California Constitutional Conventions

[7] Multiple calls for a third state constitutional convention have been raised during the past quarter-century, but none has thus far gained widespread political momentum.

[1] The memorial presenting the proposed constitution to Congress claimed it banned slavery not because of anti-slavery sentiment, but just unanimous agreement (including convention delegates originally from slave states) that California's climate and soil were not suitable for slave labor.

It also described the proposed eastern boundary as a compromise between those who wished to include all of former Mexican Alta California (including today's Nevada, Utah, and Arizona) and a committee-proposed eastern boundary at 116° (including the western half of Nevada but excluding the Lower Colorado River Valley and Imperial Valley), and denied having considered north–south division at the Missouri Compromise Line (south of Carmel and Fresno), saying Southern Californians had no interest in division.

[14] Present language in the Constitution of California: "The Legislature by rollcall vote entered in the journal, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, may submit at a general election the question whether to call a convention to revise the Constitution.

Delegates to a constitutional convention shall be voters elected from districts as nearly equal in population as may be practicable."

[16] The Call for a Citizens' Limited Constitutional Convention would have three types of delegates: Assembly district, County, and Tribal.