News & Press |
Yes On 98, No On 99
The Republican Party of Orange County regularly solicits the views and news of the state and federal delegation. Please read this week's Op-Ed by Ray Grangoff
In the June 3rd election two statewide initiatives will appear on your ballot—Proposition 98 and Proposition 99. The California Republican Party recommends a Yes vote on 98 and a No vote on 99.
The Proposition 98 campaign is being led by a coalition of taxpayer and property rights advocates that include homeowners, farmers, small business owners, realtors, rental property owners and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. The initiative’s primary objective is to protect private property from government overreach and abuse. This objective is accomplished by the initiatives two main provisions to limit government takings of private property: 1) true eminent domain reform and 2) the phase out of rent control.
The first provision of Proposition 98 provides a "Kelo-fix" to the use of eminent domain. You will recall that in 2005 the United States Supreme Court ruled in Kelo vs. the City of New London that it was permissible for government to use eminent domain to seize property from one private citizen and give that property to another private citizen or entity for the purpose of economic development. As a result of this ruling it is okay for a city to seize your property if that city would like to redevelop or use that property for a project like a mini-mall or big box store. A move like this would be beneficial to the city since a big box store brings in more tax revenue then your property. The city’s benefit, however, comes at the cost of violating your property rights. Proposition 98 states that private property may not be taken by eminent domain for private use under any circumstances, and that eminent domain can only be for public use (e.g.. freeway construction, water projects, parks, or schools). Very importantly, Proposition 98 protects all private property from such eminent domain abuse; property like individual homes, small businesses, churches, apartments, farms, etc.
Some may argue that it is necessary for cities to use eminent domain in order to clean up blighted neighborhoods or provide economic revitalization to run down communities. Shouldn’t a city be able to take private property from a slum lord in order to add a few nice shops or a new movie theater to a part of town in need of an upgrade? The answer is that improving a neighborhood can be done without using eminent domain. One only has to look at the successes of two cities in Orange County. The cities of Orange and Anaheim are two examples of how cities can revitalize a community without violating private property rights. The highly successful Platinum Triangle development in Anaheim and the area near the Block of Orange was done through the use of market incentives rather then the taking of property. I recommend skeptics of this approach read Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle’s report on this topic, it is available at http://www.castlecoaliton.org. More cities should follow Orange and Anaheim’s lead and use a creative free market strategy of development, rather then resorting to eminent domain abuses.
The second main provision of Proposition 98 seeks to prevent government from setting the price at which property owners sell or lease their property. This is the portion that phases out rent control. If passed, Proposition 98 will prevent rent control from ever being enacted either statewide or by individual cities. Tenants who live in current rent-regulated communities will continue to receive the "benefit" of rent control, but once the tenant moves out rent control on that property ends. Forty four other states have already outlawed the use of rent control, and now it is California’s time to join the mainstream and put this harmful practice to an end. Anyone that owns property or lives in a rent controlled area knows what a disaster such a policy is, not just for the property owner, but the community as a whole. For the owner, rent control places limits on the potential of their investment. Cities that have rent control will find very little new investors interested in building new multi-family housing stock. Those that are invested in rent controlled housing have very little incentive to keep the property they own in first rate condition. In fact, statistics show that nearly a third of all rent controlled housing in the United States is deteriorated, while only 8 percent of the uncontrolled units are in such a state of disrepair. This deterioration can be contributed to the fact that property owners in rent controlled areas do not have the resources to make the necessary repairs or refurbishing. The property owners’ income remains nearly the same due to rent control, but their costs continue to rise. Is it really any wonder why the rent controlled areas have some of the worst housing stock?
In addition to passing Proposition 98, Proposition 99 must also be defeated. Proposition 99, entitled the "Homeowners Protection Act," is a statewide ballot initiative being sponsored by the League of Cities. For those that may not know, the League of Cities is an organization that represents local city governments throughout California. When I say they represent city governments I don’t mean that they represent you, the taxpayer who fund those governments, rather it is the city council members and city bureaucracy that the League truly represents. At any time their objective is truly to enhance the power of local government; that is the power of local government to tax you, to regulate you, and to intrude on your property rights. That being the case, it probably seems strange that the League would sponsor an initiative called the "Homeowners Protection Act." The League claims the initiative offers real eminent domain reform and a proper Kelo-fix. In fact, Proposition 99 does very little to protect property rights and was only put on the ballot as a tactic to defeat Proposition 98. Proposition 99 states that only owner occupied homes are to be protected from eminent domain abuse; the initiative provides no protection for any other type of property (that includes businesses, churches, farms, and rental housing property). Cities most often use eminent domain against properties like businesses, farms, churches, and rental housing. By only protecting owner occupied homes Proposition 99 is accomplishing very little.
Why is it so vital to defeat Proposition 99? Even if both Proposition 98 and 99 receive a majority of votes only one can become law. If Proposition 99 receives more votes then Proposition 98, then Proposition 99 becomes law and Proposition 98 fails. In order to win a total victory and ensure Proposition 98’s success, Proposition 99 must be defeated.
Vote on June 3rd Vote Yes on 98 and No on 99. Encourage others to vote and contribute. For more information please visit the Yes on 98 website: http://www.yesprop98.com/.
Questions and Comments? - Contact Ray at - rgrangoff@aaoc.com.
Any essays, opinion-editorials, press-releases or news item contained herein is the expressed view of the author and not necessarily of The Republican Party of Orange County (also known as OCGOP.org). OCGOP.org should not be held accountable or responsible for the content associated with these writings. The literature that is provided to you, the user, is for your convenience, entertainment and education and are not to be seen as endorsed by OCGOP.org for any products, services or views promoted by said author.
» Back to News and Press
