Proposition Summary

APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT ADJUSTMENT. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Constitution limits tax revenues state and local governments annually appropriate for expenditure: allows "cost of living" and "population" changes. "Cost of living" defined as lesser of change in US Consumer Price Index or per capita personal income; measure redefines as greater of change in California Consumer Price Index or per capita personal income. "State population" redefined: includes increases in K-12 or community college average daily attendance greater than state population growth. Local government "population" redefined: includes increases in residents and persons employed. Specifies motor vehicle and fuel taxes are fees excluded from appropriations limit. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: Change in the appropriations limit inflation adjustment will allow increased state appropriations of up to $700 million in 1988-89, and increasing amounts annually thereafter. Change in the population adjustment will allow further undetermined increase in state appropriations. State's ability to appropriate additional funds as a result of increased state limit is dependent on receipt of sufficient revenue. Based on estimates contained in Governor's Budget, state revenues will not be sufficient in 1988-89 to fund any additional appropriations allowed by this measure. In future years, economy's performance will determine whether and to what extent state revenues will be available to fund such additional appropriations. Local government and school district appropriation limits will be increased by unknown but significant amounts. Change in the treatment of state transportation-related revenues would have no fiscal effect because of the limit adjustment formula.

Proposition Number




Document Type




Popular Vote Results

Y: 2544731; A: 48.87; N: 2662463; B: 51.13

Election Type


Proposition Type

Initiative constitutional

Relevant Case

McCauley v. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass'n: 68 Cal. App. 4th 1255: 80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 900, 1998

For Author

Bill Honig, State Superintendent of Public Instruction; Carol J. Federighi, President, League of Women Voters of California; Josephine D. Barbano, American Association of Retired Persons/California (AARP)

Against Author

Lewis K. Uhler, Co-Chairman, Californians Against Higher Taxes, and President, National Tax Limitation Committee; Wm. Craig Stubblebine, Von Tobel Professor of Economics Claremont McKenna College

Rebuttal Author

Paul Gann, Proponent of "Gann Spending Limit"; John Hay, Past President, California Chamber of Commerce; Tom Mezger, Yolo County Taxpayers Association

Rebuttal Against Author

John K. Van De Kamp, Attorney General; John Sonneborn, Chair, California Commission on Aging; Craig Meacham, President, California Police Chiefs Association