KPCC Election 2008
Propositions 98 & 99: Eminent Domain & Rent Control
Propositions 98 and 99 deal with the issues of eminent domain, the right of the government to take private property for public use, and rent control. The recent rise in concern over eminent domain was sparked by a Supreme Court ruling that said that the government had the right to take private property from one owner and give it to another private entity for the purpose of economic development.
The issue of rent control has been brought into the debate due to the argument that both eminent domain and rent control are property rights issues, and those supporting Propositions 98 and 99 are presenting their arguments on both of these issues. What do you think about eminent domain and rent control? Let us know in our blog comments!
You can also learn more about Propositions 98 and 99 by taking our interactive quiz:
Quiz: Propositions 98 & 99 (Eminent Domain & Rent Control)
Tools
- May 21, 2008 3:01 PM
- Comments (6)
6 Comments
I believe the vote on 98 and 99 should be NO.
98 has elimation on rent control and that will not be good for the state. Both of them give more control to the gov. fore emminate domain and that is not good for anyone.
The sad part is prop. 98 has the funding for the radio ads stating that prop 99 is bad for the people and that is the one that wipes out rent control! they are saying prop. 99 is convoulted! Ha! It's too bad that most people will hear the add and not research the prop. and it will probably win because most people do not do the research they need to do before they go to the polls.
I am voting no on both props.
Regards,
Nancy Nims
I've decided to vote NO on both 98 & 99. Most of the time when the government of the people decides that it is necessary to acquire privately owned property for some beneficial common purpose, the property owners are fairly compensated and provided with relocation assistance. On those rare occasions when a property owner refuses to sell, eminent domain provides a means for the community to proceed on an agreed upon action, while safeguarding the rights of the property owner.
Is eminent domain really that much of a problem? I don't know anyone who has been forced to relinquish property by use of eminent domain. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. . .
Here is a rhyme that summarizes how I feel about this issue:
98 I hate, but 99 is fine
I believe if you are a RENTER OR A HOMEOWNER you should vote NO on 98 and YES on 99.
Why is Prop 98 bad for renters?
Prop 98 would get rid of rent control laws.
Rent control laws offer important protections such as:
1) Protection against huge rent increases
2) Protection against eviction at the landlords whim
3) Making sure you get your security deposit refunded when you move.
Even if you think that rent control is bad and needs to be reformed (I am a renter and I can accept that maybe some reforms are appropriate), a wholesale elimination of rent control is just horrible public policy. It would hurt seniors and the working poor. These are the people in our state who are the most vulnerable, especially now during this economic downturn.
Why is Prop 98 bad for homeowners?
Prop 98 would eliminate the ability of your city to make and enforce zoning laws. If you own a home or condo, a developer could decide to build a 10 story building next door to you. As a homeowner, you receive many protections from local laws that would be eliminated if Prop 98 passed.
Why is it important to vote YES on Prop 99?
Prop 99 is an insurance policy. Prop 99 has a provision that if BOTH Prop 98 and Prop 99 pass, then Prop 99 would be put into effect and Prop 98 would not. We need Prop 99 as protection in case the deceptive ads in favor of Prop 98 work. Even if you do not fully agree with Prop 99, having it in place would be far less damaging to our state than the dire consequences of living with Prop 98.
Prop 99 is good law and gives fair protection to homeowners. It will provide protection so their property can not be taken away to be given to a private developer. Most of us agree that is just basic fairness.
Prop 98 would have a HUGE negative effect on our community if it passed. These are just my thoughts, but PLEASE take the time to learn more about these two propositions for yourself and then vote on June 3.
The supporters of Prop 98 chose the June 3 election to put this on the ballot because the expected low voter turnout favors their side. If you agree that Prop 98 is bad then you must not be complacent on election day. You must get out and vote and encourage your friends to do the same.
Proposition 98 on the statewide ballot will eliminate rent control in California.
