SB 51: the California politics thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

What's up this year? Lots!

- The housing crisis, Prop 10 and SB 827 (RIP (for now))
- Prop 5 (and the hope of a split roll measure in a couple of years?!)
- Prop 6 (lol this is going to lose I hope)
- When did Gavin Newsom disappoint you first?
- Feinstein vs De Leon (lol) and the state democratic party
- The state republican party (lol)
- Ballot Measure C in SF (this one seems nuts!)
- What is the deal with all the ballot measures, isn't that what we pay these people for?
- high speed rail (lol)
- single payer (lol)

Let's talk about it!

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 14:57 (one year ago) link

someone explain SF measure C to me? is it doomed now breed, weiner, etc. are against it?

re: ballot measure 6, is apparently a lost cause at this point, ha, http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-gas-tax-repeal-campaign-cash-20180930-story.html. but prop 10 is not polling well either (and is kind of a mess legislatively as i understand it): https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article219033985.html.

LA measure B (city bank) is cool btw, and the LA times sucks for opposing it.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 15:01 (one year ago) link

I have no idea what's going to happen to measure C but I hope it passes. The split on the Dem side (Pelosi and various supervisors for it, bu Breed/Weiner/others against it) is kind of weird but idk how many voters really take their marching orders from Breed and Weiner tbh. Whereas everyone I know thinks bajillionaire companies paying more to house the people they've misplaced is a no-brainer.

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:17 (one year ago) link

uh wtf at the DST prop?

I'm really behind the times, yall are going to have to hold my hand as I fill out my ballot. The only ones that seem clear cut to me on first blush are 6 (NO) and 10 (YES).

Catherine Power (Leee), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:38 (one year ago) link

agreed on 6 and 10.

the DST prop changes nothing but it gives the legislature the right to consider and in principle make changes. DST kills a few people people every march. vote yes IMO on that one.

the bond measures (1-4) are all yeses for me.

prop 5 extends the infamous prop 13 (i.e. restricts localities ability to fund education by restricting their ability to tax massive real estate wealth). you could make the case that extends it to be fairer, but any extension of prop 13 makes the task of removing it politically tougher. so no on 5 IMO.

8 11 and 12 are classic examples of "What is the deal with all the ballot measures, isn't that what we pay these people for?" i guess i'd be yes on 8, no on 11 and yes on 12?

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:48 (one year ago) link

Sent my ballot in the other day. Yeah C has been worth it just to see Benioff and Jack@Twitter complaining at each other in public.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:50 (one year ago) link

given the financial structure that tech VC encourage (i.e. avoid making a profit), i like that ballot measure C is a tax on revenue, not profits.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:51 (one year ago) link

caek did you go and get naturalized or somethin

I have measured out my life in coffee shop loyalty cards (silby), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:54 (one year ago) link

no i can't vote, so i'm telling as many people as possible how to vote instead

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:55 (one year ago) link

that's very generous of you; if I couldn't vote I don't know how I could stand researching ballot measures

anyway not californian so y'all can do whatever as long as you don't come for our water

I have measured out my life in coffee shop loyalty cards (silby), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:57 (one year ago) link

also lol at gerry brown's veto statement for the 4am last call option

https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/SB-905-Veto.pdf

"mischief and mayhem".

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 17:58 (one year ago) link

xp
He's the Frederik B of California!

nickn, Tuesday, 16 October 2018 18:02 (one year ago) link

ha i do live here fwiw

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 18:05 (one year ago) link

much as I find the Salesforce tower annoying (I work right next to it), I have to say this guy's allright. Or at least better than most.

Benioff and Salesforce have donated to multiple San Francisco Bay Area causes including $250 million to support hospitals, $11 million to help the homeless, and $50 million to public schools. In his talk, he acknowledges that some of city's business leaders haven't been as generous.

"I have gone hat in hand to every high net worth individual in the city," he said. "I know who is willing to give money, and who isn't. I already have the list. I know if we're going to raise money for our schools, the homeless and hospitals, there's a group of people in our city who are willing to give. And there's a group of people in the city who give nothing based on the level of wealth they have. You're either for the kids, the homeless and the hospitals, or you're for yourself."

