California Proposition 11, Creation of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative (2008)

California Proposition 11
Election date November 4, 2008
Topic Redistricting measures
Status a Approved
Type Amendment & Statute	Origin Citizens

California Proposition 11 was on the ballot as a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute in California on November 4, 2008. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported transferring the legislative redistricting power from elected representatives to a 14 member commission; establishing a process for selecting commissioners; and requiring a supermajority vote to approve redistricting map.

A "no" vote opposed transferring the legislative redistricting power from elected representatives to a 14 member commission; establishing a process for selecting commissioners; and requiring a supermajority vote to approve redistricting map.

Aftermath

In 2010, Proposition 20, the U.S. Congressional Redistricting Initiative was on the ballot. Proposition 20, which was approved by 61.3% of voters, added the task of drawing the boundaries of California's U.S. congressional districts to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Proposition 27, an effort to entirely repeal Proposition 11, was also on the November 2, 2010 ballot. Voters rejected it with 59.5% of voters favoring Proposition 11.

In January 2012, the California Supreme Court ruled that the State Senate redistricting maps generated by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission pursuant to Proposition 11 must be used throughout the elections of 2012, even if it ultimately turns out that the Referendum Challenging the State Senate Maps qualifies for the ballot--which it did. (Read more below.)

Election results

California Proposition 11
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		6,095,033	50.82%
No		5,897,655	49.18%

Results are officially certified.

Source

There were fewer total votes for Prop 11 than for any of the other eleven statewide propositions on California's November 2008 ballot.

Measure design

Proposition 11 authorized the creation of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, a 14-member commission with the responsibility of drawing the geographic boundaries of the state's 120 legislative districts and four Board of Equalization districts every 10 years. Previously, the task of setting these boundaries fell to the California State Legislature.

Commission membership

In order to serve on the commission envisioned by Proposition 11, commission applicants must:

• be registered voters;
• show consistent voter registration for the past five years;
• have voted in two of the last three general elections; and
• in the last 10 years, the applicant or a close relative cannot have been a federal or state political candidate, lobbyist, or donor of $2,000 or more to a candidate.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 11 was as follows:

“

Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

“

• Changes authority for establishing Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization district boundaries from elected representatives to 14 member commission. • Requires government auditors to select 60 registered voters from applicant pool. Permits legislative leaders to reduce pool, then the auditors pick eight commission members by lottery, and those commissioners pick six additional members for 14 total. • Requires commission of fi ve Democrats, fi ve Republicans and four of neither party. Commission shall hire lawyers and consultants as needed. • For approval, district boundaries need votes from three Democratic commissioners, three Republican commissioners and three commissioners from neither party.

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Constitutional changes

The successful passage of Proposition 11 changed parts of the California Constitution. It:

• Amended Section 1 of Article XXI.
• Added a new Section 2 to Article XXI.
• Added a new Section 3 to Article XXI.

Fiscal impact

See also: Fiscal impact statement

The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:

“

Potential increase in state redistricting costs once every ten years due to two entities performing redistricting. Any increase in costs probably would not be significant.

”

Support

"Yes on 11" website banner

Yes on 11 led the campaign in support of Proposition 11.

Supporters

• California Common Cause
• AARP
• The Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce
• The League of Women Voters
• Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R).
• Former Governor Gray Davis (Democrat)
• ACLU - Southern California
• California Black Chamber of Commerce
• Central California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
• NAACP California State Conference
• California Police Chiefs Association
• California Forward
• Pasadena City Counci

Official arguments

The official arguments submitted to the California Voter Guide were signed by Janis R. Hirohama, president of the League of Women Voters of California; Teresa Casazza, president of the California Taxpayers’ Association Jeannine English, president of AARP California:

“

THE POLITICIANS WANT TO CONFUSE VOTERS, BUT THE CHOICE IS SIMPLE: Bipartisan Groups Urge You to Vote YES on Prop. 11, FOR CHANGE in Sacramento. Good government, senior, consumer, business, and taxpayer organizations are asking you to vote YES on Prop. 11 (note some of the signers of this ballot argument). The Politicians Oppose Change and Want You to Vote NO. On the NO side of this measure are politicians, political insiders, and political party elites who will do or say almost anything to stop change and protect the status quo. YES ON PROP. 11: CHANGE IN SACRAMENTO There is a serious conflict of interest when legislators are allowed to draw their own district boundaries. They divide up neighborhoods and communities to create districts where they are virtually guaranteed reelection. Once elected, these politicians aren’t accountable to voters because they don’t have to earn our votes. Instead, they pay more attention to the special interests. 'The current system where politicians draw their own districts is rigged to make sure they get reelected. Prop. 11 will put voters back in charge and make it easier to vote them out of office if they’re not doing their job.' — Pete Constant, Retired San Jose Police Officer YES ON PROP. 11: PUT VOTERS IN CHARGE Prop. 11 will end this conflict of interest by establishing an independent citizens commission to draw districts so that they are fair. Standards required by this measure will assure that districts are drawn so they don’t divide neighborhoods and communities. The commission will include Democrats, Republicans, and independents, and the process will be open to the public. This will assure a balanced, inclusive process that produces fair districts. 'If legislators don’t have to compete to get reelected, they have no accountability to voters. That means they don’t have to work together to solve problems like education, health care, roads, crime, and the state budget. Prop. 11 will keep politicians tuned-in to voter needs.' — Jodi Serrano, Public School Teacher, Sacramento YES ON PROP. 11: HOLD THE POLITICIANS ACCOUNTABLE Many of the problems we face in California are a direct result of politicians not being accountable to voters. When they draw their own districts, we end up with gridlock and nothing gets done. 'It’s time to send the politicians a message and change Sacramento. That’s why I’m voting YES on Prop. 11.' — Mike Holley, Owner, Apogee Publications, Whittier Proposition 11 will help end the gridlock and force the politicians to start solving problems. If they don’t, we can vote them out of office because they’ll have to run in fair districts. 'Democrats, Republicans, independents, and people from every walk of life and every corner of the state support Prop. 11 to send a strong message to politicians that it’s time to quit playing games and work together to get California back on track.' — Eligio Nava, President, Central California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING YES ON PROP. 11. Check it out for yourself: YesonProp11.org

”

Opposition

"No on 11" website banner

Citizens for Accountability: No on Proposition 11 led the campaign in opposition to Proposition 11.

Opponents

• U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D)
• Nancy Pelosi
• California Democratic Party
• Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund
• NAACP Legal Defense Fund
• Asian-American Pacific Legal Center

(For a full list, see List of Proposition 11 opponents).

Official arguments

The official arguments in opposition to Proposition 11 submitted to the California Voter Guide were signed by Daniel H. Lowenstein, former chair of Fair Political Practices Commission; Robert Balgenorth, president of the State Building & Construction Trades Council of California; and Martin Hittelman, president of California Federation of Teachers:

“

Faced with real problems—budget deficits, rising gas prices, and a shaky economy—what do the politicians bring us? Prop. 11—another nonsensical scheme to change how we draw lines between one district and another. What are they thinking? Redistricting may not mean much to you, but for some politicians, it’s all they care about. Five times, they’ve spent millions on lawyers, consultants, and paid signature gatherers to put a new scheme on the ballot. Every time, voters said 'NO.' The forces behind Prop. 11 don’t respect California’s voters, so they’re back again. What do they REALLY want? Power for themselves, at your expense. They know redistricting is about power. They want to rewrite our Constitution to suit themselves. PROP. 11 UNDERMINES DEMOCRACY Prop. 11 gives the final say for the entire state to a 14-member 'redistricting commission' never elected by the people. You don’t get a choice. There’s no guarantee they’ll represent you or your neighbors. That’s why community organizations oppose Prop. 11. Prop. 11 sets aside 10 of the 14 commission seats for partisan members of the two biggest political parties—and gives them veto power over almost every decision. If the big party representatives don’t go along—nothing gets done. What does that mean? Political insiders will keep carving up the state to serve their own interests. PROP. 11 GIVES POWER TO BUREAUCRATS Prop. 11 doesn’t keep politicians out of redistricting—it just lets them hide behind a tangled web of bureaucrats picked for their political ties. It actually takes state auditors off the job of rooting out government waste to spend time screening commission applications. Who picks the commission? Bureaucrats. They decide who’s qualified. And then the four most powerful legislators can reject anyone they want. That’s reform? PROP. 11 MEANS TWO BUREAUCRACIES INSTEAD OF ONE Prop. 11 only gives this new commission half the job. It leaves the other half—drawing Congressional districts—to the state Legislature. So Prop. 11 means paying for two of everything: two sets of attorneys, two teams of consultants, working out of two different offices—with neither one working together or sharing resources. PROP. 11 PROVIDES NO ACCOUNTABILITY TO TAXPAYERS Prop. 11 guarantees each commission member $300 a day, plus expenses, with no limit. There’s also no limit on how many attorneys, consultants, and staff the commission hires, or how much it spends for offices, hearings, and outreach. And there’s nothing requiring auditors to examine the commission’s spending for waste and abuse. PROP. 11 AN EMPTY PROMISE Read it yourself. It makes big promises, but never delivers. Voters get no say over who draws districts. Instead, we get a new bureaucracy with no accountability and no spending limits. Prop. 11 really means a lot of political insiders keep their power—a few get even more—and the rest of us get less. That’s not reform—that’s a hidden agenda that does nothing to address the real problems facing our state. Visit www.noonprop11.org—and vote NO!

