2008 California Proposition 6

Last updated

California Proposition 6, also known as the Safe Neighborhoods Act and The Runner Initiative, is a statutory initiative that appeared on the November 2008 ballot in California. This proposition was rejected by voters on November 4 of that year.

Contents

Proposition 6 would have placed additional penalties on gang related and drug crime.

Provisions of Prop 6

Proposition 6 would:

Estimated fiscal impact

The California Legislative Analyst's Office has arrived at the following summary of Prop. 6's estimated costs:

Funds to pay for these costs, should Prop. 6 pass, will come from 0.3% of California's general fund. [2]

In the current California state budget, $600 million (0.6%) is set aside to assist with local law enforcement. If the initiative passes, an additional $350 million (0.3%) will be required to enforce some of its provisions. [3]

Authors of Prop. 6

Supporters of Prop. 6

The name of the official campaign committee supporting Proposition 6 is the Committee to Take Back Our Neighborhoods. [8]

Arguments in favor of Prop. 6

Radio ads

Path to the ballot

The petition drive to place the measure on the ballot was conducted by National Petition Management, at a cost of $1.022 million. [10]

Supporters turned in over 750,000 signatures on April 25 to qualify the measure for the November 2008 ballot, and the measure was subsequently approved for the ballot., [11] [12]

Donors who support Prop. 6

As of July 14, 2008, eight of the largest donors to Prop. 6 included:

Nicholas, who was arraigned on June 16, 2008 and pleaded not guilty on charges that included drug use, security fraud and conspiracy and has withdrawn from active support of the initiative, though the campaign has stated they will not return his $1,000,000 contribution. Ironically he is also charged with possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, meaning he himself would receive the tougher penalties of this initiative. [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

Opposition to Prop. 6

The official committee opposing Proposition 6 is known as No on Propositions 6 & 9, Communities for Safe Neighborhoods and Fiscal Responsibility.

Arguments against Prop. 6

Donors who oppose Prop. 6

The name of the official campaign committee opposing Prop. 6 is No on Propositions 6 & 9, Communities for Safe Neighborhoods. [22]

As of September 5, 2008, the five largest donors against Prop. 6 consisted of the Ella Baker Center and four labor unions:

Newspaper endorsements

Editorial boards opposed

Results

Electoral results by county. 2008 California Proposition 6 results map by county.svg
Electoral results by county.
Proposition 6 [25]
ChoiceVotes %
Light brown x.svg No8,559,64769.12
Yes3,824,37230.88
Valid votes12,384,01990.11
Invalid or blank votes1,359,1589.89
Total votes13,743,177100.00

Basic information

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2000 California Proposition 21</span> Ballot proposition

California Proposition 21, known also as Prop 21, was a proposition proposed and passed in 2000 that increased a variety of criminal penalties for crimes committed by youth and incorporated many youth offenders into the adult criminal justice system. Major provisions of the proposition, as summarized by Attorney General of California are:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 4</span>

Proposition 4, or the Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification Initiative, also known to its supporters as Sarah's Law, was an initiative state constitutional amendment in the 2008 California general election.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 3</span> Californian law

Proposition 3 is a law that was enacted by California voters by means of the initiative process. It is a bond issue that authorizes $980 million in bonds, to be repaid from state's General Fund, to fund the construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping of children's hospitals. The annual payment on the debt authorized by the initiative is approximately $64 million a year. Altogether, the measure would cost about $1.9 billion over 30 years out of California's general fund.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 5</span> 2008 California ballot proposition

California Proposition 5, or the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act was an initiated state statute that appeared as a ballot measure on the November 2008 ballot in California. It was disapproved by voters on November 4 of that year.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 11</span> Ballot measure in California

Proposition 11 of 2008 was a law enacted by California voters that placed the power to draw electoral boundaries for State Assembly and State Senate districts in a Citizens Redistricting Commission, as opposed to the State Legislature. To do this the Act amended both the Constitution of California and the Government Code. The law was proposed by means of the initiative process and was put to voters as part of the November 4, 2008 state elections. In 2010, voters passed Proposition 20 which extended the Citizen Redistricting Commission's power to draw electoral boundaries to include U.S. House seats as well.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 7</span> 2008 California ballot proposition

