Daniel Weintraub: Eminent domain reform morphs into broader battle (CA)

Sacramento Bee ^ | March 28, 2006 | Daniel Weintraub

[Carry_Okie]

There is also the scepter specter of insider trading if compensation for regulatory taking becomes common law.

A Freudian slip?

We agree. I can just see the conservancies using this for a funding tool now. The best way to manage regulation is to eliminate the need through a better understanding of pooled risk.

[patriot_wes]

"That's an idea that has won support from Republican state Sen. Tom McClintock of Thousand Oaks, a fierce advocate of private property rights, and the California Democratic Party, which was persuaded that eminent domain is often abused by local government to take the property of homeowners and small business owners, often minorities, and sell it to wealthy developers."

Anyone see a fundamental conflict here? The Demos suddenly on the side of private property ownership after years of trumpeting the collectivist values of communism. Follow the money!

[Amerigomag]

I thought is was appropriate considering that King Peter and his Austrian prince may well be able to directly enrich the New Majority if the law passes. Initiatives take effect immediately and regulatory takings are generally instigated by the executive.

What great irony. The only bulwark that stands between my wallet and the New Majority, money belt is our liberal state appellant.

[Amerigomag]

Anyone see a fundamental conflict here?

None. The proposed Democrat legislation is aimed at local government, not state government.

It's simply an internicene, turf war with both sides demanding to keep their Eminent Domain weapons. The California Democrat Party wants to keep the purse strings close. No local rebels allowed. Takings will be state takings, benefiting state party donors, not a local developer with friends on a council or board.

[Carry_Okie]

The only bulwark that stands between my wallet and the New Majority, money belt is our liberal state appellant.

Make that...

The only bulwark that stands between my wallet and the New Majority, money belt is our liberal state repellant.

[pointsal]

Maybe this will make city managers and

public works departments stand up and take note....

Ha! Probably be ignored....

[heleny]

There is an inherent weakness in monetary penalties as a deterrent to government, regulatory takings. The supply of money is endless. Both to pay for the taking and to finance an aggressive legal defense of the taking.

There is also the scepter of insider trading if compensation for regulatory taking becomes common law. Properties1, included in unpublished, future takings, will be acquired by those in the know and properties2, without significance, will be the subject of trivial takings simply to enhance connected owners from the public trough.

I didn't think of that. But, corruption in CA goverment is inevitable, and stuff like that already happens in other ways. For instance, shortly before the recall of Gray Davis, we (California) acquired Ahmanson Ranch, north of US-101 near the border between Ventura and LA counties, for a large amount of money. If we had not bought the land, it could have been developed (subject to the obstruction of the environmentalists), or it might have been a huge investment loss if it could not be developed. CA guaranteed a profit to the former owners.

[Czar]

Very good news.

Lets see who rises in opposition.

[Seadog Bytes]

Thank you. I am keeping my fingers crossed but, morally correct as they might be, I have to say I am a little worried about the 'poison pill' potential of the 'regulatory takings' provisons, too.