Newsom plans for San Quentin, residential care make sense
Every once in a while our elected leaders surprise us with good ideas that merit not just consideration but implementation.
Recently, Gov. Gavin Newsom did that with two excellent proposals. The first would transition San Quentin State Prison into a rehabilitation center. The second would revive the idea of residential care campuses for those unhoused who suffer from the double diagnosis of disabling mental illness and substance abuse.
Count me in the category of Newsom skeptics. He's too slick for my taste. I favor the governors who are more the Jerry Brown-type, combining intellectual rigor, skepticism and an aim for long-term good.
When Newsom comes up with bold ideas, at least one of which will encounter serious opposition from a vocal but tiny part of the California Democratic Party's base exemplified by the American Civil Liberties Union, he earns my attention.
Before this praise goes too far, both proposals are void of details. Newsom's office says that the new version of San Quentin will incorporate concepts widely used in Scandinavian countries to great success. Of course, America's multicultural experience isn't at all comparable Norway.
There is no question that a key goal of the state Department of Corrections should be to curb recidivism. That's where a person is arrested, goes to jail, gets out and repeats the process, often multiple times.
Many years ago, my dad, a former lieutenant in the San Francisco Police Department, volunteered for a group called “Project Inside Out.” The goal was to end recidivism. To be part of the program, the prisoner had to be eligible for parole.
When I was in law school, my dad invited me to come with him to San Quentin and witness one of the project's roundtable discussions. It was instructive. The project often helped create a bond. The hope was that it would aid the incarcerated when the prisoner got out.
Like all such efforts, there were mixed results. But my father told me that if even a few benefited, the effort was worthwhile.
Marin is blessed with many nonprofits involved with San Quentin. The volunteers are committed, as Catholics say, to a “corporal work of mercy.” Getting someone who, for whatever reason, was bound on the path of a life of crime to get back on the straight and narrow, performs a mitzvah that aids the incarcerated while benefiting society. If Newsom adopts detailed policies that manage to end the circle of crime for substantial numbers, this will be a significant success.
A side effect of the shift in orientation means that efforts to close the prison and build housing on the spectacular San Question Peninsula are dead. It also means that death row will move out of Marin. For a fascinating look into San Quentin and its history, take advantage of visiting the open-to-public San Quentin Museum located inside the prison walls.
Newsom's proposal to create residential “campuses” for the severely mentally ill will, if accepted by the Legislature, undo one of biggest mistakes California ever made — the 1967 Lanterman-Petris-Short Act that closed state hospitals and released their residents to live on the streets, under bridges and in hillside hovels. That one misguided act set off what we are now experiencing as the homeless crisis.
Many blame then-Gov. Ronald Reagan for this fiasco. That's only half true. Reagan signed the law, as he didn't want to spend the money to run the facilities. The law passed both houses of the Legislature with the active support of Democrats. In typical fashion, civil libertarian Oakland state Sen. Nick Petrie didn't want anyone to be forced into treatment.
Then as now, It takes two great parties to really create a disaster.
The hospitals should never have been closed. What is now needed is multiple residential care facilities that treat and house those unable to care for themselves. It won't be cheap and the ACLU will be outraged. So what? It's the humanitarian thing to do.
Yes, these new hospital campuses need to be compassionate and adopt 21st century medical and psychiatric standards, but their establishment can't happen too soon. Collectively, we need to help those who can't help themselves and do it even if those in need of treatment reject that help.