Protect private property - Vote YES on Proposition 98

California voters have the opportunity in June to reform eminent domain, protect private property, and answer the infamous Supreme Court decision that said government can take your home to give to another private owner.  Proposition 98, co-sponsored by the California Farm Bureau, protects all kinds of private property.  Read it for yourself!

With the passage of Proposition 98, California would join 41 other states in protecting private property.  Proposition 98 protects all private property, including homes, farms, churches, businesses. 

Let’s be clear on one thing.  Government can take private property by eminent domain for public uses like roads, power lines and reservoirs.  Proposition 98 will not change that.  But government is supposed to – but all too often doesn’t -- pay fair prices.  Proposition 98 will fix that.

Proposition 98 will protect the resources you own -- such as the water rights or mineral rights attached to your land.  It will not interfere with public projects like pipelines and reservoirs.  These public projects collect, transport, store and deliver resources but they do NOT “consume” them.  Proposition 98 will prevent government from taking your land for the purpose of obtaining or diverting the underlying water rights or to seize valuable mineral deposits like gravel, oil or gas that you own.

Proposition 98 will protect your right to sell or rent your property.  It will prevent government from telling you how much you can charge.  Land owners offer many types of property for rent, including farm land as well as office buildings, apartments and mobile home lots.  It's your property, and Proposition 98 says government has no business setting the rental price for you.  However, Proposition 98 will not affect rent-control provisions for current residents as long as they remain in their rental agreements: it won't throw anybody out.

When opponents claim Proposition 98 is poorly written, what they really mean is it’s written too well.  It would provide almost airtight protection from eminent domain abuse.  

When government agencies take property by eminent domain for public uses like roads, power lines and reservoirs, they would have to pay fair prices, including compensation for all reasonable costs associated with loss of business and moving and reestablishing a farm or business.

Transportation Agency for Monterey County opposes Proposition 98 because it would be “too expensive” for them.  All they have to do is pay fair value.  The Constitution guarantees “just compensation.”  Proposition 98 assures necessary protection for property owners. 

• First, if an agency lowballs a property owner and the owner subsequently wins a court judgment for a higher amount, Proposition 98 requires government to pay the court costs.  Here's how government currently works.  They offer property owners low prices.  The most vulnerable property owners -- the poor, the sick, the old, and the economically distressed -- have a choice.  They can accept the low price or challenge government in court.  Legal costs can quickly exceed the value of the land.  Many owners can't risk it.  Proposition 98’s full compensation provision would shift some of the risk to government, to force it to make fair offers for property. 

• Second, if government takes property immediately and compensates the owner, Proposition 98 would guarantee that owner still has a right to go to court to contest the value of the property.  Today, under “quick take,” the government offers a price and (1) if the owner doesn’t agree, money is withheld until the value is determined, or else (2) if the owner accepts the money, however reluctantly, he must sign an agreement surrendering his right to contest the value.  Proposition 98 would guarantee immediate compensation while protecting the owner's right to seek just compensation.

The League of California Cities and other government agencies .have resorted to the nuclear option, a radioactive counter-measure that could blow up meaningful reform.  This competing measure, 99, limits protection solely to homes occupied by the owner for more than a year, with huge loopholes for exceptions.  It would negate all of Proposition 98 and prevent its key protections.  It would be the “exclusive and comprehensive authority” for eminent domain.  It intends to slam the door on any future reform of eminent domain. 

“The Best Yes” – Yes on Proposition 98 – protects a range of property.  It will stop governments from taking homes, farms, churches, businesses to hand over to private developers. 

Proposition 98 will stop government from setting prices.  It will stop government from telling you how much you can charge for the produce you farm, or for how much you can sell your house … or how much you charge to rent you home, office, apartment or mobile home park.

Proposition 98 will stop government from seizing your land to obtain the underlying water, gravel, gas, oil or other minerals that you own.

Proposition 98 will require government to state a purpose before it takes private property.  It would prevent government from speculative acquisition of your land.  It would also require government to offer your property for sale back to you at a fair price if it turns out it wasn’t needed.

Proposition 98 is sponsored by the California Farm Bureau Federation, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights.

For additional analysis or information on Proposition 98, visit www.YesProp98.com.

FARM BUREAU RESPONDS TO GOVERNOR’S POSITION ON PROPOSITION 98

 Emphasizing that property rights protection and water development go hand-in-hand, the leader of the state’s largest farm organization said today he’s disappointed that Gov. Schwarzenegger has decided to oppose the property-protection measure on the June ballot.

The California Farm Bureau Federation co-sponsors Proposition 98, the California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act, which would add needed protection for homes, farms, businesses and churches from abuse of the government property-seizure process known as eminent domain. It also assures fair treatment of property owners when property is seized.

