Prop 13 (megatopic) (Sacramento, El Dorado Hills: condos, townhouses, appraise)

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

I encourage you to. I'm not the least bit concerned and am confident I am right.

I actually hope YOU are right. I just don't think you will be.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

I don't think there are very many elderly in California in 3k sq ft homes who have lived in those homes long enough to have significantly benefited from prop 13. And not elderly person in California lives in a million dollar home either. A friend of mine in Sacramento has lived in his home since it was built in 1960, he bought that home on the GI bill. He's now 84 and in good health for his age but his only income is a small Social Security check. The value of his house today is somewhere between 330 and 360k and you think he can 'cash out' and move into 'more suitable housing', or move in with his non-existent children?

The entire neighborhoods where I lived on both my stays in CA are virtually all still owned by the same people as were there 23 years ago when we left. There was some turnover in the 90s but almost none since.

My SIL is another. Bought a craftsmen cottage in good S. CA and lives there to this day. Paid a little less than 30K for it 60 years ago. Now worth about 2.3 million. They have added a MIL suite to the back and the kids have moved into the front.

I am in no way advocating abandoning P13. I voted for it when it was passed and have not changed my mind. I would however modify it closer to the NV version where the tax can go up enough to at least overcome inflation and commercial property has different rate of closure.

The present P13 is in fact widening the margin between the taxes paid by the new arrivals and that of those already there. I would think that eventually will break when it gets far enough out of bed.

[NewbieHere]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

I'm talking about perception. PERCEPTION.

Of course rent control hurts renters. Did that stop Los Angeles, Santa Monica, San Francisco and numerous other cities that have implemented it? Santa Monica has a MAR for crying out loud.

Poor voters would not hesitate to throw privileged home owners under the bus to get "free" health care.

What is a MAR, I’m from MARS, but don’t know the acronym.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by NewbieHere

What is a MAR, I’m from MARS, but don’t know the acronym.

MAR = Maximum Allowable Rent

aka the easiest method to reduce the supply of rentals in a given market.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

I don't think there are very many elderly in California in 3k sq ft homes who have lived in those homes long enough to have significantly benefited from prop 13. And not elderly person in California lives in a million dollar home either. A friend of mine in Sacramento has lived in his home since it was built in 1960, he bought that home on the GI bill. He's now 84 and in good health for his age but his only income is a small Social Security check. The value of his house today is somewhere between 330 and 360k and you think he can 'cash out' and move into 'more suitable housing', or move in with his non-existent children?

I know several my parents' ages (more like a 2,000 sq ft home). However, all but a handful have sold their homes and are using the proceeds to fund their a) retirement communities or b) assisted living facilities. Some are in Memory Care facilities, which are expensive. Anyone with an older parent or grandparent knows how expensive medical care is can be for this age group.

I agree that the idea that people are going to "cash out," pick up and move in their mid to late 70s, and start over in another state is not very realistic.

[horchata111]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Maybe paid by groups that want to get the idea out that it hurts people rather than helping them?

so some philanthropic entity wants to 'help' middle class ca homeowners by threatening the loss of their house? yeah right.

tech no longer has a halo and it will be easy enough to connect the dots between what is really behind the 2020 initiatives. there are a lot of homeowners whose kids won't work at google but could work at the myriad legacy companies in CA. like the vast majority of californians, their home is their most important asset.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by expatCA

In other words they want the middle class out sand the rich in, for more taxes and the poor can stay to get the goodies that make them vote for those wanting the rich in.

Pretty much

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

I'm talking about perception. PERCEPTION.

Of course rent control hurts renters. Did that stop Los Angeles, Santa Monica, San Francisco and numerous other cities that have implemented it? Santa Monica has a MAR for crying out loud.

Poor voters would not hesitate to throw privileged home owners under the bus to get "free" health care.

Yeah, capitalizing it doesn't exactly make the case. Who's perception? You can find any editorials you want on-line or listen to some of the blowhards, but ultimately Prop 13 has withstand the test of time and I see no reason why it won't continue. Even Jerry Brown gave up on it. The only thing I care about is whether something could pass a ballot measure and so far, nothing has. We can agree to disagree. I have no intention of ever selling my home and think the decision by the majority of my friends to keep theirs and rent it out is the right one. Even during the financial crisis, rents didn't take much of a hit. People have to live somewhere and in my neck of the woods (SF/Daly City), rents have always been solid. The recent fires have made houses even more in demand. In San Francisco, rents have come up 38% since 2012, but even that haircut during a recession would still put rents in the high $2000 range. And there's no reason for me to think that the $1 million dollar homes won't be $2 million, 20 years from now.

[NewbieHere]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Pretty much



Yeah, capitalizing it doesn't exactly make the case. Who's perception? You can find any editorials you want on-line or listen to some of the blowhards, but ultimately Prop 13 has withstand the test of time and I see no reason why it won't continue. Even Jerry Brown gave up on it. The only thing I care about is whether something could pass a ballot measure and so far, nothing has. We can agree to disagree. I have no intention of ever selling my home and think the decision by the majority of my friends to keep theirs and rent it out is the right one. Even during the financial crisis, rents didn't take much of a hit. People have to live somewhere and in my neck of the woods (SF/Daly City), rents have always been solid. The recent fires have made houses even more in demand.

We were able to raise rent during the Great Recession. Our tenant was hesitant about buying his own house at the wrong time even though he had the cash and everything.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by NewbieHere

We were able to raise rent during the Great Recession. Our tenant was hesitant about buying his own house at the wrong time even though he had the cash and everything.

A common theme. Too many of the people now that are complaining about Prop 13 were the same ones that were mocking homeowners during the Great Recession. A remarkable lack of foresight. And as UR has pointed out, those people that bought in 2010 actually paid less in property tax than many that bought just a few years previous to them. Again, making the point that it is about acquisition cost.

[horchata111]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Pretty much



Yeah, capitalizing it doesn't exactly make the case. Who's perception? You can find any editorials you want on-line or listen to some of the blowhards, but ultimately Prop 13 has withstand the test of time and I see no reason why it won't continue. Even Jerry Brown gave up on it. The only thing I care about is whether something could pass a ballot measure and so far, nothing has. We can agree to disagree. I have no intention of ever selling my home and think the decision by the majority of my friends to keep theirs and rent it out is the right one. Even during the financial crisis, rents didn't take much of a hit. People have to live somewhere and in my neck of the woods (SF/Daly City), rents have always been solid. The recent fires have made houses even more in demand. In San Francisco, rents have come up 38% since 2012, but even that haircut during a recession would still put rents in the high $2000 range. And there's no reason for me to think that the $1 million dollar homes won't be $2 million, 20 years from now.

at a 3% rate of inflation the value of a dollar is almost halved every 20 years.