Comments so far on this story:

1. Brian T. Peterson, DVM wrote on May 8, 2008 3:11 PM:
"If you are wondering if Prop 98 will really impact our ability to care for our environment, please read the initiative for yourself at link"

2. larry92108 wrote on May 8, 2008 3:20 PM:
"I am a consumer attorney who has read Prop 98. Overall, Prop 98 stops government powers from taking your home or property and giving it to private entities, such as exploiters. I have mixed feelings about the rent control part which would not allow any new rent control laws. It appears that a consumer group wants to redistribute rich people's property and give it to poor people as a reason for opposing Prop 98. If you believe in the Robin Hood theory of theft, then maybe theft is OK. Problem is, the government is often run by rich people's puppets. So the victim's property would likely be poor people who would lose their property to condo builders who would make millions if Prop 98 fails."

3. savedme wrote on May 8, 2008 4:12 PM:
"READ Prop 98 for yourselves. There is nothing hidden in there at all. They are trying to make sure the government stops abusing it's power. When they come to take your home, you'll wish you had voted YES for 98. They can take it, and sell it to the next guy, just to get more tax revenue. Socialism refers to the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.[1] This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the STATE!!!!!!!!!!! bye"

4. Linda J. Wilson wrote on May 8, 2008 4:19 PM:
"I've heard the environmental argument against Prop 98. Having read Prop 98, I had to wonder who contacted them with this bogus scare tactic. The truth is that there are a few well-connected individuals with big plans that involve taking what isn't theirs (your property) to make their dreams come true. I urge everyone to not accept attacks against Prop 98 at face value. Read the actual wording of Prop 98 and you will see these attacks for the uninformed, enflamed B.S. they are."

5. Robert C. Leif, Ph.D. wrote on May 8, 2008 10:01 PM:
"I agree with most of the goals of the EHC. I cannot understand how this organization would let an official representative spread this gross disinformation. The politicians, developers, and municipal bond companies have been using redevelopment to their own benefit. The politicians use the tax increment bonds to obtain money, which they use for the benefit of the developers; not the people. The bond companies make a commission for selling the bonds. The property owners are robbed of their buildings and land. The business owners have, if they are lucky, to start all over, the workers lose their jobs, and the tenants are thrown out on the street. How does this help the environment? As for rent control, ask these hypocritical politicians if they have ever introduced or voted in favor of rent control legislation. They cannot do so because it would offend the developers."

6. CV Mom wrote on May 9, 2008 9:45 AM:
"I previously supported EHC, when their primary focus was San Diego Bay Cleanup. However, once they began collaborating with the UNIONS to block the Gaylord Convention Center Development in Chula Vista, threating environmental lawsuits unless Gaylord met Union demands to lock out anyone but local union workers, they lost all credibility with me. Now they just seem to be a mouthpiece and tool for the local unions. Never again will I donate to this organization -- they've sold out to the unions!"

7. Prop 98 sucks wrote on May 9, 2008 10:27 AM:
"EHC is doing the right thing. Proposition 98 hurts taxpayers, just as a similar measure 37 in Oregon. Cash-strapped cities, already struggling with limited resources should not waste money on lawsuits every-time they plan for the public good. If Proposition 98 were indeed fair, then it would require private developers that benefited from planning actions to compensate the taxpayers. This is instead a one-way stream of money from the public to landlords."

8. EHC deserves support! wrote on May 11, 2008 7:52 PM:
"I've been a supporter of EHC for a number of years. I disagree with "CV Mom's" comments criticizing EHC. Their message has been remarkably consistent over the years: fighting against environmental hazards to people of color and poor people, as well as trying to strengthen those communities in any way possible. Supporting union jobs, which generally have better pay, working conditions and benefits than non-union ones, is entirely consistent with EHC's goal of supporting low income families."