The League of Women Voters California has taken the following positions on the two state propositions on the Primary Election Ballot.
No on Proposition 98: deceptive measure would abolish rent control and harm environmental protection.
Californians deserve protection from eminent domain abuse, but Prop. 98 is a radical proposal that goes too far. Its extreme provisions would eliminate rent control and other renter protection laws. That is why wealthy apartment and mobile home park owners have contributed most of the money to qualify Prop. 98 for the ballot. In addition, Prop. 98 contains language that would make it difficult to protect the environment and regulate land use, growth and development. This hidden agenda would threaten water quality, hurt the environment and thwart regulations that protect our neighborhoods.
Yes on Proposition 99: Homeowners Protection Act.
This measure is a real eminent domain reform measure that will protect homeowners, without the hidden agendas and adverse consequences of Prop. 98. Prop. 99 will prohibit the government from using eminent domain to take a home to transfer to another private party. It is supported by a broad coalition of homeowners, business, labor, cities, counties and environmentalists.
Vote with the League on June 3.
Zone 7 board member gives endoresements
Having dedicated my professional career to water quality and having served 15 years on the Zone 7 water board, many people have asked me whom I am supporting for Zone 7. I support Chris Moore and Dale Myers.
During my tenure on the board, the region endured one of the worst droughts in recorded history. Myers was instrumental in ensuring Zone 7's financial stability during that time. As a retired Zone 7 general manager, he knows more about the operations of Zone 7 than almost anyone.
When I was elected to the City Council, Moore was unanimously selected to succeed me on the board. As a lawyer and former board member, he is well versed in water issues. As a deputy police chief, he knows emergency preparedness and public safety.
California faces a drought that is unprecedented in its history; a drought that is not only climatologic, but regulatory. California water issues require a steep learning curve. We cannot afford inexperience. For that reason, I also support Dick Quigley.
Ensure our safe, reliable drinking water supply. Vote for Chris Moore, Dale Myers and Dick Quigley for the Zone 7 water board.
Vote no on Prop. 98
Prop. 98 has two issues: limiting eminent domain and rent control. Regarding the latter, the City of Pleasanton has been the champion of the seniors in Pleasanton Mobile Home Parks. Why change a good thing? Vote no on Prop. 98.
Pleasanton Chamber endorses Moore, Myers for Zone 7
The Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce announced its support for Christopher Moore and Dale Myers, two candidates running for seats on the Zone 7 water board, the agency responsible for providing a reliable supply of high-quality drinking water and an effective flood control system to the Livermore-Amador Valley.
According to Chamber spokesperson Eric "Otis" Nostrand, both Myers and Moore earned the Chamber's endorsement for the June race because they bring the experience and expertise needed to ensure the Valley continues to have safe, reliable sources of water to meet the needs of Valley residents and businesses.
"Moore brings past experience on the Zone 7 Board and a legal background that will be of great value as the board negotiates future contracts," said Nostrand.
"Dale Myers is a recently retired administrator for Zone 7 and very familiar with the needs of the area as well as the intricacies of the agency. He is extremely knowledgeable about water quality and safety standards," said Nostrand.
Zone 7 supplies treated drinking water to retailers serving nearly 200,000 people in Pleasanton, Livermore, Dublin and, through special agreement with the Dublin San Ramon Services District, to the Dougherty Valley area. They also supply agricultural water to 3,500 acres, primarily South Livermore Valley vineyards, and provide flood protection to all of eastern Alameda County.
Thorne supports Prop. 99
The proponents of Proposition 98 want you to believe that the measure is only about "eminent domain." However, Prop. 98 is a dangerous and deceptive measure that is full of hidden provisions that are unrelated to eminent domain. These hidden provisions would harm local business and local economies, hurt senior citizens who are dependent on rent controls, diminish local control of land use decisions, gut important environmental protections and a variety of other hidden impacts.
Proposition 99 is the straight forward solution to protect us from eminent domain abuse. Prop. 99 prohibits government from using eminent domain to take a home to transfer to a private developer. Unlike Prop. 98, Prop. 99 is eminent domain reform with no hidden agendas.
Please vote no on Prop. 98 and yes on Prop. 99.
Hillside initiative was necessary
From the sound of your editorial, "Just say no to more initiatives" (May 16, page 12), one wonders if your real message wasn't "Just say no to Kay Ayala." It is not the first time that Oak Grove supporters have tried to dismiss the opponents of hillside development on the basis of her involvement. But having spoken to hundreds of people while I was collecting signatures on the hillside petitions, I can assure you that Kay Ayala's name rarely came up. Perhaps because people tend to follow issues more than personalities, what resonates most strongly is the City Council's willingness to put gigantic houses on the remaining open spaces around Pleasanton. With respect to Oak Grove, the parkland offered in compensation may not be enough to justify such excessive building. Just ask the next 10 or 20 strangers you meet on any street corner.
I disagree with you that these issues lack urgency. Times change, and since the neighborhoods you mentioned were built, houses became larger while the resources to build and maintain them responsibly became scarcer. Meanwhile, in the past seven months, our City Council approved Oak Grove (with houses allowed of 6,000 to 12,500 square feet), and also found unexpected "flexibility" in the Vineyard Corridor specific plan in order to approve a house of more than 12,000 square feet. The time for building houses like this has passed, and the few remaining houses that can be built under the housing cap simply do not have to be placed on the hillsides. Or so think the 5,000-plus of our fellow residents who signed both petitions. The City Council's stubborn resistance to hearing their message made the hillside initiative necessary.
This story contains 1071 words.
If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.
If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.