Kings County decision-makers have come out against a ballot measure that would greatly reduce the government's ability to seize private property, citing concerns that it could undermine important water infrastructure projects.

Proposition 98 is on the June 3 primary election.

"My concern is that irrigation districts and other kind of water agencies that need to get right-of-ways for ditches and water pipes can be attacked under this legislation.," said Supervisor Jon Rachford. "I under stand where the farm bureau is coming from, but eventually benefits to private individuals can be served by these facilities."

The Kings County Board of Supervisors last week voted 4-1 to adopt a resolution opposing Proposition 98, with Supervisor Joe Neves opposing.

The board joins a growing list of entities, agencies and organizations opposed to Proposition 98. The huge list now includes Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein, a Democrat, and former Gov. Pete Wilson, a Republican.

Neves, a sole voice against passing an anti-Prop. 98 resolution, said county leaders should focus more on educating the voters than influencing their votes.

"We should be encouraging people to vote, not necessarily how to vote," Neves said. "First and foremost, we should educate the voters on these propositions."

Neves was talking about Proposition 99, a much narrower measure on the same ballot sponsored primarily by cities. He did not take a position on Prop. 99, but he said he is siding with the Farm Bureau, which supports Prop 98.

Opponents of Prop. 98 are supporting Prop. 99, which would prohibit the government from using eminent domain to take a home to transfer to a private developer.

Prop. 98 would protect most private property -- homes, businesses, churches and farmland -- from being seized and turned over for private use. But it would allow eminent domain to be used for other public benefits. It also includes provisions to phase out local rent control for apartments, raising concerns among advocates for the poor and elderly.

A major concern among Prop. 98 critics stem from the language addressing water projects, which appears ambiguous. This has prompted differing legal views over whether it would block reservoirs, pipelines or a new north-to-south canal.

"This measure came about in the first place because of the government's abuse of power against private property rights," said Supervisor Tony Oliveira. "I hope the government learns a lesson from this. But I do oppose it because of lack of clarity in the water project issue."

The push for Proposition 98 comes from the California Farm Bureau, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights.

Farm Bureau officials say the reaction by government officials are predictable.

California Farm Bureau President Doug Mosebar has stated that Prop. 98 -- despite popular perceptions -- does allow development of reservoirs and other needed public projects while protecting property rights.

"Farm Bureau strongly favors water rights and strongly favors water development, and our support of Proposition 98 fits with both," Mosebar stated following Schwarzenegger's announcement of opposition to the measure in late April. "Proposition 98 was written with a lot of thought and the best legal advice. It will protect property and water rights, while allowing government agencies to use eminent domain for legitimate public works such as water projects, roads and schools."

The Legislative Analyst's Office appears to interpret the measure differently.

The measure would indeed prevent the government from taking property by eminent domain for redevelopment, affordable housing and public ownership of water or electric utility services, LAO concluded.

This, the analyst said, could lead to either the government buying fewer properties and incurring lower costs or the government offering property owners more to buy properties and end up with higher costs.

The reporter can be reached at 583-2429.

(May 10, 2008)