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Tuesday, 16 October 2018 18:52 (one year ago) link

graded on a curve he is easily the best of the bunch. SFDC has an obscure business relationship with ICE/CBP though.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 19:14 (one year ago) link

I have to admit I don't know what Salesforce does.

Catherine Power (Leee), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 19:16 (one year ago) link

Aside from putting their name on things around the city and buying Metallica.

Catherine Power (Leee), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 19:17 (one year ago) link

Salesforce makes Rolodex-as-a-Service for your entire company.

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 16 October 2018 19:23 (one year ago) link

considering the software they sell is basically a spreadsheet/database combo from the 90s, their research team is also bizarrely good at AI/ML, which is one of their reasons their involvement with CBP is unnerving.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Tuesday, 16 October 2018 19:25 (one year ago) link

I've used a few Salesforce databases in my job and basically a spreadsheet/database combo from the 90s seems about accurate. tbf there was a huge need/demand for this, so their success is not really much of a surprise.

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Tuesday, 16 October 2018 19:46 (one year ago) link

Also it’s a federal election so off topic but it’s interesting because of the top two primary so: the congressional election where I live is between jimmy Gomez (democrat) and a Green Party guy. I believe this is the only two candidate congressional election involving the greens in the country. Based on the lawn signs and the number of times they’ve canvassed our home, the Green Party guy is going to run away with it. (He won’t. He’ll lose by like 40 points.)

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 02:49 (one year ago) link

I can't believe I am actually going to vote for Gavin Newsom for the first time in like 20 years? ... like I actually voted against him for Lt. Gov. because I hated him so much as SF Mayor and before that as appointed stooge to Willie Brown on the Board of Supes ...

otoh I'm kinda cool with Jerry Brown as governor, and I kinda hated him as mayor,

and actually a lot of the current bullshit in Oakland can kinda be laid at his feet, though not really. Like I don't think any one person can be held responsible for the incompetence, venality, and obstructionist idiocy that is a lot of Oakland government: the people that don't have to run for office, so they can be pretty much awful and stupid with few repercussions to their careers.

There's some new local version of Howard Jarvis Taxpayers sending out mailers to Oakland addresses arguing against voting for various property tax measures on principle.

Oh yeah, Yes on Measure Y -- extending Just Cause protection to people that live in duplexes and triplexes (as opposed to currently where it's like 4+ units)

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 05:54 (one year ago) link

yeah latimes had a lot of dirt on newsom a few months ago but he was still one of the favorites

i'm still registered to vote but i'm not in the country anymore, but i would vote for newsom

F# A# (∞), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 06:03 (one year ago) link

I'm with sarahell on the mixed feelings about Newsom. He is a guy who I *really* don't like or trust, even when a lot of his policy prescriptions and positions line up with mine. He's just a fucking slimeball that wants to be president really badly. Dunno if I will bother voting for him, he's almost certain to be the winner anyway.

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:35 (one year ago) link

i remember being a local blogger about 10 or so years ago and my fave thing was comparing him to Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:37 (one year ago) link

I think he is also a big fan of Huey Lewis & the News iirc

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:38 (one year ago) link

I can't hate him, he stepped forward to support same-sex marriage at a time when most of the rest of the country was charging in the other direction

Dan S, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:44 (one year ago) link

comparing him to Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman

yeah you weren't alone in this the similarity is just too eerie

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:54 (one year ago) link

he stepped forward to support same-sex marriage at a time when most of the rest of the country was charging in the other direction when it was most politically advantageous to him personally, handed the GOP a wedge-issue that helped get Dubya re-elected, resulted in the passage of Prop 8 in California actually *banning* gay marriage, and did not actually result in any valid gay marriages

fixed

that whole charade was nauseating, grandstanding at his worst. He knew he didn't have a legal leg to stand on and did it for the purposes of benefiting no one but himself.

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:55 (one year ago) link

xp - even when in practice it was preaching to the choir and a high profile distraction from his pro-development/pro-corporate policies?

