HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06062006 - SD.5 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
FROM: SUPERVISOR FEDERAL D. GLOVER - ``•
CSAC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER -��11i}�; Costa
DATE: JUNE 6, 2006 °°�rT -�o�-,:cc °
~` County
SUBJECT: INITIATIVE LIMITING COUNTY LAND USE AUTHORITY �D
INCLUDING EMINENT DOMAIN '
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SUPPORT authorization for CSAC to work with the League of California Cities, the California
Redevelopment Association, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and others in drafting and
supporting an alternative to the "Anderson Initiative", a draft ballot measure that would restrict use of
eminent domain by local agencies.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
On May 15, 2006 the proponents of the Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property
Initiative (SA2005RF0146), commonly known as the "Anderson Initiative" filed signatures with
County election officers to qualify the constitutional amendment for either the November 2006 or
June 2008 statewide ballot. The initiative would severely restrict county authority with regard to
land use and property acquisition. The Anderson Initiative:
Restricts the eminent domain powers of all public agencies, utilities, state, and local
governments unless the property acquired is owned and occupied by a governmental agency.
Redefines "just compensation" as the sum of money necessary to place the property owner in
the same position monetarily, as if the property had never been taken. It is unclear what would be
included to make the property owner whole, but presumably things such as lost income, relocation
costs, and more. Redefines "fair market value" as the highest and best use the property would
bring on the open market.
Changes requirements for property valuation. If a property taken by the government is to be
put to use at a higher value after acquisition, the property owner must be paid at the fair market
value in accordance with the government's use. For example, if a city uses eminent domain to
acquire agricultural land for a municipal airport (from which the city would receive revenues from
commercial leases, for example), then the owner must be paid fair market value in accordance
with the city's use. The owners would be paid this higher amount regardless of whether or not they
could have achieved such a use under the applicable zoning, and regardless of whether other
laws would have required them to dedicate a portion of the land.
Redefines "damage" to include many types of regulatory takings. Includes government
actions that result in economic loss to private property, including many zoning practices such as
down zoning or height restrictions, environmental regulations, affordable housing covenants, etc.
Requires compensatory payment of these damages by implementing agency.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
-------------------------------------------------- ------ - ------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ACTION 01:
BOARD ON Q CO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED)— OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
X, UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND ENTERED ON TIME MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE
AYES: NOES: _ SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
ATTESTED ESTED DwOLOlO
CONTACT: Sara Hoffman 335-1090 JOAN CUE EN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNT' INISTRATOR
CC: Countv Administrator
CSAC(via cao)
UCC(via cao)
Nielsen Merksamer(via CAO) BY DEPUTY
Board of Supervisors
June 6, 2006
Initiative Limiting County Land Use Authority
Page 2
Requires blight determinations on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Current law requires that a
project area be declared blighted before eminent domain can be used, but it does not require
every parcel in the area to be blighted.
Voids unpublished eminent domain court decisions. Currently, most eminent domain
decisions are not published because they are settled in Superior Courts, which never publish
decisions. Only appellate decisions are published and even then they are not published in every
case.
Subjects pending eminent domain proceedings to provisions immediately. Provisions of this
initiative would take effect the day following the election and would apply to any eminent domain
proceeding in which no final court judgment has been obtained. It is unclear how the provisions
relating to damages would apply to regulations in effect at the time of enactment.
At its May 25th meeting, the CSAC Executive Committee discussed the initiative, CSAC's efforts
to assess its impact on counties and the need to potentially take counter action.
► The County Counsels' Association is reviewing the draft initiative and will provide a
thorough analysis of its impacts.
► At its June 15 meeting, the CSAC Board of Directors will consider authorizing CSAC to
join with an existing coalition of the League of California Cities, the California
Redevelopment Association, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association that is
considering an alternate measure to be placed on the November ballot. The CSAC Board
of Directors' action would include some level of financial support for this effort (direct
funding and/or in kind services).
► CSAC has tentatively scheduled a special Board of Directors meeting in August to consider
a position on the Anderson Initiative and alternative measure, if necessary.
As the Board of Supervisors' representative to CSAC on both its Executive Committee and Board
of Directors, adoption of the recommended action by the Board would result in my advocacy and
support for CSAC joining the Coalition and taking other such actions necessary to ensure that
county land use authorities are not unreasonably restricted.
