[sammyg2]

The innitiative that was passed in kalifornia was related to an even worse problem.
There was a trend in this "great state" for local governments to claim emminent domain and take private property, paying only pennies on the dollar in many instances, and then sell it to developers (at a discounted price, probably brothers in law) who would build more modern urban businesses designed to cater to yuppies. It was a cheap and easy way to re-develop the downtown districts and believe it or not, it was legal.

One instance I read about detailed a small corner coffee shop that had been owned and operated by many generations of the same family. It had been there so long it had become a local icon.
The city council decided they would rather have an upscale market place on that block and the coffee shop was in the way of progress, which just happened to include an upscale car dealership. Seems the car dealership wanted to locate to that area which was more advantageous and coindently the car dealership was owned by a relative of a member of the city council.
They tried to kick the existing businesses off their property, then sell it to a developer so he could build (and sell at a profit) the type of businesses they wanted there.

The innitiative that was passed made that type of crap unconstitutional.