Judgment Day for Eminent Domain (McClintock SCA 15 up for vote)

OC Register ^ | 8-30-05 | OC Register

[calif_reaganite]

Judgment day on eminent domain

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.

[Mulch]

Looks like huge eminent domain windfall for towns along the Gulf Coast. People are already displaced. Just take their land now. Easy and Quick.

[heleny]

I heard Sen. Tom McClintock on the radio on Friday. He said SCA15 failed in committee, and the Democrats replaced it with something much weaker. [AB 1162 (Mullin-D) and SB 1026(Kehoe-D) impose only a two-year moratorium on eminent domain instead of a permanent prohibition on eminent domain for private use.]

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.

	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

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:	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
	*********************************

[calif_reaganite]

Reconsideration is a courtesy offered to the side that loses a vote and the roll call is almost always unanimous.

[heleny]

Thanks for the explanation. Would they seriously reconsider the bill, or is the "reconsideration" just a formality?

[calif_reaganite]

It's all but a formality -- unless something monumental happens -- and in that Legislature it won't.