A bipartisan group began a petition drive last Saturday, seeking to amend the state Constitution. The coalition, calling itself  “Limit Eminent Domain – The People’s Initiative,” chose to begin its statewide campaign in Downtown San Jose during the recent state Republican Party Convention. The grassroots movement needs to gather over 800,000 signatures by early May in order to qualify for placement on the November 2006 ballot. They are counting on mobilizing a statewide cyber-campaign from their website www.LimitEminentDomain.org.
Two kinds of eminent domain
The first is the type consistent with the public interpretation of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution that prohibits the seizing of private property by government except for “essential public uses” such as schools, fire stations and roads. 

The second type has expanded the meaning of “public use,” to include “economic development.” A recent Supreme Court case again legitimized a 1952 California law that allowed cities to create a separate government agency know as a Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to revitalize urban areas, and gave them the right to seize private property under eminent domain.

Citing thousands of abuses by RDAs statewide, the coalition is seeking to redefine ‘economic development’ to distinguish between private and public uses of property in California.

“I do not support eminent domain when it takes someone’s private property in favor of someone else’s private property,” said a cigar-smoking, Republican delegate from Orange County, as he signed the petition.

Huge profits are made

Angry coalition activists collected signatures for the new initiative in front of the Fairmont Hotel last Saturday. Several of their members had previously owned successful, family-run business that had been forcibly taken from them without consent and transferred to private commercial enterprises that ultimately made huge profits on the transactions.

“Why should the citizens of San Jose subsidize the building of a stadium? If it is that good a deal, the owners should build the stadium on their own. It should be self-supporting. It’s a private enterprise. “says Ed Lee, one of the coalition members.

“I don’t remember voting for spending our tax dollars on that,” exclaimed another petitioner who carried a picket sign reading ‘Eminent Domain is NOT the way to San Jose.”

Dennis Fong was also at the kick-off event. Co-owner of several properties in the Tropicana Shopping Center that were seized under eminent domain by the City of San Jose Redevelopment Agency, Fong sued the City and won in a very publicized court case.  Among several findings in favor of Fong, the seizure “…failed to meet the test of greatest public good with the least private injury, and that the transfer of a property from one owner to another violates the law” expressed Fong.

“…Eminent domain as it is practiced today has become such a powerful tool for private, large, wealthy developers to take property from small business owners just so they can enrich themselves at the public expense.” he added.

According to the organizers, a colossal redevelopment zone was shaped from one-third of the San Jose city area by declaring it “blighted” in 2002, creating the largest redevelopment zone in California.

Theoretically, all private properties are subject to the economic development powers of the RDA.

Many long-time San Jose residents remember Stevens Meat Company, a family-owned business that was seized by eminent domain along with adjacent properties to make way for the hoped-for Oakland A’s stadium.

“The approval process is long. The baseball commissioners and owners have to buy in on it. Because it’s such a lengthy process,” says Roger Betz. “Let’s say they didn’t get the approval to move the As down here… shouldn’t that property revert back to the owners of that property? Ron Gonzales says that …the second alternative is to turn the property over to a land developer. Why shouldn’t it go back to the original owners?” Betz complained. 

“Leave it (economic development) to free enterprise that already makes hefty profits from development projects,” says John Revelli, whose multi-generational family tire business was demolished on February 2nd by the Oakland RDA, using public tax dollars to buy and prepare the downtown property for a private, for-profit housing development corporation.

“I’ve lost my entire future,” Revelli says sadly, while hugging his wife Marie.