In the past week, two California cities - Riverside and San Bernardino - have repealed most of their "Crime-Free Multi-Housing" programs, which were designed to improve tenants' safety but have been criticized for destabilizing families, especially in low-income communities of color.

The program helps landlords choose better landscaping and lighting, and promotes neighborhood watch groups. City of San Bernardino Public Information Officer Jeff Kraus said it also established rules against criminal activity.

"Tenants were required to sign an addendum to the lease that, if there was illegal activity by either the tenant or the guests, that the tenants could be evicted," said Kraus. "And that component is where some of the controversy lies."

There have been cases in other cities where people were evicted even when the alleged crime took place elsewhere, or when there was no arrest or conviction.

Families have been uprooted when one member ran afoul of the law. And domestic violence survivors have been evicted after calling police.

San Bernardino will still help apartment complexes harden their property against crime, but agreed to scrap large parts of the Crime-Free Multi-Housing program as part of a settlement in a case over delays in the city's adoption of a state-mandated housing element.

Attorney Anthony Kim is a staff attorney with Inland Counties Legal Services, which brought the suit. He noted that the program required landlords to do a universal background check on all tenants.

"It's already pretty difficult for individuals to reintegrate themselves into society after getting out of jail," said Kim. "And everyone deserves housing, and having a record should not be any sort of precluding element to that."

A number of people testified against the program at the Riverside City Council meeting, including Desiree Sanchez - a member of the Inland Region Housing Justice Coalition and senior policy advocate with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California.

"The removal of the program will ensure the city does not increase homelessness by putting an end to illegal evictions," said Sanchez. "And that's strengthening the public safety and economy of the City of Riverside."

The City of Hesperia recently withdrew its program after a federal lawsuit said it discriminated against Black and Latino renters.





get more stories like this via email

New federal data show aggravated assaults are up in Kentucky by 7.2%, but other types of violent crime have gone down.

Overall, violent crime in Kentucky remains much lower compared to the nation as a whole, said Ashley Spalding, research director at the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy.

"When you compare 2023 to that 2021 peak for violent crime," she said, "we see it's come down significantly since then."

A 2022 Bureau of Justice Statistics survey found younger people and people with lower incomes are far more likely to report being the victim of a violent crime than are higher-income people.

Spalding said laws such as House Bill 5, which lawmakers passed earlier this year, will drive up the number of people in the state's prisons and jails without addressing the root cause of crime.

"High rates of incarceration in communities are associated with higher rates of overdose deaths," she said. "The more that states make harsher criminal penalties for opioids like fentanyl, can put communities more at risk."

She said the policies in the bill are expected to cost the state an estimated $1 billion over the next decade. That money, she contended, could go toward health care, shelters and other resources that help communities.

"It would be the wrong direction for Kentucky to pass more harmful, harsh, regressive criminal legal system policies in 2025," she said.

According to the Pew Research Center, at least 60% of U.S. adults have said they believe there is more crime nationally than there was the year before, despite an ongoing downward trend in crime rates.

Hundreds of people from across Michigan gathered in Lansing this week, urging House Speaker Joe Tate, D-Detroit and Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks, D-Grand Rapids, to advance the Second Look Sentencing Act to improve prison safety. The legislation allows people serving long sentences to have their cases reviewed for possible sentence reductions based on factors such as rehabilitation. The crowd included formerly incarcerated people who've turned their lives around and their families, victims of crime, prison staff and lawmakers.

Chuck Warpehoski, projects director with Michigan Collaborative to End Mass Incarceration, warned there is a prison staffing crisis in Michigan.

"We're seeing it in nursing, we're seeing it in child care, we're seeing it on the shop floor, we're seeing it with baristas. When it happens in a prison and people are forced to work mandatory double shifts, they're tired, they're not seeing their family -- it creates unsafe conditions for everyone," he said.

Warpehoski added they're urging lawmakers to pass the Second Look Act during this lame-duck session before they go home for the holidays.

He also pointed out the high costs of incarcerating people -- up to $48,000 per year, per person. He added that with the failed pay incentives to attract more staff, he believes it's clear a different solution is needed. Warpehoski shared some of the feedback they received.

"A lot of legislators and their staff said, hey, this makes sense -- and so it was a really, really positive response from not every office, but from a large number of offices we had meetings with," he continued.

Warpehoski stressed that Second Look legislation focuses on fairness by offering the possibility of release for individuals who have rehabilitated and are no longer a threat to society.

Advocates of criminal-justice reform warn the passage of Proposition 36 will mean a sharp reduction in funds to anti-crime initiatives. The measure raises the penalties for certain drug and theft crimes, making more of them felonies that carry jail time.

Will Matthews, a spokesperson for Californians for Safety and Justice, a nonprofit public-safety advocacy organization, said voters were fed false promises that Prop. 36 would reduce property crime by forcing more people to choose between treatment and incarceration.

"It really was a disingenuous initiative that now will result in billions of dollars being diverted away from treating addiction, treating mental illness, and helping folks coming home from a period of incarceration," he said.

Prop. 36 repeals parts of Proposition 47, which funneled the savings from reduced prison costs into programs designed to combat poverty and addiction - the root causes of crime.

Christopher Hallenbrook, a political science professor with Cal State Dominguez Hills, agrees that Prop 36 will cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars, money he says will be diverted from anti-crime initiatives.

"There's no way you can pass '36' and not put more people in jail. The more money you're spending on incarceration, the less money you're spending on other things," Hallenbrook stated. "That is definitely an accurate assessment for Prop. 36 and it seems to be one that voters decided they were OK with."

Prop. 36 was largely funded by such retail giants as Home Depot, Target and Walmart, hoping that the prospect of higher penalties would deter retail crime.


get more stories like this via email