Key Assembly Panel Votes to Put ‘3 Strikes’ on June Ballot

An Assembly committee long known for being the killing ground of tough anti-crime bills reversed course Thursday and voted to place the “three strikes and you’re out” initiative on the June ballot.

With the public’s fear of crime on the minds of all political leaders in Sacramento, the Assembly Committee on Public Safety also approved four other so-called “three strikes and you’re out” bills. Each would impose life sentences on habitual criminals convicted of a third felony. But none would appear on the ballot.

The committee’s turnaround came as officials from Gov. Pete Wilson on down worked to enhance their anti-crime credentials. The votes were taken in a room packed with television cameras, reporters and parents of children murdered by repeat offenders.

Committee approval of several competing proposals might seem confused, but in the end, a measure approved by voters takes precedence over an identical law passed by the Legislature. Although most committee members do not favor the initiative version, many believe that it would be politically risky to face election without taking some action to diffuse public anger over crime.

*

Three bills call for life sentences without the possibility of parole for three-time losers. Two, including the initiative proposal, would allow for parole, but not before a three-time loser serves 20 to 25 years.

The entire bundle will go to the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, where members will attempt to reach a compromise on the measures and send a single bill to the floor, plus the measure to place the three strikes initiative on the June ballot.

“You’d have to be a Pollyanna not to understand the politics involved,” said Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren, a supporter of the initiative.

Less than a year ago, the committee turned down “three strikes” legislation by Assemblymen Bill Jones (R-Fresno) and Jim Costa (D-Hanford). They had introduced it on behalf of Mike Reynolds, a portrait photographer whose 18-year-old daughter, Kimber, was murdered by a parolee outside a Fresno restaurant.

Refusing to accept defeat, Reynolds, 49, responded with a drive to place an initiative on the November ballot. The measure gained momentum with the highly publicized murder of Polly Klaas, and Reynolds received endorsements from political leaders as well as crime victims including Marc Klaas, Polly’s father.

Jones and Costa returned to the committee Thursday with a replica of last year’s bill, and told lawmakers they would accept no changes. When committee Chairman Bob Epple (D-Cerritos) offered his support for placing it before the voters in June, they and Reynolds agreed.

However, Reynolds was skeptical that the full Legislature would vote to place the initiative on the June ballot. He vowed to press ahead with his efforts to place the initiative on the November ballot.

“I know who I trust,” Reynolds said. “I trust the people of this state. We need to still proceed with the initiative drive and redouble our efforts. It’s unfortunate that this Legislature has a history of only responding to pressure.”

Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) helped engineer the move to place the measure on the June ballot even though he opposes Reynolds’ idea as too costly. Brown opposes the initiative but has said he supports placing Reynolds’ measure on the June ballot. Brown helped ensure the bill’s passage by naming moderate Assemblyman Mike Gotch (D-San Diego) to the committee on Thursday. Gotch voted for all five measures--as did all other committee members except Tom Bates (D-Berkeley), who abstained.

*

Lungren, among the most outspoken supporters of anti-crime measures, noted that similar bills could have been passed “10 years ago by many of the people in that committee right now, and I hope folks understand that.”

“It takes people being killed in tragic circumstances to get those elected to office to take these things seriously. I’m offended by it,” Lungren said.

There was some doubt whether the initiative slated for the June ballot could become law even if voters approved it. The Legislature can put proposed constitutional amendments to a statewide vote, but in an interview after the hearing, Tony Miller, chief deputy secretary of state, said the state Constitution specifies that legislators can only make statutes by passing them and sending them to the governor for approval.

“It’s going to take some creative lawyering and that may not be enough,” Miller said, adding that such a move has not been attempted since the 1930s. “It may be an unlawful delegation of power. That’s a theory that has been along for a long time.”

Mike Carrington, an aide to the governor on criminal justice issues, appeared before the committee to say Wilson supported whichever bill would create the “widest net.”

Among the proposals, one by Assemblyman Richard K. Rainey (R-Walnut Creek), a former Contra Costa County sheriff, appeared to have the bulk of the political support. Unlike the initiative, Rainey’s bill specifies no parole after a third conviction of a serious felony.

The proposed initiative says people who have committed two prior serious or violent felonies could be imprisoned for life if they commit a third felony, whether or not it is defined by the Penal Code as serious or violent. Some opponents say it could result in a life sentence for someone who commits relatively minor crimes such as shoplifting.

Another proposal, by Assemblyman Tom Umberg (D-Garden Grove), differs from the others by requiring a life sentence without parole for people who commit a second offense against children. He also seeks life sentences on three-time losers who commit violent or serious felonies.

Violent felonies include such crimes as murder, rape, attempted murder, child molestation and arson. Serious felonies includes all the violent felonies, plus such crimes as selling drugs to a minor.