Fourth District, Calaveras County, CA

Altaville | Angels Camp | Douglas Flat | Murphys | Vallecito

Events

Reforming Eminent Domain in Calaveras County

The June 2008 primary election may decide how California will reshape its eminent domain procedures. This should concern everyone. As a candidate for Supervisor in the Fourth District, you want know where I stand on such key issues. This is my personal opinion, not the Angels City Council’s.

Here in Calaveras County, we have a deep aversion to taking private property from unwilling sellers. However, recent US Supreme Court rulings prompted the need for reform at the State level. The problem is the Court’s ruling implied government could take private property for alternative private purposes with only a thin veil of public purpose. This clearly expanded the traditional usage of eminent domain. The US Supreme Court is a deeply conservative body which, in this case, placed the right of government over that of individual property owners. So the issue is not conservative versus liberal, but how to reform public property acquisition.

There are two alternative ballot initiatives, the Homeowners Protection Act (HPA) and the Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act (POFPA). These names are more advertising slogans than descriptions. You should examine the actual words of each initiative before deciding which to support. The POFPA goes well beyond the specific issues raised by the Supreme Court’s decision. POFPA could restrict a broad range of government actions beyond taking. It prohibits most regulations “affecting the use of real property that are enacted in order to transfer an economic benefit to one or more private persons at the expense of the property owner.” Virtually all development al regulations do, at some point, provide economic benefits to private citizens. Some POFPA provisions are ambiguous, meaning it will take court cases to interpret their application. POFPA, in the judgment of the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties, would prevent local governments, for example, from obtaining easements on properties necessary for water and waste water system improvements.

The other initiative, HPA, is more narrowly tailored. It specifically addresses the Court’s ruling. HPA bars any taking of homes for private development purposes. It specifically protects owner-occupied primary residences, and does not address other types of private property. HPA leaves eminent domain available for its historic uses of obtaining land for public utilities, highways and roads, and easements to support those usages. Occasionally may be necessary use eminent domain to obtain property required to complete a public project. The guiding principle should always be the absolute least intrusive approach to achieve the public interest. Governments should be very sensitive to property rights and seek to work with willing sellers at fair market prices. I believe that this is the right way. I support the HPA initiative because it is specific, limited and clear. Let’s reform, not destroy, the public’s right to regulate for the common good.