This deceptive scheme is full of hidden agendas and attacks renters, our environment, our water quality and supply, and our economy. The measure is a Trojan Horse. While Yes on 98 ads funded by landlords attempt to deceive voters into believing this measure is really about eminent domain reform, the broad and harmful provisions included in Prop. 98 will have profound negative impacts on all Californians. We do not think voters are so easily fooled.
Nearly 90% of the funding for the Yes on 98 campaign has come from wealthy landlords trying to pass Prop. 98 for their own financial gain. On top of that, Prop. 98 also jeopardizes numerous laws that protect all 14 million California renters, including the fair return of rental security deposits and laws protecting tenants from unfair and unjust evictions.
The problems with Proposition 98 don�t end with the provisions impacting renters. The landlords also wrote loopholes in Prop. 98 that allow them to get around important environmental protections. These loopholes would undermine environmental laws and regulations like the new California landmark law to combat climate change and global warming, and regulations that protect our air, coast, open spaces and water quality from pollution and unplanned developments.
Proposition 98 is strongly opposed by the AARP, California Professional Firefighters, California Teachers Association, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, US Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Labor Federation and the California Chamber of Commerce and by every major environmental group in the state. It takes a deeply flawed measure to earn opposition from all of these diverse leaders and groups, but Prop. 98 has earned this dubious distinction.
Fortunately, while the landlord-backed Prop. 98 is a deceptive and dangerous measure, the June ballot does offer voters an opportunity to enact strong and responsible eminent domain reform in Proposition 99, the Homeowners Protection Act.
Proposition 99 would prevent the government from taking a home to transfer to a private developer. Prop. 99 is simple and straightforward, without the hidden agendas and negative consequences of Prop. 98.
Vote No on 98 and Yes on 99 on June 3.
Prop. 99 is the trojan horse here! Mr. Gross, your negative statements regarding Prop. 98 are misleading and deceptive.
No one is going to be thrown out on their ear if Prop. 98 passes. Under Prop. 98 rent control is phased out. It is only when a unit is vacated will the unit no longer be subject to rent control and current market rents allowed to be charged. Currently in L.A., market rates for rent can be charged once a unit is vacated anyway. That part is no different. If Prop. 98 passes, units that are currently rented and under rental control remain so. I encourage those who are voting to to do some background research on declines in smaller, affordable rental units. When government puts controls on fair markets, everyone pays big.
I happen to be one of "those" income property owners, albeit a small income investor. My rental building contains eight units. I inherited the "investment" five years ago from a relative who held them for several decades and self managed them. Rents were far below market when I inherited them due to the ill health of the previous owner for a number of years. Rather than deal with doing a major rehabilitation each time a tenant moved, it was easier for them to keep rents low and raise the rent only occasionally to encourage tenants to stay. Apparently it worked. Thus, at the time I inherited the property, 90% of the tenants were paying on average $350 per month below market and the majority of the tenants were in possession of their units for more than five years (a couple of them more than ten). Rent control dictates what I am allowed to raise the rent on an annual basis and has traditionally run about 3%. I have yet to show a profit, yet maintain them well and to code. I'm fed up with the hassles and stress of rent control in L.A. and am in the process of trying to sell my units, but because my rents are so far below market, it has severely impacted my listing price to the detriment. There are many small landlords out there like me who are burdened by rent control with little room to maneuver financially and frustrated with government control. Wealthy landlord??? Ha!
I almost didn't vote this election. The day was busy and quickly crept into night. The ballot was thin in my district.
Then I heard Senator Clinton's speech. Sure, she didn't concede, but it was an inspirational speech.
Then Senator Obama spoke. I found myself reaching for my car keys, straping the infant into a carseat and heading to my polling place with ten minutes left to vote.
As I left, three voters were coming in with just three minutes left. I wonder if they were similarly fired up, ready to go.
Leave a comment
Please be civil, concise, and on-topic. Notes:Please read our full Terms of Use before posting.