergrou ndgrit. org www.undergroundgrit.org GROWING DAILY REGAINING INDEPENDENCE. INVESTING IN FUTURE GENERATIONS. TRANSFORMING COMMUNITY Ibarra, Evelyn From: Ana Charco <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 2:08 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution wnen opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Ana Charco Ibarra, Evelyn From: Arcelia Gutierrez <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 2:13 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution wnen opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Sincerely, Arcelia Gutierrez Arcelia Gutierrez Ibarra, Evelyn From: Jacob Reisberg <JReisberg@aclusocal.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 2:14 PM To: eComment Cc: Jessica Farris Subject: Agenda Item 21 Attachments: Santa Ana City Council Prop 36 Opposition Comment.9.17.24.pdf Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Please find attached a comment opposing Agenda Item 21. Sincerely, Jacob Jacob Reisberg, Senior Policy Counsel ACLU of Southern California 1313 W 8t" Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.977.5262 (o) Pronouns: he/him/his aclusocal .org 11 facebook 11 twitter 11 blog ACLU SoCal : STAND FOR JUSTICE THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. 1 September 17, 2024 Via e-mail Members of the Santa Ana City Council Re: Agenda Item 21- Request that the City Council REJECT the resolution supporting Proposition 36 Honorable Members of the Santa Ana City Council: ACLU of Southern California urges you to oppose the resolution to support Proposition 36, the mass incarceration measure that will appear on the California Ballot in November. Proposition 36 is wrong for the city of Santa Ana, and harmful to the state of California. It is an extreme measure that will divert funds from crime victims, schools, and drug treatment programs straight to California prisons. Disguised as a retail theft measure, the prison spending initiative would impose draconian criminal penalties, including possible prison time, for low-level drug - related offenses — returning California to an era of costly mass incarceration and dangerously overcrowded prisons. Perhaps most importantly, Proposition 36 will not solve the problem it claims to address. "Prop. 36 is not the solution; it's a step backward," according to Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen. As this Vera Institute analysis explains, Proposition 36 will roll back Proposition 47, which in 10 years has been wildly successful by any measure at both reducing incarceration while also reducing crime. Proposition 36 will be a major step backwards. For all these reasons and more, Proposition 36 is opposed by Governor Newsom, the California Democratic Party, League of Women Voters, Speaker Robert Rivas, Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire, California Nurses Association, California Teachers Association, National Union of Healthcare Workers, Disability Rights California, SEIU, and Smart Justice CA. Our communities are facing very real challenges that deserve real solutions. But Proposition 36 is not that solution. Sincerely, Jacob Reisberg Senior Policy Counsel Flores, Dora From: Greg Camphire <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 5:13 PM To: eComment Subject: Oppose Proposition 36: Santa Ana Needs Crime Prevention & Rehabilitation Instead of Further Punishment Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. Greg Camphire Santa Ana, California 92701 Alcala, Abigail From: Alexander Fitch <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 2:37 PIVI To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Afteifl.Win,]Ifis eauffl orOnaW fug-mn onutsde o'Cu y o�'Sanm Ana. Use can fion when opelfing aflachmews or finks. Sainta Ana City CouncH, Dear Mayor Arnezcua and the Sainta Ana City CouncH, As a iresident of Sainta Ana, l urge you to vote NO on the Iproposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would Ihave negative consequences for Sainta Ana's imost Wlineirable iresidents and undo years of Iprogiress lin crirnllinall justice ireforim. This imeasuire, wNich emphasizes Ipunlislhirnent, would lead to Ihliglheir Iincairceiration rates, especially affecting commu6ifies of color, worse6ling iraciall Iinequlities. Proposition 47, Ipassed lin 2014, Ihas saved over $800 iml!Hioin and reduced iraciall disparities Iby re61recting funds to essent4l services Illilke imeintall IheaIltlh care and Ihornellessiness prevention. Pirogiraims such as Project IKiinsNlp and Neutrall Ground Ihave Ihellped iresidents r6lintegirate post lincairceiration, ireducing recidivism and Iprornoting Ipulbllic safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on &Iime" Ipollicies, lIncreasing