Does the Attorney General have any grounds to argue that theft provides a basis for violation of Vehicle Code section 10851?

The Attorney General recognizes theft provides a basis for violation of Vehicle Code section 10851, but argues it makes no sense to apply Penal Code section 490.2: "So construed, the law would require that the defendant with the more culpable mental state (the intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession) be convicted of only a misdemeanor, while the defendant with the less culpable mental state (to temporarily deprive the owner of possession) could be convicted of a felony." This is akin to an equal protection argument; and People v. Wilkinson (2004) 33 Cal.4th 821, upon which the Attorney General relies in his brief, provides the response: "[N]either the existence of two identical criminal statutes prescribing different levels of punishments, nor the exercise of a prosecutor's discretion in charging under one such statute and not the other, violates equal protection principles." (Id. at p. 838.)