The Fight for Private Property Rights
I knew that my decision to host several town hall style meetings on the subject of private property rights would draw some interest from the constituents that I represent in the 4 th Senate District. However, I was not expecting to tap into the depth of emotion and support that materialized during these meetings.
 |
| Dana Berliner is a Senior Attorney with the Institute for Justice and argued on behalf of homeowners in the now infamous Supreme Court case, Kelo v. City of New London. |
Turnout at town hall style events can vary from event to subject. Some draw a little more interest than others. But I never expected to see more than 200 people cram inside the Yuba City – City Council Chambers for a recent town hall on private property rights, nor did I expect the 300 who showed up a week later in Redding.
I was surprised – but pleased.
I hosted these events because I am troubled by a recent Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London. Justices in the nation’s highest court ruled last summer that our homes and lands can in fact be taken away through the process of eminent domain, and then awarded to the highest bidder. The ruling stripped away the due process protections that we all enjoy under the 5 th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The landmark ruling not only troubled lawmakers across the nation, it had a ripple effect through our homes and communities. A great number of people are alarmed to learn that the government practice of taking land from one private owner to transfer to another has become routine. In fact, one such effort is taking place right now in Yolo County, where Supervisors are using the power of eminent domain in an attempt to acquire the 17-thousand acre Conaway Ranch.
 |
| Marko Mlikotin is President of the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights and was a guest speaker at the Lincoln town hall forum. |
This is one of the primary reasons why I decided to add my name to Senate Constitutional Amendment 20. Introduced this year by Senator Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks), the measure would greatly curtail the use of eminent domain to acquire private property.
I do understand, like most Californians, there are legitimate uses for eminent domain. Land can be and should be acquired for public benefit, such as a new highway, school, community center or other project that will benefit the entire community. However, the use of this tool has been perverted in recent years and is used to acquire land for private development.
This is clearly wrong. I wanted to use these town hall forums in Yuba City, Redding and Lincoln to not only explain SCA 20, but my opposition to last summer’s Supreme Court decision. The brazen taking of private property has touched a nerve among home and business owners in my district, which has resulted in the Homeowners and Private Property Protection Act.
The Homeowners & Property Protection Act will add two short paragraphs to Article I, section 19 of the California State Constitution which grants the power of eminent domain. The proposed change requires that any government agency that acquires land through the process of eminent domain – must be the owner and occupier of that property and use it for the stated public use. The Homeowners & Private Property Protection Act also allows the former owner to reacquire the property if the government agency in question ceases to use the property for its stated use.
 |
| Senator Jim Nielsen responds to an audience question at the Lincoln town hall. Senator Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks) is seated to his left. |
This is an issue that is just not supported by Republicans. Support for Senator McClintock and his efforts crosses party lines, but there is still a well organized and funded source of opposition. That opposition stems from people and organizations that make a direct profit from the taking of private land to sell to the highest bidder.
Former State Senator Jim Nielsen is leading the crusade for eminent domain reform in Northern California. As a guest at my three town hall meetings, he urged participants to “not just go away, but go away angry.” We both agree that positive change can happen, and we can restore some measure of protection from government abuse of eminent domain, but it will take an informed and motivated electorate to make it happen.
That’s why I’ve created a section on my State Senate website to help and inform citizens about the steps they can take to fight government abuse of eminent domain. Momentum is gathering to place reform efforts on the statewide ballot should our reform attempts fail in the State Legislature. Constituents can take successful action to stop brazen land grab efforts, but it’s going to take more than just one person or one group.
If you are concerned about government abuse and the taking of private property for public profit, be assured that you are not alone. Take action now to become an activist to protect our private property rights. The document below will outline actions that you can take from your own home to STOP eminent domain abuse in California.
STOP EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE – WHAT YOU CAN DO (pdf)
 |
| The town hall forums on private property rights drew a wide array of guest speakers who touched on a number of topics. |
Articles of Interest
Click here for a list of guests that spoke at each Town Hall Forum.
 |
| Senator Aanestad’s private property rights forum at Yuba City Hall focused on actions that constituents can take in the fight against eminent domain abuse. |
|