the Iprlison Ipopullation and iraciall disparities Without addressing root causes of crime Illilke poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert crliticall funds from education, housing, and job tral161ing, worse6ling Ihornellessiness and ecoinornllc linstalbillity lin the City. As a sanctuary city, Sainta Ana imust protect its lImmigiraint and refugee Ipopullations. Proposition 36 could lIncrease deportations and fair Hy separations, disproportionat6ly hairming lImmigiraint commu6ifies. Instead of supporting t1his costly and lIneffective imeasuire, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and irelhalbilktation. PlIease vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence based solutions for safer, IheaIltlhlieir commu6ifies. Nso Ikeep llin immind that imany city councH caimpaigns currenfly going on seek to Iput Ipeople on the ir9ight Ipatlh, as quoted, and this is inot done Iby sticking theim llin jaH and arresting theim without the possibifity of irelhabHktafion. The Ipeople acre aWays watclNling! Nexandeir Fitch aIlexfitclhdesigin@gimallV. Ana , CaIlkfornia 92706 Alcala, Abigail From: Vanessa Salgado <noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 3:24 PM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Afteifl.Win,]Ifis eauffl orOnaW fug-mn onutsde o'Cu y o�'Sanm Ana. Use can fion when opelfing aflachmews or finks. Sainta Ana City CouncH, Dear Mayor Arnezcua and the Sainta Ana City CouncH, As a iresident of Sainta Ana, l urge you to vote NO on the Iproposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would Ihave negative consequences for Sainta Ana's imost Wlineirable iresidents and undo years of Iprogiress lin crirnllinall justice ireforim. This imeasuire, wNich emphasizes Ipunlislhirnent, would lead to Ihliglheir Iincairceiration rates, especially affecting commu6ifies of color, worse6ling iraciall Iinequlities. Proposition 47, Ipassed lin 2014, Ihas saved over $800 iml!Hioin and reduced iraciall disparities Iby re61recting funds to essent4l services Illilke imeintall IheaIltlh care and Ihornellessiness prevention. Programs such as Project IKiinsNlp and Neutrall Ground Ihave Ihellped iresidents r6lintegirate post lincairceiration, ireducing recidivism and Iprornoting Ipulbllic safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on &Iime" Ipollicies, lIncreasing the Iprlison Ipopullation and iraciall disparities Without addressing root causes of crime Illilke poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert crliticall funds from education, housing, and job tral161ing, worse6ling Ihornellessiness and ecoinornllc linstalbillity lin the City. As a sanctuary city, Sainta Ana imust protect its lImmigiraint and refugee Ipopullations. Proposition 36 could lIncrease deportations and fair Hy separations, disproportionat6ly hairming lImmigiraint commu6ifies. Instead of supporting t1his costly and lIneffective imeasuire, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and irelhalbilktation. PlIease vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence based solutions for safer, IheaIltlhlieir commu6ifies. Vanessa Salgado L.alke Forest, Cdhifornia 92630 Flores, Dora From: Ronaldo Villeda < Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 5:32 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda Item 21: Oppose Resolution in Support of Prop 36 Attachments: Letter of Opposition on Prop 36.pdf Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Ronaldo Villeda Executive Director Hoops4Justice Pronouns: He/his September 17, 2024 Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 ecomment@santa-ana.org Via Email RE: OPPOSE ITEM 21: Resolution in Support of Proposition 36 Dear Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, Hoops4Justice urges you to vote NO on Item 21, the resolution supporting Proposition 36. Approving this resolution will have harmful consequences for the City of Santa Ana's most vulnerable communities and roll back years of progress in criminal justice reform. Proposition 36's punitive approach will not only lead to increased incarceration but will disproportionately affect communities of color and perpetuate racial inequities in our justice system. Proposition 36, which seeks to undo the gains of Proposition 47, is a misguided measure that emphasizes punishment over prevention. Proposition 47, passed by the voters in 2014, has saved the state over $800 million, reduced racial disparities, and directed savings toward crucial services like drug treatment, mental health care, and homelessness prevention. The City has directly benefited from Proposition 47's programs, with organizations like Project Kinship and Neutral Ground providing essential re-entry services to help