”

Editorial opinion

2008 propositions
February 5
Proposition 91 • Proposition 92
Proposition 93 • Proposition 94
Proposition 95 • Proposition 96
Proposition 97
June 3
Proposition 98 • Proposition 99
November 4
Proposition 1A • Proposition 2
Proposition 5 • Proposition 6
Proposition 7 • Proposition 8
Proposition 9 • Proposition 10
Proposition 11 • Proposition 12
Local measures

"Yes on 11"

• The Los Angeles Times
• San Francisco Chronicle
• San Jose Mercury
• Fresno Bee
• The Torrance Daily Breeze
• San Diego Union Tribune
• Pasadena Now
• LA Daily News
• North County Times
• Redding Searchlight
• Stockton Record
• San Gabriel Valley Tribune
• Santa Cruz Sentinel
• Lompoc Record

"No on 11"

• The Bay Area Reporter
• San Francisco Bay Guardian

Polls

See also Polls, 2008 ballot measures.

Month of Poll	Pollster	In favor	Opposed	Undecided
July 2008	Field	42 percent	30 percent	28 percent
August 2008	PPIC	39 percent	36 percent	25 percent
Sept. 2008	PPIC	38 percent	33 percent	29 percent
Oct 12-19, 2008	PPIC	41 percent	34 percent	25 percent
October 18-28	Field	45 percent	30 percent	25 percent
Nov. 1-2	SurveyUSA	39 percent	26 percent	35 percent

Lawsuits

See also: List of ballot measure lawsuits in 2012

Vandermost v. Bowen

2012 measure lawsuits
By state
Arizona • Arkansas • Colorado • Florida • Maryland Michigan • Massachusetts • Minnesota Missouri • Montana • Nevada North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma Oregon • Rhode Island
By lawsuit type
Ballot text Campaign contributions Constitutionality Motivation of sponsors Petitioner residency Post-certification removal Single-subject rule Signature challenges Initiative process

In January of 2012, the California Supreme Court declared in the opinion of Vandermost v. Bowen (S198387) that the State Senate redistricting maps generated by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission pursuant to 2008's Proposition 11 must be used throughout the elections of 2012, even if it ultimately turns out that the Referendum Challenging the State Senate Maps qualifies for the ballot--which it did.

• More information on the ruling can be found here.

Path to the ballot

See also: California signature requirements

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 combined initiatives filed in 2008, at least 694,354 valid signatures were required.

Kimball Petition Management was paid $2,332,988 from two separate campaign committees to collect signatures to put this measure on the ballot.Signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2008 ballot were submitted to election officials on May 6, 2008. On June 17, the California Secretary of State announced that a check of the signatures had established that the measure had qualified for the ballot.

See also: California ballot initiative petition signature costs

See also

2008 Measures

• 2008 Measures
• Redistricting measures on the ballot
• 2008 legislative sessions

California

• California ballot measures
• California ballot measure laws

News and analysis

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

External links

Suggest a link

Basic information:

• Official Voter's Guide to Proposition 11
• League of Women Voters, Time line of the initiative
• Full text of Proposition 11
• Proposition 11 in the Smart Voter Guide
• Analysis of Proposition 11 from the Institute of Governmental Studies
• Guide to Proposition 11 from the California Voter Foundation
• Summary of donors to and against Proposition 11 from Cal-Access
• Donors for and against Proposition 11 from Follow The Money
• Voter Minute video on Prop 11
• Video of Prop 11 debate

Supporters:

• Yes on Prop 11, official website supporting Proposition 11
• California Common Cause website
• Financial details of support committee
• Join Arnold (timed out)

Opponents:

• No on Prop 11, official website opposing Proposition 11