Skip to comments.Judgment Day for Eminent Domain (McClintock SCA 15 up for vote)
Posted on 08/30/2005 11:40:19 AM PDT by calif_reaganite
The state Senate Judiciary Committee today likely will vote on several measures that would curb alarming abuses of eminent domain by California cities and redevelopment agencies. Local governments routinely take property from homeowners and small-business owners and transfer it to large corporations that promise a huge tax windfall to cities that are willing to trample on property rights.
A U.S. Supreme Court decision in June - Kelov. City of New London(Conn.) - ruled in favor of such takings, but the public backlash has spurred efforts in most states, including California, to put some limits on cities' abuse of this power.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
Here we see the CA Senate Judiciary Committee voted SCA15 down on a direct party-line vote: 2 Republicans for adopting SCA15, 3 Democrats against adopting it, and 2 Democrats absent. (Why are there 5 Democrats and only 2 Republicans when the state senate has more than 1/3 Republicans?)
SCA 15 requires 2/3 of each house, plus the governor's signature, to be placed on the ballot. Clearly, the Democrats are afraid of letting the voters of CA vote on SCA 15, probably because it would surely pass. Hopefully, voters will wonder/see why the Democrats are so reluctant to protect property rights.
But, there was another committee vote the same day to reconsider SCA15. I don't understand why they work this way.VOTES - ROLL CALL MEASURE: SCA 15 AUTHOR: McClintock TOPIC: Eminent domain: condemnation proceedings. DATE: 08/30/2005 LOCATION: SEN. JUD. MOTION: Be adopted, but re-refer to the Committee on Elections, Reapportionmnt and Constitutional Amend (AYES 2. NOES 3.) (FAIL) AYES **** Morrow Ackerman NOES **** Cedillo Escutia Kuehl ABSENT, ABSTAINING, OR NOT VOTING ********************************* Dunn Figueroa
VOTES - ROLL CALL MEASURE: SCA 15 AUTHOR: McClintock TOPIC: Eminent domain: condemnation proceedings. DATE: 08/30/2005 LOCATION: SEN. JUD. MOTION: Set, first hearing. Failed passage in Committee. Reconsideration granted. (AYES 7. NOES 0.) (PASS) AYES **** Dunn Morrow Ackerman Cedillo Escutia Figueroa Kuehl NOES **** ABSENT, ABSTAINING, OR NOT VOTING *********************************
Reconsideration is a courtesy offered to the side that loses a vote and the roll call is almost always unanimous.
Thanks for the explanation. Would they seriously reconsider the bill, or is the "reconsideration" just a formality?
It's all but a formality -- unless something monumental happens -- and in that Legislature it won't.
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.