default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Proposition 22 is not good for California

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Monday, October 25, 2010 12:00 am | Updated: 6:14 am, Mon Oct 25, 2010.

Proposition 22 is a power grab by California redevelopment agencies. Redevelopment agencies now control 30 percent of all urbanized land and spend 12 percent of all property taxes (a figure that has doubled since 1990), now $6 billion annually, starving local agencies of needed revenues for essential services.

Assemblyman Chris Norby says that Proposition 22 would make the following big-government abuses worse:

  • Eminent domain: All properties within a redevelopment area are presumed to be blighted and can be seized by eminent domain. All attempts to end eminent domain abuse have since been fought by the California Redevelopment Association.
  • Impact on services: Counties have lost nearly $5 billion the past 15 years. California's 350 fire service districts stand to lose millions more if Proposition 22 passes. Local school districts are major losers, as tax dollars intended to build classrooms now build Costcos. Proposition 22 would make this revenue shift permanent, pressuring tax increases to make up the difference.
  • Corporate welfare: Republicans believe in a free market that functions best without government controls or subsidies. Yet redevelopment agencies pour billions of tax dollars into private malls, auto plazas, movie multiplexes, hotels and stadiums — many of which now sit empty.

Proposition 22 is intentionally deceptive. It looks good on paper, and sounds good, but has negative consequences.

Proposition 22 protects no one but redevelopment agencies. It would lock redevelopment protections into the state constitution, forbidding the Legislature from diverting redevelopment property increment funds to schools, fire departments or paramedics in times of need.

John Talbot


Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Manuel Martinez posted at 1:32 am on Tue, Oct 26, 2010.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    Is this an area where conservatives and progressives are united?

  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:23 pm on Mon, Oct 25, 2010.

    Doug Chaney Posts: 1232

    When those last council crooks, Robert Johnson, Katzakian, manager King and Hansen brought the redevelopment issue up and greedily included Hutchins Street Square and its neighborhood in the redevelopment area, it only gave the assumption of them again pandering to their developer friends and business associates. Thank you Mr. John Talbot for bringing this money grabbing scam to a screeching halt.

  • Kim Parigoris posted at 1:18 pm on Mon, Oct 25, 2010.

    Kim Parigoris Posts: 470

    google agenda 21, Dr Micahel Coffman, and you will see what these redevelopment agencies are all about. I was going to vote yes on 22, but then dug deeper and it is another step in the wrong direction. No on 22


Recent Comments

Posted 2 days ago by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Liberals believe in free speech…

Very true, Steve. But, I'm curious... what do you mean by the gun part?


Posted 2 days ago by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: It’s great to have freedom of r…

I think Cornell University (Ivy League and all) is a very credible source, but if you disagree, that’s fine. I like how you ignored the en…


Posted 2 days ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: People who need help deserve to…

Kaur: I take your post as a compliment as at time we seem to be on the opposite ends of the spectrum. Concerning the color of a persons…


Posted 2 days ago by Todd Cronin.

article: Galt Police Department seeks help ident…

The funny thing is, is that this is the most business they have had in months!


Posted 2 days ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Liberals believe in free speech…

[thumbup] Mr Heuer. I think you have analyzed the Mr Paglias angry responses to responding comments very well. Too emotional rather than …



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Alexus Bock chosen for 2015 Congress of Future Medical Leaders in Boston
Posted: March 28, 2015
Daughters of the American Revolution recognize essay contest winners
Posted: March 25, 2015
Order of the Eastern Star honors members at awards luncheon
Posted: March 25, 2015

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists