California Online Voter Guide

November 2008 General Election
17th edition

Proposition 6 - Police and Law Enforcement Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws. Failed

Initiative Statute

Summary

• Requires minimum of $965,000,000 each year to be allocated from state General Fund for police, sheriffs, district attorneys, adult probation, jails and juvenile probation facilities. Some of this funding will increase in following years according to California Consumer Price Index.

• Makes approximately 30 revisions to California criminal law, many of which cover gang-related offenses. Revisions create multiple new crimes and additional penalties, some with the potential for new life sentences.

• Increases penalties for violating a gang-related injunction and for felons carrying guns under certain conditions.

• Fiscal Impact: Net increase in state costs that are likely within a few years to exceed $500 million annually, primarily due to increasing state spending for various criminal justice programs to at least $965 million, as well as for increased costs for prison and parole operations. These costs would increase by tens of millions of dollars annually in subsequent years.

• Fiscal Impact: Potential one-time state capital outlay costs for prison facilities that could exceed $500 million due to increases in the prison population.

What a Yes or No Vote Means

YES: A “YES” vote on this measure means: The state would be required to increase spending for specified state and local criminal justice programs to at least $965 million in 2009–10, an increase of $365 million, growing in future years. Sentences also would be increased for certain crimes—such as crimes related to gangs, methamphetamine sales, and vehicle theft—resulting in more offenders being sent to state prison and for longer periods of time. The measure would make various other criminal justice changes related to such things as parole agent caseloads and use of hearsay evidence.

NO: A “NO” vote on this measure means: The state Legislature and Governor would continue to have their current authority over the state funding levels provided for specified criminal justice programs. Criminal penalties would not be increased. Parole caseloads and use of hearsay evidence would remain unchanged.

Full Text of Proposition 6 - (PDF)

Official Campaign Web Sites and Contact Information

• Yes on Proposition 6

  Committee to Take Back Our Neighborhoods
  976 Pacific Ave.
  Willows, CA 95988
  Phone: (916) 996-7467
  Email: Contact Page
  Web site: www.safeneighborhoodsact.com

• No on Proposition 6

No on 6
1510 J Street, Suite 210
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 443-7817
Email: josh@votenoprop6.com
Web site: www.votenoprop6.com

Who Signed the Ballot Arguments

• Yes on Proposition 6

  Lee Baca, Sheriff , Los Angeles County
  Bonnie M. Dumanis, District Attorney, San Diego County
  Harriet C. Salarno, Chair , Crime Victims United of California

• No on Proposition 6

  Lou Paulson, President, California Professional Firefighters
  Stephan B. Walker, Chief Executive Officer, Minorities in Law Enforcement

News Articles

CVF's News Stories section provides California voters with convenient access to a sampling of news articles that give an overview of the potential impact of the propositions on the ballot.

Follow the Money

Proposition 6 Campaign Finances through October 18, 2008
Position	Support			Oppose
Total Raised	$1,770,150			$1,845,192
Top Donors	Name	Amount		Name	Amount
	Dr. Henry T. Nicholas III, Businessman, NS Holdings LLC [Aliso Viejo, CA]	$1,000,000		California Teachers Association Issues PAC [Burlingame, CA]	$674,804
	Larry Rasmussen, President, Spirit Holdings, Inc. [Santa Clarita, CA]	$200,000		California State Council of Service Employees Issues PAC  [Sacramento, CA]	$497,805
	George Runner, State Senator [SD17 – Lancaster, CA] Crime Victims United of California [Sacramento, CA] (tied)	$100,000		Democratic State Central Committee of California (Sacramento, CA]	$364,238
	Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs PAC [Los Angeles, CA], Committee to Elect Gary C. Ovitt – Supervisor  [Rancho Santa Margarita, CA], (tied)	$50,000		California Federation of Teachers COPE/Prop Ballot Committee [Burbank, CA],	$100,000
				Ella Baker Center for Human Rights [Oakland, CA]	$64,466

Note: The committee opposing Prop. 6 is also opposing prop. 9

Detailed information about all contributors for and against Proposition 6 is available from campaign finance reports at Cal-Access, the Secretary of State's campaign disclosure web site. To view the most recent contributions, select a committee and click "Late and $5000+ Contributions Received".

 

 

Proposition 1A Proposition 2 Proposition 3 Proposition 4 Proposition 5 Proposition 6 Proposition 7 Proposition 8 Proposition 9 Proposition 10 Proposition 11 Proposition 12

This page was first published on September 27, 2008 | Last updated on December 21, 2008
Copyright California Voter Foundation, All Rights Reserved.