Gerrie Schipske for City Council.: Supreme Court Is Wrong About Redevelopment

Gerrie Schipske for City Council.

The voters of Long Beach wisely approved a limit of two terms (8 years) for members of the City Council. As a result, in 2006, the voters of the 5th Council District will have the opportunity of selecting a new councilmember. Gerrie Schipske is a candidate for the 5th Council District in 2006. This site will provide information on Gerrie's campaign for City Council. You can contact Gerrie Schipske at gerrie@schipske4council.com.

About Me

Name: Gerrie Schipske

Location: Long Beach, California

Local Roots. Local Values. Gerrie Schipske's grandparents came to Long Beach in the late 1940's. Her parents met at the Pike and married at St. Lucy's Church. They held their wedding reception in Silverado Park. Gerrie was born in 1950 at the Long Beach Naval Hospital. She has worked and lived in Long Beach for 29 years. Her three children attended Long Beach public schools and Long Beach City College. Gerrie has a distinguished career of public service at the city, state and congressional levels. She has served for over 15 years on Long Beach City committees, commissions and boards -- including the Board of Health and Human Services, the Joint Powers Authority for the CSU Headquarters, and the Queensway Bay Committee that guided the development of the Aquarium of the Pacific. In 1992, she was elected to the Long Beach City College Board of Trustees. She has won the nomination of her political party three times for state and federal offices. Gerrie Schipske is the founder of Long Beach Cares... and RxforLongBeach.com.

Thursday, June 23, 2005

Supreme Court Is Wrong About Redevelopment

Lordy, what were they thinking when the Supreme Court by a narrow majority decided that cities can take homes if needed for redevelopment in a "blighted area"?

Does anyone remember when Long Beach declared the Marina Pacific mall as blighted so that it could help get a "rack" store into the mall? (I think that only former Councilwoman Jenny Oropeza objected to that non-sense.)

So now with the US Supreme Court firmly behind them, cities can take homes to turn the property over to developers. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor got it right when she stated in a stinging dissent, arguing that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers.

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," she wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process,including large corporations and development firms."

Right now, voters in Long Beach should start putting pressure on the City Council to enact a "home owners' protection" ordinance that carefully spells out that only under an extremely limited case, with careful attention to give the homeowner due process, could Long Beach ever "take" a residence. Otherwise, it may be open season.

1 Comments:

Sharon Raphael said...: That cat picture with the lime peel helmut on her head is really cute. I agree with your point of view on the Supreme Court Decision but I am confused that the more liberal Justices sided with business interests and that it was the conservatives who sounded so logical including Clarence Thomas who never writes anything with which I thought I would agree. Schipske for Council Website is great.

Sharon Raphael, Long Beach; 1:31 AM