Hacker News Reader

Comment by vmception | Hacker News Reader

are there enough of us that are not beneficiaries of Prop 13 to repeal Prop 13?

are there comprehensive stats of which properties are under that system and how many residents that applies to?

I don't care about the LLC part, its stupid for types of property (house, cars) to have separate transfer tariffs on them to begin with, so therefore it would be stupid for me to care that an LLC gets around them

I'm just wondering about the numbers of people, helps me determine if this is a useful area to spend energy at the moment

View on HN

  are there enough of us that are not beneficiaries of Prop 13 to repeal Prop 13?

No. Repealing Prop 13 is a third rail, ask our last republican governor. A common suggestion is to implement a so-called "split roll" system where non-residential property gets no Prop 13 protections and residential (ideally only the primary residence) maintains the limits. Unfortunately I doubt that'll ever pass within my lifetime.

2020 Proposition 15 was to require commercial and industrial properties, except those zoned as commercial agriculture, to be taxed based on their market value, rather than their purchase price. it failed 52 / 48.

> is a third rail, ask our last republican governor

what does that mean?

and propositions are citizen initiated amendments that citizens vote on

It's a train metaphor. Electric trains, like any other trains, have 2 rails the wheels go on. But there's a 3rd rail from which the train draws power. Touching it is death.

It was a common metaphor to describe Social Security reform years ago as people realized the system was headed for "bankruptcy". At least that's what they called it. In reality it was just that outgoings would exceed receipts by the 2030s, which means funding it from general revenue or reducing benefits.

But anyone who suggested "reforming" Social Security, such as private retirement accounts replacing it, tended to die a horrible political death and thus the third rail.

The other third rail I can think of is eliminating free street parking in NYC.

thanks for elaborating on that for them, California propositions are citizen initiated amendments that citizens vote on

so it doesn't need a politician to run on that sacred platform

To clarify Prop 13 is an initiative, a normal law passed by ballot box tyranny, not a constitutional amendment.

The same people who would shout down a politician for trying to reform Prop 13 would vote against any effort to reform it via initiative. Besides, as a result of Prop 13, tax "increases" require a ⅔ majority to pass. Try getting ⅔ of California to agree on anything.

Modifications to Prop 13 get to the ballot box periodically and the only ones that seem to pass expand its scope. Attempts to pare it back are met with fierce resistance from the anti-government folks. In general initiatives are a scourge and not a remedy to anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_California_Proposition_13

https://www.indiebound.org/book/9781565843578

> a normal law

No, Prop 13 was an Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

>not a constitutional amendment.

You're flat wrong.

>California propositions are citizen initiated amendments

Propositions are anything going on the ballot for voter confirmation. They encompass Legislative statutes, Legislative Consitutional Amendments, Initiative Statutes, and Initiative Constitutional Amendments.

>propositions are citizen initiated amendments that citizens vote on

But those statutes and Constitutional elements can be changed and put back on the ballot for confirmation by the legislative process alone. Then all it takes is a simple majority on the next statewide ballot.

Yeah, that was a brain fart. Prop 13 is a constitutional amendment.

Prop 13 can be changed by the legislature but won't because change is wildly unpopular (OMG they're gunna raize our taxez) and there's zero chance you'll get the 2/3 majority required to pass it through the legislature.

Prop 13 can be modified by an initiative, but the only related initiatives that pass expand Prop 13's scope. And without legislative action the 2/3 majority stands for any sort of tax increase.

Legislating by sound bite is pretty much how things have been done in California for decades. No matter how much sense reigning in Prop 13 might make, there's always going to be some Jarvisite that is going to scream about kicking granny out of her home because of high property taxes.

>the 2/3 majority stands for any sort of tax increase.

Propositions pass with a simply majority of voters; a 2/3 vote isn't necessary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com