Proposition 98 — Planners and Environmentalists Voice Concerns

Environmentalists have added to the list of groups with a critique against California’s June 3rd initiative on eminent domain, Proposition 98.

Proposition 98 is one of two ballot referenda which would curb eminent domain. It has been a focus of MHR because it would also gradually phase out rent control, a protection that governs lot rents in many municipalities in California.

The California chapter of the American Planning Association believes that provisions in 98 could pave the way for a rewriting of many laws that protect the environment in the state. Included are laws protecting air, water, and wetlands. Cal APA also believes 98 could affect smart growth provisions.

The reason is that 98 prohibits the transfer of property where economic benefit is transferred from one group to another. This changes the rules around “takings.”

Environmentalists concede that almost any protection would have the affect of shifting value from one group to another.

• Constrain development in historic neighborhoods, take potential equity from land owners in those locations.
• Protect Mono Lake, harm thirsty people downstream.

The language in Proposition 98 goes even further to provoke questions about how well communities would be able to enforce rules in their own neighborhoods. Would a town be able to enforce a blue law against liquor sales on Sunday if liquor store owners could demonstrate that they would experience a taking?

APA is actually supporting Proposition 99.