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:56 (one year ago) link

^^^

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:58 (one year ago) link

he has a history of this grandstanding, like when he wanted to improve the health of poor & working class San Franciscans by banning cigarette sales from chain stores with pharmacies -- that pretty much affected nothing except the ability to buy fairly low-priced cigarettes at Walgreen's stores. ... as opposed to walking a block or less to a liquor store and buying cigarettes

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:58 (one year ago) link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55cG7EytB7M

omg I pulled up this video to show how fuckin obnoxious he was at the time and the closed captioning is wild

**APPLAUSE BY HOMOSEXUALS**

officer sonny bonds, lytton pd (mayor jingleberries), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:58 (one year ago) link

xp the conversation it started was a huge push forward for gay rights

Dan S, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 16:59 (one year ago) link

i don't think he literally tried to feed a cat to an ATM tho

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:00 (one year ago) link

the conversation it started was a huge push forward for gay rights

he didn't start it - Alaska and Arizona already had gay marriage rulings on the books - he just made the splashiest (and emptiest) show about it. which is his modus operandi.

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:03 (one year ago) link

xp Dan -- I'm not saying he's evil incarnate, just that it was a self-serving move. And it is often super useful to be reminded that in the central SF Bay Area, one lives in kinda a political bubble and that there is certain hair-splitting we do here, some more-progressive-than-thou type stuff, that looks ridiculous to most other Americans

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:04 (one year ago) link

Oh yeah, and Oakland has a mayoral election ...

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:05 (one year ago) link

Alaska and Arizona, come on. This *was* a big push forward.

Bush had already given his SOTU pressing for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Massachusetts was on track to start allowing marriages in May of that year. A backlash was going to happen in 2004. And Prop 8 was a direct response to the California Supreme Court recognizing marriage rights in 2008

agree that it was a partly self-serving move, but it was also a very good thing

Dan S, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:11 (one year ago) link

yeah, on paper he has done all the right things, but you read into the details of his life and he is a total slimeball

thing is, how else would you vote if not on what he has done and the positives more or less outweigh the negatives

i feel like this single payer healthcare program was hyped a lot in california, but like it's crazy when you do the math

i'm not against it though

F# A# (∞), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:36 (one year ago) link

on paper he has done all the right things

not when he was mayor! he did a lot of not-right things

sarahell, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:37 (one year ago) link

as mayor his sponsorship of Prop N (Care not Cash) was very controversial

Dan S, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:46 (one year ago) link

yeah, i know what you mean

i guess i should say given the options

F# A# (∞), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:48 (one year ago) link

I agree that policy-wise I'm compelled to vote for him, more or less. At the same time, I absolutely hate watching him talk and prior to our current scandal-goalpost-moving POS chief exec I would have assumed Newsom was a lock for doing something scandalously unethical/illegal that would tank his career. I guess we're going to find out soon enough.

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:51 (one year ago) link

Well when the alternative is John Cox...

Catherine Power (Leee), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 17:58 (one year ago) link

i was listening to an interview with scott weiner and he mentioned that brown had vetoed the 4am last call thing but he would bring it back next year and didn't expect any problems with newsom on that issue. there was then a weird moment where the interviewer and weiner acknowledged that yes, newsom is a known partier.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Wednesday, 17 October 2018 19:17 (one year ago) link

a friend of mine/former journalist wrote a semi-autobiographical novel that briefly features an obvious Newsom character riding around in a limo drinking champagne, doing blow and engaging in bisexual hijinks

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 19:23 (one year ago) link

"That, in turn, should be the opening line of your novel.

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 17 October 2018 19:39 (one year ago) link

god damn i need a voter guide who tf are all these yahoo local judges speaking in code

the late great, Thursday, 18 October 2018 03:59 (one year ago) link

i forget, are you in LA?

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Thursday, 18 October 2018 04:20 (one year ago) link

Yeah legitimately excited about nithya

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Saturday, 7 March 2020 01:02 (one month ago) link

looooooool

Ex-L.A. Councilman Mitchell Englander surrenders in federal probe -- more details to come https://t.co/wlbrWLZlWk

— Emily Alpert Reyes (@AlpertReyes) March 9, 2020

(i know this stuff is boring for the non-LA people, but LA council people are incredibly corrupt and have had a totally free hand for a long time, and it does feel like things are getting kind of interesting electorally right when they're all going to jail)

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Monday, 9 March 2020 17:34 (four weeks ago) link

New details: Englander faces criminal charges that he obstructed an investigation into him accepting cash, female escort services, hotel rooms and expensive meals from a businessman during trips to Las Vegas and Palm Springs, then lying to the FBI about his conduct.

