The Center for Public Integrity

Seattle-based Citizens for Community Protection has produced the first television ad of the 2006 campaign in opposition to a takings initiative.

The organization’s Web site notes that the idea for the ad — as well as its setting — were provided by “fifth-generation Palouse wheat grower Aaron Flansburg.”

The ad, featuring and narrated by Dave Hedlin, who’s identified as a Washington farmer, shows Flansburg plowing the text “No 933” into his barley fields. Subtitles advise viewers that Initiative 933 is opposed by the United Farm Workers and the Western Washington Agricultural Association.

“No on 933” Television Ad 1

Hedlin: To us, it’s not just a farm, it’s our way of life — passed down for three generations and worth protecting. That’s why so many farmers are voting no on 933. [Initiative] 933 isn’t for farmers, it’s about turning our farms into housing developments and strip malls. You want to know what farmers think about 933? Ask me. I’m a farmer, and I’m voting no on 933.”

The ad is then identified as “Paid for by Citizens for Community Protection.”

Missouri: Constitutional Amendment to Article I - Eminent Domain, 2006-34 “The Protect Our Homes Initiative”

Read the full text of the ballot initiative.

See who financed the “Yes” efforts 
2006 04 10 Missourians in Charge Filing .pdf
2006 05 24 Missourians in Charge Filing .pdf
2006 07 17 Missourians in Charge Filing .pdf
2006 08 04 Missourians in Charge Filing .pdf
2006 09 07 Missourians in Charge Filing .pdf

Status: Missouri Secretary of State disqualified the initiative because the signed petitions were not submitted in the legally required manner.

Colorado: Proposed Intiatives 79 and 86
Unofficially captioned “Compensation for Land Use Regs that Diminish Property Value”

Status: Proponents did not submit petitions.

Oklahoma: State Question 729
“The Protect Our Homes Initiative”

Ballot initiative. A procedure by which a specified number of voters may, by means of a petition, propose a statute, constitutional amendment, or ordinance and compel a popular vote on its adoption. For more, see Wikipedia entry for initiative.

Eminent domain. The inherent power of the government to expropriate private property without the owner’s consent, either for its own use or by delegation of its taking power to third parties for “public uses,” the most common examples being public utilities or railroads. For more, see Wikipedia entry.

Kelo v. City of New London. A 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision (545 U.S. 469) that upheld the plans of New London, Connecticut, to condemn homes and transfer the land to private interests to further commercial and residential development on the ground that such a plan was in the public interest and therefore was permissible under the government’s eminent-domain power. For more, see Wikipedia entry.

Land-use planning. The scientific, aesthetic, and orderly disposition of land, resources, facilities, and services with a view to securing the physical, economic and social efficiency, health, and well-being of urban and rural communities. From the Canadian Institute of Planners; for more, see Wikipedia entry.

On November 7, 2006, ballot initiatives that seek to restrict “regulatory takings” will be put to voters in at least four Western states: Arizona, California, Idaho, and Washington. Although the potential impact of these initiatives is far-reaching — all would generally require landowners to be compensated for government regulations that reduce property value — citizens and journalists in these states might not know who’s underwriting the multimillion-dollar campaigns to promote and pass them.

Through its Takings Initiatives Accountability Project, the Center for Public Integrity aims to exhaustively investigate the ideological and financial interests behind these ballot measures and to make the findings of its research and reporting available to others as soon as is practicable.

The overarching rationale for this project is to allow citizens in those states and elsewhere to assess not only the substance and potential impact of the takings initiatives but also to report on who’s bankrolling these measures, and why, as well as who’s opposing them, and why. In this way, the Center hopes to uniquely contribute to a better-informed electorate and news media in the important but narrow window before the November 7 elections.

The Takings Initiatives Accountability Project was launched in August 2006 with a grant from the Wallace Global Fund.

Key Personnel