Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.
California Proposition 89, Governor's Parole Review Amendment (1988)
California Proposition 89 | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Election date November 8, 1988 | |
Topic Law enforcement and State executive official measures | |
Status![]() | |
Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
California Proposition 89 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in California on November 8, 1988. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to authorize the governor to approve, modify, or reverse any decision by the parole authority (Board of Prison Terms or Youthful Offender Parole Board) regarding the parole of persons who are sentenced to an indeterminate term for committing murder within 30 days. |
A "no" vote opposed amending the state constitution to authorize the governor to approve, modify, or reverse any decision by the parole authority (Board of Prison Terms or Youthful Offender Parole Board) regarding the parole of persons who are sentenced to an indeterminate term for committing murder within 30 days. |
Election results
California Proposition 89 |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
4,928,991 | 55.01% | |||
No | 4,031,422 | 44.99% |
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 89 was as follows:
“ | Governor's Parole Review. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
“ | Provides that no decision of the parole authority which grants, denies, revokes, or suspends the parole of a person sentenced to an indeterminate term upon conviction of murder shall become effective for a period of 30 days. Permits Governor to review the decision during this period subject to statutory procedures. States that the Governor may only affirm, modify, or reverse a parole authority decision on the basis of the same factors which the parole authority may consider. Requires Governor to report to the Legislature the pertinent facts and reasons for each parole action. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: The fiscal impact of this measure is unknown and depends on the actions of the Governor. Grants of parole would result in relatively minor savings. Denials of parole could result in relatively minor costs. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Fiscal impact
The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:[1]
“ | The fiscal impact of this constitutional amendment is unknown and would depend on the actions of the Governor. The measure could result in relatively minor state savings if the Governor decided to release a person from prison or the Youth Authority after the person's parole had been denied by the Board of Prison Terms or the Youthful Offender Parole Board. The measure could, however, result in relatively minor state costs if the Governor decided to deny parole to a person who would have been granted parole by the Board of Prison Terms or the Youthful Offender Parole Board.[2] | ” |
Path to the ballot
A two-thirds vote was needed in each chamber of the California State Legislature to refer the constitutional amendment to the ballot for voter consideration.
The California State Legislature voted to put Proposition 89 on the ballot via Senate Constitutional Amendment 9 (Statutes of 1988, Resolution Chapter 63).[1]
Votes in legislature to refer to ballot | ||
---|---|---|
Chamber | Ayes | Noes |
Assembly | 63 | 11 |
Senate | 29 | 5 |
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 University of California, "Voter Guide," accessed December 20, 2021
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
![]() |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |