New Independent Legal Analysis of California's Prop. 99 Exposes Fatal Flaws

Purported Homeowner Protections Easily Circumvented & Redevelopment Zones Exempt

SACRAMENTO, Calif., April 17 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, proponents of Proposition 98 announced new evidence that a competing eminent domain ballot measure, Proposition 99, will do next to nothing to protect homeowners from eminent domain abuse. Proposition 99 includes a major loophole that will allow public agencies to continue to forcibly seize owner occupied homes for the benefit of wealthy and politically connected developers even if the measure wins voter approval.

According to the Institute for Justice (IJ), an independent non-profit organization that represented Susette Kelo before the U.S. Supreme Court, public agencies could circumvent Prop. 99's purported homeowner protections by merely rezoning residential neighborhoods for business use.

IJ's independent analysis states: " ... Prop 99 only applies to owner-occupied residences when the government's 'purpose' is to convey property to another private party, so it is unclear if Prop 99 would protect any property. Government can always claim that its purpose is something else. For example, under the Prop 99 'purpose' test, a government could change the zoning of an area -- from residential to commercial, for example -- and then, with the alleged purpose of making the properties in the area meet the new zoning requirements, use eminent domain to transfer homes to private developers. Courts give great deference to a government's claim of purpose, so Prop 99 would be of little use to homeowners whose cities are determined to take their properties.

Prop 99 will do little to prevent eminent domain abuse in California -- and this flaw is fatal."

"Prop. 99 will not stop the City of Vista from giving my home of 10 years to a developer," said Jerome Hymes, a Northern San Diego County homeowner threatened by eminent domain. "Prop. 99's loopholes explain why the city is not concerned with whether or not voters approve this fatally flawed ballot measure. Prop. 99 does not protect my home."

The City of Vista has instituted an ambitious redevelopment plan spanning over 2000 acres, threatening hundreds of small businesses and homeowners.

In addition to rezoning, Prop. 99 includes several other loopholes within its exemption clauses, that do not apply purported protections to all California homes, its failure to reform overly broad blight designations that allow any modest home or productive business to be seized by eminent domain, allowing private to private takings by preserving the Kelo definition of what is a legitimate "public use," and its failure to define its health and safety, and so called emergency exemptions.

Since the purported purpose of redevelopment zones are to stimulate economic development by replacing existing properties with business and retail tenants, it is reasonable to conclude that Prop. 99's purported homeowner protections will not apply to any residential neighborhood within a redevelopment area rezoned for business purposes. According to the Municipal Officials for Redevelopment Reform (MORR), "Fully 30% of all urbanized land in California has now been declared blighted."

Given how fatally flawed the measure is, it is not surprising that the State's independent Legislative Analyst has said that Prop. 99 "is not likely to significantly alter current government land acquisition practices."

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Farm Bureau Federation and the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights are the sponsors of Proposition 98. Prop. 98 is the only measure appearing on the June ballot that protects all private property from private to private takings, while allowing traditional uses of eminent domain for roads, schools and water projects. The measure is endorsed by NFIB, the Hispanic Chambers of Commerce and a diverse coalition of taxpayer, faith and good government organizations. For more information on Prop. 98, visit http://www.yesprop98.com/.

First Call Analyst:
FCMN Contact:


Source: Yes on Prop. 98 - Californians for Property Rights Protection

CONTACT: Marko Mlikotin of Yes on Prop. 98 - Californians for Property
Rights Protection, +1-916-444-8781; or Steven Anderson of The Institute for
Justice, +1-703-682-9320, for Yes on Prop. 98 - Californians for Property
Rights Protection

Web site: http://www.yesprop98.com/


2008-04-17 18:25:51 0339259 PRNEWSWIRE

Legal Disclaimer: We are not responsible for the content of the news. Please, contact each company regarding their message.

HOME || Press Release Archive || © Leigh Media Corporation || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Publish Your Press Release Here

Market Segmentation Starts Here || Free Advertising

Search Term: