Posted on 07/14/2005 4:46:27 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO – A group of California lawmakers is trying to block the impact of last month's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that expanded the government's power to seize private property, a decision that was swiftly criticized by groups across the political spectrum. In the 5-4 decision, the nation's highest court ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses without their consent for private development.
State Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Northridge, said the court ruling in Kelo v. New London allows governments to "take the house of a person that it doesn't like, and give it to a person that it does like."
McClintock and Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, have introduced a state constitutional amendment that would prohibit governments from seizing private property for anything other than public use. The property could not be sold to retailers, housing developers or any other private entity.
Property not used for public purposes such as parks and roads would have to be offered back to the original owner at the price paid or fair market value, whichever is lower.
Assemblyman Doug Malfa, R-Chico, has introduced an identical amendment in the state Assembly. He said he hoped it would force governments to negotiate fairly with homeowners.
"As in (the movie) 'The Godfather,' if you want to take someone's property, you should make them an offer they can't refuse," Malfa said.
But local government groups have denounced the proposal as extreme and unnecessary.
Chris McKenzie, executive director of the California League of Cities, said the measure would kill jobs and thwart redevelopment of blighted or damaged areas.
"This is how many downtown areas have been completely renewed," McKenzie said, pointing to the rebuilding of downtown Santa Cruz after the 1989 earthquake and development of a mall and affordable housing complex on a polluted site in Emeryville.
McKenzie said California already has protections against the abuses that led to the Supreme Court case.
In that case, the New London City Council wanted to bulldoze homes to make way for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices. Seven families refused to sell and challenged the city's seizure of their property.
The justices found that promoting economic development is a suitable purpose for using eminent domain, but majority opinion noted that states are free to pass additional protections, if they see fit.
California law already requires governments to pay "just compensation" to homeowners, as determined by a court, and to find that a property is blighted before seizing it.
Forty-five lawmakers, including four Democrats, have signed on to the amendment. Lawmakers will have a three-day window to vote to put the measure on the special election ballot in November. McClintock said if that effort fails, he will attempt to put the issue before voters next summer.
The effort has the backing of the Pacific Legal Foundation, a property rights group, which is involved in court cases challenging eminent domain in several states.
Timothy Sandefur, an attorney for the group, called eminent domain abuses "legalized theft," and said the court's decision has galvanized opposition and forged unusual partnerships. His group has recently worked with the American Civil Liberties Union, consumer advocate Ralph Nader and the American Association of Retired People on the issue, he said.
This will be interesting to see how this plays out in the legislature.
McClintock Ping List -- Please freepmail me if anyone wants on or off this list
Duplicate thread:
California lawmakers seek to strengthen homeowners' rights (Tom McClintock, PLF)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1443163/posts
Something like this should be done at every government level!
Bump
Wait a minute! When has any government been on the level in our lifetime?
GOOD!!! There's nothin but blue zone voters in them sesspools anahow!!! They'll move out as soon as they run outa government give-outs!!!
I know it sounds harsh, but so's bein a property owner an gittin an offer you cain't refuse from the guviment an having to pay a much higher rate of property tax on what you were forced to move to!!!
Good reason to write the legislators and let them know that we DISAGREE with the SC's recent decision, and that we expect them to represent us in this matter. McClintock should have been Governor.
Where does Arnold stand?
Behind his wife's skirt...
I don't expect any forceful comments from Arnold supporting this. Many of most ardent supporters would relish using the eminent domain hammer.
My guess is he will dodge comment as long as he can, then move to some mushy non-committal statement.
LOL! That's so cold, but so true!!! (broad grin)
My... My... And he used to talk so big!!! "I want to BLOW UP THOSE BOXES!" Phhhhhht!!!
Like I said the other day... Democrats get so steamed when they lose ANY elective office that they relentlessly set out to make it seem like it never happened. I know this from personal experience.
Income for vetoes? Yep. Just another of many conflicts, IMO. Disgusting.
Here's the FR threads that relate to your link.
CA: Governor's muscle magazines packed with ads for supplements
Posted by NormsRevenge
On News/Activism 07/14/2005 7:10:55 PM PDT · 7 replies · 100+ views
Bakersfield Californian ^ | 7/14/05 | Beth Fouhy - AP
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Tucked deep in the August 2005 issue of Muscle & Fitness magazine, past the photographs of men with chiseled muscles and stories such as "How I Built the World's Biggest Chest," is a glossy, two-page article proclaiming "It's Now Or Never!" The article details the bodybuilding industry's efforts to block state and federal regulations on nutritional supplements. It also proclaims the support of a powerful spokesman, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The story describes how Schwarzenegger attended a private meeting with bodybuilding executives at the Arnold Classic in March to vow a united front in the battle...
CA: Gov. to Be Paid $8 Million by Fitness Magazines
Posted by NormsRevenge
On News/Activism 07/14/2005 10:00:01 AM PDT · 13 replies · 214+ views
LA Times ^ | 7/14/05 | Peter Nicholas and Robert Salladay
SACRAMENTO — Two days before he was sworn into office, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger accepted a consulting job paying an estimated $8 million over five years to "further the business objectives" of a national publisher of health and bodybuilding magazines. The contract pays Schwarzenegger 1% of the magazines' advertising revenue, much of which comes from makers of nutritional supplements. Last year, the governor vetoed legislation that would have imposed government regulations on the supplement industry. According to records filed Wednesday with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Schwarzenegger entered into the agreement with a subsidiary of American Media Inc. on Nov. 15,...
CA: Filings show Schwarzenegger gets millions as fitness consultant
Posted by NormsRevenge
On News/Activism 07/14/2005 10:10:00 AM PDT · 17 replies · 239+ views
Bakersfield Californian ^ | 7/14/05 | AP - Sacramento
SACRAMENTO (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is being paid $1 million a year for his role as a consultant to a company that publishes several fitness magazines, a deal critics say represents a serious conflict of interest for the former bodybuilding champion. The payments, revealed Wednesday in filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, are from Schwarzenegger's consulting job with American Media Operations, a subsidiary of the company that publishes Flex and Muscle & Fitness magazines, among others. Critics say the contract is a conflict of interest because Schwarzenegger's pay comes from the magazines' advertising revenue and the magazines...
BTTT!!!!!!!
BTTT
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.