Pending its review by the County Counsels' Association and its qualification for the ballot, I
intend to bring the Anderson Initiative back to the Board for consideration at a later date. The
same would be true for any alternate measure developed by the Coalition.
December 13,2005
The Honorable Bill Lockyer IgGE1
V
Attorney General,State of California
Office of the Attorney GeneralO
DEC Z 125
ATIM Initiative Coordinator
1300 I Street INITIATIVE COORDINATOR
Sacramento,California 95814 ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
Dear General Lockyer:
Pursuant to Elections Code§9002,I hereby request that your office prepare a title and
summary of the chief purpose and points of the attached proposed initiative measure. 1
am registered to vote in the State of California at the address listed below. Included is
my check for$200 as required by §9002.
Thank you.
Anita S.Anderson
2005
Section 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
(a) The California Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of
property without due process of law and allows government to take or damage private
property only foi a public use and only after payment to the property owner of just
compensation.
(b) Despite these constitutional protections, state and local governments have
undermined private property rights through an excessive use of eminent domain power
and the regulation of private property for purposes unrelated to public health and safety.
(c) Neither the federal nor the California courts have protected the full scope
of private property rights found in the state constitution. The courts have allowed local
governments to exercise eminent domain powers to advance private economic interests in
the face of protests from affected homeowners and neighborhood groups. The courts
have not required government to pay compensation to property owners when enacting
statutes,charter provisions,ordinances,resolutions, laws,rules or regulations not related
to public health and safety that reduce the value of private property.
(d) As currently structured,the judicial process in California available to
property owners to pursue property rights claims is cumbersome and costly.
Section 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
(a) The power of eminent domain available to government in California shall
be limited to projects of public use. Examples of public use projects include, but are not
limited to,road construction,the creation of public parks,the creation of public facilities,
land-use planning,property zoning,and actions to preserve the public health and safety.
(b) Public use projects that the government assigns,contracts or otherwise
arranges for private entities to perform shall retain the power of eminent domain.
Examples of public use projects that private entities perform include,but are not limited
to, the construction and operation of private toll roads and privately-owned prison
facilities.
(c) Whenever government takes or damages private property for a public use,
the owner of any affected property shall receive just compensation for the property taken
or damaged. Just compensation shall be set at fair market value for property taken and
diminution of fair market value for property damaged. Whenever a property owner and
the government can not agree on fair compensation,the California courts shall provide
through a jury trial a fair and timely process for the settlement of disputes.
(d) This constitutional amendment shall apply prospectively. Its terms shall
apply to any eminent domain proceeding brought by a public agency not yet subject to a
final adjudication. No statute,charter provision,ordinance,resolution,law,rule or
regulation in effect on the date of enactment that results or has resulted in a substantial
loss to the value of private property shall be subject to the new provisions of Section 19
of Article 1.
(e) Therefore,the people of the state of California hereby enact"The Protect
Our Homes Act."
1
Section 3. AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
Section 19 of Article I of the state constitution is amended to read:
SEC. 19. awl_)Private property may be taken or damaged only for a stated public use
and only when just compensation,ascertained by a jury unless waived,has first been paid
to,or into court for,the owner. Private property may not be taken or damaged for rivate
use.
(2)Property taken by eminent domain shall be owned and occupied by the
condemnor,or another governmental agency utilizing the property for the stated public
use by-agreement with the condemnor,or Mabe leased to entities that are regulated by
the Public Utilities Commission or any other entity that the government assigns,contracts
or arranges with to perform a public use project.All property that is taken by eminent
domain shall be iised only for the stated public use.
(3) If any Vroperty taken through eminent domain after the effective date of this
subdivision ceases to be used for the stated public use,the former owner of the property
or a beneficiary or an heir,if a beneficiary or heir has been designated for this purpose,
shall have the right to reacquire the property for the fair market value of the property
before the property may be otherwise sold or transferred.Notwithstanding subdivision(a)
of Section 2 of Article XIIIA, upon reacquisition the property shall be appraised by the
assessor for purposes of property taxation at its base year value,with any authorized
adjustments, as had been last determined in accordance with Article Xlti A at the time
the property was acquired by the condemnor.
lAlThe Legislature may provide for possession by the condemnor following
commencement of eminent domain proceedings upon deposit in court and prompt release
to the owner of money determined by the court to be the probable amount of just
compensation.