California Proposition 7, would have required California utilities to procure half of their power from renewable resources by 2025. In order to make that goal, levels of production of solar, wind and other renewable energy resources would more than quadruple from their current output of 10.9%. It would also require California utilities to increase their purchase of electricity generated from renewable resources by 2% annually to meet Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of 40% in 2020 and 50% in 2025. Current law AB32 requires an RPS of 20% by 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 California Proposition 10</span> Ballot measure in California

California Proposition 10, also known as the California Alternative Fuels Initiative, was an unsuccessful initiated state statute that appeared on the November 2008 ballot in California. Proposition 10 was funded by Clean Energy Fuels Corp., a corporation owned by T. Boone Pickens. Clean Energy Fuels Corp. is the nation's leading operator of natural gas vehicle fueling stations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 California Proposition 66</span> Proposed legislation in California, US

Proposition 66 was a California ballot proposition on the November 2, 2004 ballot. It was a proposed amendment to the California three-strikes law. Prop 66 would have required the third felony charge against a suspect to be especially violent and/or serious crimes to mandate a 25-years-to-life sentence. It also would have changed the definition of some felonies. It was rejected by voters, with 52.7% voting against the proposition.

Marsy's Law, the California Victims' Bill of Rights Act of 2008, enacted by voters as Proposition 9 through the initiative process in the November 2008 general election, is a controversial amendment to the state's constitution and certain penal code sections. The act protects and expands the legal rights of victims of crime to include 17 rights in the judicial process, including the right to legal standing, protection from the defendant, notification of all court proceedings, and restitution, as well as granting parole boards far greater powers to deny inmates parole. Critics allege that the law unconstitutionally restricts defendant's rights, by allowing prosecutors to withhold exculpatory evidence under certain circumstances, and harms victims by restricting their rights to discovery, depositions, and interviews. Passage of this law in California led to the passage of similar laws in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Ohio and Wisconsin, and efforts to pass similar laws in Hawaii, Iowa, Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, and Pennsylvania. In November 2017, Marsy's Law was found to be unconstitutional and void in its entirety by the Supreme Court of Montana for violating that state's procedure for amending the Montana Constitution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reached the same conclusion as Montana under its own state constitution in 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010 California Proposition 23</span> Ballot proposition concerned with environmental regulations

Proposition 23 was a California ballot proposition that was on the November 2, 2010 California statewide ballot. It was defeated by California voters during the statewide election by a 23% margin. If passed, it would have suspended AB 32, a law enacted in 2006, legally referred to its long name, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Sponsors of the initiative referred to their measure as the California Jobs Initiative while opponents called it the Dirty Energy Prop.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marcella Leach</span> American victims rights advocate

Marcella Nicholas Leach was an American victims' rights advocate based in Southern California and the mother of businessman Henry Nicholas. After the murder of her daughter, Marsalee (Marsy) Nicholas in 1983, she helped build Justice for Homicide Victims, one of California's early victims' rights organizations. Her late daughter is the namesake for Marsy's Law, the California Constitutional Amendment and Victims' Bill of Rights, which appeared on the November, 2008, ballot as Proposition 9.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010 California Proposition 20</span> Approved Congressional Redistricting Initiative

A California Congressional Redistricting Initiative, Proposition 20 was on the November 2, 2010 ballot in California. It was approved by 61.2% of voters. Election officials announced on May 5 that the proposition had collected sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot. The measure is known by its supporters as the VOTERS FIRST Act for Congress.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010 California Proposition 19</span> Failed measure to legalize marijuana

California Proposition 19 was a ballot initiative on the November 2, 2010, statewide ballot. It was defeated, with 53.5% of California voters voting "No" and 46.5% voting "Yes." If passed, it would have legalized various marijuana-related activities, allowed local governments to regulate these activities, permitted local governments to impose and collect marijuana-related fees and taxes, and authorized various criminal and civil penalties. In March 2010, it qualified to be on the November statewide ballot. The proposition required a simple majority in order to pass, and would have taken effect the day after the election. Yes on 19 was the official advocacy group for the initiative and California Public Safety Institute: No On Proposition 19 was the official opposition group.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2012 California Proposition 39</span> Ballot measure in California modifying corporate tax burdens

Proposition 39 is a ballot initiative in the state of California that modifies the way out-of-state corporations calculate their income tax burdens. The proposition was approved by voters in the November 6 general election, with 61.1% voting in favor of it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2012 California Proposition 32</span> California ballot measure in 2012

