Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.
California Proposition 48, Cap on Retirement Payments for Legislators and Judges Amendment (June 1986)
| California Proposition 48 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date June 3, 1986 | |
| Topic State and local government budgets, spending and finance | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
California Proposition 48 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in California on June 3, 1986. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to set limits on retirement payments for enrollees of the California Legislators' and Judges' Retirement Systems who enrolled after December 31, 1986. |
A "no" vote opposed amending the state constitution to set limits on retirement payments for enrollees of the California Legislators' and Judges' Retirement Systems who enrolled after December 31, 1986. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 48 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
3,649,784 | 85.11% | ||
| No | 638,678 | 14.89% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 48 was as follows:
| “ | Legislators' and Judges' Retirement System. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ | Limits payment of retirement allowances to members of the Legislators' Retirement System or the Judges' Retirement System, or to their beneficiaries or survivors, to higher of (1) the salary received by the person currently serving in the office in which the retired person served or (2) the highest salary received by the retired person while serving in that office. Limitation on retirement allowances applies only to members entering retirement systems for first time on or after January 1, 1987. Authorizes Legislature to define terms used in the measure. Contains other provisions. | ” |
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]
| “ | This measure could produce minor savings to the state in future years. Such savings would occur if, over a period of time, the rate of inflation exceeds the increases in salaries paid to the current officeholders.[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.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ University of California, "Voter Guide," accessed August 13, 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 |