residents successfully reintegrate into the community after incarceration. These services are critical to reducing recidivism and supporting public safety. By supporting Proposition 36, the City would be endorsing policies that take us back to the failed "tough on crime" era. Proposition 36 will reinstate harsh penalties, increase the prison population, and worsen racial disparities —without addressing the root causes of crime like poverty, mental health, and substance use. In Santa Ana, we've seen firsthand the benefits of reform -focused policies, and we should be moving forward, not backward. Moreover, Proposition 36's provisions will be costly and ineffective. It will drain resources that could be better spent on education, housing, job training, and other community -based services that prevent crime and uplift vulnerable individuals. At a time when California faces budget challenges, this proposition diverts funds from essential services, risking an increase in homelessness, recidivism, and economic instability. As a Sanctuary City, Santa Ana should continue its tradition of protecting immigrant and refugee residents by rejecting Proposition 36. The proposition would make more immigrants vulnerable to deportation and feed more of our community members into the detention and deportation pipeline. Proposition 47 reclassified six felony offenses to misdemeanors, including shoplifting Flores, Dora From: Nathan Aguayo < Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 6:26 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda item 21 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. I am Nathan Aguayo am from the I am 16 I am memeber from under ground grit a non profit organization and I am here opsing item agenda 21 As country we been fighting the war against drugs since the late 80 almost 40 year of policy that over police and over criminalize our community of color and we haven't seen a end to use of drugs in our community I urge the city council to vote against item 21 and to vote against prop 36 thank you for time city council 4 Flores, Dora From: Jesus Cuenca < Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 6:35 PM To: eComment Subject: Item agenda 21 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Hello my name is Jesus cuenca ima member of under ground grit and I'm here today to tell a guys to say no to prop 36 Flores, Dora From: aimee gamez < Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 6:41 PM To: eComment Subject: agenda item 21 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. hello my name is Aimee Gamez, and i am a formerly incarcerated youth. i am a member of Underground GRIT a program that has helped me have a second chance at life. i am currently in college and learning to be a leader in my community. i am here to ask the council to vote no on line item 21 and vote no to prop 36. thank you. Flores, Dora From: Jasmin Galiote < Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 6:41 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda item 21 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Hello my name is Jasmin Galiote I am a resident of Santa Ana I am a formally incarcerated youth I am a member of underground grit I ask that you vote no on agenda item 21. Flores, Dora From: Maleikaii Alforque < Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 6:42 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda item 21 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. My name is Malei'kaii Alforque, I am a formerly incarcerated member of Underground Grit which is a non profit, and re-entry program. Underground Grit has helped me by overcoming the obstacles I never thought I would even see myself in, overcoming my drug addiction, and giving me amazing opportunities in life. The reason I am here today is because I am against prop 36. One of the reasons I say no to prop 36 is because Increasing prison sentences may reduce savings for mental health and drug treatment programs, k-12 schools, and crime victims. Not only that but prop 36 will only lead to more crime. Reigniting the failed war on drugs makes simple drug possession a felony and wastes billions of dollars on prisons, while slashing crucial funding for victims, crime prevention treatment, and rehabilitation. So I hope you vote NO to Agenda item 21. Thank you. Flores, Dora From: Ramon Campos <ramon@undergroundgrit.