Although we had a temporary setback last year with the defeat of Prop 90’s property rights protection initiative I am pleased to report that all sides of this debate acknowledge that “the current system is broken and needs to be fixed.”
I am pleased to see all of the recent coverage on this topic starting with our MORR/CURE Annual Conference on Redevelopment Abuse that is being held at the San Diego Four Points Sheraton on Saturday April 21st. For information call 714.871.9756 or contact myself at lgpwr@aol.com
This Saturday evening the Pacific Legal Foundation PLF is sponsoring a dinner event at the Long Beach Aquarium where a group of attorney’s will be addressing property rights. PLF is a major player in the fight to protect property rights across the country. The keynote speaker will be Hugh Hewitt. For information on that event contact Jennifer at 916.419.7111.
Today’s OC Register editorial says it all. “Property rights back on the radar.” In that editorial it cautions the reader to not be snookered by the competing choices. Recognizing that something will be done in the area of reform the League of Cities is promoting their own version which I would never support. Their agenda surely is not in the best interest of those victims most impacted.
The latest issue of Red County Magazine contains an article written by Westminster Mayor Pro Tem Kermit Marsh entitled “Eminent Domain: Kelo Reform in the aftermath of Prop 90’s defeat.” That commentary can be found on pages 26 and 27 of this second issue. www.redcounty.com
Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, is co-sponsoring the California Property Owners Protection Act. You will shortly see petition gatherers at your local supermarket requesting your support of this initiative.
There’s more to this effort. In my March 8th post I mentioned the latest proposed Legislation by Laguna Niguel Assemblywoman Mimi Walters who on December 5th introduced ACA-2, a Constitutional Amendment that would extend further protections to homeowners in California from having their property seized by local jurisdictions exercising eminent domain.”
We will achieve stronger property rights protection in California next year but it will take your support. If you want to learn more on this topic simply attend one of the above referenced meetings. You can also reply with questions and comments and I will do everything possible to get you truthful answers from those experts involved in the reform efforts.
Larry Gilbert, Orange County Co-Director, Californians United for Redevelopment Education CURE) the “grass roots” partner of Supervisor Chris Norby’s MORR.
Larry—last time you posted on this subject I pointed out that Coupal & the Jarvis organization were not going to circulate a “clean” anti-Kelo ballot measure but were going to load it down with an anti- rent-control albatross.
Im not a rent control fan(it generally reduces incentives to build more housing) but feel this is best left to local governments and local initiatives. Further, it mucks up the eminent domain debate.
You said you’d contact Coupal and check with him and get back on the issue, You didn’t. You dont even mention the rent control issue even though the Register lamented that Coupal’s blurred the debate by inserting a seperate issue.
Why not paint the complete picture here?
Bladerunner.
As much time as I devote to researching and posting articles on this blog, and others, it is not my full time job. And I did contact Jon Coupal who responded. As you also know we have a sizeable team of active bloggers and that post had already moved to the archives.
Your comments took a swipe at Jon Coupal and what you label an “anti-rent control provision” in the new initiative.
In any event let me share his comments:
“I am stunned to see that people think that rent control regulations have nothing to do with Kelo. As a former PLFer, we have always approached property rights with a view that, like a bundle of sticks, property rights are varied and many. What good is a law which prevents government from taking your home to give to a private developer if government can also regulate the price which you sell or lease your home? For anyone who has ever contemplated leasing the home in which they currently reside, rent regulations are clearly a “taking” of a valuable “stick” in the bundle of rights you have in property.”
Bladerunner. Let me repeat your own Feb 20th words in which you stated “I generally oppose rent control, thinking that in most cases the market is a better regulator.”
Therefore we all agree, myself included, that rent control is a form of “taking.”
PS: There is no issue regarding the single subject rule that you also questioned.
Larry,
Thank you for taking your time to try to help all of us!
To be sure you can count on my vote and support on this subject.
be honest Larry–Coupal is just using a popular issue(anti-Kelo) to carry in an unpopular issue(rent control) and by doing so jeopardizes the chance of changing California redevelopment law to prohibit takings for the benefot of private interests.
You don’t address that point, nor does Coupal. its the same reason that Prop 90 lost–because it was saddled down with another albatross—another alleged “taking ” issue. Why don’t you cover that one too larry? Do all the takings…..
Stick to the issue–lets pass a pure anti-kelo measure.
larry—I don’t doubt this is not your full time job. But you volunteered you’d post Coupal’s response. So don’t get touchy when I call you on it.
As I mentioned, Coupal is trying to bootstrap the anti-rent control provisions onto an anti-kelo measure. Rent control is not a taking–thats a legal conclusion. The California Supremes held that it substantially advances legitimate state interests and is therefopre not a taking. I don’t think it does so effectively–the market just works better—but that just means I wouldn’t support rent control if it came to a ballot. If Coupal wants to stop rent control, let him fund those ballot measures in those communities. Don’t drag down the anti-Kelo measure a second time by putting another special interest albatross around this issue.
Bladerunner.
At the present time I am aware of three ongoing efforts to reform our current laws with respect to property rights protection.
Last year I devoted many hours supporting Senator Kehoe’s SB 1206 that eventually became law when Governor Schwarzenegger signed that Bill. Sadly, that redevelopment reform Bill, which I signed as an early supporter, was watered down leaving limited protection. But a baby step towards reform is better than none at all. My initial efforts this year will be to support Assemblymember Mimi Walters ACA-2, a CA Constitutional Amendment addressing this very topic. Each of the current reform proposals have their differences.
Not being part of the team that crafted the California Property Owners Protection Act proposal I will need to devote some time reviewing every one of the suggested provisions, including the proposed “phase out of traditional rent control over a three year period.”
Let me also point out that this Measure is being co-sponsored by groups other than just the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. The other sponsors being the California Farm Bureau Federation and the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights.
Having invested over 10 years of my life to this issue I will surely be looking out for the best interests of those least likely to defend themselves. Namely the pending victims of “eminent domain” abuse.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.