Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
California Proposition 39, Creation of Redistricting Commission of Retired Judges Initiative (1984)
| California Proposition 39 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Redistricting policy |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute |
|
California Proposition 39 was on the ballot as a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute in California on November 6, 1984. It was defeated.
A “yes” vote supported creating a 10-member commission, including eight voting members who are retired or resigned appellate or lower court judges, to adopt redistricting plans for state legislative, congressional, and Board of Equalization districts. |
A “no” vote opposed creating a 10-member commission to adopt redistricting plans for state legislative, congressional, and Board of Equalization districts, thus leaving redistricting powers with the state legislature. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 39 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 3,995,762 | 44.82% | ||
|
|
4,919,860 | 55.18% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 39 was as follows:
| “ | Reapportionment. Initiative constitutional amendment and statute. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ | Repeals existing constitutional and statutory provisions. Adds provisions specifying criteria and procedures to reapportion Senate, Assembly, congressional, and equalization districts for 1986 elections and after each decennial census. Establishes new commission to adopt plans. Commission composed of eight former appellate court justices, who haven't previously been representatives from districts reapportioned and meet other criteria, and certain nonvoting members. Voting members selected by lot equally from two lists comprised of justices appointed by governors representing political parties with largest (list 1) and second largest (list 2) registered voters. Plans subject to referendum, Supreme Court review. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: Commission costs of up to $3.5 million for reapportionment for 1986 election. Costs of $10,000 to $20,000 each to relocate an unknown number of district legislative offices. One-time county costs of approximately $500,000 for new maps and election materials. Savings for certain counties on printing costs of about $300,000 in 1986 and $200,000 every two years thereafter. Reapportionments after 1990 census, and following, will probably cost less than under existing law due to expenditure limit in measure. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Path to the ballot
In California, the number of signatures required for a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated amendments filed in 1984, at least 630,136 valid signatures were required.
See also
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 |
