 
LWVC HOME -
VOTING Q&As -
STATE PROPS -
ABOUT LWV
ON BALLOT MEASURES:
ABOUT OUR ANALYSIS -
LIST of PROPS -
SMART VOTER
|
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA EDUCATION FUND
|
Proposition 221 SUBORDINATE JUDICIAL OFFICERS. DISCIPLINE.
 |
| Legislative Constitutional Amendment |
THE QUESTION
Should the Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) be granted the discretionary authority to review complaints about subordinate judicial officers after an initial review by their employers?
THE SITUATION
Judges appoint commissioners and referees to perform subordinate judicial duties and are responsible for handling complaints and discipline. The CJP is an independent state agency that investigates complaints and disciplines judges who may act inappropriately.
THE PROPOSAL
Proposition 221 would allow the CJP oversight over non-elected court commissioners and referees. The CJP would rule whether or not to consider the case. If the CJP hears the case, it rules on the commissioner's actions and on the actions of the presiding judge whose ruling was questioned.
FISCAL EFFECT
Additional costs are probably minor.
SUPPORTERS SAY
- Proposition 221 will remove personal bias from the discipline of commissioners/referees.
- This measure gives dissatisfied defendants another level for complaints if they are not satisfied with the decision of the presiding judge.
OPPONENTS SAY
(Analysis prepared by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund.)
- Commissioners and referees already fall under the applicable county court discipline procedure and should not be burdened with "two masters."
- Meaningful reform should be based on a more comprehensive study of the present system.
On Propositions:
About our Analysis -
List of Props -
Smart Voter
LWVC Home -
Voting Q&As -
State Props -
About Us
Last updated: April 22, 1998
Send comments and suggestions concerning this page to nvmk16b@prodigy.com
Copyright 1998 League of Women Voters of California Education Fund. All rights reserved.