Deceptive Campaign Ads Funded by Landlords in Favor of June Ballot Prop 98 Blasted by League of Voters and AARP

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Frank D. Russo

Today both the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) and the California League of Women Voters are wasting no time in denouncing as “shameful and deceptive” radio ads that apartment and mobile home park landlords started airing yesterday in support of Proposition 98 on the June ballot. They say that those who have bankrolled this initiative are trying to trick voters into believing Prop 98 is only about eminent domain, when in fact the measure was written by landlords, bankrolled by landlords and is for the sole financial benefit of them.

The record is clear. Apartment and mobile home park owners spent millions to place Proposition 98 on California’s June 3 statewide ballot. One picture says it all. Based on information from the California Secretary of State’s office through April 18, landlords and organizations that represent them have contributed 80% of funding behind Prop 98. Mobile home park owner interests have contributed the most to Yes on 98: (45%) in the amount of $1,770,699, followed closely by apartment owner interests (35%) in the amount of $1,373.84.

These folks don’t care about eminent domain. They’ve cleverly hidden provisions in Proposition 98 that would abolish rent control and renter protections. This would be devastating to millions of California seniors, veterans and others. They also wrote loopholes in Prop 98 that would gut environmental protections, which is why every leading environmental organization in California opposes Prop 98.

We’ve seen this before. It looks like a repeat of Prop 90— which California voters defeated in the November 2006 election. Then, supporters got greedy and went way beyond what was necessary to solve the problems created by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Kelo case. Only this time, the measure is written in even more of an extreme manner and is a bit of a sleeper on the June primary ballot. In their sheep’s clothing they are counting on a low turnout without a presidential primary race on the ballot to draw attention.