Posted by Doug Pearson, a resident of the Blossom Valley neighborhood, on May 24, 2010 at 7:43 pm
This article indirectly mentions perhaps the most serious problem with Prop 13: it legislates the rate of inflation to be a maximum of 2%/year. This has not been as serious a problem in recent years (as property values headed down) as it was during the most recent housing boom but overall, since 1975, it has had the effect of reducing property tax's share of state and local tax revenue.
To keep tax revenue high enough to pay for needed programs, the state has resorted to increasing the sales tax--the most regressive tax we pay. Shamefully, the state now gets a higher percentage of its poorest citizens' income (10.2%) that it does of its richest citizens (7.4% after Federal tax offset). (See Web Link.)
Posted by Steven Nelson, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on May 24, 2010 at 8:32 pm
Even worse - our own Castro St. and 10X bigger Shoreline district have locked the rate of property tax 'inflation' to 0% (that's zero as in nada) when it comes to school General Fund revenue! This is what the budgets on these districts mean when they say 1969 "Frozen Base" assessment. This is not really a 'Sacramento problem' but as the Voice editorial stated several month's ago, a local political will problem. 5% of the Castro St. district general property tax goes to schools, 3% of the Shoreline general property tax goes to schools.