Our editorial board asked candidates for Orange County District Attorney about their thoughts on Proposition 57. The measure, approved by more than 64% of voters in 2016, increased opportunities for state prisoners to be considered for parole and time credits. It also allows for judges, rather than prosecutors, to decide whether to try juveniles in adult court. Here are the responses of Pete Hardin, Mike Jacobs and Todd Spitzer. Click here for their views on Proposition 47.

Pete Hardin:

“I think that the decision to transfer kids to adult court rests appropriately with the court, as many prosecutors seek to transfer kids for the wrong reasons. Therefore, the ability to direct file on kids was ripe for abuse.

Proposition 57 also incentivized incarcerated individuals to better themselves while on the inside, by enabling them to earn a parole hearing. The recidivism rates among people released by the parole board are negligible – those on the parole board are very good at their jobs.

People exiting prison who have not sought to rehabilitate themselves are far more likely to offend.

It comes down to safety or retribution – and by incentivizing people to rehabilitate themselves we make our communities more safe upon their return, rather than simply handing out longer sentences.”

Todd Spitzer:

“When I was in the state Assembly, I chaired the Select Committee on Prison Operations and Construction. I was in the middle of all of the negotiations with the Three Judge Panel, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the appointed Receiver by the federal judge. I toured at least ten prisons with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and worked with him to develop a plan to reduce overcrowding.

I support incentivizing inmates to achieve early release credits when they engage in education and self-promotion efforts that increase the likelihood of success when released from prison. I helped shape and fashion the legislative policies behind Prop. 57 before it was even enacted. At the same time, release credits are not candy. They cannot simply be handed out without earning them or with a program and rationale for those credits behind the policy.

CDCR has failed to provide meaningful rehabilitative programs inside the prisons that lead to reduced recidivism. Fire Camps are where inmates earned the largest incentive credits and fire camp is a critical service here in California.

But sitting on a bunk and burning time without more is not making the inmate a better citizen for the future. There must be a connection between increased credits and inmate performance and achievement and without more it’s a disservice to the inmate and to society that is paying for incarceration and public safety services.”

Mike Jacobs:

“Proposition 57 was another ballot proposition approved by the voters in 2016. It allows the state prison parole board to release nonviolent prisoners once they have served the sentence on their primary criminal offense without being required to serve extra time for sentence enhancements.

It also requires the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to provide additional parole credits for good behavior to reduce sentences.

Related Articles

The proposition also changes previous California law and allows juvenile court judges to decide whether or not juveniles 14 and older should be prosecuted as adults.

Results following its implementation have been a mixed review. Since California law does not specify which crimes are considered violent, there has been extensive legislation proposed adding new felonies as to the list of what constitutes a ‘violent act.’

Although the goal of reducing the prison population over time is likely to be met, the question of whether it reduces recidivism is still unanswered. The cost benefits of reducing prisoners’ sentences have been offset by the requirement of more parole hearings and probation supervision.”