There are numerous endorsements supporting the Yes on 90 effort that can be found at www.90yes.com. However, I just received a hard copy of one signed by the President/CEO of the California Black Chamber of Commerce dated Sept 15th. Some of the highlights follow:
“The California Black Chamber of Commerce urges an “AYE” vote on Proposition 90, the “Protect Our Homes” initiative on the November 2006 ballot.
The California Black Chamber supports Proposition 90 because our community stands to lose much, if not more than most,if current California law remains unchanged.
We believe that as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Kelo v. City of New London, the unprecedented expansion of eminent domain to allow state and local governments to take individual homes, businesses, investment properties and churches simply by asserting that another owner (almost certainly NOT a person of color) will put the property to a “higher use” that serves some “public purpose” will send a frightening messsage to the African-American community…Particularly our entrepreneurs and business owners.”
“Allowing California state and local government to pursue eminent domain for another owner’s private gain, and merely to increase local tax revenues–as the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo decision specifically allows–will clearly have a disparate impact on African-Americans, and all other racial and ethnic minorities.”
I’ll skip to the bottom line which reads: “We therefore urge every registered California voter to go to the polls on Election Day, and to cast and enthusiastic “AYE” vote on Proposition 90, the “Protect Our Homes Act.”
Signed. Aubrey L. Stone President/CEO
PS: In Jan 1998 I was in Sacramento with Ronzel Cato, a fifth generation African-American, first in his family to own a piece of America, when he testified for (than) Assemblyman Tom McClintock on losing his Fresno home for a turkey processing plant. Therefore I have seen the horror’s of eminent domain abuse firsthand.
We must pass Prop 90 to curtail these takings which are not for a valid “public use.”
Larry Gilbert
It is not about eminent domain and you all know it!
I agree. If 90 passes, anyone with an interest in property, no matter how inchoate, will have the right to sue any level of government to seek monetary damages if they believe their interest has been substantially impaired. Our tax dollars will be spent on legal fees and not public services. That is why police and fire organizations are opposed to Prop. 90.