California Proposition 6, Require Elected County Sheriffs Amendment (June 1978)

California Proposition 6
Election date June 6, 1978
Topic Local government officials and elections
Status Approved
Type Legislatively referred constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature

California Proposition 6 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in California on June 6, 1978. It was approved.

A “yes” vote supported requiring county sheriffs to be elected offices in all counties, whether chartered or non-chartered.

A “no” vote opposed this constitutional amendment, thus continuing to allow non-chartered counties to decide whether to have a sheriff and whether the position is elected or appointed.

Election results

California Proposition 6
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		3,276,230	60.83%
No		2,109,533	39.17%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 6 was as follows:

“

Sheriffs. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

“

Amends Constitution, article XI, sections 1(b) and 4(c) , to require Legislature and county charters to provide for elected county sheriffs. Financial impact: No direct state or local fiscal effect.

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Support

Arguments

• State Sen. Robert Presley (D) and Asm. William Craven (R): "The passage of this constitutional amendment will assure all of the people in each of fifty-eight counties of this state that their chief law enforcement officer at county level, the sheriff, will continue to be directly answerable to them through the elective process. During the one hundred and twenty-eight years that have transpired since California became a state, the sheriffs have distinguished themselves by providing excellent law enforcement services to the public they serve. This evolvement of excellence has not come about by mere happenstance. During the entire history of the state, there has never been anything but elected sheriffs directly responsible to the people. This adherence to the most basic of democratic principles has done much to enhance continued professional service and conduct in the office of sheriff. The sheriffs of this state have broad powers and responsibilities enumerated in virtually all of the codes of the state of California. Indeed, one of the most awesome of these responsibilities is a mandate to take appropriate action when there is a breakdown of law enforcement at the local level, in a municipality. In order to effectively carry out the myriad of duties and responsibilities imposed on them, and most certainly in the case cited, the sheriffs require a degree of independence free from undue political influence. This has been the case for one hundred and twenty-eight years and has been accomplished by making the sheriff directly accountable to the people. Favorable consideration of this constitutional amendment will ensure a continuation of this most desirable relationship which has worked so well, for so long."

Opposition

Arguments

• State Sen. Omer Rains (D), Asm. Howard Berman (D), and Asm. Bill McVittie (D): "This proposed amendment to our constitution represents but one more example of the state attempting to intrude on the rights of local government and is, indeed, a violation of the basic concept of home-rule. Throughout our state history, charter counties have had the option of electing or appointing certain local officials, including sheriffs. Until 1970, this choice was specifically provided for in the constitution. That year, the voters approved a constitutional amendment deleting all reference to election or appointment of county officers, with the exception of an elected governing body. The intent of this change was to provide local governing bodies with a greater degree of autonomy and flexibility in order to better meet local needs. Proposition 6 would take away this prerogative of the counties to experiment with new methods of more efficiently controlling the governmental process. Statements by proponents that Proposition 6 would restore the office of sheriff to the constitution are therefore misleading. If this amendment is approved by the voters, only elected sheriffs will be permitted anywhere in California (whatever the wishes of the people in any given county), and charter counties would lose the self-determination that each now has to decide for itself the most appropriate manner in which to select the county sheriff. Although all charter counties presently have elected sheriffs, persuasive arguments can be made that the appointment process often involves a greater degree of competition and assures a greater chance of securing excellence in law enforcement. For this reason, most city police chiefs are already appointed, generally after undergoing a thorough screening process. Therefore, in the interest of efficiency and better government, it is vital that this alternative be preserved. In short, if Proposition 6 passes, counties will lose their present right to amend their charters to provide for appointed sheriffs. Proposition 6 should be rejected so that counties can retain the authority to exercise this option as they see fit. Don’t vote for the further erosion of local control."

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the California Constitution

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.

In the California General Assembly, the vote was 54-22. In the California State Senate, the vote was 28-1.

See also

1978 Measures

• 1978 Measures
• Local government officials and elections on the ballot
• 1978 legislative sessions

California

• California ballot measures
• California ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• California Voter Guide (June 1978)