Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have low property taxes, compared to most of the places people are coming from. Taxes happen. We need them, and in New Mexico we certainly need them. Existing homeowners can complain, and be upset about inequity, but that happens everywhere - look at Calif. after Prop. 13.
To blame California's problems on Prop 13 is Naive to say the least...
Thanks for the suggested sources. However, my interest in Prop 13 is limited to the question of what light, if any, Prop 13 experience sheds on our situation here in Santa Fe.
I think that question would be on topic, and I would be interested in hearing about it.
It does strike me that there are some dissimilarities. I believe that in California the Constitution was amended so that Prop 13 is constitutional. (Referring to the state constitution.)
Here Tax Lightning seems pretty flagrantly unconstitutional.
I believe that Prop 13 is a one per cent limit on tax increases.
Here Tax Lightning is a three per cent limit on assessment increases. You could still get a bigger than 3 per cent tax increase if the rate were increased.
On the other hand, Santa Fe City and County seem quite willing to spend money, so it is possible to imagine us getting in financial trouble. Both seem prone to taking on projects without fully considering long-run costs.
You raise an important issue SF. CA allows their constitution to be amended by referendum, and allows for referendums to be placed on the ballot by petition. New Mexico requires amendments to the consitution to be placed on the ballot by the legislature. That significantly reduces the possibility of voters changing to the constitution.
Thanks for the suggested sources. However, my interest in Prop 13 is limited to the question of what light, if any, Prop 13 experience sheds on our situation here in Santa Fe.
I think that question would be on topic, and I would be interested in hearing about it.
It does strike me that there are some dissimilarities. I believe that in California the Constitution was amended so that Prop 13 is constitutional. (Referring to the state constitution.)
Here Tax Lightning seems pretty flagrantly unconstitutional.
I believe that Prop 13 is a one per cent limit on tax increases.
Here Tax Lightning is a three per cent limit on assessment increases. You could still get a bigger than 3 per cent tax increase if the rate were increased.
On the other hand, Santa Fe City and County seem quite willing to spend money, so it is possible to imagine us getting in financial trouble. Both seem prone to taking on projects without fully considering long-run costs.
Prop 13 is a 1% Statewide Property Tax Based on the Property's value at time of transfer. Prop 13 also limits Property Value Increases to 2% per annum...
In addition, it requires additional levies recieve 2/3 voter approval except in the case of School Construction Bonds where voter Approval requires 55%... (School Bonds 55% approval passed in a separate initiative)
Special Assessment Districts, approved by the Voters are not subject to restrictions that I'm aware of regarding inflation indexes or other increase mechanism...
Prop 13 has been in place 30 years and I believe California would still have finance issues even if Prop 13 didn't exist... it's the nature of Government.
My city spends approximately 16k per year per student with Prop 13 in effect... I don't believe lack of funds can be blamed for the mediocre student performance... at least not at the present spending level... yet, not a day goes by that someone isn't saying Prop 13 wreck schools in CA.
Prop 13 only came about because the Legislature failed to address the ever increasing tax burden placed on property owners... Prop 13 was approved by a ground swell of voters, both property owners and renters.
Even with Prop 13, my city has collected taxes knowing full well the likelihood they would later be found un-constitutional and eventually had to refund monies collected... I, and many others refused to pay and 3 years later we were proven right... it took a lawsuit to settle the issue.
If there aren't sales indicating an increase then what do they justify it with? If there's nothing take it protest and you'll have a quick win and a lower value.
All property subject to valuation for property taxation purposes shall be valued as of January 1 of each tax year, except that livestock shall be valued as of the date and in the manner prescribed under Section 7-36-21 NMSA 1978 and tangible personal property of construction contractors shall be valued as of the date and in the manner prescribed under Section 1 [7-38-7.1 NMSA 1978] of this act.
Hey, I just wanted to clarify that I don't work in the property tax business anymore and I'm not, necessarily, trying to defend them. Just make everybody informed what the rules really are.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Prop 13 on topic as it sheds light on Santa Fe situation
