There is a dangerous measure on the June 2008 Ballot that could wipe out important laws and regulations that protect our environment.  Every leading environmental organization, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, National Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club California, California League of Conservation Voters, California Coastal Commission (read their report here) and many others are opposed to Proposition 98 - dubbed the "Hidden Agendas Schemes". The proponents want voters to believe it's about eminent domain. But a legal analysis by the respected environmental law firm of Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger has found that hidden provisions in this measure would wipe out regulations intended to protect our environment.  Specifically, the measure prohibits laws and regulations that "transfer an economic benefit to one or more private persons at the expense of the private owner."  The courts have ruled that virtually all environmental regulations and land-use decisions are likely to impose costs on the affected party, while transferring economic benefits to another private party.  Thus, the measure will gut all manner of laws and regulations that protect our environment and regulate growth and development.

Prop 98 would lead to overcrowding by making it more difficult to build new schools or expand old schools. 

Respected education organizations like the California Teachers Association and the California School Boards Association oppose Prop. 98 on the June 3, 2008 ballot because it would make it much more difficult to build new schools or expand existing ones to relieve overcrowded classrooms. That is because the measure makes major changes to laws governing use of property, including use of eminent domain and regulation of land use. These changes could have a significant impact on the construction of needed new schools.

Instead of simply trying to reform eminent domain, the proponents of Proposition 98 - dubbed the "Hidden Agendas Scheme" - have once again over-reached in a way that could harm California businesses and local economies.  This measure on the June 2008 ballot contains poorly-drafted provisions unrelated to eminent domain that could stop much needed water projects, destroy local land-use planning, hurt new housing and commercial development, and lead to frivolous lawsuits and project delays. That's why leading business groups like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Black Chamber of Commerce and other local business associations oppose Prop. 98.

Wealthy mobile home park and apartment owners are spending millions on a deceptive campaign to pass Prop. 98 in June 2008 for their own financial gain.  These landlords want voters to believe that Proposition 98 is about eminent domain.  But their hidden agenda is to eliminate rent control and other renter protections so they can make hundreds of millions of dollars by raising rents on seniors and working families.  In fact, landlords make up for 85% of this measure’s funding. Senior and mobile home owner advocate groups like AARP, Golden State Manufactured Home Owners League, Coalition of Mobile Home Owners-California, the California Alliance for Retired Americans and many other mobile home owner associations, renters’ rights groups and seniors are waging an aggressive campaign to defeat this deceptive measure.

Buried in the definitions of Proposition 98 is a provision that will wreak havoc with local government planning and zoning decisions. Section 19(c)(3)(iii) of the measure prohibits laws and regulations that “transfer an economic benefit to one or more private persons at the expense of the private owner.”  This broad language contains no exceptions for decisions to protect health and safety.  Nor does it protect currently existing programs from attack.

Proposition 99 - The Homeowners Protection Act - will prohibit t he government from using eminent domain to take a home to transfer to a private developer.

Compare Propositions 98 and 99 by downloading the chart here.