AnaheimChamber.Org - Legislative Resource Center
Anaheim Chamber Of Commerce
Home | Sitemap
 
Legislative Home
Election Calendar
Candidate Summary
Proposition Summary
Anaheim Legislators
Chamber Policy
Statements
Key Issues
 
 
 
 
Government Resources
.
City of Anaheim
.
County of Orange
.
State of California
.
.
 
Legislative Resources
Find your California Representatives
.
Find your Federal Representatives
.
California Senate
.
.
California Assembly
.
US Senate
.
US House of Representatives
.
.
Official California Legislative Information
.
California Legislative Analysts Office
.
United States Library of Congress

Election Resources
.
California Secretary of State
.
Orange County Registrar
.
 
Other Organizations
US Chamber of Commerce
.
.
California Chamber of Commerce
.
Orange County Business Council
.
.
Orange County Tax Payers Association
.
 

 

November Election Voting Guide

THE ANAHEIM CHAMBER ENDORSES BUSINESS CHAMPIONS COUNCILMAN HARRY SIDHU AND PLANNING COMMISSIONER GAIL EASTMAN FOR ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
 
PROPOSITION 1A Anaheim Chamber
Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act SUPPORT
 
PROPOSITION 3 Anaheim Chamber
Children's Hospital Bond Act OPPOSE
 
PROPOSITION 7 Anaheim Chamber
Renewable Energy OPPOSE
 
PROPOSITION 10 Anaheim Chamber
Bonds. Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Renewable Energy. OPPOSE
 
PROPOSITION 11 Anaheim Chamber
Redistricting. Constitutional Amendment and Statute. SUPPORT
 

 

05/30/2008 - June 2008 Chamber Voting Guide

As your VOICE for business in Anaheim, the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce has taken positions for the June 2008 elections.

With such a significant election year in full swing,the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce has compiled a voter guide of the positions of various organizations on Propositions 98 & 99.

Remember to vote on these important propositions as well as for your candidate in the primary election on June 3rd, 2008.If you live in the 33rd California Senate district, remember that the Anaheim Chamber supports Harry Sidhu for Senate, as a businessman and an Anaheim Councilman.


Proposition 98

Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property. Constitutional Amendment.

Bars state and local governments from condemning or damaging private property for private uses. Prohibits rent control and similar measures. Prohibits deference to government in property rights cases. Defines “just compensation. Requires an award of attorney's fees and costs if a property owner obtains a judgment for more than the amount offered by the government. Requires government to offer to original owner of condemned property the right to repurchase property at condemned price when property is put to substantially different use than was publicly stated. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Increased costs to many governments due to the measure's restrictions. The fiscal effect on most governments probably would not be significant.

Chamber's Position
OPPOSE


Proposition 98 restricts eminent domain for private uses, in reaction to the Kelo v. New London case.Proposition 98 is strong legislation which restricts eminent domain for all private property, including businesses and farmland.This bill is more restrictive than Proposition 99, the other eminent domain legislation currently on the ballot.It also would prohibit rent-control in the state.

The Anaheim Chamber opposes this Proposition due to a concern that it will restrict the use of eminent domain for public agencies, which may hinder much-needed infrastructure projects such as water storage
.


Anaheim
Chamber

California
Chamber

Orange Council
Business Council

Orange County
Tax Association

Oppose

Oppose

No Position

Support

 

 

Proposition 99

Eminent Domain. Acquisition of Owner-Occupied Residence. Constitutional Amendment

Bars state and local governments from using eminent domain to acquire an owner-occupied residence, as defined, for conveyance to a private person or business entity. Creates exceptions for public work or improvement, public health and safety protection, and crime prevention. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: The measure would likely not have a significant fiscal impact on state or local governments.

Chamber's Position
OPPOSE


Proposition 99 restricts eminent domain for private uses, in reaction to the Kelo v. New London case.Proposition 99 is not as restrictive as Proposition 98, the other eminent domain legislation currently on the ballot and applies only to owner-occupied residential properties.

The Anaheim Chamber opposes this Proposition as it will have little impact to the way eminent domain is used in the state of California.  In addition, there is a concern with the Poison-Pill clause which would make this bill the governing bill on eminent domain and would negate other eminent domain bills, even if both bills passed.


Anaheim
Chamber

California
Chamber

Orange Council
Business Council

Orange County
Tax Association

Oppose

No Position

No Position

Oppose




 

 

 

 

2/06/2008 - Anaheim Chamber of Commerce Announces Super Tuesday Victory - Voters Defeat Propositions 91, 92 & 93

The February 5, 2008 Super Tuesday election resulted in a sound defeat for Propositions 91, 92, and 93. The results paralleled the position that the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce Legislative Committee had taken.

Indian Gambling Propositions 94-97 were approved by a slight statewide majority vote; the Anaheim Chamber opposed these propositions due to the forecasted ramifications to California taxpapers.