“It’s not surprising that politicians and government would oppose Proposition 98,” Mosebar said. “After all, it would take power away from government and give more power to people who have been victims of eminent domain abuse. Government wants to be able to take property for whatever purpose it wants, even to give it to private developers for their own personal gain. Proposition 98 would curb that power. No wonder politicians don’t like it.”

Mosebar noted that legal experts and water groups including the Institute for Justice, Pacific Legal Foundation, California Water Association and Family Water Alliance have all reviewed Proposition 98 and found that it protects property rights while allowing development of reservoirs and other needed public projects.

“Farm Bureau strongly favors protecting water rights and strongly favors water development, and our support of Proposition 98 fits with both,” California Farm Bureau President Doug Mosebar said. “Proposition 98 was written with a lot of thought and the best legal advice. It will protect property and water rights, while allowing government agencies to use eminent domain for legitimate public works such as water projects, roads and schools.”

Proposition 98 will appear on the statewide ballot in the June primary election.

The California Farm Bureau Federation, the state’s largest farm organization, works to protect family farms and ranches on behalf of 91,000 members statewide.

Proposition 98
Eminent Domain

READ THE INITIATIVE

Proposition 98, the California Property Owner & Farmland Protection Act is simple -- it provides property rights protections for all.  Right now, government has the right to take private property - our homes, family farms, mom-and-pop small businesses - to build a sports stadium, big-box chain store, or a hotel. Politically connected special interests use and abuse government's power of eminent domain to take and develop private property.  This is what the initiative does:

·                                 Private property may not be taken by eminent domain for private use under any circumstances (i.e. to build a shopping center, auto mall or industrial park).

·                                 Property may be taken by eminent domain only for public use (i.e. freeway construction, parks, schools).

·                                 Property may not be taken by government and used for the same purposes (i.e. residential housing cannot be used for government housing).

·                                 Family farms and open space are protected from seizures by government for the purpose of selling the natural resources.

·                                 If a public agency takes property under false pretenses, or abandons its plans, the property must be offered for sale to the original owner at the original price and the property tax would be assessed at the value of the property when it was originally condemned.  

·                                 If farmers or business owners are evicted by eminent domain, they would be entitled to compensation for temporary business losses, relocation expenses, business reestablishment costs and other reasonable expenses.

·                                 Government may not set the price at which property owners sell or lease their property.

SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS

(a) Our state Constitution, while granting government the power of eminent domain, also provides that the people have an inalienable right to own, possess, and protect private property. It further provides that no person may be deprived of property without due process of law, and that private property may not be taken or damaged by eminent domain except for public use and only after just compensation has been paid to the property owner.

(b) Notwithstanding these clear constitutional guarantees, the courts have not protected the people's rights from being violated by state and local governments through the exercise of their power of eminent domain.

(c) For example, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Kelo v. City of New London, held that the government may use eminent domain to take property from its owner for the purpose of transferring it to a private developer. In other cases, the courts have allowed the government to set the price an owner can charge to sell or rent his or her property, and have allowed the government to take property for the purpose of seizing the income or business assets of the property.

(d) Farmland is especially vulnerable to these types of eminent domain abuses.

SECTION 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

(a) State and local governments may use eminent domain to take private property only for public uses, such as roads, parks, and public facilities.

(b) State and local governments may not use their power to take or damage property for the benefit of any private person or entity.

(c) State and local governments may not take private property by eminent domain to put it to the same use as that made by the private owner.

(d) When state or local governments use eminent domain to take or damage private property for public uses, the owner shall receive just compensation for what has been taken or damaged.

(e) Therefore, the people of the state of California hereby enact the "California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act."

SECTION 3. AMENDMENT TO CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION

Section 19 of Article I of the California Constitution is amended to read:

SEC. 19(a) Private property may be taken or damaged only for a stated public use and when just compensation, ascertained by a jury unless waived, has first been paid to, or into court for, the owner. The Legislature may provide for possession by the condemnor following commencement of eminent domain proceedings upon deposit in court and prompt release to the owner of money determined by the court to be the probable amount of just compensation. Private property may not be taken or damaged for private use.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(1) "Taken" includes transferring the ownership, occupancy, or use of property from a private owner to a public agency or to any person or entity other than a public agency, or limiting the price a private owner may charge another person to purchase, occupy or use his or her real property.

(2) "Public use" means use and ownership by a public agency or a regulated public utility for the public use stated at the time of the taking, including public facilities, public transportation, and public utilities, except that nothing herein prohibits leasing limited space for private uses incidental to the stated public use; nor is the exercise of eminent domain prohibited to restore utilities or access to a public road for any private property which is cut off from utilities or access to a public road as a result of a taking for public use as otherwise defined herein.