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 7:05 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda item 21 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Hood evening, My name is Ramon Campos. I am a resident of Santa Ana and a staff member of Underground GRIT. Underground GRIT is a reentry service program that works with currently incarcerated people, formerly incarcerated people, foster care youth, and systems impacted people from across Orange County including Santa Ana. We are here to defend prop 47 and to oppose agenda item 21. Prop 47 has successfully reduced Californias reliance on harmful and costly incarceration while providing critical resources to those that need them most. Today fewer Californians cycle through jails and prisons for low level offenses. This keeps families and communities intact while saving the state and counties nearly $1 billion since 2014. The money that has been saved in turn has funded k-12 public schools, housing programs, drug treatment programs, and funds organizations like Project Kinship and Neutral grounds, organizations who's funding will be slashed if prop 36 were to pass. I hope the council truly believes in providing second chances and truly believes that all people are capable of developing into their best selves. I ask the council to vote no on agenda item 21 and oppose prop 36. Thank you. Ramon Campos I Case Manager Underground GRIT 1914 West Orangewood Avenue, Suite 101 Orange Ca, 92868 C: 714-867-3338 www.under rg ound ritg.org o 0 "The information contained in this electronic message is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the content of this information is strictly prohibited." "If you have received this copy in error, immediately notify the sender by e-mail and delete the information from your system." (Welfare and Institutions Code, Section 5328) Flores, Dora From: Robert Andaluz < noreply@adv.actionnetwork.org > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2024 12:09 AM To: eComment Subject: Focus on Prevention & Rehabilitation, Not Punishment! Oppose Proposition 36! Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Santa Ana City Council, Dear Mayor Amezcua and the Santa Ana City Council, As a resident of Santa Ana, I urge you to vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36. Supporting Proposition 36 would have negative consequences for Santa Ana's most vulnerable residents and undo years of progress in criminal justice reform. This measure, which emphasizes punishment, would lead to higher incarceration rates, especially affecting communities of color, worsening racial inequities. Proposition 47, passed in 2014, has saved over $800 million and reduced racial disparities by redirecting funds to essential services like mental health care and homelessness prevention. Programs such as Project Kinship and Neutral Ground have helped residents reintegrate post -incarceration, reducing recidivism and promoting public safety. Endorsing Proposition 36 would return us to the failed "tough on crime" policies, increasing the prison population and racial disparities without addressing root causes of crime like poverty and substance use. Proposition 36 would also divert critical funds from education, housing, and job training, worsening homelessness and economic instability in the City. As a sanctuary city, Santa Ana must protect its immigrant and refugee populations. Proposition 36 could increase deportations and family separations, disproportionately harming immigrant communities. Instead of supporting this costly and ineffective measure, we urge the City to continue focusing on justice and rehabilitation. Please vote NO on the proposed resolution supporting Proposition 36 and support evidence -based solutions for safer, healthier communities. :no XffiriFIIM 10 Santa Ana , California 92706 11 Flores, Dora From: Hairo Cortes <hairo@chispaoc.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 10:19 PM To: steven@projectkinship.org Cc: Ramon Campos; Bulmaro Vicente; Sandra Esmeralda De Anda; !City Clerk; Karen Hernandez Subject: Re: Prop 36 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. I expect a response On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 10:18 PM Hairo Cortes <hairogchispaoc.org> wrote: Hi Steve, I would like to clarify Project Kinship's Position on Prop 36 and Prop 47. I think a lot of of our community is concerned regarding Mayor Amezua's description of Project Kinship's pro- criminalation position. In Solidarity Hairo Cortes Executive Director I Chispa e: hairoPchispaoc.org c: 657.272.3475 t: Pcosmic mijo 1505 E 1.7th Street, Suite 117 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Chispa is building a political home for Latinx Youth in Orange County! Please consider making a small donation to help us build our casita. Chispa is a project of Tides Advocacy, a 501(c)4 non-profit organization. Chispa Confidentiality Notice: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely.for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the communication. E-mail: hairo(&chispaoc.org