Free Republic

Proponents of Prop. 98 Respond to Election Outcome Vow to Work on Legislative Solution to End Eminent Domain Abuse 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...

Sleight-of-hand relies heavily on misdirection and distraction. The Proposition 99 campaign tries the same trick on voters, attempting to get Californians to look only where it wants, while ignoring the most important issues in eminent domain reform. Proposition 99 was crafted because Proposition 98 had qualified for the ballot with a good chance of winning, backed by many documented abuses of emotionally appealing “little guys” steamrollered by the politically powerful—i.e., to defend the beneficiaries of eminent domain abuse against real reform. 99 does nothing to restrict eminent domain to justifiable public uses. It “protects” only owner-occupied primary residences, while undermining...

The June ballot is bringing rent control back into the spotlight. Proposition 98 would protect all Californians from abuses of eminent domain and phase out rent control. Proposition 99 is a decoy measure which would override Proposition 98 if it attracted more votes, written by beneficiaries of eminent domain abuse, that the Legislative Analyst concluded involved so little reform that it “is not likely to significantly alter current land acquisition practices.” Proposition 99 offers precious little protection. It wouldn’t protect farmland, churches, businesses or rental properties from eminent domain abuse. It wouldn’t restrict the almost unlimited purposes for which eminent...

Protecting Californians from eminent domain abuses headlines our June ballot. There are two Propositions--98 and 99--that address the issue. However, both are portrayed as real reform by backers and as misleading scams by opponents, making it hard for voters to sort through the assertions. Given both propositions’ backers claim they intend to rein in government eminent domain abuses at the expense of property owners, the best approach is to ask which “reforms” would be most effective at restricting them. If the intent is to limit abuses, would we want to protect owners of all property—homes, farms, churches, businesses and rental...

In the battle over two state propositions on Tuesday's ballot that would restrict government seizure of private property, nearly a majority of California voters support the more limited Proposition 99 while giving thumbs down to Proposition 98, which would abolish rent control, according to a Field Poll released today. A survey of 660 likely voters conducted May 17-26 found 48 percent favoring Prop. 99, with 30 percent opposed and 22 percent undecided, according to the poll results. Those supporting Prop. 98 stood at 33 percent, with 43 percent opposed and 24 percent undecided. Field Poll Director Mark DiCamillo said he'd...

Both would load up the state constitution to attack a problem that just doesn't exist - It's back. Yet another initiative – Proposition 98 – is on the ballot masquerading as "eminent domain" reform and trying to scare people with the prospect that their homes might be "taken" by the government.Yet Proposition 98 is really about a sweeping agenda to lard up the California Constitution to end forever the ability of local governments to enact rent control or affordable housing ordinances, to set rules that set liquor store hours or to require developers to pay fees to build schools.In Sacramento,...

In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Connecticut city's right to seize through eminent domain the waterfront homes of long-time residents for private development. The court held that, like the construction of schools and roads, economic development itself constitutes a "public use" under the Fifth Amendment. Both liberals and conservatives were outraged. As dissenting Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote, "The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory." Some 40 states responded by passing...

The U.S. Supreme Court created a huge political backlash when it ruled that local governments could use eminent domain to seize private property and transfer it to other private owners for "economic development." Since the Kelo ruling in 2005, 42 states have enacted limitations on eminent domain — not always effective ones. But like lawmakers in many other states, some California officials are trying to block real eminent domain reform. On June 3, Californians will vote on Proposition 99, a ballot initiative sponsored by groups representing cities, counties, redevelopment agencies and other pro-condemnation interests. It purports to protect property rights...

Both sides allege tainted funds in duel over Propositions 98, 99. In the June 3 ballot showdown over governments' power to take private property, both sides agree on one thing: Their opponents rely on tainted money that reveals their true motives.One side gets much of its money from landlords and mobile home park owners that stand to benefit from Proposition 98's ban on rent control.The other side opposes Proposition 98 and supports a far less restrictive initiative, Proposition 99. Much of its campaign money comes from local government groups that resist major curbs on their use of eminent domain. Both...

Big Government types and Prop 99 All you really need to know about the two eminent domain propositions on the June 3 ballot, 98 and 99, is that Proposition 99 is being touted by politicians and other government types as the real solution to government intrusion on private property ownership. Among them are the usual suspects, including California Sen. Dianne Feinstein and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, both of whom believe in Big Government, and both of whom describe Proposition 98 as a hindrance to solving such state problems as water quality and supply. Feinstein, in a release at the end...

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...

Editorial: Prop. 98 protects private property rights June election is coming: Vote yes on Prop. 98, for real eminent-domain reform, and no on Prop. 99, which is designed to stop such reform. The campaigns for Propositions 98 and 99 on the June 3 ballot are getting heated, and it would be no surprise if most California voters are confused by the two eminent domain-related measures. As often occurs in political campaigns, one side or the other misrepresents the purpose of its initiative. For instance, Prop. 99's supporters claim that the measure will stop eminent domain abuses that have become well...

One consequence of the state's first February presidential primary election – unintended, perhaps, but a consequence nevertheless – will almost certainly be an extraordinarily low voter turnout for the June 3 regular primary. Primary elections generally see subpar turnouts, in part because independents have almost no motivation to vote. But June's election will be especially devoid of motivation – no presidential contest or any other statewide candidate duel, only a handful of meaningful legislative or congressional primaries and just two statewide ballot measures, both of which deal with the very arcane issue of property seizures by local governments. We'll have...

While most developers were eyeing property in suburbia in the 1980s, Moe Mohanna was staking his claim on some rundown buildings a few blocks from the state Capitol. The Sacramento landlord began fixing up nine storefronts along K Street in an area frequented by vagrants. His properties are at the heart of the city's plans to revitalize its business district. After years of failed negotiations to rehabilitate, exchange or buy Mohanna's buildings—which the city says violate health and safety codes—Sacramento's redevelopment agency recently moved to condemn and seize his property. "We've done all of these things, and they are chasing...

Propositions that are on the June 3, 2008 Statewide Direct Primary Election Ballot Initiative Constitutional AmendmentProposition 98 1248. Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property. Constitutional Amendment. Proponents: Doug Mosebar, Jon Coupal and Jim Nielsen Bars state and local governments from condemning or damaging private property for private uses. Prohibits rent control and similar measures. Prohibits deference to government in property rights cases. Defines “just compensation.” Requires an award of attorneys fees and costs if a property owner obtains a judgment for more than the amount offered by the government. Requires government to offer to original owner of condemned property...