Posted by
Neophyte Pundit on Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:00:00 AM
When I first saw these two propositions I was a little suspicious, especially of Prop 99. With 98 I was leaning toward supporting. So, this mornings San Diego Union Tribune made the following endorsement: No on 98, No on 99. They claim 98 is too vague, that the language gives some fudge factors. In addition it makes the claim that if 98 had been enforced we would not have Petco Park nor Horton Plaza. I am so against takings for private purposes that I must support 98. If a project is so worth doing then developers need to use negotiation and make a private purchase, and not rely upon the government to enforce eminent domain.
Proposition 99 is merely an attempt by developers to fool voters. They are hoping for a no on 98 and yes on 99. I cannot support a sham...therefore no on 99.
Proposition 98: YES
Proposition 99: NO
What say you?