Repealing Prop 13 and removing local control of zoning decisions can be done via votes in the legislature, no new technologies required, so I beg to differ with the "no easy fix" tag.
Parent comment said "Repealing Prop 13 and removing local control of zoning decisions can be done via votes in the legislature". I don't know if that is true or not, I'm responding to that premise. Either one of you could help the discussion by providing a source backing up your conflicting claims.
The Prop 13 problem is easy to solve technically, if you see the problem as described in this piece... but that's not the problem that needs to be solved. The real problem is California's referendum system that allows such populist lunacy to pass at all.
There is zero chance of modification either, if such modification increases the tax burden for current homeowners. Even homeowners who might have voted in favor of changes in the past won't do so now, given the skyrocketing home prices. To vote for a change would be to do themselves great personal harm.
It's obvious that Prop 13 contributes to the problem, but Prop 13 is untouchable. Realistic proposals to make housing affordable do not involve changes to Prop 13.
That's one solution to Prop 13; I can't help but think that the $120M would be better spent trying to repeal that example of what's wrong with direct democracy.
I'm aware that prop 13 requires a ballot measure to repeal -- I think we may disagree on the semantics of what constitutes a "government solution" though.
> Prop 13, voted in by the residents themselves 40 years ago, is a giant sandbag on the state's finances.
Yes, prop 13 is a stupid piece of legislation. But it isn’t an insurmountable obstacle to good governance. Prop 13 made it impossible to have a reasonable property tax system, so California (and its subdivisions) should not rely on property taxes. Problem solved.
Absolutely wrong. Prop 13 will not and can never be repealed because:
1) It would bankrupt older residents on fixed incomes similarly to a generation ago who needed Prop 13 in the first place to avoid homelessness.
2) Older retirees vote in large numbers so they have political power.
3) This article reads like the sociopathic desires of moral-panicking techers unconcerned with people other than themselves, so long as everyone else has austerity foisted on them while they themselves enjoy the benefits. A society of hyper-individualists who don't care about other people ceases to be a viable civilization, but slips into anarchy, decay and dark ages.
4) What needs to happen is a redo of property taxes at the state level to replace Prop 13 in one go with an exclusion based on income (cost-of-living adjusted), disabilities and age such that no one who can't afford it isn't thrown out onto the street.
There are around 40 million people in California. What's hard is that a fair solution to Prop 13 is difficult. You can't just shut it off suddenly or even gradually over a decade because people will lose their homes en masse and property values and current mortgage rates combined make it very difficult to move, and just about impossible for the seniors who Prop 13 was supposed to help. You have to carve a solution very carefully not to screw over a large segment of voters.
Or all the renters can get together and decide to screw over the owners; fuck 'em 'cause they're old anyway. That's certainly a possibility. However, expect your children to treat you the same way.
>Prop 13 for non-primary and commercial property should be repealed.
Agreed. The Democrat legislature could do anytime without a single Republican vote. All it takes then is a simple majority of voters in the next statewide election. Ask yourself why that has never even been attempted.
There’s an obvious and easy first step: End Prop 13 for anything that isn’t an owner occupied home. Business/capital interests won’t allow that though.
Sorry that you're so fixated on prop 13 not contributing to any issues with local revenue collection or housing shortfalls. I continue to disagree. Either way though, neither of us are likely to get to express our opinions by voting in our life times.
To your point that "no one is talking about prop 13": a constitutional amendment to modify it was proposed 3 months ago [1]. Obviously that will never go anywhere -- the state can't even pass a balanced budget with regularity. But then, that's the whole problem with propositions, isn't it?
Otherwise, I think that you can rest easy, your point has been made. You prefer to make accusations (article skimming! anecdotes that are anecdotal!) rather than constructive dialogue. Welcome to the Internet, it's full of people you won't get along with.
reply