Topic: Hey Judge, do you have any info on prop 98/99?

[Just plain old Punisher]

No information on either prop come with my absentee ballot...and I don't know anything about them. Do you have the skinny on either prop?

[Centurus]

Oddly enough I was part of a focus group about these props.

Both deal with limiting eminent domain, however Prop 98 would also give a means to with which to remove rent control, and could possibly make it easier for developers to break into areas normally prohibited against development of anykind.

Prop 99 just limits eminent domain, however it's far weaker than Prop 98 from what I've read and understand, so therefore it may not be as enforceable.

[TheJudge]

Yep, I do have info on both Props since I've got some clients involved in them.


Prop 98 is a real humbdinger.  It's got some nice, good, strong language on eminent domain that I would like if I was in real estate or a developer or a rental property manager.  The biggest backers are private developers and rental property managers who see its removal of rent controls and some environmental laws as a way to make a lot more money.  They can build in areas where they couldn't build before, and they can kick up the rent on the folks that have been living in their LA apartments for 20 years. 

Personally I'm against Prop 98 and so is almost everyone I know.  It's a perfect example of well-moneyed special interests crafting laws that will do THEM financial good and packaging it as a proposition because their lobbyists in Sacramento can't get the laws they want passed.  (Yup, an example of how California's Initiative process, meant to break the backs of Sacramento lobbyist special interests has now been taken over by those same people.)

Prop 99 is actually weaker than I would prefer, but does have some of the protections we need due to the Supreme Court ruling on eminent domain.  I have voted Yes on this measure.

Now, here's the link to the California Secretary of State website's Voter Information Guide.  This iincludes the pamphlet information on the ballot measures, and the for and against summaries:  http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/


(sidenote, I've written those summaries for other ballot measures before...always take them with a grain of salt)

[Just plain old Punisher]

Ok sounds like a big old no on 98 and yes on 99.

[marstone]

Ok sounds like a big old no on 98 and yes on 99.

Before just signing on the line, see if you can get the text of the props so you can see for yourself.

I am not from the area, but I don't really like taking someones word without reading it myself (no offense Judge, but people read things differently and see them from their own point of view, your choice is probably the right one, but always good to actually see it for yourself).
I have just had some props come through my area that most people liked until you looked at the brass tacks of what was proposed.

[TheJudge]

Marstone, that's why I included the links to the California Secretary of State's website where all that information is available.

[AcePylut]

I'd vote for both.

It's not the governments job to control rest, and if some guy owns an apartment block where the rent is $1000, but he could easily have renters pay $2000, then he should have that right to do so. 

[marstone]

  Woops, sorry about that.  After a 16hour work day, I wasn't seeing to straight.

[Soreyes]

Yep 98 is a joke. 99 I'm having some problems with. It's not to bad but to me there are some areas that are just, well to me ambiguous. I may go with "If in doubt Vote NO"

[TheJudge]

I vote NO on most propositions.  Voting no when in doubt is a good thing usually.  However, voting yes on both is kind of funny.  Prop 99 was written so that if it gets MORE votes than Prop 98, Prop 98 is nullified, even if it passes. 

[Pestalence_XC]

I'd vote for both.

It's not the governments job to control rest, and if some guy owns an apartment block where the rent is $1000, but he could easily have renters pay $2000, then he should have that right to do so.

What if his tenants can not afford $2000 a month or on a fixed income... Do you really support kicking Grandma and Grandpa out because they can't afford the new rent? Having a ceiling on the rent prevents housing from becoming like our medical field.. outrageously overpriced.

For Example, I use to build MRI's and test them out, construct the rooms, set the equipment up.

Have you ever had an MRI? how much did they charge you?

Most hospitals and clinics charge between $1800 to $2500 for a standard MRI scanning.

I go to the Doctor to get better, not to buy him a new Lexus or Mercedes or BMW or Ferrari.

