« History: Two new Washington Park plaques | Main | ECR: The Axe man cometh »

June 12, 2024



And things have gotten so bad in Menlo Park- Atherton - Woodside that we need a pricey reward system to reign in the burglaries!

New rewards program aims to catch residential burglars in San Mateo County’s District 3

In District 3, individuals with information on home burglaries could make up to $10K


Peter Garrison

What happens if the burglars only steal $949.99 worth of stuff?

Asking for a friend…

Paloma Ave

Our democRAT legislators introduced and supported Prop 47 to lower crime stats. That was it. It has increased crime, substantially! But they don't care. It is all about optics. Keep voting in criminal advocates!!!


The Chronicle is out with another article about the shenanigans in Sacramento. It notes the basic outline of the Proposition that just made the ballot:

The new initiative would eliminate the $950 threshold for a third theft, meaning someone caught stealing three times could be prosecuted for a felony, regardless of the value of the merchandise stolen. It would do the same for a third drug possession charge and increase jail time for repeat and organized retail theft. The measure also contains provisions to compel people with multiple drug convictions into treatment.

The measure has picked up support from retailers, who say thefts have gotten out of control, as well as moderate Democratic mayors — including San Francisco’s London Breed — who argue Prop. 47 has emboldened criminals.


And in a timely bit of related news, the Merc is reporting on a 20-person smash and grab of a Sunnyvale jewelry store:

The store surveillance video, released by police Friday, shows two employees sitting in the store’s front area; no customers are visible. The workers are both startled by a noise; they turn to see a disturbance at the front doors, then quickly flee behind doors inside the store.

Within 20 seconds, several people in mostly black clothing smash their way through two sets of glass doors and enter the store.

One by one, nearly 20 people pass through the ruined doors, moving quickly to the store’s many display cases. They swing hammers and other tools, breaking the glass and reaching in to retrieve handfuls of necklaces, bracelets and rings. Most stuff the jewelry into backpacks or other bags they carry as they loot the store.

There is surveillance video on the Merc site, but it's not posting well here.

George Clunie

Here is what the initiative would look like

Someone with two prior convictions for theft could be charged with a felony on the third offense no matter the amount. The value of stolen property from multiple thefts could be combined for a felony charge.

The initiative would also make possessing fentanyl while carrying a loaded firearm a felony. Dealers could be charged with homicide if their clients overdose. Prosecutors would have the discretion to charge drug possession as a felony after two prior drug convictions. To avoid jail and expunge the charge, drug users could get treatment and would receive shelter and job training.

Sounds good, right?


From the Cal Policy Center:

Gov. Gavin Newsom has abandoned his plan to put a competing crime measure on California’s November ballot that he launched — and withdrew— this week in an attempt to neuter a district attorney-backed initiative to reform Prop 47.

After years of attempted reforms squashed by soft-on-crime advocates, frustrated district attorneys, retailers and citizens finally qualified their initiative to reform Prop 47 — the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act — for this year’s ballot after submitting more than 900,000 signatures, well above the 600,000 valid signatures required to qualify.

That’s when Newsom and legislators sprang into action to derail the crime reform initiative. First, they tried to pressure the district attorneys to withdraw their measure by offering a package of retail theft bills to address some of their concerns without going to the ballot. But that strategy imploded after lawmakers added “poison pill” amendments to the package that would kill the bills if voters passed the DA’s initiative.

When the district attorneys said “no dice,” Newsom and lawmakers rushed this week to introduce Senate Bill 1381, which would have put a competing crime measure on the ballot to confuse voters and weaken Prop 47 reforms. Blowback against the move was immediate.

Public scrutiny and political maneuvering intensified ahead of the legislators’ scheduled vote on Newsom’s proposal set for Wednesday. But the governor abruptly ended his fight Tuesday night.

In a statement, Newsom said proponents of his alternative measure would not be able to meet the deadline for it to be added to the 2024 ballot. However, KCRA Capitol Correspondent Ashley Zavala reports that “sources close to the negotiations” said the real reason behind the surrender was that the “governor was not fully focused on getting the proposal on the ballot and failed to build a coalition of law enforcement groups to back the measure.”

Nearly two dozen law enforcement unions sent a letter opposing SB 1381 to Assembly Public Safety Committee Chair Kevin McCarty earlier in the week.

When news broke that Newsom’s countermeasure was DOA, California Congressman Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) pulled no punches.

“Newsom’s final scheme to sabotage the End Prop. 47 initiative just failed,” Kiley wrote on social media. “This is the most embarrassing episode for a governor in modern California history. More importantly, it is a historic win for Californians.”

Still, CPC attorney Julie Hamill predicted that the motive behind Newsom’s sudden change of heart was as obvious as it is ominous:

“Good news: No more competition with the citizen initiative to repeal Prop 47.

Bad news: He's angling for that Presidential ticket.”

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

About the Voice

  • The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community. Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California. On it you can read and comment on important city issues.

    Note: Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice Blog are those of the poster and not necessarily the opinion of the editorial board of the Burlingame Voice. See Terms of Use

Contributing to the Voice

  • If you would like more information on the Burlingame Voice, send an email to [email protected] with your request or question. We appreciate your interest.

    Authors may login here.

    For help posting to the Voice, see our tutorial.