Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
California Proposition 221, Oversight of Court Commissioners Amendment (June 1998)
| California Proposition 221 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date June 2, 1998 | |
| Topic State judiciary and Government accountability | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
California Proposition 221 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in California on June 2, 1998. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to authorize the state's Commission on Judicial Performance to oversee and discipline court commissioners or referees according to the same standards used in oversight of judges. |
A "no" vote opposed amending the state constitution to authorize the state's Commission on Judicial Performance to oversee and discipline court commissioners or referees according to the same standards used in oversight of judges. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 221 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
4,274,331 | 81.00% | ||
| No | 1,002,620 | 19.00% | ||
Measure design
Proposition 221 gave the state's Commission on Judicial Performance the authority to oversee and discipline court commissioners or referees. The Commission already had that authority over judges. Proposition 221 also said that a person who is found unfit to be a commissioner or referee by the Commission on Judicial Performance may not serve as a commissioner or referee.[1]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 221 was as follows:
| “ | Subordinate Judicial Officers. Discipline. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
-This measure grants the Commission on Judicial Performance discretionary authority with regard to the oversight and discipline of subordinate judicial officers, subject to California Supreme Court review, according to same standards as judges. -Provides that no person found unfit to serve as subordinate judicial officer after hearing before Commission shall have status required to serve as subordinate judicial officer. -Responsibility of court to initially discipline or dismiss subordinate judicial officer as employee not diminished or eliminated by measure. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Constitutional changes
Proposition 221 added a new section (Section 18.1) to Article VI of the California Constitution.
The text of Section 18.1, added by Proposition 221, stated:
| The Commission on Judicial Performance shall exercise discretionary jurisdiction with regard to the oversight and discipline of subordinate judicial officers, according to the same standards, and subject to review upon petition to the Supreme Court, as specified in Section 18.
No person who has been found unfit to serve as a subordinate judicial officer after a hearing before the Commission on Judicial Performance shall have the requisite status to serve as a subordinate judicial officer. This section does not diminish or eliminate the responsibility of a court to exercise initial jurisdiction to discipline or dismiss a subordinate judicial officer as its employee. |
Fiscal impact
The California Legislative Analyst's Office provided an estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact for Proposition 221. That estimate was:[1]
| “ | Probably minor, if any, state costs for the Commission on Judicial Performance to provide oversight and discipline over court commissioners and referees.[2] | ” |
Support
Supporters
- Senator Tim Leslie (R)[1]
- Kate Killeen, president of Women Prosecutors of California[1]
- George Kennedy, president of California District Attorneys Association[1]
Official arguments
The official arguments in support of Proposition 221 for the voter guide can be found here.
Opposition
Official arguments
No official arguments for the voter guide were submitted in opposition to Proposition 221.
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.
Proposition 221 was voted onto the ballot by the California State Legislature via SCA 19 (Proposition 221).
| Votes in legislature to refer to ballot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Chamber | Ayes | Noes |
| Assembly | 72 | 1 |
| Senate | 39 | 0 |
External links
Footnotes
 |
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 |
