Explain Why I shouldn't Vote "NO" on Proposition 5 (San Francisco: mortgages, loan)

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

It was about "Outsiders" getting lower property taxes than those in the county...

Eldorado County has seen quite an influx of Bay Area Expats... it encouraged growth which meant jobs...

Well, as far as growth and jobs, I don't see how that would change, just because the properties sold had a lower tax payment.

However, I could see the argument that perhaps the number of property sales would not change, but all new property owners would be contributing more in tax revenues, if new property owners weren't allowed to transfer their Prop 13 benefits.

If the goal, though, is growth, it seems to me that allowing people to move to an area with Prop 13 benefits, would increase property sales and competition, and drive up prices - and bring more people in who would be paying all other manner of taxes in that area. And it could provide a need for new hospitals (for the baby boomers) and a growing healthcare industry and all the other services that seniors need, etc.

I am having a hard time imagining where allowing this tax base transfer - would actually harm an area. It sounds like it's just a jealousy issue, that's not based on any sound fiscal reasoning. But, maybe I'm missing something.

[Ultrarunner]

My info comes from the construction side of things and only from what I have heard...

Allowing Bay Area retired home owners to move to El Dorado was seen as a means to spur development... also, retirees often do not come with School Age children which can account for half a typical tax bill... plus the life span of retirees was another factor.

The complaint there was it was too successful or that reciprococtiy has served it's purpose... new roads and infrastructure got built... popluation or well heeled or better off increased etc...

A lot of the skilled trades for the Hospital's last build out lived in Sacramento and in Eldorado County... they said the Bay Area pays a higher prevailing wage and this was at time when construction was lagging...

One of the electricians said Eldorado might as well be Bay Area east... as so many are Bay Area transplants... he had bought a new home and his neighbors on both sides were retired from the Bay Area and paid half the property tax that he did... he went on to say that the his kids school PTA was also saying lower property taxes was hurting schools there but it never mentioned few retired have kids in public school...

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

My info comes from the construction side of things and only from what I have heard...

... he went on to say that the his kids school PTA was also saying lower property taxes was hurting schools there but it never mentioned few retired have kids in public school...

I don't understand this. Whether one has children or not shouldn't be an issue; we need an educated public.

Whether one is a homeowner with school age kids, a homeowner with grown kids, a homeowner with kids being sent to private school, or a homeowner with no kids, we all should be paying for public education, not complaining that paying these taxes doesn't benefit one or another of us.

[Ultrarunner]

When the counties were looking at a big picture of the cost of services paid by taxes it was a factor used.

Some seniors can already apply for a tax portion rebate as it pertains to schools... even in Oakland but you have to apply each year within a window... I have seen the entire 50% property tax burden removed from an entire zip code.

The one that comes to mind is in Washington State the community is a large retirement community.

Attempts to raise the education tax levies continued to fail as the seniors in this one community always voted against which was enough to prevent passage.

So the levy was rewritten to specifically exclude residents of this community from the school levy and then it passed...

Schools are the single largest expenditure aggregate on many property tax bills...

If you have an entire group of retired transferring their established Prop 13 to another county the lack of demand for schools is a significant offset.

There was a time in Alameda County where schools could not be built fast enough... as the communities aged the demand decreases... several of the schools I attended are no more... they are now tract housing... simply not enough bodies to fill the seats...

[Ultrarunner]

Just came across a local example that has gotten a lot of push back from home owners...

One of the local Junior High Schools had budgeted 300k to renovate the gym... it was discussed at length and the time frame was over summer break...

The project is now on track to be over 2 million with the new date pushed out a year... so instead of 3 months it is now 15 months...

Only government can exist with such blunders and it is all tax dollars...

It is easy to find without looking hard... cost over runs, bike paths that cost millions... half million dollar park restrooms...

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Only government can exist with such blunders and it is all tax dollars...

It is easy to find without looking hard... cost over runs, bike paths that cost millions... half million dollar park restrooms...

Don't forget a $250 million bridge that ending up costing $13 billion

[Ultrarunner]

Can't forget is as I see it every day... used in maybe twice since built.

Now there is the SF Transit Center... open a few weeks and closed because support beams are cracked.

Business couldn't survive if it operated like public works projects.

Of course there are exceptions...

[JGC97]

I'm still not sure how voting on this Proposition will hurt the state. Homes sold with lower property taxes will now jump to the rate of the new purchase and the number of people moving out and utilizing this deal won't be that large. At least that's how I see it. Not that many people over 55 are moving around the state, except for those who have life changes i.e. spouse dies, change in one's own health, home burns down, and things like that. I really don't think it will make much of an impact.

As for schools, though. I paid property taxes for schools before I had children, while I had children in them and even after. I don't see it as a situation where I will only pay for things I actually use. Just like my parents paid taxes after all their children were out of school, it's just something we do for the generation after us.

I just don't understand the culture today. If something doesn't benefit you personally, you (generally speaking) don't want to pay for it. "Let someone else do it" seems to be the mantra we live by today. As much as I hated the expression and thought it was used strictly for political reasons, I do believe that it takes a village and when it comes to our children, I want them educated, whether they're my children or not. The children are the future of this country .... hell, this world! Educate them!

[Ultrarunner]

There would have been no Prop 13 without the Serrano Decision...

This was to "Level" the playing field and made the State in charge of Public School funding instead of local communities...

It was one thing to pay a higher tax to benefit top notch local public schools and another having local tax dollars spent elsewhere... having the State take over was enough to push Prop 13 into law...

Public schools have never recovered since the State took over... in my opinion.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

I'm still not sure how voting on this Proposition will hurt the state. Homes sold with lower property taxes will now jump to the rate of the new purchase and the number of people moving out and utilizing this deal won't be that large. At least that's how I see it. Not that many people over 55 are moving around the state, except for those who have life changes i.e. spouse dies, change in one's own health, home burns down, and things like that. I really don't think it will make much of an impact.

As for schools, though. I paid property taxes for schools before I had children, while I had children in them and even after. I don't see it as a situation where I will only pay for things I actually use. Just like my parents paid taxes after all their children were out of school, it's just something we do for the generation after us.

I just don't understand the culture today. If something doesn't benefit you personally, you (generally speaking) don't want to pay for it. "Let someone else do it" seems to be the mantra we live by today. As much as I hated the expression and thought it was used strictly for political reasons, I do believe that it takes a village and when it comes to our children, I want them educated, whether they're my children or not. The children are the future of this country .... hell, this world! Educate them!

I agree. And the thing is, the better the schools, the higher the property values. So, it always benefits property owners to have better schools, regardless of whether or not they have kids in them currently. I think most people understand that, who understand what affects their property values, at least.