Categories: Bay Area Politics

Deadline passes or eminent domain ballot initiative

Organizers with a Peninsula-based campaign seeking to impose limits on eminent domain will learn this week whether their proposal collected the 800,000 signatures required to qualify for the November state ballot.

The proposed amendment to the California Constitution, called the California Eminent Domain Limitations Act, was filed with the state by Daly City Democrat Annette Hipona, a school board member and neighborhood activist, and Republican Douglas McNey of Santa Clara County.

It would bar the taking of private property by the government for development by another private entity, and would require cities to pay property owners “just compensation” when taking land for public use.

Signatures were collected statewide with the aid of campaigners, including San Ramon business owners, Filipinos in Long Beach and a group of San Jose seniors known as the Ironhair Brigade.

The petitions were due Sunday, and organizers were not sure yesterday exactly how many signatures had been collected.

“There’s something very un-American about the idea that you are not secure in the ownership of your property,” campaign chairwoman and San Jose resident Lorraine Wallace Rowe said.

The ballot initiative is the latest response to the Supreme Court’s June 2005 ruling upholding cities’ authority to use eminent domain for private developments with a public benefit such as increased sales tax revenues.

The Supreme Court decision doesn’t apply in California, however, where eminentdomain law is already more strict, according to Assemblyman Gene Mullin, D-South San Francisco, who has authored and sponsored a handful of bills on eminent domain.

“I’m not a big fan of the initiative process, but I have no position on the initiative,” Mullin said.

Instead, he proposes an independent study of eminent-domain abuse before further limits are imposed.

Eminent domain has touched many Bay Area communities. Officials in Redwood City were forced to pay out $3 million in a legal settlement with a property owner after a judge found they had improperly taken his property to build a theater and shopping center.

In Half Moon Bay, residents last fall overwhelmingly approved an advisory measure barring the city from taking private property for private projects.

The ballot initiative and other legislative proposals are not without their opponents.

Many would “make it impossible to use eminent domain for redevelopment,” said John Shirey, head of the California Redevelopment Association.

CRA is working with some legislators to make their bills more likely to gain redevelopers’ support.

bwinegarner@examiner.com

SF Examiner
Share
Published by
SF Examiner

Recent Posts

A few words about critters with English Beat’s Dave Wakeling

At 61, San Fernando-Valley-based Brit Dave Wakeling knows how surreal it sounds to have not one, but two, viable versions…

3 hours ago

Rejected scooter company files appeal, calls SF permit process ‘secret’ and ‘unlawful’

An e-scooter company rejected from San Francisco’s shared scooter pilot program has filed an appeal, alleging The City’s application criteria…

3 hours ago

Drivers to pay Treasure Island toll in both directions starting in 2021

Starting in 2021, drivers travelling to or from Treasure Island will be forced to pay a toll in addition to…

3 hours ago

1 dead, 1 arrested in SoMa hit and run

A 65-year-old man was struck and killed by a vehicle in a hit-and-run in San Francisco's South of Market neighborhood…

7 hours ago

If you want to address climate change, clean up the air

Like climate change itself, recent environmental news from throughout the country can feel overwhelming and scary. As leaders from around…

16 hours ago

Transportation justice requires housing justice, and vice versa

Why should transportation advocates support ballot measures put forth by housing activists? And why should housing activists defend a gas…

16 hours ago