If you want to know why the City of Concord, and other municipalities in California, are beating the drums for new taxes this fall, look no farther than Proposition 22. Proposition 22 and Concord’s Measure Q should both be soundly defeated. The pro-government growth measures are two sides of the same coin of government abuse of private property and tax revenue.
The chief argument Measure Q proponents provide is, “Sacramento ate our Redevelopment money,” and Measure Q will protect new tax revenue from Sacramento. But what they don’t tell you is the handpicked local control panel cannot protect new monies from the gaping maw of the Concord Redevelopment agency nor the Concord Police Officers’ Association.
Mismanaging Redevelopment Agencies over the past decades is a critical part of the fiscal imbalance California cities now face. You’ve heard every one say “They did this and they did that.” Well, If you ever wanted to know who “THEY” are, it’s the California Redevelopment Lobby pushing Proposition 22.
If you want to know more about the impact California Redevelopment has had in the current crisis and how Proposition 22 will further institutionalize this government abuse, see Chris Norby’s article below, published recently at the FlashReport.

You should also attend the 15th Annual Northern California Conference on Redevelopment Abuse, to be held at the Sacramento Sheraton, October 1, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Registration is $65. Join public officials, labor leaders, attorneys and community activists concerned about financial and propery rights abuses by California Redevelopment Agencies. REGISTER

Proposition 22 is a power grab by California redevelopment agencies
It protects agencies from legislative and voter oversight, allowing them to spend more tax dollars, seize more land and sell more bonds. Redevelopment agencies now control 30% of all urbanized land and spend 12% of all property taxes, starving local agencies of needed revenues for essential services.
Proposition 22 would make the following big government abuses worse:
EMINENT DOMAIN: All properties within a redevelopment areas are presumed to be blighted and can seized them by eminent domain. This has included small businesses, homes, churches and farmland. In the infamous Kelo vs. New London decision, a 5-4 liberal Supreme Court majority allowed a Connecticut redevelopment agency to take Suzette Kelo’s home for a private development—that was never built! All attempts to end eminent domain abuse have since been been fought by the California Redevelopment Association.
GROWING PROPERTY TAX DIVERSIONS: Redevelopment’s share of property taxes continues to grow without voter approval. Fully 12% of local property taxes are now diverted into redevelopment schemes, a figure that has doubled since 1990. That’s $6 billion annually in funds diverted from counties, cities, school districts, special districts and fire service districts.
IMPACT ON SERVICES: Counties have lost nearly
$5 billion in the past 15 years. California’s 350 fire service district stand to lose millions more if Proposition 22 passes, which is why the California Professional Firefighters strongly opposes it. Local school districts are major losers, as tax dollars intended to build classrooms now build Costcos. Proposition 22 would make this revenue shift permanent, pressuring tax increases to make up the difference.
CORPORATE WELFARE: Republicans believe in a free market that functions best without government controls or subsidies. Yet redevelopment agencies pour billions of tax dollars into private malls, auto plazas, movie multiplexes, hotels and stadiums —many of which now sit empty. Team owners shake down cities for public money for new stadiums and arenas. The Santa Clara Redevelopment agency is spending $14 million in public funds to lure the 49ers out of San Francisco and the Chargers are also eying public giveaways elsewhere. Proposition 22 locks in the wasteful spending and continues to enrich politically favored developers.
DEBT: Redevelopment agencies have total statewide debt now topping $93 billion and continue to sell bonds without voter approval. Proposition 22 locks in this abuse, assuring that future debt will extend well above $100 billion. That’s why the National Tax Limitation Committee and Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association oppose Prop. 22.
Proposition 22 makes it impossible for the legislature to reform the worst abuses of redevelopment agencies. Their big government powers of land use, eminent domain, subsidies and uncontrolled debt will be enshrined in our constitution.
As a conservative elected official for 26 years, I have seen redevelopment abuses at all levels. As a Fullerton City Council Member I watched nearby Buena Park lure away our auto dealerships with lavish tax subsidies. As an Orange County Supervisor I saw the Santa Ana Redevelopment Agency demolish an entire neighborhood, then leave the fenced off lots vacant for years. I saw millions in property tax revenues diverted from public safety to redevelopment schemes.
As a state legislator I seek controls on redevelopment spending, bond debt and property tax growth. Proposition 22 would prevent any and all such reforms.
Based on my experience and research, I wrote the manual “Redevelopment: The Unknown Government” with the aid of conservative philanthropist Howard Ahmanson. Call 714-813-5899 for your copy.
Redevelopment agencies were originally created to cure urban blight and then be abolished. They were never intended to be a permanent drain on public services, nor a cash cow for private interests. Proposition 22 will constitutionally guarantee the worst abuses of redevelopment agencies.
Republicans support property rights, free enterprise, fiscal responsibility and public accountability. We must oppose Proposition 22.
~ Assemblyman Chris Norby represents the 72nd Assembly District. He also serves as State Chair of Municipal Officials for Redevelopment Reform (MORR) and moderates regional meetings seeking to curb abuses.