"A psychological revolution is to challenge bad laws and tyranny  from our government to realize a right to own property and have property as our constitutional right. This revolution comes from an insight to challenge boundaries the government has imposed on us.  Only than you will find energy to liberate yourselves from demagogues and tyrants".Deanna

Why should Eminent Domain, Redevelopment,  and Revitalization using condemnation as a tool be defeated?

" I support Revitalization but oppose Condemnation as the tool". Deanna

2. It is politically, unconstitutionally,  and morally wrong for the government to take land from one and give it to another for redevelopment.

3 The state's right to "take" property from its citizens should be reserved for extraordinary circumstances.

4. (county government) There has been a systematic takeover of county government over the years that allows for big money deals made against the backdrop of personal connections.

5. The decisions to seek condemnation has left residents wondering if their community will be replaced rather than revitalized.

6. The road to revitalization should not be paved with condemned homes, destroyed businesses, and shattered dreams.

7. The City and County didn't ask who live and work in the community to be involved in its revitalization because they don't fit the administration's vision for those areas.

8. Eminent Domain and Redevelopment using condemnation as a tool violates his or her constitutional rights.

9.Every citizen is under a threat and does not have security in ownership of his or her property.

10. Every citizen lose their rights to pass their home and family business on to their children and grandchildren.

11. Eminent Domain, Redevelopment,and Revitalization for private gain using  condemnation as a tool destroys the American Dream.

Many cities held off on Eminent Domain actions, waiting for the Supreme Court to decide Kelo, Now, with a thumbs-up from the Court, these cities can be expected to move aggressively. So, anyone who owns a piece of property anywhere in this country is at risk. Owning a home is the desire of every citizen. Your home is a part of you, a part of your family, and you are part of a community. For every citizen owning a home is the American Dream and have it forcibly taken away to benefit someone else is against all of the principles of what being an American is all about. Less than a month from the Kelo's decision, the flood gates are opening to abuse. Already, the ruling has emboldened governments and developers of the Inland Empire are seeking to take property from home and small business owners.

It would be appropriate for the State of California to take action to voluntarily limit their own power of Eminent Domain. As the Court in Kelo noted, nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power. The following are findings to argue a change in the law.

1. The protection of homes, small businesses, and other private property's rights against  other private property rights, and other reasonable government interference is a fundamental principle and core commitment of our Nation's Founders.

2. As Thomas Jefferson wrote on April 06, 1816, the protection of such rights is the first principle of association, the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his or her industry, and fruits acquired by it.

3. The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution specfically provides that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.

4. The Fifth Amendmenent thus provides an essential guarantee of liberty against the abuse of the power of Eminent Domain, by permitting government to seize private property only for "public use".

5. On June 23, 2005, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Kelo v. City of New London, No. 04-108.

6. As the Court acknowledged, it has been accepted that the sovereign may not take the property of "A" for the sole purpose of transferring it to another private party "B", and that under the Fifth Amendment, the power of Eminent Domain may be used only for "public use".

7. The Court nevertheless held, by a 5-4 vote, that government may seize the home, small business, or other private property of one owner, and transfer that same property to another private owner, simply by concluding that such a transfer would benefit the community through increased economic development.

8. The Court's decision in Kelo is alarming because, as Justice O'Connor accurately noted in her dissenting opinion, joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia and Thomas, the Court has effectively deleted the words "for public use" from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment and thereby refused to enforce properly the Federal Constitution.

9. Under the Court's decision in Kelo, Justice O'Connor warns, the specter of the condemnations hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.

10. Justice O'Connor further warns that, under the Court's decision in Kelo, any property may now by taken for the benefit of another's private party. and the fall out from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has the license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The founders cannot have intended the preverse result.

11. As an amicus brief filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, AARP, and other organizations noted that the takings that result will disproportionately affect and harm the economically disadvantaged and, in particular, racial and ethnic minorities and the elderly.

12. Protection of homes, small businesses, and other private property rights shall be available only for public use. The term public use shall not be construed to include economic development and Federal funds must not be available for such use.