Proposition 98

With early returns showing Proposition 98 facing heavy rejection from voters statewide, Yes on 98 is conceding.

The ballot measure aimed to limit government’s power of eminent domain while phasing out rent control.

“Since California is among the biggest abusers of eminent domain in the country, our coalition cannot abandon efforts to restore private property rights in California, and will continue to hold government accountable for eminent domain abuse,” said Jon Coupal, the president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, an organization supported the measure.

With 12 percent of the votes counted statewide, Proposition 98 was supported by just 44.6 percent.

Both sides on the battle over Proposition 98 agreed that the low turnout that has been reported across the state would likely help the forces trying to pass the measure, which aims to limit government’s power of land seizure while phasing out rent control.

“Low turnout doesn’t benefit us,” said Kathy Fairbanks, a spokeswoman for No on 98. “Traditionally it’s more conservative voters who vote in a low-turnout election.”

Marko Milkotin, a spokesman for Yes on 98, agreed with the assessment. “Low turnout tends to trend more conservative,” he said.

Milkotin argued that several recent polls showing the measure lacking support failed to take into account that the election would see a relatively low turnout. He said the surveys, conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California and the Field Poll, polled a more general audience.

The campaign to defeat proposition 98, a statewide measure that aims to limit the government’s ability to seize private property while phasing out rent control, is out with its first television advertisement of the cycle.

The 30-second spot emphasizes the campaign’s central message: that the measure is a veiled attempt to benefit landlords and that it would harm tenants. The ad also highlights the opposition of the AARP to the measure.

“AARP, the nation’s leading senior organization, strongly opposes Proposition 98,” an announcer says. An elderly man then states, “Prop. 98 is a deceptive scheme by a few wealthy landlords to eliminate rent control. “98 also enables unfair evictions of seniors and other renters so that rents can be raised without limits. And 98 creates loopholes for landlords so that they can get around laws that protect our environment. Stop this shameful deceptive scheme. Vote no on 98.”

Less than two weeks before California voters head to the polls to decide on the fates of Propositions 98 and 99, the dueling measures that aim to address the issue of eminent domain, a new poll shows both measures receiving less than the required 50 percent needed to pass.

The survey, conducted by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California, shows Proposition 98, which aims to limit the government’s ability to seize private property while phasing out rent control, with 30 percent support. 48 percent say they would vote no on the measure and 22 percent say they are unsure.

The poll shows Proposition 99, a measure that is less restrictive in limiting the government’s seizure powers and that omits the rent control component, receiving 44 percent support. 36 percent said they would not support the measure and 20 percent say they are unsure.

The campaign seeking to head off Proposition 98, a statewide measure appearing on the June 3 ballot that aims to limit the government’s ability to seize private property and that would phase out rent control, has unveiled a list of more than 500 individual mobile park and apartment owners who have contributed to the Yes on Proposition 98 campaign.

The release of the list is part of a broader strategy on the part of No on 98: To portray the measure as benefitting of moneyed, landlord interests and contrary to the needs of tenants. “Five hundred of California’s wealthiest landlords have reached into their deep pockets to fund this deceptive scheme,” said Dean Preston, the co-chair of the Coalition to Protect California Renters. “From the beginning, there has been no doubt that Prop. 98 was written by landlords, paid for by landlords, for the sole financial benefit of landlords.”

The campaign for Proposition 98, which seeks to ban government from taking private property such as homes, businesses, and churches and converting it for other private use, is out with its second radio advertisement this week.

The advertisement, which focuses on a project to seize land and develop property on the Los Angeles community of Baldwin Park, casts the issue in a common man versus the government light.

“It's the city council that's taking our business. They want to get rid of the working-class people for higher income people. You know, it doesn't sound American to me. The Constitution says something about ‘Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.’ How come not us?” Ken Woods, the small business owner of Woods N’ Sons, says in the advertisement.

Battle lines are hardening over the June 3rd primary’s eminent domain initiative Proposition 98, with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger opposing it Friday and the farm and small business lobbyists reacting quickly.

The Fresno Bee is reporting a split between farmers over Proposition 98, which would bar eminent domain if property is seized by the state for private use. The California Farm Bureau Federation supports Prop. 98 but the Western Growers Association opposes it out of concern that thirsty Central Valley farmers could lose much needed, eminent domain-created waterworks including canals and pipelines.