— Emily Alpert Reyes (@AlpertReyes) March 9, 2020

The indictment says that an Englander staffer accompanied him on the Las Vegas trip, describing him as "a high-ranking staff member ... until approximately June 2017." I've asked John Lee, who left as Englander's chief of staff in June 2017, if he went on the trip.

— Emily Alpert Reyes (@AlpertReyes) March 9, 2020

(john lee currently up 52/48 in the count for CD12, englander's old seat)

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Monday, 9 March 2020 18:31 (four weeks ago) link

it's not boring to me! ... besides, I post a bunch of Oakland content that I'm sure isn't all that interesting to, even the handful of Oakland people on here

sarahell, Monday, 9 March 2020 18:31 (four weeks ago) link

https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/ex-los-angeles-city-councilman-surrenders-face-federal-charges-obstructing-public

"On February 12, 2018, Englander allegedly met Businessperson A in Englander’s car and, after Englander turned up the car stereo music to a loud volume to obstruct possible listening devices, Englander again repeatedly instructed Businessperson A to lie to the FBI while driving in a circle around the block to conceal their meeting."

is that bad?

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Monday, 9 March 2020 18:56 (four weeks ago) link

depends, what was he playing?

ΞŸα½–Ο„ΞΉΟ‚, Monday, 9 March 2020 19:08 (four weeks ago) link

the Eagles

sarahell, Tuesday, 10 March 2020 17:33 (four weeks ago) link

nicely done

justice 4 CCR (Sparkle Motion), Tuesday, 10 March 2020 21:22 (four weeks ago) link

So ... martial law, Gavin, really?

sarahell, Thursday, 19 March 2020 20:29 (two weeks ago) link

I'm not seeing anything? Source?

justice 4 CCR (Sparkle Motion), Thursday, 19 March 2020 23:11 (two weeks ago) link

Something about activating 500 National Guardsmen as a backup for food distribution, allegedly.

Ned Raggett, Friday, 20 March 2020 04:26 (two weeks ago) link

SF feels like a ghost town, it's surreal

Dan S, Friday, 20 March 2020 04:35 (two weeks ago) link

We’ve been in a quieter part of town anyway but when the nearby bar closed, it definitely got quiet.

Ned Raggett, Friday, 20 March 2020 05:19 (two weeks ago) link

I have never seen as many people on my block in Oakland as I have today

justice 4 CCR (Sparkle Motion), Friday, 20 March 2020 06:00 (two weeks ago) link

I remember everyone in my neighborhood coming out of their houses after the 89 Loma Prieta earthquake

Dan S, Friday, 20 March 2020 06:14 (two weeks ago) link

Truly sobering story about the state of California's budget β€” even with a record $20 billion-plus in reserves https://t.co/C0V72BtLme

— Liam Dillon (@dillonliam) March 25, 2020




Just a reminder that California's state budget is super reliant on rich people and when rich people lose money the state as a whole suffers β€” via @melmason https://t.co/x7koQOiJja

— Liam Dillon (@dillonliam) March 25, 2020

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Wednesday, 25 March 2020 17:03 (two weeks ago) link

honestly I feel like California isn't going to be as fucked by this as some other states.

sarahell, Wednesday, 25 March 2020 17:19 (two weeks ago) link

And idk how "sobering" the fact that this huge crisis would wipe out our reserves is, really ... I remember the CA economy after the dot-com crash / 9-11 ...I feel like then we were super fucked as a state.

sarahell, Wednesday, 25 March 2020 17:21 (two weeks ago) link

he's right tho that state revenue in any given year is more tied to individual income than it would be elsewhere (bc prop 13 yay!)

Larry Elleison (rogermexico.), Wednesday, 25 March 2020 17:45 (two weeks ago) link

definitely more tied to individual income than in states with no income tax! ... what about the states that rely on sales tax for more of their budget?

sarahell, Wednesday, 25 March 2020 18:42 (two weeks ago) link

lol hi

silby, Wednesday, 25 March 2020 18:43 (two weeks ago) link

sure you're fucked if you rely on sales tax and there's a once in a century quarantine (hi WA). but CA fucked every time there's a stock market correction if you rely on income tax that is dominated by residents who receive stock compensation.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Thursday, 26 March 2020 03:35 (one week ago) link