California voters also had the opportunity yesterday to help choose the next Presidential candidate. Presidential primary elections happen just once every four years, but this election is particularly exciting because it is America's first presidential election since 1952 in which no incumbent president or vice president is running. View results of Orange County Presidential Vote.

For more information on upcoming elections, please visit the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce website at: www.anaheimchamber.org/leghome.asp

 

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
OPPOSE
FAILED

Prohibits retention of funds earmarked for the Transportation Investment Fund in the General Fund for use unrelated to transportation after 7/1/08. Requires repayment by 6/30/17 of transportation funds retained in the General Fund in years prior to 2007-08. Eliminates General Fund borrowing of specified transportation funds, except for cash-flow purposes (repayment required within 30 days of adoption of budget); current law allows borrowing for three years where Governor declares transfer would cause significant negative fiscal impact on governmental functions and Legislature enacts authorizing statute.

This proposition is redundant and 2006’s Proposition 1A already does this.

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
OPPOSE
FAILED

Establishes in state constitution a system of independent public community college districts and Board of Governors. Generally, requires minimum levels of state funding for school districts and community college districts to be calculated separately, using different criteria and separately appropriated. Allocates 10.46 percent of current Proposition 98 school funding maintenance factor to community colleges. Sets community college fees at $15/unit per semester; limits future fee increases. Provides formula for allocation by Legislature to community college districts that would not otherwise receive general fund revenues through community college apportionment.

While the committee supports the Community Colleges, this will have too dramatic an impact on the California State Budget in an already difficult time.

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
OPPOSE
FAILED

Reduces the total amount of time a person may serve in the state legislature from 14 years to 12 years. Allows a person to serve a total of 12 years either in the Assembly, the Senate, or a combination of both. Provides a transition period to allow current members to serve a total of 12 consecutive years in the house in which they are currently serving, regardless of any prior service in another house.

This bill originally included redistricting as well as term limits.  However the redistricting was removed before it qualified for the ballot.  The committee saw this bill as self-serving to the legislators who are supporting it and did not want to support it without the redistricting component.

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
SUPPORT
PASSED

If this petition is signed by the required number of registered voters and timely filed with the Secretary of State, it will stop the law from going into effect, unless a majority of voters at the next statewide election vote in its favor. The challenged law ratifies an amendment to an existing gaming compact between the state and certain specific Indian tribes; exempts certain projects from the California Environmental Quality Act; requires that revenue paid by tribe be deposited in the General Fund.

The committee did not support the gaming contracts, as these compacts give certain tribes a competitive advantage over other tribes as well as private industry.  Additionally the committee did not support these as a band-aid to the state budget crisis.

 

 

 

 
AnaheimChamber.Org - Legislative Resource Center
Anaheim Chamber Of Commerce
Home | Sitemap
 
Legislative Home
Election Calendar
Candidate Summary
Proposition Summary
Anaheim Legislators
Chamber Policy
Statements
Key Issues
 
 
 
 
Government Resources
.
City of Anaheim
.
County of Orange
.
State of California
.
.
 
Legislative Resources
Find your California Representatives
.
Find your Federal Representatives
.
California Senate
.
.
California Assembly
.
US Senate
.
US House of Representatives
.
.
Official California Legislative Information
.
California Legislative Analysts Office
.
United States Library of Congress

Election Resources
.
California Secretary of State
.
Orange County Registrar
.
 
Other Organizations
US Chamber of Commerce
.
.
California Chamber of Commerce
.
Orange County Business Council
.
.
Orange County Tax Payers Association
.
 

 

Special Issue: 2008 Voting Guide for Prop 98 & 99

05/30/2008 | June 2008 Chamber Voting Guide

As your VOICE for business in Anaheim, the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce has taken positions for the June 2008 elections.

With such a significant election year in full swing, the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce has compiled a voter guide of the positions of various organizations on Propositions 98 & 99.

.Remember to vote on these important propositions as well as for your candidate in the primary election on June 3rd, 2008.  If you live in the 33rd California Senate district, remember that the Anaheim Chamber supports Harry Sidhu for Senate, as a businessman and an Anaheim Councilman.”

For more information, visit the Legislative Advocacy portion of the website at http://anaheimchamber.org/leghome.asp




Proposition 98

Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property. Constitutional Amendment.

Bars state and local governments from condemning or damaging private property for private uses. Prohibits rent control and similar measures. Prohibits deference to government in property rights cases. Defines “just compensation.” Requires an award of attorney’s fees and costs if a property owner obtains a judgment for more than the amount offered by the government. Requires government to offer to original owner of condemned property the right to repurchase property at condemned price when property is put to substantially different use than was publicly stated. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Increased costs to many governments due to the measure’s restrictions. The fiscal effect on most governments probably would not be significant.

 


Position Statement
OPPOSE
Anaheim Chamber of Commerce


Proposition 98 restricts eminent domain for private uses, in reaction to the Kelo v. New London case.  Proposition 98 is strong legislation which restricts eminent domain for all private property, including businesses and farmland.  This bill is more restrictive than Proposition 99, the other eminent domain legislation currently on the ballot.  It also would prohibit rent-control in the state. 

The Anaheim Chamber opposes this Proposition due to a concern that it will restrict the use of eminent domain for public agencies, which may hinder much-needed infrastructure projects such as water storage


Anaheim
Chamber
California
Chamber
Orange Council
Business Council
Orange County
Tax Association
Oppose Oppose No Position Support



Proposition 99

Eminent Domain. Acquisition of Owner-Occupied Residence. Constitutional Amendment

 

Bars state and local governments from using eminent domain to acquire an owner-occupied residence, as defined, for conveyance to a private person or business entity. Creates exceptions for public work or improvement, public health and safety protection, and crime prevention. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: The measure would likely not have a significant fiscal impact on state or local governments.

Position Statement
OPPOSE
Anaheim Chamber of Commerce


Proposition 99 restricts eminent domain for private uses, in reaction to the Kelo v. New London case.  Proposition 99 is not as restrictive as Proposition 98, the other eminent domain legislation currently on the ballot and applies only to owner-occupied residential properties. 

The Anaheim Chamber opposes this Proposition as it will have little impact to the way eminent domain is used in the state of California.  In addition, there is a concern with the Poison-Pill clause which would make this bill the governing bill on eminent domain and would negate other eminent domain bills, even if both bills passed. 


Anaheim
Chamber
California
Chamber
Orange Council
Business Council
Orange County
Tax Association
Oppose No Position No Position Oppose


 

 

 

 

 

2/06/2008

Anaheim Chamber of Commerce Announces Super Tuesday Victory - Voters Defeat Propositions 91, 92 & 93

The February 5, 2008 Super Tuesday election resulted in a sound defeat for Propositions 91, 92, and 93. The results paralleled the position that the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce Legislative Committee had taken.

Indian Gambling Propositions 94-97 were approved by a slight statewide majority vote; the Anaheim Chamber opposed these propositions due to the forecasted ramifications to California taxpapers.

California voters also had the opportunity yesterday to help choose the next Presidential candidate. Presidential primary elections happen just once every four years, but this election is particularly exciting because it is America's first presidential election since 1952 in which no incumbent president or vice president is running. View results of Orange County Presidential Vote.

For more information on upcoming elections, please visit the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce website at: www.anaheimchamber.org/leghome.asp

 

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
OPPOSE
FAILED

Prohibits retention of funds earmarked for the Transportation Investment Fund in the General Fund for use unrelated to transportation after 7/1/08. Requires repayment by 6/30/17 of transportation funds retained in the General Fund in years prior to 2007-08. Eliminates General Fund borrowing of specified transportation funds, except for cash-flow purposes (repayment required within 30 days of adoption of budget); current law allows borrowing for three years where Governor declares transfer would cause significant negative fiscal impact on governmental functions and Legislature enacts authorizing statute.

This proposition is redundant and 2006’s Proposition 1A already does this.

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
OPPOSE
FAILED

Establishes in state constitution a system of independent public community college districts and Board of Governors. Generally, requires minimum levels of state funding for school districts and community college districts to be calculated separately, using different criteria and separately appropriated. Allocates 10.46 percent of current Proposition 98 school funding maintenance factor to community colleges. Sets community college fees at $15/unit per semester; limits future fee increases. Provides formula for allocation by Legislature to community college districts that would not otherwise receive general fund revenues through community college apportionment.

While the committee supports the Community Colleges, this will have too dramatic an impact on the California State Budget in an already difficult time.

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
OPPOSE
FAILED

Reduces the total amount of time a person may serve in the state legislature from 14 years to 12 years. Allows a person to serve a total of 12 years either in the Assembly, the Senate, or a combination of both. Provides a transition period to allow current members to serve a total of 12 consecutive years in the house in which they are currently serving, regardless of any prior service in another house.

This bill originally included redistricting as well as term limits.  However the redistricting was removed before it qualified for the ballot.  The committee saw this bill as self-serving to the legislators who are supporting it and did not want to support it without the redistricting component.

 

Anaheim Chamber
Orange County Voters
Statewide Voters
OPPOSE
SUPPORT
PASSED

If this petition is signed by the required number of registered voters and timely filed with the Secretary of State, it will stop the law from going into effect, unless a majority of voters at the next statewide election vote in its favor. The challenged law ratifies an amendment to an existing gaming compact between the state and certain specific Indian tribes; exempts certain projects from the California Environmental Quality Act; requires that revenue paid by tribe be deposited in the General Fund.

The committee did not support the gaming contracts, as these compacts give certain tribes a competitive advantage over other tribes as well as private industry.  Additionally the committee did not support these as a band-aid to the state budget crisis.