Assemblyman Mark Leno Joins Poverty Rights, Tenant Advocacy, Environmental and Labor Leaders to Discuss Efforts to Derail Misguided Eminent Domain Ballot Initiative

WHEN:      Wednesday, November 14 at Noon

WHERE:     Civic Center Plaza, across from SF City Hall on Polk Street between McAllister and Grove Streets.

WHO:         Assemblyman Mark Leno

Susan Leal, General Manager, SF Public Utilities Commission

                        Ted Gullickson, SF Tenants Union

                        Barbara Blong, Senior Action Network

                        John Rizzo, Sierra Club

                        Tim Paulson, SF Labor Council

                        League of California Cities

WHAT:        Inspired by a narrow defeat by California voters in 2006, supporters of a deceptive ballot measure to restrict the use of eminent domain are back at it again with an even more seriously-flawed initiative that favors wealthy property owners.

Assemblyman Leno will be joined by a coalition of poverty and tenant rights organizations, environmentalists, labor leaders and others to denounce the so-called “California Property Owners and Farmland Preservation Act,” which would abolish rent control, reduce rights for many low-income Californians, remove important environmental protections and hand rich property owners more power to control local land-use decisions.

Leno discusses what the impacts would be of this initiative and what efforts are under way to ensure it meets the same fate as its 2006 predecessor.

The San Francisco Sentinel reports:

Opponents argue the Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property measure could displace 180,000 residents living in rent-controlled residences.

“If this measure were to pass, thousands of San Franciscans would be forced out of the city,” said Ted Gullicksen of the San Francisco Tenants Union.

“Seniors especially would be hard hit if they lost their rent control protections.”

Paul Hogarth has a long piece for Beyond Chron:

But you don’t have to be a tenant to be outraged about CPOFPA – you just have to drink water. Other parts of the ballot initiative – which would be enshrined in the state’s Constitution – would prohibit the acquisition of land and water through eminent domain to develop public water projects. The initiative would ban eminent domain for private use, but Section 19(b)(3)(ii) includes such “private use” as the transfer of property rights to a “public agency for the consumption of natural resources.”

What does that mean? Any construction projects to deliver running water would be ruled unconstitutional. San Francisco’s long-term plan to revamp Hetch Hetchy that provides our clean water would be nixed, as well as other efforts to bring public drinking water to California’s growing population. That’s why Susan Leal, who manages our Public Utilities Commission, will be speaking out at today’s rally in opposition.

Anyone who cares about the environment should oppose CPOFPA. The proposition would ban laws or regulations that “transfer an economic benefit to one or more private persons at the expense of the private owner.” Because the courts have ruled that virtually all land-use decisions and environmental laws can transfer an economic benefit from one party to another, these laws could suddenly be out the window. That’s why John Rizzo, who chairs the local Sierra Club, will be speaking out today. Other environmental groups are expected to come out in opposition as well.

Right-wing proponents of CPOFPA are hoping that voters will get confused – and simply support it because it says it will restrict eminent domain. There are legitimate reasons to oppose eminent domain abuse – nobody wants the government to take someone’s property and give it to a private developer like Wal-Mart. The Supreme Court’s 2005 decision allowing a local city to take peoples’ homes for private use was certainly misguided. But the solution is not to ban rent control, repeal environmental laws and make it impossible to provide clean drinking water.

Attend if you can.