Alan Smithee

As Archimedes mentioned, a split-roll initiative is likely coming. But voters need to be careful what they wish for: If voted in, who do you think will be absorbing the increase in commercial property taxes? Businesses and...ultimately...their customers.

bmw_e30

https://www.lexingtonlaw.com/blog/fi...tatistics.html

Archimedes

Do you know how many people would have to migrate to California from those countries to even begin to impact a proposition vote like that? We will all be long dead by then.

And thats the problem with repealing Prop 13. Property values would fall and that would work against the goal.

robmypro

The impact started LONG AGO.

California Population:

1980:
23.67 million total
15.76 million white
4.5 million hispanic

2010:
37.2 million total
14.9 million white
14.0 million hispanic

Note that these numbers are as of 2010. Today the total population could easily be at 40 million with hispanics representing the largest group. Within 10 years they will probably have a majority (over 50%). This isn’t something that is going to happen. It already has.

Hispanics are the largest ethnic group in California. In 2015, California had the largest ethnic/racial minority population in the United States. Non-Hispanic whites decreased from about 76.3 - 78% of the state's population in 1970 to 38.0% in 2015. By ethnicity, 38.8% of the total population is Hispanic-Latino.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demo...ational_origin

Alan Smithee

^ While you are digging up data, why don’t you do a little research on home ownership demographics in CA. Hispanic and white population may be nearly equal, but you are making an incorrect assumption that those Hispanics are all poor immigrants.

Marv

Huh? Where did you do your analysis?

People that live on the beach pay higher insurance costs, but we are 8 miles from the shoreline and our insurance is not significantly worse than any other place I have lived (< $1500 per year). We invested about $2,000 in a backup generator and window shields over the last 12 years. During that time we needed the generator two days.

You are correct, it does get hot and humid, but I find those months much, much more tolerable than the winters in the North East, particularly nearer the Mason-Dixon line where winter is an oscillating mix of snow, sleet, and rain, punctuated with many gray days.

Where to live is a personal thing. If it turns the corners of your lips up, you're probably doing the right thing.

Colorado is beautiful. Western Colorado is on my list of places to visit.

fast1

You aren't being nice. The poor guy was just trying to rationalize the exorbitant taxes that his State charges, and you burst his bubble. There is one certainty regarding taxes. No matter how much any government collects, they never believe that it's enough. BTW I just paid my registration tax in MD, and it was $155 for two years.

robmypro

I am not assuming they are all poor, just that many bring their politics with them.

A majority of California voters back a potential 2020 ballot measure that would increase property taxes on businesses, according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll. Backing for the proposed change was high among Democrats, with 64% in favor, and a majority of those surveyed across regions of the state were behind it. Support was weakest among Republicans, with just over a third in favor.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-...525-story.html

Note: In 1978 Proposition 13 passed with almost 65 percent of those who voted in favor. What changed?

BTW:

SACRAMENTO — A ballot measure that would overhaul the state’s tax-cutting Proposition 13 by charging companies in the state billions of dollars more in property taxes will go before voters in 2020.

The measure, which is backed by community groups, education advocates and unions, qualified for the November 2020 ballot on Tuesday when the secretary of state determined that the supporters had gathered more than the needed 585,407 valid signatures of registered voters. Proponents call it the first proposed change in commercial property taxes to qualify for the ballot since Prop. 13 passed in 1978.

“Californians now have the opportunity to reform a 40-year injustice,” said Helen Hutchison, president of the League of Women Voters of California, one of the groups supporting the measure. “After five years of planning and strategizing, we have qualified a split-roll initiative for the ballot — an achievement once thought impossible.”

Under Prop. 13, California property — both residential and commercial — is reassessed only when it is sold. Houses and condominiums tend to change hands every few years, but many large businesses stay put for decades. That means some businesses are paying property taxes based on assessments that date from as long ago as the 1970s.

The measure that qualified for the 2020 ballot would create a system to reassess large commercial businesses every three years, with the Legislature able to increase that frequency. Small businesses with 50 or fewer employees would be exempt, as would agricultural land.

Homes would continue to be reassessed only when sold. Backers say the change would raise an extra $11 billion a year, the bulk of which would go to schools and local governments.
Anti-tax and business groups said they plan to fight the ballot measure, which they said lacks transparency on exactly how the new revenue would be spent.

“We have already established a strong and broad-based coalition to fight this assault on the most important taxpayer protection Californians have,” said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Jarvis, who died in 1986, and fellow anti-tax advocate Paul Gann were the main backers of Prop. 13.

“A split-roll property tax is an $11 billion tax increase that will increase costs for everyone at a time when the high cost of living is already driving companies and residents out of the state,” Coupal said.

robmypro

We asked a realtor regarding a place in the $1.5 mill range in WPB. The range was around $10k per year. The winters in the northeast are brutal.

jp884

Completely agree it seems that he is making ignorant comments and assumptions about minorities. Texas and Arizona have a large Hispanic population for a while now and they seem to be doing fine. They’re deadbeats in all ethnicities and nationalities. Making a blanket assumption makes you look like an ***. I don’t agree with illegal immigration but a lot of minorities are contributing members of society. Myself included, ( being Hispanic) and unless Rob is paying more than $500k a year in taxes. I think I have contributed more on that end.

robmypro

How does sharing public stats about California demographics equate to making ignorant comments and assumptions about minorities? My comments and stats were regarding Prop 13. My best friend and business partner is from Peru, and he came here illegally 35 years ago (now fully legal). This isn’t about attacking minorities, but rather understanding how the change in demographics in California will eventually impact Prop 13 for both commercial and residential owners.

Now, if you believe the demographic data i provided is wrong, that is different. Otherwise, it is what it is.

I stand by my comments.

jp884

It seemed you were drawing a correlation between minorities and the reason why certain states ie.. California are in the state that they are in. For the record I don’t believe in illegal immigration. People should wait in line like my parents did and follow the law. What is a country if it has no borders or laws? But that’s coming from a law abiding, tax paying citizen even if I don’t agree with most of the taxes that are imposed on us. No hard feelings if I misread your post.

robmypro

It is all good. Agree 100% about legal immigration. We are a country of immigrants, and I think we are stronger because of it. But for security alone you need to have control over your borders.

Archimedes

And yet Prop 13 is still in place. You totally missed my point. You insinuated that the current/future immigration was going to swing Prop 13 toward repeal, which is nonsense. The demographic with the most to lose in a Prop 13 repeal is the lower income, longer term resident who hasn't flipped houses over the years. Retirees, stable families that are long term residents, poorer homeowners who stay in one place a long time. The wealthy tech elite that all bought new houses and keep flipping every 5-10 years could care less about a repeal of Prop 13.

robmypro

I think current and future immigration will absolutely swing Prop 13 to repeal. It is on the ballot in 2020 to repeal the commercial provisions, and the polls show it has wide support, particularly among Democrats. Speaking of those wealthy tech elites, a major backer of the repeal is The Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative (yes, that Zuckerberg). Also, Latinos have a significantly lower home ownership rate that non Latinos. You can take all this data together and draw whatever conclusions you want. You can argue that just because the commercial portion of Prop 13 gets repealed that doesn't mean the residential side will. You might be right. Only time will tell on that one.