Posted on 06/04/2008 6:33:05 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
Sacramento, CA - Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, issued the following statement on the outcome of the Election.
"Since the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo v. New London decision in 2005 more than 40 states have passed reforms that would prohibit government from profiting by seizing private property and giving it to politically connected developers. Prop. 98 was the only measure on the ballot that addressed the Kelo decision by providing comprehensive protections to all private property and would have phased out dated rental policies not practiced in 46 states.
By placing a second eminent domain measure on the ballot, opponents of private property rights created enough confusion between the ballot measures to defeat Prop. 98. Prop. 99's loopholes will allow eminent domain abuse to continue. Even with its passage, over 400 Baldwin Park property owners and many others are at risk of losing their property to politically connected developers. Prop. 99's purported home protections do not apply to all homes, and not one business, family farm or place of worship.
Throughout the campaign, Prop. 99 proponents repeatedly assured voters that after Election Day they would address the measure's shortcomings through the legislative process.[1] We would gladly join such efforts with the Governor and the Legislature to protect all homes and all private property - including businesses, family farms and places of worship. If the legislature fails to act, we will consider qualifying another ballot measure.
While we will work in good faith with Prop. 99 proponents, we will continue to support local and state calls for a legislative investigation into how an obscure public agency, controlled by the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties, could funnel millions of dollars into their campaign accounts. Had it not been for these anonymous campaign accounts, Prop. 99 would not have qualified for the June election and contributed to Prop. 98's defeat. Public agencies using taxpayer dollars for campaign purposes is illegal and sets a dangerous precedent.
Since California is among the biggest abusers of eminent domain in the country, our coalition cannot abandon efforts to restore private property rights in California, and will continue to hold government accountable for eminent domain abuse."
The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Farm Bureau Federation and the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights are the sponsors of Proposition 98. Prop. 98 was the only measure appearing on the June ballot that would protect all private property from private to private takings, while allowing traditional uses of eminent domain for roads, schools and water projects. The measure is endorsed by NFIB, the Hispanic Chambers of Commerce and a diverse coalition of taxpayer, faith and good government organizations. For more information on Prop. 98, visit http://www.yesprop98.com/.
[1] "League President Jim Madaffer, a San Diego city councilman and a backer of the cities' counter-initiative, said he supports that approach. He said the legislation could give more protections against eminent domain to small businesses, owner-occupied duplexes and churches..." San Diego Union-Tribune, Jan. 17, 2008
Good faith with politicians? Don't count on it...
Start crafting a new initiative without the rent control issue attached and let's do this right.
Ping
And if the CA Supreme Court rules against it?...
Rent control, a God given right in California, is the stuff that communism is made of. Establish strong property rights and the mob is kept at bay.
These groups need to be neutered. I have no problem with cities or counties collaborating on common issues but separate governing organizations work for their own interests, not the people of those areas.
It's just plain wrong. In fact, I'm really surprised Howard Jarvis didn't file such an action.
I think there should be a lawsuit to enjoin the California League of Cities and other governments from using third parties to spend tax revenues on political campaigns.
Should be:
There should be a lawsuit to enjoin the California League of Cities and other non-governmental organizations from spending tax revenues on political campaigns.
I know how funds can be shifted and that it could be tricky to enforce, but there has to be something that can be done to at least limit this madness.
I live in a state filled with morons. Depressing...
I see you’re in California but please give it a rest. Rent control is not seen as a “God given right” in this state.
The results of the Prop 98/99 battle would say otherwise. Rent control was the only issue raised by government to defeat 98.
Yep. Simple inititatives survive court challenges better. Do the rent control law separately.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.