Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

California Proposition 36, Probation and Treatment for Drug-Related Offenses Initiative (2000)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Proposition 36
Flag of California.png
Election date
November 7, 2000
Topic
Drug crime policy
Status
Approveda Approved
Type
State statute
Origin
Citizens

California Proposition 36 was on the ballot as an initiated state statute in California on November 7, 2000. It was approved.

A "yes" voted supported requiring that people convicted of the possession, use, or transportation of controlled substances and similar parole violations, except sale or manufacture of drugs, receive probation and drug treatment, rather than incarceration.

A "no" voted opposed requiring that people convicted of the possession, use, or transportation of controlled substances and similar parole violations, except sale or manufacture of drugs, receive probation and drug treatment, rather than incarceration.


Election results

California Proposition 36

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

6,233,422 60.86%
No 4,009,508 39.14%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 36 was as follows:

Drugs. Probation and Treatment Program. Initiative Statute.

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

  • Requires probation and drug treatment program, not incarceration, for conviction of possession, use, transportation for personal use or being under influence of controlled substances and similar parole violations, not including sale or manufacture.
  • Permits additional probation conditions except incarceration.
  • Authorizes dismissal of charges when treatment completed, but requires disclosure of arrest and conviction to law enforcement and for candidates, peace officers, licensure, lottery contractors, jury service; prohibits using conviction to deny employment, benefits, or license.
  • Appropriates treatment funds through 2005-2006; prohibits use of these funds to supplant existing programs or for drug testing.

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.


Fiscal impact statement

See also: Fiscal impact statement

The fiscal impact statement was as follows:

  • Net savings to the state of between $100 million and $150 million annually, within several years of implementation.
  • Potential one-time avoidance of capital outlay costs to the state of between $450 million and $550 million in the long term.
  • Net savings to local government of about $40 million annually, within several years of implementation.

[1]


Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in California

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated statutes filed in 2000, at least 419,260 valid signatures were required.

PCI Consultants, Inc. was hired to manage the signature drive for the ballot initiative.

See also


External links

Footnotes

  1. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.