(b) For purposed of applying this section:
"Public use"shall have a distinct and more narrow meaning than the term
"public purpose:" its limitingeffect ffect prohibits takings expected to result in
transfers to non-governmental owners on economic development or tax revenue
enhancement grounds,or for any other actual uses that are not public in fact.
even though these uses may serve otherwise legitimate public purposes. .
Public use shall not include the direct or indirect transfer of any possessory
interest in property taken in an eminent domain proceeding from one private
party to another private party unless that transfer proceeds pursuant to a
government assignment,contract or arrangement with a private entity whereby
the private entity performs a public use proiect. In all eminent domain actions,
the government shall have the burden to prove public use.
Unpublished eminent domain judicial opinions or orders shall be null and void.
In all eminent domain actions,prior to the government's occupana,a property
owner shall be given copies of all appraisals by the government and shall be
entitled,at the property owner's election,to a separate and distinct
determination by a superior court jury,as to whether the taking is actually for a
public use.
2
If a public use is determined,the taken or damaged property shall be valued at
its highgg and best use without considering any future dedication requirements
imposed by the government. If rmvate progerty is taken for any proprietary
governmental purpose,then the property shall be valued at the use to which the
og vernrnent intends to put the property,if such use results in a higher value for
the land taken.
In all eminent domain actions,just compensation shall be defined as that sum of
money necessary to place the property owner in the same position monetarily,
without any governmental offsets,as if the property had never been taken. Just
compensation shall include,but is not limited to,compounded interest and all
reasonable costs and expenses actually incurred.
0 In all eminent domain actions, fair market value shall be defined as the highest
price the property would bring on the open market.
M Except when taken to protectpublic health and safety."damage"to private
property►includes government actions that result in substantial economic loss to
private property. Examples of substantial economic loss include,but are not
limited to,the down zoning of private property,the elimination of any access to
private property,and limitations on the use of private air space. "Government
action"shall mean any statute,charter provision,ordinance, resolution, law,rule
or regulation.
A property owner shall not be liable to the government for attorney fees or costs
in any eminent domain action.
(110) For all provisions contained in this section, government shall be defined as the
State of California. its political subdivisions, agencies,any public or private
agent acting on their behalf,and any public or private entity that has the power
of eminent domain.
(c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the California Public Utilities Commission from
relating public utility rates.
(d) Nothing in this section shall restrict administrative powers to take or damage private
properly under a declared state of emergency.
(e) Nothinj;in this section shall prohibit the use of condemnation powers to abate
nuisances such as blight obscenity,pomogoRhv.hazardous substances or environmental
conditions provided those condemnations are limited to abatement of specific conditions
on specific parcels.
Section 4. IMPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENT
This section shall be self-executing. The Legislature may adopt laws to further
the purposes of this section and aid in its implementation. No amendment to this section
may be made except by a vote of the people pursuant to Article H or Article XVIII.
3
Section 5. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section or its
application is held invalid,that finding shall not affect other provisions or applications
that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
Section 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This section shall become effective on the day following the election pursuant to
section 10(a)of Article H.
The provisions of this section shall apply immediately to any eminent domain
proceeding by a public agency in which there has been no final adjudication.
Other than eminent domain powers,the provisions added to this section shall not
apply to any stat-.ate,charter provision,ordinance,resolution, law,rule or regulation in
effect on the date of enactment that results in substantial economic loss to private
property. Any statute,charter provision,ordinance,resolution, law,rule or regulation in
effect on the date of enactment that is amended after the date of enactment shall continue
to be exempt from the provisions added to this section provided that the amendment both
serves to promote the original policy of the statute,charter provision,ordinance,
resolution, law,rule or regulation and does not significantly broaden the scope of
application of the statute,charter provision,ordinance,resolution,law,rule or regulation
being amended. The governmental entity making the amendment shall make a
declaration contemporaneously with enactment of the amendment that the amendment
promotes the original policy of the statute,charter provision,ordinance,resolution, law,
rule or regulation and does not significantly broaden its scope of application. The
question of whether an amendment significantly broadens the scope of application is
subject to judicial review.
4
1204. (SA2005RF0146)
Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property. Initiative
Constitutional Amendment.
Summary Date: 02116/06 Circulation Deadline: 07117/06 Signatures
Required.• 598,105
Proponent: Anita S. Anderson
Bars state and local governments from condemning or damaging private
property to promote other private projects, uses. Limits government's
authority to adopt certain land use, housing, consumer, environmental and
workplace laws and regulations, except when necessary to preserve public
health or safety. Voids unpublished eminent domain court decisions. Defines
"just compensation." Government must occupy condemned property or lease
property for public use. Condemned private property must be offered for
resale to prior owner or owner's heir at current fair market value if
government abandons condemnation's objective. Exempts certain
governmental actions. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and
Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local. governments:
Unknown, but potentially significant major future costs for state and local
governments to pay damages and/or modify regulatory or other policies to
conform to the measure's provisions. Unknown, potentially major changes
in governmental costs to acquire property for public purposes.
(SA2005RF0146.)
LAO-_,
60 PEARS or SERVICE
February 1,2006
Hon. Bill Lockyer
Attorney General
1300 I Street, 17'hFloor
Sacramento,California 95814
Attention: Ms.Tricia Knight
Initiative Coordinator
Dear Attorney General Lockyer:
Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9005, we have reviewed the proposed
initiative entitled "The Protect Our Homes Act" (File No. SA2005RF0146). This
measure makes changes to the California Constitution related to public actions to
acquire private property through the eminent domain process and public actions
that reduce or "damage" the economic value of property.
BACKGROUND
To build public transportation and other facilities,promote.economic development,
and/or carry out other public policies,California state and local agencies sometimes
buy.private property or take actions that reduce the economic value of private property.
Most of these property purchases and payments do not involve court action,but are
negotiated between private property owners and public agencies. In some cases,
however,a public agency and owner cannot agree upon the value of the property or
damages or the owner does not want to sell the property. In these cases,the matter may
be resolved in court.
Under the United States and California Constitutions and other statutes,public
agencies may use eminent domain power to acquire private property (real,business,
personal,tangible,or intangible property) or reduce the economic value of property for
a public purpose if they pay"just compensation"to the owner.Just compensation
includes (1) the"fair market value" of the real property and its improvements and (2)
any diminution in value of the remaining property when the property taken is part of a
larger parcel. California statutes also require public agencies to compensate property
owners (including,in some cases,lessees) for the loss of business goodwill and
relocation costs associated with eminent domain activities. Under current statutes and
case law, (1)public agencies may use eminent domain for a broad array of public
Hon. Bill Lockyer 2 February 1,2006
purposes and (2) courts give deference to a public agency's eminent domain findings
and usually limit their review to the information in the administrative record.
Current law does not require the agency to return the property to its previous owner
if it no longer uses the property for its originally intended purpose.
PROPOSAL
This measure constrains public agency authority to (1)use eminent domain powers,
(2) enact new policies that reduce the economic value of property,and (3)use property
acquired through the eminent domain process.
Provisions Related to Eminent Domain Authority
This measure requires public agencies to (1) specify a "public use" for property
before it is taken or damaged, (2)own the property taken by eminent domain, and (3)
make sure the property is used for the stated public use. The measure's statement of
purposes provides these examples of public use projects: road construction,the creation
of public parks,land use planning,property zoning,and actions to preserve the public
health and safety. The measure defines the term public use to exclude taking private
property to transfer it to a nongovernmental owner for economic development, tax
revenue enhancement, or other purposes that are not public use projects.
The measure specifies that in any challenge of the validity of an eminent domain
action, government has the burden to prove public use and the court must issue a
published judicial opinion or order for the court ruling to be valid.
Finally,the.measure amends the definition of just compensation and fair market
value.While the measure is not clear,it appears to broaden the definition of just
compensation and might increase the amount that would be considered fair market
value.
Provisions Related to Damages
The measure expands the definition of damaged in the Constitution to include laws
and actions by a public agency—other than those taken to protect public health and
safety—that result in substantial economic loss to private property. The measure cites
down zoning of private property,the elimination of any access to private property,and
limitation on the use of private air space as examples of governmental actions that
impose a substantial economic loss to property owners. In addition, under the terms of
the measure, certain business,environmental,land use,and other regulatory actions
might be viewed as resulting in compensable damages.
Hon. Bill Lockyer 3 February 1,2006
Provisions Related to Long-Term Use of Property Acquired By Eminent Domain
If a public agency ceases to use property taken by eminent domain for the stated
public use,the public agency must offer the property to the former property owner(or
his/her heir) at the current fair market value. If the former owner reacquires the
property, the measure specifies that the property shall be taxed at its precondemnation
value.The measure is not clear as to whether it imposes limitations on public agency
use or sale of the property if the former owner chooses not to reacquire the property.
Exemptions
The measure specifies that its provisions do not:
• Prohibit the use of condemnation powers to abate nuisances such as blight,
obscenity,pornography,hazardous substances or environmental conditions,
provided the condemnations are limited to abatement of specific conditions
on specific parcels.
• Prohibit the California Public Utilities Commission from regulating public
utility rates.
• Restrict administrative powers to take or damage private property under a
declared state of emergency.
RSCAL IMPACT
The measure's fiscal effect is subject to considerable uncertainly and would depend
on (1) how the courts interpret its provisions (particularly the range of policies for
which compensatory damages payments would be required)and (2)future actions
taken by governments to enact regulatory and other policies and buy property.
Regulatory and Other Policies. By broadening the definition of damages, the
measure reduces government's ability to enact certain business, environmental,
land use and other regulatory actions and policies that can decrease private
property values. Because enactment of these policies would require state and local
governments to pay compensatory damages, governments might choose not to
enact these policies or enact alternative ones where the fiscal burden is shifted
from property owners to government. The fiscal impact of these provisions is
unknown but could result in potentially major costs to state and local government.
These costs could result from having to pay more damages and from modifying
regulatory and other policies to conform to the measure's provisions.
Property Acquisition. The measure would have various effects on government's
costs to acquire property. On the one hand, by limiting the situations where
eminent domain could be used, the measure could reduce public spending. On the
Hon. Bill Lockyer 4 February 1,2006
other hand, the measure: (1) would increase the amount of money government
must pay a property owner for just compensation, and (2) could increase the costs
that government must pay to acquire property from willing sellers. Overall, the net
fiscal effect on state and local government associated with these provisions cannot be
determined,but could be major.
Summary of Fiscal Effects
The measure would have the following major fiscal impacts:
• Unknown,but potentially major future costs for state and local governments
to pay damages and/or modify regulatory or other policies to conform to the
measure's provisions.
• Unknown, potentially major changes in governmental costs to acquire
property for public purposes.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth G.Hill
Legislative Analyst
Mike Genest
Director of Finance
PRESS RELEASE League of California Cities: Response to Signature Filing on Eminent Domain Initiat... Page 1 of 3
W
o CENMcMewsCnn,Pony Advanced Search Search.News
o-eoam car seance aft u9e uk? nsaw*Ne s. we9ommes rbm*us Forwodo l.g Wakwoit
Email this Release Printer-Friendly
LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA
C I T I E S
League of California Cities: Response to Signature Filing on Eminent Domain
Initiative
SACRAMENTO, CA—(MARKET WIRE) —05/15/2006—Today, a committee financed by New York
millionaire Howie Rich announced they had filed signatures with county elections offices to qualify a
constitutional amendment for either the November 2006 or June 2008 statewide ballot. In addition to
provisions dealing with eminent domain,the measure contains far-reaching constitutional changes dealing
with regulatory takings and compensation required when state and local entities acquire property (fact
sheet below).
Chris McKenzie, Executive Director of the League of California Cities, issued the following statement today
in response:
"California voters beware. This measure goes dangerously beyond what is needed or reasonable to protect
homeowners from the use of eminent domain.
"Provisions in this initiative would also change the constitution and significantly erode environmental
protections, limit the ability to restrict sprawl and protect open space, and significantly increase the cost of
building all sorts of public works projects like schools and roads--at the taxpayers' expense.
"There is a more responsible way to provide homeowners with needed protections against the use of
eminent domain. We will continue to work with key legislators, environmental advocates, business and
labor organizations, education groups and taxpayer advocates to develop and enact eminent domain
protections that do not shift unreasonably high costs to taxpayers and limit important programs that protect
our environment, our communities and our quality of life.
