patrick.net

RC2006 says

BayArea says

Anyone who argues in favor of prop13 is being disingenuous and supporting a really unfair law that benefits them while hurting most, nothing more.

Let’s be honest about this.

True, but with the current libs in charge any brake on them

Now we are making sense 👍

AD says

FortWayneIndiana says

Patrick, I know what you are saying. It is very likely prices will go down in poor areas. However, that is because cost of ownership will go up a lot.

Excellent point, as the homes that would be impacted the most are the lower end homes. They will experience the largest increase in monthly housing cost if Proposition 13 is revoked.

I just saw Adam Corolla give a great perspective on California.

Corolla said that the entire California governmental system (i.e., cops, city bureaucrats, etc.) are geared toward shaking down those with money.

He said a cop is more interested in giving a speeding ticket to a soccer mom going 37 in a 30 mile per hour zone instead of going after the illegal street merchant who is within eyesight of the cop.

Corolla said the government is only geared toward collecting money from those that have money, and that th...

I've seen pretty much this all my life out here in CA. The government has always been more about shaking down as much money out of working people. If you have it, they want it, and if you don't... they'll leave you alone to be a bum.

Patrick says

FortWayneIndiana says

It'll be even more streets of shame if our streets fill up with old people getting kicked out by government.

Sure, that's how Prop 13 was sold to the public, and it's a fine idea to protect POOR old people.

But what we have is a massive transfer of tax burden from RICH old people to everyone else.

That was part of the plan from the start, as well as allowing BUSINESSES to get away with pushing their taxes onto everyone else, resulting in a big rise in CA income taxes and sales taxes.

WTF? Why should businesses get away with legalized tax evasion? Why should we be paying their property taxes for them?

I think this is why they should remove the inheritance portion of taxation. Anything else they remove, I think will end up hurting everyone as pass through cost and lower employment. Government just wants money, unions want money, they don't give a shit about businesses, or people here. You give them a little, and they'll take a lot more. Look at how they treat everyone now, we are all just cash cows to milk for them. That won't change. They'll just get more money out of private sector, and ask for more anyway. I guess I don't see it as a fair share as much as this government doesn't need the money it gets, but that it finds the need for all the money it can pull out of everyone. They can cut taxes, but they won't because they want the money.

I've contracted with government before, sold close to 14 million in goods/services to CA, I'm more than bitter over experience. They don't try to save money, no one cares about costs or anything, lazy as fuck out there, very entitled, all costs are basically = 100% of the budget (BANTO), even if overpaying. Coming in low gets you kicked out of the bidding process, because they want to spend the budget, not save money. Bribing and kickbacks are the norm. I just don't want to give those assholes any more money to waste, they are the most wasteful enterprise in the world.

FortWayneIndiana says

I've contracted with government before, sold close to 14 million in goods/services to CA, I'm more than bitter over experience.

You mean they don't have their own acquisition and procurement regulations like the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) ?

They should go out for at least 3 competitive bids, etc.

If not awarded solely on lowest bidder or cost, then they should evaluate based on "best value" (i.e., 40% on cost, 25% on past performance, 35% of merit of proposal).

As far as "bribing and kickbacks" the FBI Public Integrity Unit should investigate that and anyone filing a complaint should bypass the local and California state authorities because of conflicts of interest, etc.

Renter here too!

just_dregalicious says

Renter here too!

Just had lunch with a work colleague who's brother owns a bunch of rental properties in the Orange County area. He said that he would have to raise his rents if this Prop 13 bill passes this Fall.

socal2 says

Just had lunch with a work colleague who's brother owns a bunch of rental properties in the Orange County area. He said that he would have to raise his rents if this Prop 13 bill passes this Fall.

What kind of rental properties ?

If he owns a few condos that are leased, would he be considered a "small business" or still a "homeowner" ?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Under the proposed initiative, county assessors would split their tax rolls into two lists. Homeowners and some small businesses would still receive the full Proposition 13 benefits: a 1% tax based on a property’s purchase value and annual tax increases of no more than 2%. But commercial and industrial property owners would be required to pay more. While their tax rates wouldn’t change, beginning in 2022 the levy would be based on the current market value of the real estate. Business property values would have to be updated by county assessors at least every three years."

socal2 says

Just had lunch with a work colleague who's brother owns a bunch of rental properties in the Orange County area. He said that he would have to raise his rents if this Prop 13 bill passes this Fall.

Yeah well I'm against the initiative. It's pulling the wrong lever.

More development and less permit extortion is what we need.

Deportations too...

SEC. 6. Section 2.5 of Article XIII A of the California Constitution is added to read:
(4)(A)"Residential property" shall include real property used as residential property, including both single-family and multi-unit structures, and the land on which those structures are constructed or placed.

AD says

You mean they don't have their own acquisition and procurement regulations like the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) ?

They should go out for at least 3 competitive bids, etc.

If not awarded solely on lowest bidder or cost, then they should evaluate based on "best value" (i.e., 40% on cost, 25% on past performance, 35% of merit of proposal).

As far as "bribing and kickbacks" the FBI Public Integrity Unit should investigate that and anyone filing a complaint should bypass the local and California state authorities because of conflicts of interest, etc.

Of course, they do it, generally a checklist of criteria. Sales cycle is about a year and a half, most of it is the usual (getting naysayers onto your side), when the time comes for the evaluation and scoring, well you already know you'll win if you spoke with the right influencers. It's all bullshit man, it'll never be unbiased.

Patrick says

Sure, that's how Prop 13 was sold to the public, and it's a fine idea to protect POOR old people.

Florida has all types of discounts or breaks for property tax.

One is homestead exemption where you get $50,000 off the assessed value of your home.

For the panhandle of Florida this is worthwhile since the average assessed value of a housing unit is about $150,000.

And the average mil rate is 8 mils (i.e., property tax of $1600 annually for a $200,000 home) in Florida panhandle.

For Florida senior citizens who earn less than $37,000 a year, there is a major break off the taxes that usually yields about a 50% discount.

I believe Santa Clara County has a deal where old people can have the county put a lien on their house for the taxes owed. The lien isn't collected until the old person dies (or maybe it is when they move out of their house?). That seems like a great solution to keeping the old people in their homes. If their home didn't increase much in the last 40 years, then even without Prop 13 their taxes wouldn't be very much. If their home price zoomed, they wouldn't need the help of Prop 13 because they could just tap that $1,000,000 (or more!) free equity in their house. If they used their house as an ATM... then they made financial choices and shouldn't be subsidized by everyone else.