- HOME
- About
- Topics
- Angelides
- Arnold Schwarzenegger
- California Attorney General Race
- California Congressional Races
- California Democratic Party
- California Legislative Races
- California Lt. Governor Race
- California Secretary of State Race
- California State Budget
- California State Controller
- Campaign Finance Reform
- Campaigns
- Cell Phones
- Children and Families
- Consumer Rights
- Corporate Accountability
- Criminal Justice
- Death With Dignity
- Disaster Preparation
- Discrimination and Civil Rights
- Education
- Elections and Voting
- Electoral College
- Energy
- Environment
- Flood Control
- Food Safety
- Gas Prices
- Governor's Election Race
- Gun control
- Health Care
- Health Insurance
- High Speed Rail
- Hiram Johnson's Corner
- Housing
- Human Rights
- Humor
- Immigration
- Infrastructure
- Initiative Reform
- Insurance Commissioner Race
- Labor
- Language and Politics
- Legal System
- Media and Communication
- Minimum Wage
- Open Government
- Pharmaceutical Companies
- Politics
- Preschool
- Presidential Election 2008
- Prison Reform
- Privacy
- Privitization
- Prop 85 Parental Notification
- Prop 86 Tobacco Tax
- Prop 87--Alternative Energy
- Prop 90
- Prop 91--Transportation Funding
- Prop 92- Community Colleges
- Prop 93--Term Limits
- Props 94-97--Tribal Gaming
- Props 98 and 99
- Racial Disparities
- Redistricting/Reapportionment
- Responsible Lending
- Retirement Benefits
- Site of the Day
- Structure of California Government
- Taxes
- Toxic Chemicals
- Transportation/Transit
- Water
- Westly
- Workers' Compensation
- Stories
- Preschool Reform Package is Alive and Well in the California Legislature
- Prop 98: A Cardboard Box for Your Troubles
- Planning and Conservation League Testifies on Environmental Dangers of Proposition 98, Benefits of 99 on the June Ballot
- Obama and Clinton Unity Begins in California Congressional District 42 Where Democrats Have United for Ron Shepston
- The Green Energy War: Will Edison’s Solar Play Trigger Be Properly Regulated by the California PUC?
- Perata Calls Off Denham Recall
- “How California’s School Districts Spend Their Funds” by the California Budget Project is our site of the day
- Cavala: Obama Will Be the Nominee--Happy Days Are Here Again
- A Tale of Two Speakers of the California Assembly
- Trickle of Cuts Led to Vallejo Declaring Bankruptcy
- A California Delegate on Obama's Win: The Fly on the Wall Is the Wall
- A Behind the Scenes Perspective from a Democratic Club President on Stacking for Endorsements in California
- Directory
- Donate
- Contact Us
RSS Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- Cavala: Rich-Guy Governor Demonstrates Insensitivity to Salaried Employees of California’s Government
- Political Robo Calls Are Illegal in California: You Can Help Enforce the Law and Protect Your Privacy
- I'd Buy That for $10 - Access To California State Parks
- Cal in the Capitol Gives Students a Bird’s Eye View of State Politics and Public Policy
- 11 Things I've Learned Running Over 100 Bond and Tax Measure Campaigns in California
- A McCain Meltdown?
- Cavala: Field Poll Suggests G.O.P. “Comeuppance” This November in California
About Us
The California Progress Report is published by Frank D. Russo, a longtime observer of and participant in California politics.
About Frank Russo.
About California Progress Report.
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column? Contact Frank here.
Sponsors
Books
Planning and Conservation League Testifies on Environmental Dangers of Proposition 98, Benefits of 99 on the June Ballot
By Traci Sheehan
Executive Director
Planning and Conservation League
Last Thursday, the Planning and Conservation League's Tina Andolina, along with representatives from the American Planning Association, the California Center for Environmental Law & Policy, and the California Farm Bureau Federation, testified at the State Capitol on the environmental, water, and land use implications of Propositions 98 and 99, two competing measures that will appear on the June 3rd ballot.
Both of these measures claim to reform eminent domain law by limiting the ability of local jurisdictions to take private property simply to give it to a private developer. However, as Andolina explained to legislators and journalists, that's where the similarities end.
Propositions 98 goes far beyond its stated purpose by eliminating rent control and wreaking havoc on the ability of local governments to build sustainable, healthy communities, control unwanted sprawl, and protect precious natural resources.
One of the most egregious provisions of the proposition prohibits laws or regulations which "transfer economic benefits to one or more private persons at the expense of the property owner," eliminating our state's ability to implement key laws and regulations. PCL's Andolina offered several examples to illustrate how this ambiguous language could wipe out measures designed to protect our environment:
• Laws or regulations that require logging companies to protect rivers and water quality could be invalidated because they transfer an economic benefit from logging companies to the beleaguered fishing industry.
• Laws and regulations to control emissions of greenhouse gases from oil refineries and power plants in accordance with the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 could be prohibited since they may transfer an economic benefit from the polluter to the manufacturers of cleaner technologies.
Proposition 99, on the other hand, is a balanced approach to reforming eminent domain law. The clear language in this measure gets the job done without prohibiting necessary laws and regulations designed to improve our quality of life.
You can help fight against proposition 98 and support proposition 99.
Traci Sheehan is the Executive Director of the Planning and Conservation League, a statewide, nonprofit lobbying organization. For more than thirty years, PCL has fought to develop a body of environmental laws in California that is the best in the United States. PCL staff review virtually every environmental bill that comes before the California Legislature each year. It has testified in support or opposition of thousands of bills to strengthen California's environmental laws and fight off rollbacks of environmental protections.
Comments
Patently false. It prohibits regulations that are enacted "IN ORDER TO transfer economic benefits to one or more private persons at the expense of the property owner." You can't presume that any clause is intended to be without effect. Environmental regulations are enacted in order to benefit the PUBLIC, and any benefits experienced by "one or more private persons" are incidental side benefits.
Rent control is enacted in order to transfer an economic benefit to a private person, and any benefits for the public are incidental side benefits. That would be prohibited
Posted by: Ben at May 8, 2008 08:40 AM
Post a comment
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
