[quote=SK in CV][quote=CA renter]
Agree with Brian on this one. The impetus behind tinkering with or abolishing Prop 13 is to get more revenue by eliminating the tax subsidies for those who don’t need or deserve them.[/quote]
I’m not sure there is any significant impetus behind abolishing it. And I think the reason for that is those supporting a repeal are making the wrong argument. The problem with it is not that it mandates too much or too little tax, but rather that it mandates a tax that is unfairly distributed. And the only fix that’s been proposed is one that increases total revenues. It doesn’t have to do that. If the limits were set at the revenue end, instead of the assessment end, the state and municipalities wouldn’t have huge swings in revenues as they’ve seen over the last decade. No huge increases when property values skyrocket, or huge decreases when property values plummet.[/quote]
There is a lot of energy behind the split roll property taxes. Prop 13 would never have passed if it was presented solely as a means to give commercial/industrial property owners or landlords a tax subsidy (at the expense of others, either in the form of higher fees/taxes or reduced services). The ONLY reason it passed was because it was a way of “keeeping granny from being taxed out of her home.”
We DO need more revenues, and there is no doubt that the state and municipalities are losing billions each year on these subsidies. They are not needed and, IMHO, can distort the market, as well. We need to split the rolls, at the very least, and there is quite a lot of energy behind this.
