VOTE NO on PROP 98 – VOTE YES on PROP 99

by adragonfly

It is important to vote on June 3, 2008 on these two critical propositions that will directly affect any renter in California – including mobile home owners who “rent” the land their mobile home sits on.

VOTE NO on Prop 98: The California Property Owner & Farmland Protection Act (CPOFPA) is being promoted as an eminent domain proposition only ( the right of a government to take, or to authorize the taking of private property for public use.) HOWEVER, there is a ‘hidden agenda’ in this initiative to abolish rent control and gut the laws that protect renters in California. It is being supported by the Howard Jarvis Tax Association, and the LARGEST SUPPORTER (BY DONATIONS) ARE THE MOBILE HOME PARK OWNERS at 44%, Apartment Owners at 41% (a total of 85%!), Calif. Farm Bureau at 10%, and misc donations.

It is documented that the Western Manufactured Housing Communities donated $154,020.71 to Prop 98, and the management company, Sierra Corporate Management has donated at least $35,000 that has been tracked so far. (I obtained the above statistics from Bicker, Castillo, & Fairbanks.) This gives us an idea how important this is to them to get Prop 98 passed. VOTE NO on PROP 98. IT IS NOT IN OUR BEST INTERESTS!

NO on PROP 98:

– Masquerades as Eminent Domain reform
– Carries hidden agenda of eliminating rent control upon resale
– Destroys value of mobile homes
– Allows park owner initiated condo conversions of MHPs
– Outlaws local affordable housing ‘inclusionary’ zoning requirements
– Contains poorly drafted provisions that could stop future water projects
– AND destroy local land-use planning and erode environmental protections.

YES on PROP 99 (Homeowner’s Protection Act – HOPA):

– A grass-roots effort with well over 1 million signatures to qualify a ‘clean’ eminent domain proposition on the June 3rd ballot. This is supported by GSMOL, Comocal, Neighborhood Friends, the League of California Cities, and many senior organizations. My opinion is this, it’s not perfect but it is better than anything we have in place now.

IMPORTANT: IF BOTH PASS, THE ONE WITH THE MOST VOTES WINS –
So NO on PROP 98, YES on 99

NEWS UPDATE!

Members of the NO on 98/YES on 99 coalition, which includes the Coalition for Economic Survival, have just filed a lawsuit in Sacramento Co. Superior Court, asking a judge to change the official title of Prop 98 to include mention of the measure’s rent control provisions!

Advertisements

21 Responses to VOTE NO on PROP 98 – VOTE YES on PROP 99

  1. I am a 71 year old widowed senior citizen and only living on social secirity benefits. There are way too may people living on the streets now. If proposition wins there will be more people on the streets. The economy is bad enough as it is now, why does the state want it to be worse. I will deninitely VOTE NO ON PROPORISION 9811111111 I have lived in my apartment building for almost 44 years. My dear late Father and my Late Husband were both Union men and so was my dear late Grandfather.

    Martha C. Baker
    2822 clement street #8
    San Francisco, Ca. 94121 (415)668-3203 marine42mb@aol.com Please post

  2. jojo says:

    You need to learn the difference between the word affect and effect. Right in the second line of your post. Too bad.

  3. harriet says:

    Well, the post by Ms. Baker looks like a fake, but let’s assume it’s genuine. Here’s a woman who has lived in the same apartment for 44 years. With rent control her rent has increased very slightly since 1978. Thirty years her landlord has provided housing and not received a decent return on his investment. What other private citizen has subsidized another private citizen for a good or service for 30 years? When you go to the grocery store do they charge you less if you don’t have money? No. You have food stamps. You are subsidized by the GOVERNMENT not by the RETAILER. Prop 99 says that the property owner/landlord should personally subsidize his/her tenants rather than having a Section 8 or similar program do so. This means that the landlord, who is in the BUSINESS of providing housing, is prevented from making a return on the investment. If we as a society want to provide assistance to tenants that is great. Why penalize a property owner, an individual, and place him/her in the position of directly gifting rent to a tenant? Look at Berkeley. With rent control for 20 years landlords let their buildings fall apart because they did not make enough money to maintain them. Ms. Baker, in her apartment for 44 years, has had her rent frozen at 1978 prices. What other thing that she pays for has not increased in cost for 30 years? Why should the owner of her building be supporting her? This is the job of GOVERNMENT in the form of rent vouchers (Section 8). This is not an emotional issue, don’t be manipulated by the little widow. That little widow could be the landlord and not be able to pay her property taxes because she can’t raise the rents.

