Eminent domain: Ballot is a battlefield

Two propositions take different approaches.

Published online on Monday, May. 19, 2008

One of two June 3 ballot measures concerning government's power of eminent domain would complicate the city of Fresno's ambitious redevelopment plans -- but supporters say that's just as well.

Proposition 98 would prohibit governments from seizing property to help private developers. The measure also would ban rent control, potentially leading to higher rates for Fresno and Clovis residents who pay for space in mobile home parks.

Fresno officials worry the initiative would tie their hands as they pursue large projects such as the proposed housing and commercial development near Chukchansi Park downtown.

"It will make projects of that magnitude much more difficult to do," said Marlene Murphey, executive director of the city's Redevelopment Agency.

The initiative's backers say it would save homes, farms and businesses from being seized for private use.

Local governments opposing Prop. 98 "created the problem by taking property," said Michael Der Manouel Jr., president of the conservative Lincoln Club of Fresno County, which has endorsed the measure.

Eminent domain has been a hot issue ever since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that governments could seize private property for the sake of economic development, even for private developers. California voters two years ago narrowly defeated a measure, which cities strongly opposed, that would have put sweeping restrictions on eminent domain.

Prop. 98 was crafted by the California Farm Bureau Federation and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Groups that say Prop. 98 goes too far are pushing an alternative -- Proposition 99, a more narrowly written initiative supported by the League of California Cities. It would bar governments from seizing owner-occupied residences for transfer to a private developer.

Both initiatives would still allow governments to take property for public uses such as schools, roads and parks.

But Prop. 98 is more broadly written than Prop. 99 and would outlaw the taking of any property for transfer to a private developer. Also, governments would have to pay more for property taken for public uses. Current law requires only that owners get fair market value. Under Prop. 98, owners could get more money for relocation costs and also could recoup legal fees if they thwart a condemnation attempt.

Governments in California have used eminent domain sparingly for private uses, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. The Fresno City Council, acting as the Redevelopment Agency's board, has used eminent domain three times for major downtown projects in the last five years.

The board voted to condemn two office buildings to make way for Armenian Town, which includes the recently completed state appeals court. It also took several properties for an addition to the Fresno Convention and Entertainment Center. And the board voted to condemn an apartment building for Community Regional Medical Center.

City officials considered using eminent domain to help celebrity billionaire Donald Trump obtain land for the proposed Running Horse golf and luxury housing project in southwest Fresno. Ultimately, the city and Trump parted ways, but city officials continue to work with Forest City Enterprises on the project near Chukchansi Park.

Officials with the city and Forest City said they're committed to the project and will press forward even if Prop. 98 passes. Some property owners have indicated they're willing to sell, but the city will not actively try to acquire land until an environmental-impact report is completed in the fall, Murphey said.