I would be interested in hearing pros/cons of Prop 90 (as it applies to the EPHS' goals), if that's not outside the scope of this board.
While a bit after the fact (seeing that Prop 90 was defeated last week), here's my take (not official, by any means):
Prop 90 would have prohibited government takings of private property to give to other private individuals for a "higher use" (in order to increase prop. tax revenue, remove blight, etc). This sort of taking is what is currently being done by the CRA in Hollywood currently at Hollywood & Vine to build a new "W" hotel.
I'm going to venture to say that this is something that most people have a concern about. But Prop 90 went much farther, and would have required government agencies to "compensate" any potential "loss" involved with acts like rezoning, etc. This would have made any act impossibly expensive and inherently unfair to taxpayers, who would have to compensate property owners as if they were already, or on the verge of, using their land in the most profitable use of their land.
I'm actually pretty surprised that Prop 90 didn't pass, since so many people see the injustice in government transfers of private property. But, I guess enough people sat down & read their voter guides & realized how far-reaching & extreme this proposition was.