Yes but, the anti-Prop 13 crowd will still insist that it needs to be overturned.
I work in government. The standard rule is, there is never enough money. We need more! That’s always the answer. We will be everything to everyone. Just give us more money.
There is an opinion piece in the East Bay Times today about how the majority of “funding” for Alameda County comes from federal and state sources while property tax revenues make up much less of that. And how the author, part of the budget committee sees their budget as being sound and meeting the needs of the unfortunate.
It’s exactly that kind of thinking that gets us into trouble. The programs are aimed at a constituency based on a perception of charity. But the source of revenue to pay for that is completely decoupled from the local “need”. It encourages waste and inefficiency.
I well remember that CC County used to have a list of such programs they with the funds spent and the number of people served by them. It was easy to calculate a $/person cost of each of those programs. The result was astounding. I remember that one reading program for “disadvanteged youth” had served a couple hundred youth at a cost of more than $1,000 per. In my day, that’s what libraries were for. And now we have the internet. One doesn’t even need to leave home to go to the library. But the county will happily spend $1,000 per kid of our tax dollars for a few to encourage them to read. How refreshing!
Well, many people believe governments are bloated and wasteful. There is no incentive for governments or say organizations like BART to be truly efficient and running a tight ship. They can just raise taxes or fares. And we get a taste of this in private industry too, where if you don’t spend the entire amount of your budget your next year budget may be impacted and since you don’t want that you end up spending it all this year just to “justify” the amount for next year.
And I do understand and see both sides as I purchased my SF home in the early 2000s while our family home was purchased over 50 years ago. I help my mom with all of her bills so I know what she pays. My HALF YEAR property tax payment is like 4X her ANNUAL amount.
So which side are you for? In Singapore, property tax is based on assessed annual (rental) value not market price of property. Owner occupied pays lower %. For example, for first $55k annual value, owner occupied pays $1,880, rental property pays $5,800.
I am obviously for a that is uniform and consistent for everyone. Mom’s property is worth even more than my place yet here we are paying so much more. Sorry, Mom!!!
Prop 13 grants all property owners a level of certainty. It constrains local government from taxing them on a whim to fund whatever fantasies they might entertain. It keeps taxes and expenditures in the public realm where they can at least be considered, vetted and approved or not.
Your mother can plan on a 2% annual raise in her property taxes until death. The government can plan on a 2% increase in property tax revenue annually with certainty. You were afforded the same certainty, albeit on a much, much larger taxable base, when you bought your home. It’s fair and everyone wins.
Without Prop 13, all bets are off. And your house better be built of brick because that government wolf will huff and puff and blow it down. They know you can’t take it with you when you leave so, they know you or the successor owner will just be forced to pay…and pay…and pay.
I get it, but in my scenario it almost forces the heirs to properties to want to keep them in the family because of the low tax bill. I mean, if my Mom doesn’t disown me or cut me out of her will when she sees that I am advocating for her to pay more property tax, we the kids will be “forced” to keep the property as rental income properties to take advantage of the Prop 13 law. Hey, I ain’t gonna be complaining then but you can see how the laws like this can impact our housing market situation.