The View - Yes on Prop. 98/No on Prop. 99 - The Battle to Restore Private Property Rights

California Real Estate Journal ^ | 28 April 2008 | Joel Ayala, John Kabateck, Doug Mosebar

[CounterCounterCulture]

The View - Yes on Prop. 98/No on Prop. 99 - The Battle to Restore Private Property Rights

Since California has failed to join more than 40 states in reforming its eminent domain statutes, a diverse group of business, farm and taxpayer organizations have taken a leading role in restoring private property protections for California business property by qualifying Proposition 98, the California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act, for the June 2008 ballot.

It is well documented that business owners are the most common victims of eminent domain abuse because of local governments' appetite for sales tax revenue to finance unsustainable levels of spending. In the never-ending chase to generate greater sales tax revenue, it is increasingly common for public agencies to use the power of eminent domain to replace existing businesses with projects that hold the promise of generating more tax revenue.

As a result, it is not just homes and businesses in blighted neighborhoods that are seized from property owners who don't want to sell; it is also modest homes and productive businesses that have the responsibility of supporting their employees and families.

The good people of Baldwin Park know this first hand. The elected leaders are forcing more than 500 home and business owners off their property - bulldozing an area of about 125 football fields in size. So far, pleas to keep their property have fallen on deaf ears.

According to the Institute for Justice, the organization that litigated the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo v. New London case, California is among the biggest abusers of eminent domain in the nation and absent any reforms, the problem is only getting worse.

Fortunately, California's business community has the opportunity to restore private property protections in California by supporting Proposition 98...

[CounterCounterCulture]

Article also available here

[GOP Poet]

thanks for the post

[sergeantdave]

I’d recommend that people behind Prop 98 meet with the group that passed Measure 37 in Oregon. They ran a great campaign to rouse the citizenry and ended bureaucratic abuse and theft of private property.

I fear, though, that the sheep and socialists now outnumber productive citizens in CA.

[MS from the OC]

I’m not an attorney, and I’m not an expert... But as I read the voter’s guide, the main difference between Props 98 and 99 was that Prop 98 ended all rent control in California. What this has to do with eminent domain is questionable (yes, rent control is a taking of property of some sort).

However, with California’s law restricting propositions to a single topic Prop 98 would seem to be easier to challenge in court.

If there is anyone out there with the ability to do a real, unbiased analysis, that would be appreciated.

[Carry_Okie]

I think Prop 98 also includes compensation for regulatory takings, the most common form of property rights abuse.

[calcowgirl]

There is a good comparison chart here:
http://yesprop98.com/comparefacts/

[goldstategop]

I recall the last property rights proposition on the ballot was rejected by the voters because it would have harmed environmental and public health regulations and given standing to any one to sue the government if government takings jeopardized the actual value of their property. Prop. 98 protects private property rights while curbing that alleged overreach. Yet the Big Government types from Red Arnold on down, reject eminent domain reform. This has revealed they are opposed to such reform in principle rather simply taking issue with aspects of such reform they think are too costly or don't work. Californians deserve to know the truth about property rights and where their state's elite stands on the issue.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[calcowgirl]

Follow the money—especially with Arnold’s plan to “leverage” the state’s investments through use of the fascist “public private partnerships.” Arnie wants to be able to have his buddies use eminent domain to build their favored “private” infrastructure projects. Heaven forbid that they would actually have to find and pay a willing property owner without the power of eminent domain for them to take on their so-called “private” enterprise.

[Tempest]

Voting for Prop 99 is good enough for me.

[CounterCounterCulture]

Prop 99 would be a victory for the corrupt politicians who would abuse eminent domain powers for the benefit of corrupt developers.

Prop 99 is supported by the Democratic Party. Prop 98 is supported by the Republican and Libertarian Parties.

We need Prop 98 to win to secure the property rights for all homeowners, farm owners, small business owners, and for places of worship from the misuse of eminent domain.