Proposition 32 is a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. This initiative statute would have affected political contributions via payroll deductions, and contributions to political candidates. The proposition was defeated by voters by a margin of 56 to 44 percent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2012 California Proposition 34</span> Failed California ballot measure

Proposition 34 was a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. It sought to repeal Proposition 17, originally passed by voters in 1972, thus abolishing the death penalty in California.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2014 California Proposition 47</span> Reduction of some crimes to misdemeanours

Proposition 47, also known by its ballot title Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties. Initiative Statute, was a referendum passed by voters in the state of California on November 4, 2014. The measure was also referred to by its supporters as the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act. It recategorized some nonviolent offenses as misdemeanors, rather than felonies, as they had previously been categorized.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2016 California Proposition 64</span> 2016 California voter initiative that legalized recreational cannabis

The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) was a 2016 voter initiative to legalize cannabis in California. The full name is the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. The initiative passed with 57% voter approval and became law on November 9, 2016, leading to recreational cannabis sales in California by January 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 22</span> Gig economy workers employment status ballot initiative

Proposition 22 was a ballot initiative in California on the November 2020 state election which passed with 59% of the vote and granted app-based transportation and delivery companies an exception to Assembly Bill 5 by classifying their drivers as "independent contractors", rather than "employees", thereby exempting employers from providing the full suite of mandated employee benefits while instead giving drivers new protections of:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 California Proposition 20</span> Rejected initiative regarding non-violent felonies

California Proposition 20 was a proposed initiated state statute on the ballot in the 2020 California elections. This initiative would have added more crimes to the list of non-violent felonies for which early parole is restricted, and would have required DNA collection for certain misdemeanors.

References

  1. 1 2 Legislative Analyst's Office's Report
  2. http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/BudgetSummary/SUM/1249561.html Archived 2008-10-19 at the Wayback Machine "California's Budget 2008" California Department of Finance
  3. "Runners support initiative against gender law, Daily Press, Dec. 30, 2007". Archived from the original on 2008-11-21. Retrieved 2008-10-08.
  4. "Supervisor Gary Ovitt". Archived from the original on 2008-11-14. Retrieved 2008-10-29.
  5. "Senator George Runner". Archived from the original on 2008-10-07. Retrieved 2008-10-08.
  6. "A Message From Senator George Runner, Oct. 27, 2008". Archived from the original on 2008-10-08. Retrieved 2008-10-08.
  7. Safe Neighborhoods Statistics and Facts
  8. 1 2 Prop 6
  9. California Secretary of State
  10. Campaign expenditure details
  11. The Appeal Democrat, Crime initiative could hit ballot Archived 2012-07-21 at archive.today , April 30, 2008
  12. "KHTS-AM, "Runners Looking To Target Gangs In Ballot Initiative", March 18, 2008". Archived from the original on 2009-11-01. Retrieved 2008-10-08.
  13. Details of donations to the Yes on 6 committee
  14. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0605082nicholas1.html "Henry Nicholas charged with, among other things, possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute"
  15. http://news.muckety.com/2008/06/13/indicted-billionaire-henry-nicholas-iii-crusaded-for-tough-penalties-for-criminals/3401 Archived 2008-09-28 at the Wayback Machine "Indicted billionaire Henry Nicholas III crusaded for tough penalties for criminals"
  16. Los Angeles Times "The Two Henry Nicholases"
  17. Los Angeles Times "Initiative sponsor in spotlight"
  18. http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capitolalertlatest/013300.html Archived 2008-10-12 at the Wayback Machine "Nicholas pleads not guilty"
  19. "List of Prop 6 opponents". Archived from the original on 2008-09-09. Retrieved 2008-10-08.
  20. "Tabulations from a survey of California Registered Voters about the State's Budget Deficit" (PDF). Field Research Corporation. 2008-06-10. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-09-04.
  21. Gang Wars: The Failure of Enforcement Tactics and the Need for Effective Public Safety Strategies, Loren Siegel, 2003
  22. "Defeat the Runner Initiative". Archived from the original on 2008-07-27. Retrieved 2008-07-12.
  23. Details of donations to the No on 6 & 9 committee
  24. Los Angeles Times, "No on Proposition 6", September 26, 2008
  25. "Statement of Vote: 2008 General Election" (PDF). California Secretary of State. 2008-12-13. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-10-18. Retrieved 2009-02-21.

Further reading