(3) "Private use" means:

(i) transfer of ownership, occupancy or use of private property or associated property rights to any person or entity other than a public agency or a regulated public utility;

(ii) transfer of ownership, occupancy or use of private property or associated property rights to a public agency for the consumption of natural resources or for the same or a substantially similar use as that made by the private owner; or

(iii) regulation of the ownership, occupancy or use of privately owned real property or associated property rights in order to transfer an economic benefit to one or more private persons at the expense of the property owner.

(4) "Public agency" means the state, special district, county, city, city and county, including a charter city or county, and any other local or regional governmental entity, municipal corporation, public agency-owned utility or utility district, or the electorate of any public agency.

(5) "Just compensation" means:

(i) for property or associated property rights taken, its fair market value;

(ii) for property or associated property rights damaged, the value fixed by a jury, or by the court if a jury is waived;

(iii) an award of reasonable costs and attorney fees from the public agency if the property owner obtains a judgment for more than the amount offered by a public agency as defined herein; and

(iv) any additional actual and necessary amounts to compensate the property owner for temporary business losses, relocation expenses, business reestablishment costs, other actual and reasonable expenses incurred and other expenses deemed compensable by the Legislature.

(6) "Prompt release" means that the property owner can have immediate possession of the money deposited by the condemnor without prejudicing his or her right to challenge the determination of fair market value or his or her right to challenge the taking as being for a private use.

(7) "Owner" includes a lessee whose property rights are taken or damaged.

(8) "Regulated public utility" means any public utility as described in Article XII, section 3 that is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission and is not owned or operated by a public agency. Regulated public utilities are private property owners for purposes of this article.

(c) In any action by a property owner challenging a taking or damaging of his or her property, the court shall consider all relevant evidence and exercise its independent judgment, not limited to the administrative record and without deference to the findings of the public agency. The property owner shall be entitled to an award of reasonable costs and attorney fees from the public agency if the court finds that the agency's actions are not in compliance with this section. In addition to other legal and equitable remedies that may be available, an owner whose property is taken or damaged for private use may bring an action for an injunction, a writ of mandate, or a declaration invalidating the action of the public agency.

(d) Nothing in this section prohibits a public agency or regulated public utility from entering into an agreement with a private property owner for the voluntary sale of property not subject to eminent domain, or a stipulation regarding the payment of just compensation.

(e) If property is acquired by a public agency through eminent domain, then before the agency may put the property to a use substantially different from the stated public use, or convey the property to another person or unaffiliated agency, the condemning agency must make a good faith effort to locate the private owner from whom the property was taken, and make a written offer to sell the property to him at the price which the agency paid for the property, increased only by the fair market value of any improvements, fixtures, or appurtenances added by the public agency, and reduced by the value attributable to any removal, destruction or waste of improvements, fixtures or appurtenances that had been acquired with the property. If property is repurchased by the former owner under this subdivision, it shall be taxed based on its pre-condemnation enrolled value, increased or decreased only as allowed herein, plus any inflationary adjustments authorized by subdivision (b) of Section 2 of Article XIIIA. The right to repurchase shall apply only to the owner from which the property was taken, and does not apply to heirs or successors of the owner or, if the owner was not a natural person, to an entity which ceases to legally exist.

(f) Nothing in this section prohibits a public agency from exercising its power of eminent domain to abate public nuisances or criminal activity;

(g) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or impair voluntary agreements between a property owner and a public agency to develop or rehabilitate affordable housing.

(h) Nothing in this section prohibits the California Public Utilities Commission from regulating public utility rates.

(i) Nothing in this section shall restrict the powers of the Governor to take or damage private property in connection with his or her powers under a declared state of emergency.

SECTION 4. IMPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENT

This section shall be self-executing. The Legislature may adopt laws to further the purposes of this section and aid in its implementation. No amendment to this section may be made except by a vote of the people pursuant to Article II or Article XVIII.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY

The provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE

The provisions of this Act shall become effective on the day following the election ("effective date"); except that any statute, charter provision, ordinance, or regulation by a public agency enacted prior to January 1, 2007, that limits the price a rental property owner may charge a tenant to occupy a residential rental unit ("unit") or mobile home space ("space") may remain in effect as to such unit or space after the effective date for so long as, but only so long as, at least one of the tenants of such unit or space as of the effective date ("qualified tenant") continues to live in such unit or space as his or her principal place of residence. At such time as a unit or space no longer is used by any qualified tenant as his or her principal place of residence because, as to such unit or space, he or she has: (a) voluntarily vacated; (b) assigned, sublet, sold or transferred his or her tenancy rights either voluntarily or by court order; (c) abandoned; (d) died; or he or she has (e) been evicted pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4) or (5) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure or Section 798.56 of the Civil Code as in effect on January 1, 2007; then, and in such event, the provisions of this Act shall be effective immediately as to such unit or space.

Home Up