"And we'll be working actively to educate Californians that the'Anderson Initiative' is an assault on our
environment and taxpayers dressed up as eminent domain reform."
The "Anderson Initiative"
Official ballot title: Government Acquisition,
Regulation of Private Property.
Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
A group recently filed signatures with county elections offices to qualify a constitutional amendment for the
November 2006 or June 2008 ballot. This measure, dubbed "the Anderson Initiative,"deals with the use of
eminent domain and regulatory takings. The counties and Secretary of State's offices must now go through
the signature verification process to determine if enough valid signatures have been submitted to qualify.
Depending on the timing, this measure may or may not be on the November 2006 or June 2008 statewide
ballot.
http://�vww.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b 1?release_id=129499 5/30/2006
PRESS RELEASE League of California Cities: Response to Signature Filing on Eminent Domain Initiat... Page 2 of 3
Anderson Initiative Facts at a Glance
-- Constitutional amendment would apply to all public agencies and
utilities, and all state and local government property acquisitions.
-- Would likely impact a wide variety of public projects including
schools, roads and highways, dams, levees, and affordable housing.
-- Would limit government's ability to adopt certain land use, housing,
consumer, environmental and workplace laws and regulations, except when
necessary to preserve public health or safety.
-- The State's Legislative Analyst says the measure would have the
following fiscal impacts:
-- Unknown, but potentially major future costs for state and local
governments to pay damages and/or modify regulatory or other
policies to conform to the measure's provisions
-- Unknown, but potentially major changes in governmental costs to
acquire property for public purposes.
-- If passed by voters, it could only be changed by another initiative.
Anderson Initiative Provisions
-- Prohibits use of eminent domain unless the property acquired is owned
and occupied by a governmental agency.
-- Redefines "just compensation" -- Redefines "just compensation" as the
sum of money necessary to place the property owner in the same position
monetarily, as if the property had never been taken. It is unclear what
would be included to make the property owner whole, but presumably
things such as lost income, relocation costs, and more. Redefines
"fair market value" as the highest and best use the property would
bring on the open market.
-- Changes requirements for property valuation -- If a property taken by
the government is to be put to use at a higher value after acquisition,
the property owner must be paid at the fair market value in accordance
with the government's use. For example, if a city uses eminent domain
to acquire agricultural land for a municipal airport (from which the
city would receive revenues from commercial leases, for example) , then
the owner must be paid fair market value in accordance with the city's
use. The owners would be paid this higher amount regardless of whether
or not they could have achieved such a use under the applicable zoning,
and regardless of whether other laws would have required them to
dedicate a portion of the land.
-- Redefines "damage" to include many types of regulatory takings --
Redefines "damage" to include government actions that result in
economic loss to private property, including many zoning practices such
as down zoning or height restrictions, environmental regulations,
affordable housing covenants, etc. Requires compensatory payment of
these damages by implementing agency.
-- Requires blight determinations on a parcel-by-parcel basis -- Would
require that blight findings be made on a parcel-by-parcel basis.
Current law requires that a project area be declared blighted before
eminent domain can be used, but it does not require every parcel in
the area to be blighted.
littp://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b 1?release_id=129499 5/30/2006
PRESS RELEASE League of California Cities: Response to Signature Filing on Eminent Domain Initiat... Page 3 of 3
-- Voids unpublished eminent domain court decisions -- Would annul
judgments in every eminent domain action that does not result in a
published appellate opinion. Currently, most eminent domain decisions
are not published because they are settled in Superior Courts, which
never publish decisions. Only appellate decisions are published and
even then they are not published in ,every case.
-- Pending eminent domain proceedings immediately subject to provisions --
Provisions of this initiative would take effect the day following the
election and would apply to any eminent domain proceedings in which no
final court judgment has been obtained. It is unclear how the
provisions relating to damages would apply to regulations in effect at
the time of enactment.
Contact:
Megan Taylor
(916) 658-8228
Cell: (916) 705-6679
1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
Phone: (916) 658-8200
Fax: (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org
SOURCE: League of California Cities
Back To Recent News
Issuers of news releases. not Market Wire-are solely responsible for the accuracy of the content.
For more information about Market Wire's services, please Contact Us.
Site Map I Contact Us( Privacy Statement I Terms of Service I Copyright Market Wire
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release—html—b I?release—id=129499 5/30/2006