  4. JimM says:

    I agree with harriet…..rent control is a illegal taking by the government,without just compensation.Some rent controlled units are rented by middle and upper class people.Why should property owners (private citizens) subsidize their rent?I will vote yes on 98 no 99!!!!!!!!!

  5. jrb says:

    To greedy the landlords who wrote Prop 98 no amount of return on their investment will ever be enough. Nothing will do but that they remove any and all poor people from their property and charge as much rent as the market will bear.

    I currently, half of what I make goes to renting a small single apartment. Right across the street from me a brand new developement of apartments are renting for more that twice what I pay now.

    When I do the math I see that if prop 98 passes I would have to get a second job just to eat. A landlord’s costs on their rental property have not doubled, and yet they want every cent of what I make to go into their pockets.

    This is nothing less than slavery and insane greed on their part. If they had not been so greedy in the first place rent control would never have been needed.

    Greedy people like this deserve to experience homelessness first hand and obtain a measure of emapathy.

  6. JimM says:

    The cost to replace a roof ,plumbing,painting,taxes, insurance utilitys, inspection fees ,ect have all increased more than 500% since 1978 while the rent on a welfare rent controlled apt has gone up 3% That’s why mobile home park owners are going bankrupt and thousand of rent controlled units are being held out of the rental market.

  7. jrb says:

    In 1978 I was paying $125 for a one bedroom. I now pay $750 for a single, market rate one a one bedroom is more like $1000-$1200. With the units right across the street from me going for $1800 for the smallest uinit available.

    So by your own math, (which I find questionable), property owners have gotten a 1000% increase in what they can charge, while their costs according to your math have not gone up the same amount. The amount that a property owner can sell their property has alos risen at least 1000% since 1978.

    BTW my pay has not increased 1000$ since 1978, it has maybe gone up 300%.

    My budgeted rent used to be about 25% of my take home pay, it is now more than half.

    So Boo F@#king Hoo for property owners. You’re still making out like bandits.

  8. JimM says:

    Vote yes on 98 no on 99!!!!!!!

  9. jrb says:

    Dream on JimM

  10. Brad Davis says:

    JOJO affect is a verb and effect is a noun.

    Seems like the auther used the correct word.

    Google affect or effect:

    The word affect is primarily used as a verb in English. It has two main meanings, which are closely related. Affect may mean to alter the feelings of, or to change the mental state of someone or something. It may also mean, in a broader sense, to change or affect someone or something in any way. So it is that we might say: How will the election affect the course of history? We might also say: The painting affected him so deeply he could not speak.

    The word effect, in contrast, is used primarily as a noun in English. It has a number of related meanings, but generally speaking refers to the result of something, the power something might have to get that result, or a phenomenon in the world. An example of the word used to refer to the result of something would be: The election had no effect on the course of history. We might also say: The effect of the painting on him was profound. Phenomena are often also referred to as effects, such as the photoelectric effect or the greenhouse effect.

  11. A.Citizen says:

    Excellent response. It’s good to know that the readers of this humble blog are aware of the importance of words and that their use, to be effective, must be in accordance with generally accepted usage.

    Kudos to you Brad!

  12. Citizen X says:

    I believe No on 98/ Yes on 99. If you are for Prop. 98 I hope you take a close look at your family if you don’t have any one on a fixed income, or living in the same apartment for years and the only reason they can afford that is because of rent control. The main people how will be affected by Prop. 98 are the elderly. These are the same people who sacrificed everything in WWII. They deserve to live out the last few years of there life without stressing if they are going to be able to afford the rent or even have a roof over there heads.

  13. Greg says:

    There are lots of businesses where the government has to force regulations so that those business owners dont’ take advantage of people who require their product. In other words if you’re in the business of selling concrete – government’s not too concerned because not everyone needs to buy concrete – but when you’re in the business of selling housing or food, or oil, or other necessities that people require to exist in this society, then the government cannot (or SHOULD not in the case of oil) allow the consumer to be taken advantage of. Essentially housing is a monopoly with a bunch of different owners – i know that doesn’t sound logical but all sellers are in collusion with one another based the fact that there’s less and less supply and more and more demand – the answer cannot be that only the wealthy deserve housing. There has to be control on the profits – no one is forcing people to be in the property renting business and those who are in it went in it knowing the rent control laws – now they want to change them so they can take advantage of everyone – they will put thousands of people out on the street and they will damage our economy – the gap between the poor and rich will only widen with this bill

  14. JaneJax says:

    I don’t get it. Landlords are well aware of the rules when they buy apartment buildings. Before you buy a place you find out how many units are rented and for how much and for how long they have been renting. Now they want to change the rules and eliminate rent control? I have lived in my apartment for over 10 years. I can’t afford to buy in the bay area, and I have a full time job at a UC. Without rent control, I could not live in the bay area. The regulations are there for a reason, and that reason is to reign in greed. The mortgage brokers were not regulated, see how great that has worked out?

  15. Rodzilla says:

    I find that most of the previous responses deal with folks who are concerned with losing the opportunity to live off the rest of the tax payers. The major issue here is the greed of governments to take from one and give to others who will in turn make profit for them and their counterparts in government. Please look closely at why politicians do as they do. It is not because they are concerned with your welfare but their own. They do not have to live by the rules set for you and me because they are the above the law.

  16. adragonfly says:

    Many of us have worked very, very hard on the NO on Prop 98/YES on Prop 99 campaign on the California June 3rd ballot. Please vote NO on 98/YES on 99 and tell all your friends and family to do the same. If Prop 98 passes, this could have drastic consequences for us in California. Almost every major organization is against it including AARP, the major water boards, most cities, affordable housing organizations, and this could devastate affordable senior mobile home parks in California. Thanks for voting No on 98/YES on 99.

  17. hexodus says:

    Many of the arguments posted in favor of Proposition 98 sound good on the surface, but fall apart on examination. I understand the points that these people are trying to make but they seem to lack a full understanding of the issues involved.

    Even if you disagree with rent control(and there are certainly justifications for that position), Proposition 98 is a horrible way to go about fixing the problem. It’s simply the wrong tool for the job.

    I do a more complete breakdown on my site, and I welcome your comments.

  18. Hillel says:

    Dear friends,

    Presenting:

    BR
    Balloon Revolution

    Please watch this 3 minutes U-Tube video and pass it on. Thank you!

    Geetings.

    Hillel

  19. samsondoggie says:

    There is only a little time left. I think its worth considering some facts about how rent control is doing on the ground in California.

    I hope people take this seriously. It is time to care about issues concerning manufactured housing.

  20. barbiedoll61 says:

    What happened to the bartering system? Does the government dictate the most you can charge for a soda? Why is the government involved in rental agreements? If you own property and choose to rent it out it should be on your terms and the person who signs the contracts, it is called an agreement. Boo hoo to the people who cannot afford the cost of living, time to go out of state then. The other businesses are not subject to limitations. When you sell a car do you ask the government how much you can sell it for?

    Get it straight people, renting out property IS A BUSINESS. This is supposed to be a free country. I have been a poor renter and a homeowner who rented out. I know what it is like to be on low income and with this economy I still am. My low income is not going to keep milk prices low, or drinks or gas so why housing. It is not the homeowners or apt owners responsibility to save the world.

    Besides if you are locked into a low rate THAT WILL NOT CHANGE. It is the next place you go to rent that you will have to review the rental conditions and actually read and agree to a contract between you and the owner, as it should be! So those sob stories of living somewhere for sooo long this is not AFFECTING THEM!

    Wake up Americans.

  21. Bruce B. says:

    PGE is a business too, and they are regulated. So are phone companies. living accomodations are not luxury items, they are necessary for survival. Your need for greed needs to be checked against the survival needs of the American citizen. Nothing can go “unchecked”, everything has rules and regulations – prices are not exempt.

    Did you forget “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?”. How can you have that when you want to put people in a place where they cant even afford a place to live? There must be a balance – and the prices are way too high already! it isn’t right that an American citizen has to fork over half of his / her income just to have a roof over their head, just because some greedy property owner wants to make a profit. If it weren’t for the laws that American citizens, who you want to gouge, put in place in the first place – you wouldn’t even have the right to “own” the land and property at all.

    Housing is just like any other utility, and should be treated as such so that people aren’t thrown under the bus and out into the streets so you can get not rich – but grossly RICHER. You have e responsibility to the people and communities of this United States to handle your “business” responsibly, so that you don’t cause unnecessary financial burden upon them, and it’s time for you to sacrifice some of your profit – just as we sacrifice our hard earned income to you – to the end of that cause.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: