You make it sound worse than it is, Rancy.
Decluttering the dockets of petty misdemeanors allows the legal system to be more responsive in its handling of serious criminal offenses. Sure, it sucks when some petty thief makes off with a pair of Air Jordans without paying for them as the theft cuts into the profits of mega-corporations who then inevitably pass off the shrinkage cost to consumers but, really, men that covet their neighbour's ass is as old as the Sinai Desert itself. Laws aiming to curb men's greed will never be as effective as the moral components of a sound education, a liberal education (in the traditional sense of the word "liberal"). The courts are better off not being stuffed with, and police work not being choked by, these minor legal irritants.
Conservatives are strange in this regard; they wish to wrest the responsibility of providing a formal education to their children from the school system because "CRT" and "inclusivity" and "diversity" but lay the blame squarely at the feet of the local AG when their attempt at home-schooling their brood produces nitwits who don't know right from wrong (and forget to address the judge as "Your Honor").
As for homelessness and abusive drug use, it's a proven fact that Housing First and Harm Reduction principles occasion a far smaller economic (and social) toll on society than outright "displacement" and interdiction, respectively, by, again, disengorging the courts. As an added bonus, applying these principles also relieves a tremendous amount of pressure on an already taxed health system (well, such as it is, in the U.S., anyway). In the end, everybody wins.
But don't take my word on this. Look it up. Do your own research. Or don't.