Actual cost for running the equipment and for the Doctor and Technician.. $415.. Do you see the mark up.. Now imagine housing doing the same thing and this time you don't have insurance to cover the cost..

If people are actually paying attention, the Proposition 99 would be really stupid to pass.

[AcePylut]

I'd vote for both.

It's not the governments job to control rest, and if some guy owns an apartment block where the rent is $1000, but he could easily have renters pay $2000, then he should have that right to do so.

What if his tenants can not afford $2000 a month or on a fixed income... Do you really support kicking Grandma and Grandpa out because they can't afford the new rent? Having a ceiling on the rent prevents housing from becoming like our medical field.. outrageously overpriced.

If the tenants can't afford a 2k monthly payment, and that's what the market will pay for that apartment, then the tenant shouldn't be living in that building.  Kicking them out?  I read that as breaking the lease.  If they have a lease for 1k a month, than that's what they pay until that lease runs out.  If at the end of that lease, the owner of the building can rent that apt. for 2k, then he should be able to charge 2k.  If gramma and grandpa can't afford it, it shouldn't fall on the owner of the building to shoulder that lost income.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Actually, state law dictates how much per year a landlord can increase the rent. Something like 10 percent. Which is fair.

[marstone]

I'd vote for both.

It's not the governments job to control rest, and if some guy owns an apartment block where the rent is $1000, but he could easily have renters pay $2000, then he should have that right to do so.

What if his tenants can not afford $2000 a month or on a fixed income... Do you really support kicking Grandma and Grandpa out because they can't afford the new rent? Having a ceiling on the rent prevents housing from becoming like our medical field.. outrageously overpriced.

For Example, I use to build MRI's and test them out, construct the rooms, set the equipment up.

Have you ever had an MRI? how much did they charge you?

Most hospitals and clinics charge between $1800 to $2500 for a standard MRI scanning.

I go to the Doctor to get better, not to buy him a new Lexus or Mercedes or BMW or Ferrari.

Actual cost for running the equipment and for the Doctor and Technician.. $415.. Do you see the mark up.. Now imagine housing doing the same thing and this time you don't have insurance to cover the cost..

If people are actually paying attention, the Proposition 99 would be really stupid to pass.

Last I checked our country is suppose to believe in the free market.  The free market is suppose to set the price, it doesn't work that way with govenement stepping in and telling people and buisnesses that they have to shoulder the burdon of the laws that are passed.  I love when the governement thinks they should step in and say, "oh, you can only charge this much" "You can only make this much money"

Well, as for the MRI, jewelry stores have a higher mark-up then that. 

I guess that if the government is believed that it should set rent controls (now low income housing area's are fine, but setting it for everyone, no), maybe they should set a max rate a house can appreciate.  Since most rents are set by a math formula on the value of the place you are renting, if the value is growing by 20% and you can only increase a rent by 10% you are losing money, nice if the government would reimburse the buisnesses for the expenses they dictate.

[Centurus]

Let's not forget that there are numerous federal assisted housing grants and programs available to everyone, especially elderly on a fixed income.  Thing is most people aren't aware of them cause it's not completely advertised, which sucks. 

And those that do know of it tend to get confused as to how to go about applying for it, and you really can't blame them, cause the government never makes anything easy to understand.

Also, I don't think any and all rent control laws would be done away with in one shot by Prop 98 passing, so there would still be laws and regulations to maintain rent control, just not as strongly as now probably.

I do appreciate rent control, really I do.  I also know that here in California, the rent prices are so out of control right now because of the housing situation, that even with property values dropping, most people can't afford the rent rates for more than a year, unless you're living in places like South Central Los Angeles, and even then, some people are finding it hard to make the rent.

