Juice readers. By now you should have received your 24 page Primary Election Ballot for the Tuesday, June 3, 2008 election that contains material on competing property rights Propositions 98 and 99 Constitutional Amendments.
While you surely know where I stand on these two initiatives let me suggest reading the following commentary and going to the (below) referenced web site and listen to the two minute audio from Paul Jacob.
Email received from Paul Jacob today.
Subj:Common Sense: A Tale of Two Propositions
To make sure you get Common Sense emails, please add commonsense@samadamsalliance.org to your address book now. If you have problems viewing this email, please visit: www.samadamsalliance.org/common_sense
A Tale of Two Propositions
April 30, 2008
Beware of enemies of property rights bearing pallid imitations of the real thing.
Californians face an alternative on the upcoming June ballot: protect their private property, or expose it to the continued attack of politicians and private entities seeking easy ill-gotten gain.
Proposition 98 is the real thing. It would outlaw taking private property for private use. It defines “just compensation” in detail so that persons who lose property to a public use have a better chance of being fairly compensated. It would enable the original owner of a property to buy it back if it was grabbed under false pretenses. And Prop 98 also phases out rent control.
All this is spelled out in California’s official ballot summary. But opponents complained about the official title — “Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property” — saying it doesn’t mention the ban on rent control. Which is, however, clearly stated in the summary. In any case, the courts have rebuffed this attempt to undermine the measure.
Opponents prefer Proposition 99 , a much more limited measure. It states that eminent domain may not be abused to steal an “owner-occupied residence.” So Prop 99 basically sanctions the state’s grabbing of small businesses — or any property for any purpose at all if you happen not to live there.
Sorry, 99. But you’re not the right choice for real advocates of property rights.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
As always you are welcome to share your views on this very critical ballot choice.
Larry Gilbert, Orange County Chairman, Prop 98 campaign
So what are the odds that Art will let someone who opposes prop 98 post about why they don’t think it’s such a great idea?
We have already discussed/debated this initiative in this blog. Let it rest Mr. Gilbert (unless you are paying a fee to post your political advertisements, that is)
I second #2 Mr. Gilbert!…. especially because you believe in the collectively owned properties a.k.a. HOAs.
This new plug by Mr. Gilbert just confirms that this Proposition is a rather deceptive one.
It is not about Eminent Domain, as the title implies. The fact that the summary also mentions rent control is rather irrelevant.
We have seen with Santa Ana’s Measure D that most people don’t read the description in the booklet.
Just like Measure D, Prop. 98 is designed to scare voters, and as such is deceptive.
What it looks like to me is that Prop 99 protects the welfare of the developers who want to continue to have carte blanche over our
private property rights versus Prop 98, which protects the interests of the homeowners and small businesses.
If you want to STOP government’s unconditional authority it presently has over our private property rights, then please vote
YES on Prop 98 and vote NO on 99. cathy schlicht
Hello All,
I have read the details of both and I suggest that everyone does the same. Look at who is supporting and funding these Props. 98 is a scheme to eliminate the only protection many of our lower income &/or senior citezen to protect the afordability of their homes and apts.
The evil genius is the way it is worded.
NO on 98 and YES on 99!
I’ll put my name on thisone that is how strongly I feel.
#1,
My writers are free to take that position, but I doubt any of them will. However, I encourage you to email me your thoughts, to apedroza@earthlink.net. I can always put your ideas up as a post.
#6, I’m with you. Prop 98 is a landlord’s dream- imagine being able to raise rent to whatever you please. YES on 99
Juice readers. While I cannot determine the outcome of any future speaking engagement as it relates to victors or endorsements, I will be posting the results of a local debate I am having with a representative of the CA. League of Cities tomorrow morning.
Art. As some complain that no one on the juice blog is writing for Prop 99 let me help out.
Have you all read your ballots?
While we protect every type of private property taken for a private use they limit Prop 99 solely to owner occupied homes where it is your principle place of residence for over one year. Should they win on June 3rd they have cleverly given themselves six months before the law goes into effect which is more than adequate time to draft Resolutions of Necessity to take your homes anyway if that their intent. They can also change the zoning.
As to renters. A key point to consider. If Mr. X owns a rental unit in which you live, by their definition in Prop 99, you can still become a victim as you are not the owners of record. That property can be taken by their definition.
How clear can I paint this picture?
If you doubt what I am saying please ask an attorney.
The supporters of Prop 99 discuss rent phase out but have they provided the above comment? No Sir!
… still thinking both initiatives are too loaded up with extras. I’d love to see an initiative that deals with just eminent domain protections. Remember James Carville: KISS – keep it simple stupid.
SMS
SMS:
Yup, that’s my sentiment as well. I would vote in a heartbeat for a pure proposition limiting Eminent Domain.
But I can’t vote for these overloaded propositions.
Larry:
Comparing Prop 98 to Prop 99 doesn’t get you anywhere. It basically is an argument of “It may be bad, but pay no attention and instead look over there, that’s worse.” Too bad that some people are paying attention…
That Prop 99 is bad doesn’t mean that Prop 98 is better.
As far as I am concerned, both are deeply flawed.
Catch 22? You betcha! The sad
part is that we will have to vote
for “either / or”….because the
one that gets the most votes wins!
If we don’t vote for either one..
that is stupid.
We agree with Sarah…100%
Sarah, Joe and Ron.
Rather than duplicate text from my latest post let me simply reportthat earlier today Tony Cardenans and I squared off on both measures.
The Irvine Chamber voted to
support Prop 98 and rejected Prop 99.
Joe, Ron & Anna:
Larry raises a good point. It’s an either/or proposition. Apparently, that was also one of the ‘extras.’ Now what is a voter to do? I guess abstaining won’t help.
Looks to me like we need to vote for 99 and then try to improve the protections to cover more than just owner-occupied real estate in the next election cycle.
Sorry Larry, but it’s tricks like these which keep me from registering Republican. I don’t understand why when your party actually decides to live up to their platform of smaller government, they always seem to start by trying to circumvent or repeal the most important laws that protect the lower classes.
My whole family is in real estate and while I understand that rent control limits the freedom of the landlord to make more of a profit (i.e. be greedy), the freedom of the poorer classes to keep their homes must be protected as well. Where will these people go when their rents increase two and three-fold? I don’t want to see any more people become homeless in my neighborhood, especially with homeowners literally walking away from their mortgages these days.
Sounds to me like the OC Republicans are trying to gentrify the whole county in order to try to bring the red voters back. Sounds like a trap to me. Sorry Larry.
SMS
Dear Sarah.
What trap? If you live in that same unit for the next 65 years your rent will not exceed the legal limits you now have. Kindly show me where it says that rents “will increase two and three fold” in either Prop 98 OR Prop 99 literature or Ballot Measures.
“Prop 98 does NOT make any changes to other renter protections or tenant laws–such as the fair return of deposits or protection against unfair evictions.
Prop 98 does NOT prohibit government from subsidizing the housing needs of the truly needy. In addition to housing vouchers, public agencies could offer market based incentives that benefit renters, property owners and ocmmunities with low income housing needs. For example, public agencies could offer property owners long term land leases in return for offering lower rents and as well as offering housing developers market based incentives to build low income housing in return for development rights.”
Let me share some data:
A poll of the American Economic Association found 93 percent of its members agreeing that a ‘ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing.’ Almost every college freshman-level textbook contains a case study on rent control, using its know adverse side effects to illustrate the principles of supply and demand. Well known liberal economist and Columnist, Paul Krugman says, ‘Rent Control–is a textbook case of Economic stupidity.”
And my final input from another source reads in part as follows:
“By phasing out price controls over the long run, Prop 98 will allow the housing market to work by requiring government to assume the public responsibility of providing housing assistance to the truly needed while creating market incentives for investors to build affordable housing for the general public. California is perceived as being a trend setter in so many ways, but in the case o f eminent domain reform and draconian rent control laws, it has some catching up to do–a broken system is in need of immediate repair.”
Larry-
I’m sorry but it seems to me that Prop 98 is no better than Measure G in that is has the same effect: pricing people out of their homes.
So your argument is that if someone wants to live in the same unit for the rest of their lives, they’ll be protected? Kind of cynical, no?
Who’s going to protect people who don’t want to or somehow can’t keep their apartments (or worse still are removed for unrelated reasons by greedy landlords) but want to remain in OC? They’re going to end up in LA or IE; then the most affluent among us can have OC all to themselves.
Oh, and using college textbooks as reference materials is great, but I’m sure there are other books and professors who feel the opposite way. There are two sides to every story. If this were so simple, there would be no need for so much discussion on the matter.
This is coming from a former landlord.
SMS