California's role in the presidential primaries may be complete, and the surviving presidential candidates have moved on to fresher hunting grounds for voters as they attempt to secure their parties' nominations, but the 2008 election cycle is far from over: one down, two elections to go.
According to the California Secretary of State's Web site two initiatives have qualified for California's June election.
The two qualified initiatives, Propositions 98 and 99 , would both amend California's constitution to change state and local government power to acquire property for private uses. The issues are similar to those that would have been addressed by passage of Proposition 90 in 2006, an initiative that was defeated with 52.3 percent of the voters voting against amending the state constitution.
But government acquisition of private property, for whatever use, is in the news. The federal government is taking property to survey and build a border fence. Downtown redevelopment is back in the limelight as San Diego and the Centre City Development Corportation, no strangers to using the power of eminent domain for private use, celebrate the restoration of the Balboa Theatre funded by downtown redevelopment tax dollars.
Alma from San Diego
February 13, 2008 at 08:47 PM
Thanks for bringing up June's election, and certainly for discussing eminent domain. Personally, I can't believe our State government is seriously trying to convince the population we "owe" California chunks of our ever-encroached-upon properties. Even when PetCo was being built, I thought it was a rotten deal for the former owners of warehouses, restaurants, etc.. to have to give up the space right before the big boom in business.
It will be very interesting to read how the spin is put on Props 98 & 99, especially because, as you point out, the verbiage is out of control on what votes in favor or opposed will mean.
Chuck
from Escondido, CA
February 14, 2008 at 12:50 AM
Prop. 98 looks to be the interesting (or scary) one. It would effectively end local rent control ordinances and creates repurchase rights if the use of the condemned property changes from the original reason for the condemnation.
Candace
February 15, 2008 at 04:15 AM
Thank you for bringing this to my attention and and educating me to some of the related issues. I am familiar with the culture along the Texas border and can hardly believe the idiocy of this "wall".
Candace
Marin
August 02, 2008 at 03:30 AM
Property rights are fundamental to a free society, they must be protected at all costs.