But also, because most people can't afford the rents in most areas, landlords have one of several options: 1.) Keep rents at their current rates and have their properties left vacant for a considerable amount of time, which costs them money each month.  2.) Lower the rents to make them more competitive, and hopefully improve the chances of finding a tenant, even if it means you might take a loss each month, because taking a small loss is a lot better than taking a larger one, and you can declare it on your taxes and get a refund.  3.) Sell off their properties that they can't rent out, but due to the real estate values in California, they'll more than likely have to sell the properties off at a either the exact same price they either paid for or currently owe on the properties, if they were lucky enough for their properties to have maintained a decent value.

But I see the whole situation as this:

*Prop 98 passes, and some landlords manage to get rid of rent control after the leases of some of their tenants are up.  They raise the rents, and the current tenants have to move out.  Unfortunate, it is.

Prop 98 doesn't pass, rent controls remain in place, but the government eventually comes in, declares the property and the surrounding properties eminent domain, doesn't give a reason which it normally doesn't, takes the properties away, tears down the buildings, erects a mini-mall with another damned Starbucks and limited parking, and some public official has more petty cash.  No need to worry about rent control, cause there's nothing left to control the rent for.*

Prop 99 really isn't strong enough to be truly enforced from the sounds of it.  Good on paper, but so were the Articles Of Confederation, and those didn't last long after the British left.

If there was a prop that could be strongly enforced without all the other crap loaded into it, I'd vote for it in half a second. 

[TheJudge]

There's talk in certain circles that if 99 does fail, the legislature might actually do its job and come up with a decent bill that would prevent municipalities from taking property for commercial purposes.  Only problem is that unless we really trounce the Republicans in this next election we'll have to worry about the Republicans putting in a poison pill amendment. 

[Just plain old Punisher]

Yay! I voted! Mailed my ballot off today.

[Centurus]

There's talk in certain circles that if 99 does fail, the legislature might actually do its job and come up with a decent bill that would prevent municipalities from taking property for commercial purposes.  Only problem is that unless we really trounce the Republicans in this next election we'll have to worry about the Republicans putting in a poison pill amendment. 

I'm willing to serve my country.  Give me a list of all Republicans that could do any harm, get some video recording equipment, and give me some plane fare, and I'll sleep with all of them and you can record it and release to the press.  Cause enough scandal that the Republicans may never recover from.

[Soreyes]

There's talk in certain circles that if 99 does fail, the legislature might actually do its job and come up with a decent bill that would prevent municipalities from taking property for commercial purposes.  Only problem is that unless we really trounce the Republicans in this next election we'll have to worry about the Republicans putting in a poison pill amendment. 

I'm willing to serve my country.  Give me a list of all Republicans that could do any harm, get some video recording equipment, and give me some plane fare, and I'll sleep with all of them and you can record it and release to the press.  Cause enough scandal that the Republicans may never recover from.

  Cent your a little late on that. The Republicans have all ready Hired all the Hookers in the Sac area and are sending them to pester the Democrats. Of course if they do get film of Dem's and hookers having a party. It would not matter any how. They would put it in there private collections or try to Blackmail the Dem's

[Centurus]

There's talk in certain circles that if 99 does fail, the legislature might actually do its job and come up with a decent bill that would prevent municipalities from taking property for commercial purposes.  Only problem is that unless we really trounce the Republicans in this next election we'll have to worry about the Republicans putting in a poison pill amendment. 

I'm willing to serve my country.  Give me a list of all Republicans that could do any harm, get some video recording equipment, and give me some plane fare, and I'll sleep with all of them and you can record it and release to the press.  Cause enough scandal that the Republicans may never recover from.

  Cent your a little late on that. The Republicans have all ready Hired all the Hookers in the Sac area and are sending them to pester the Democrats. Of course if they do get film of Dem's and hookers having a party. It would not matter any how. They would put it in there private collections or try to Blackmail the Dem's

No no no.  You don't understand.  I'm willing to take it up the rear from Republicans while being video taped and then putting the whole works all over the net and causing a massive scandal.

Dems with prostitutes.  That didn't hurt them in the past, I don't think it's gonna hurt them now.