news story / By John C. Osborn

Mad Props

Running down this June’s state ballot measures: Part 1 of 2

(May 20, 2010)  This is a hot political season, not only because of the battles raging across Humboldt County for a variety of key positions, but also for the multitude of ballot initiatives coming to a ballot near you in June.

Much attention has been paid to the Tax Cannabis Act, which could very well legalize marijuana in November if voters approve. In the meantime, though, five propositions will come before voters on the June ballot, and each could have a serious impact on California. Voters will decide whether to change the rules on when property is assessed, to eliminate the partisan primary, to test run a publicly funded elections scheme, to bring any attempt to create a public energy entity to a ballot vote and to loosen auto insurance regulations.

To Tax or Not to Tax

Proposition 13 is probably the most straightforward and broadly supported of the props on the ballot in June. No, this is not the earthshaking tax-limiting Prop. 13 approved in 1978, which some have issues with, but this 13 does have to do with the conditions that trigger a reassessment of property for tax purposes, specifically in regards to seismic retrofitting.

As it stands, either a change in ownership or new construction will trigger the reassessment of property for tax purposes. There are two exemptions in the California Constitution relating to the “new construction” trigger: Unreinforced masonry buildings that undergo seismic retrofitting are reassessed 15 years later, and other types of seismic upgrades to any building are exempted completely. Both only apply until the buildings are sold.

If approved by voters, the two current exclusions will be removed and replaced with one general exemption on all seismic upgrades made to a building until the property is sold, allowing property owners to retrofit their buildings without the worry of their property taxes increasing.

The proposition — which would amend the Constitution — was unanimously approved by the Legislature and referred to the voters. It has the support of many California newspaper editorial boards, the California Democratic Party and other state officials. The California Nurses Association has officially opposed it, but the opposition in general has been fairly quiet — no official arguments against it were submitted to the Secretary of State.

The only possible fiscal impact of Prop. 13 would be on upgrades made to unreinforced masonry buildings that would no longer be reassessed after 15 years, leading to minor reduction in local property tax revenue.

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE >SHARE