“It is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that homeowners and residents of mobilehome parks have the right to peacefully assemble and freely communicate with one another and with others with respect to mobilehome living or for social or educational purposes.” California Civil Code § 798.50

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Special Interests Run Amok! If You Live in California and You Rent Your Mobilehome Space…Be VERY Afraid!

If you think the eminent domain debate is of no concern to you because you are on a long-term lease for your mobilehome space, think again. If you think the current Prop 98 vs. Prop 99 campaigns do not affect you because you don't live in a "rent-controlled" mobilehome park, think again.

Both measures will be on the June ballot. Both measures claim to eliminate potential misuse of eminent domain to transfer property from one private owner to another private developer. However, only one initiative – Proposition 99, the Homeowners and Private Property Protection Act – will bring true eminent domain reform by prohibiting such abuse of the government's power of eminent domain. On the other hand, Proposition 98 – dubbed the Landlords' Hidden Agenda Scheme – is a completely different story. Once again, wealthy landlords and real estate developers are taking advantage of the fear, passion, and indignation most Americans feel when it comes to the government seizing their property. This time, under the guise of "eminent domain reform," they are trying to sneak in legislation that eliminates virtually all tenant protections under California law!

Many state and local jurisdictions have passed laws to prevent eminent domain abuse, following the landmark decision in Kelo vs. the City of New London, the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the transfer of private property to a private developer. The Supreme Court, in a narrow 5-4 ruling, held that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

In this California election, the supporters of Prop. 98 are muddling the issues, and attempting to confuse the public. According to California Assemblyman Mark Leno, "This time around, with the threat even greater, they are prepared to spend $15 to 20 million on television to confuse the voters." TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS! For the record, Prop. 98 is funded almost entirely (recent reports indicate more than 85%) by wealthy apartment and mobilehome park owners. And they aren't even in California! This is outrageous! Sam Zell/Equity Lifestyle Properties (of Meadowbrook infamy) donated $50,000 to the campaign, from his Illinois company!

Gee, do you think they have an agenda to push? I'll tell you what they REALLY want: to outlaw rent control. Sadly, they have taken an unconscionable position that, while displacing many seniors and low-income families who have been granted a reprieve from unlimited rental increases, also indiscriminately carves a vast swath of "collateral damage" that hurts ordinary, hard-working Californians who are not fortunate enough to own their own homes, and, in fact, all who live in this state and rely upon a stable infrastructure, steady water supply, etc.

What kind of collateral damage? For starters:

· Eliminates tenant protection laws, including the return of security deposits, tenant notice periods like the 60-day notice to move, etc.
· Could overturn the Mobilehome Residency Law's just cause eviction protections, which would then allow park owners to immediately start evicting mobilehome owners simply to take their spaces out of rent control
· Abolishes all rent control protections in the State of California
· Invalidates requirements for a certain number of units to be affordable to low-income families
· Prohibits the use of eminent domain to acquire land and water to develop public water projects
· Changes the law to contain no exceptions for actions taken to protect health & safety
· Increases taxpayer costs and delays traditional public works projects
· Could be construed to restrict a host of environmental and land use regulations
· Could prevent the enforcement of existing environmental regulations

Don't believe me? Think I'm exaggerating? See for yourself. This type of greed and blatant disregard for the well-being of millions of Californians simply baffles me. I mean, really, doesn't Sam Zell and his ilk have enough money? Do they really need to cripple California's infrastructure and guarantee a future of uncertainty, fear and "temporariness" for all of us who happen to rent our homes?

Please help spread the word to your friends and neighbors. Vote No on 98 and Yes on 99. For more information, visit http://www.eminentdomainreform.com/.

No comments: