Republish
After 40 years, let’s finally reform Proposition 13
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
After 40 years, let’s finally reform Proposition 13
Share this:
By Lenny Goldberg
Lenny Goldberg is a consultant to the Sacramento-based California Tax Reform Association, and lives in Portland, lennyg916@gmail.com. He wrote this commentary for CALmatters.
I was working as a staffer in the Legislature when Proposition 13 passed 40 years ago. It brought about a seismic shift in governance in California.
Suddenly, local government, schools and the state had to contend with budget cutbacks. Anti-tax ideology became part of California’s Constitution with new two-thirds vote requirements for tax increases. And Proposition 13 set the tone nationally for the Reagan years and many subsequent years of fiscal austerity.
A decade later, as director of the California Tax Reform Association, I set out to examine its impacts. Homeowners were protected, the point of the measure. Local governments and schools had significantly cut back employees, budgets, infrastructure and services, as supporters may have intended.
But one surprising fact jumped out, emphasized in my report in 1991: business property was a huge winner, gaining massive tax reductions which had nothing to do with the reason for Proposition 13.
In the 1990’s, I participated in consensus-building discussions on how to solve California’s deepening fiscal problems. But one rule of the discussion was that reforming commercial property taxes was off the table. Later, business defeated a legislative effort to simply examine the issue, which they said would lead to split roll, as they called it.
I called it the Empire’s New Clothes.
Businesses and their representatives had good reason to avert their eyes. Companies such as Chevron, Intel and IBM were and are paying taxes based on land values from 1975. Commercial property based on ridiculously low assessed values can use loopholes and pass property on to heirs to maintain those low taxes forever.
Business knew that discussion could reach only one conclusion: there was no rational way to defend these massive tax breaks.
In the 2000s, we at the Tax Reform Association continued to document the failures in the system. We documented the abuses of the loophole-ridden law, and the shift in the property tax burden away from commercial property and on to residential property in virtually every county.
Massive disparities in property taxes developed for otherwise similar hotels, shopping centers, office buildings and high-tech industrial property.
In this decade, researchers at USC determined that this system cost cities, counties, schools and special districts $11 billion in lost revenue annually.
Other facts uncovered by on-going research:
The failure to reassess land has rewarded sprawl and speculation, with miles of vacant and underutilized land in our commercial strips. School funding in this supposedly advanced state is far below the rest of the nation. And a majority of business properties are close to market value, with the biggest tax breaks accruing to large long-held properties.
It doesn’t have to be this way.
In 2020, 42 years after Proposition 13’s passage, voters will have an opportunity to reform property taxes for commercial and industrial property.
The straightforward measure will:
The results will all be positive:
And perhaps one more: it can place California at the forefront of a new national direction as Proposition 13 did 40 years ago, only this time we’ll be on a path to fair taxation and a healthier public sector.