SAN DIEGO – Proposition 19 is one of those measures that gives something with one hand and takes something away with another.
What does it give?
Currently people over age 55, disabled persons, and victims of natural disasters are able to transfer the base value of their former property to whatever new property they move to within the same county. This Proposition would allow the homeowners to move anywhere in the state and retain the previous tax base – which is a benefit to them. If they move to a more expensive home than their former home, their property taxes would go up, but not by as much. The right to move and preserve lower property taxes could be used as many as three times.
What does it take away?
Currently, children may inherit your property at the same tax rate you would pay. If your children die before you do, your grandchildren would have the same right. This proposition says if the value of your property has increased by $1 million, the children or grandchildren would have to pay more than you did in taxes, but not as much as if they purchased the home on the open market.
California’s legislative analyst believes the state “could gain tens of millions of dollars of property tax revenue per year,” according to a statement in the official ballot pamphlet. “These gains could grow over time to a few hundred million dollars per year.”
Most of the new revenue would be spent on fire protection, according to the legislative analyst.
Personally, I believe the state should not try to confuse voters with trade-off legislation, which says if you want this, you have to give up that.
Rather, I believe the state should offer voters straightforward choices. For example, Q: Do you want the elderly, disabled, and victims of natural disasters (such as fires, floods and earthquakes) to keep the lower tax on their former house, in the event that they decide to move somewhere else in California? A: Yes.
Q. Do you want your children or grandchildren to pay more taxes in the future on property they might inherit from you? A: No.
The state has offered us a confusing trade-off proposition, causing various voters to be tempted to take their accountants with them to the polling place, before marking their ballots. Once the confusion is cleared up, people are likely to answer differently depending on what kinds of property they own. I recommend my late father’s old rule: “When in doubt, vote No.”
Favoring the ballot measure are Brian Rice, president of the California Professional Firefighters; Kathleen Barajas, Californians for Disability Rights; George Mozingo, a board member of California Senior Advocates League; Kristy Militello, a Tubbs Wildlife Survivor; David Wolfe, former legislative director of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and Salena Pryor, president of the Black Small Business Association of California.
Those opposed are Democratic Assemblyman Ken Cooley of Rancho Cordova; Republican State Senator Patricia Bates of Orange County; and Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
It’s interesting that the current president and former legislative director of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association are on different sides.
We urge a “No” vote on Proposition 19.
*
Donald H. Harrison is editor of San Diego Jewish World. He may be contacted via donald.harrison@sdjewishworld.com
I believe the “inheritors” (children and or grandchildren) would only be subject to those additional taxes if the home isn’t used as their primary residence, but as a rental.
Pingback: Comprehensive list of SDJW endorsements - San Diego Jewish World