I don't know if it's actually "dominated" by that? I would be curious to see the statistical data.

sarahell, Thursday, 26 March 2020 03:40 (one week ago) link

"we're unusually sensitive to the stock market (especially tech IPOs etc.)" is the premise of the article in the second tweet i posted https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-pol-ca-next-california-economy/. there's plenty of numbers in there. but fair enough, if "dominated" means > 50% of the revenue, then probably not.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Thursday, 26 March 2020 03:49 (one week ago) link

income tax is 70% of the revenue, that's fine -- but that doesn't really show that the income tax revenue is dominated by the tax on stock compensation? ... even if it's saying that a lot comes from capital gains, not all capital gains are coming from stock compensation. You also get capital gains from buying and selling real estate.

sarahell, Thursday, 26 March 2020 04:07 (one week ago) link

i know you work in this area so maybe you already know this? but i'm not sure if people outside tech realize that a typical tech worker's W2 is usually at least 20% stock comp, and closer to 80% or more at the better paid end, see https://www.levels.fyi. or at least it is, until the market crashes and then the highest paid people in the state get a huge pay cut.

granted, the *seriously* rich are getting their income from capital gains, not on a W2. and granted tech people aren't the only people in CA. but it's not a coincidence that the top 4 zip codes for CA income tax are in PA, Burlingame and Menlo Park. and in the context of a budget without a lot of wiggle room, an unanticipated pay cut on the W2 income of the highest paid "regular" W2 employees in the state is a big deal! and it happens every time there's a stock market correction.

note i'm not saying CA should take care of its tech workers better. fuck those guys myself included. i'm saying we (and washington) should move more revenue to property tax (and wealth tax more generally). it would be fairer and it would make CA revenue more predictable.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Thursday, 26 March 2020 04:44 (one week ago) link

I was actually thinking about this last night -- because I'm hearing from various people that with the stock market correction, housing prices will go down, because some of the pricing is based on the people with tech money, so a fair amount of capital gains from real estate is connected to the capital gains from stock.

But are you saying that income tax _isn't_ a wealth tax? Or just that the different forms of wealth should be taxed equally? The fact that capital gains tax rates are lower than those on income people actually work for is one of those things that I find fundamentally wrong with our system. And some of it comes down to old money vs. new money, too. For example, I am interested to see what the aggregate income and tax data are for "older money" zip codes in places like Monterey and Carmel and Marin County. I feel like they have had time to shelter their income and perhaps pay less tax than the tech people who are "new money" ... idk.

sarahell, Thursday, 26 March 2020 17:37 (one week ago) link

I had a tax client for a while that had a modest income -- that consisted of like $5k from music gigs, another couple thousand from dividends, and about $60k in tax-exempt bond interest. He paid 0 tax.

sarahell, Thursday, 26 March 2020 17:39 (one week ago) link

If I have 100 and earn 10, and the 10 is taxed, that’s an income tax. If the 100 is taxed that’s a wealth tax. Property tax is an example of a wealth tax.

Wealth taxes tend to affect older people more than income taxes because older people often have little or no income but have accrued more wealth because they’ve lived longer. But they also affect the super rich, who find it easier to disguise income as wealth and avoid income taxes. Aside from property tax, wealth taxes are pretty rare. Elizabeth Warren famously wants a wealth tax on all wealth (not just real property) above a certain amount.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Thursday, 26 March 2020 18:39 (one week ago) link

Wealth tax is a tax on savings, which is, like caek said, pretty hard to propose in the USA without people freaking out. Good idea though. Keeps people from hoarding money.

DJI, Thursday, 26 March 2020 19:15 (one week ago) link

It’s desirable for all sorts of reasons but it’s particularly desirable in CA because real property is incredibly valuable so taxing it good for state revenue, and normal income is unusually volatile in this state because of the tech stocks while wealth is pretty stable or at least varies differently than income so the volatility is reduced.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Thursday, 26 March 2020 19:28 (one week ago) link

Here's the other side of the argument:

the thing is, it isn't that real property isn't being taxed based on its value -- it's that people have locked in rates based on how long they have held the property. It's basically rent control for property owners. Should the state abolish rent control for tenants?

And, another thing is, real property values are also volatile in CA (some areas less so than others). So, the technical issue would be, to be equitable, property values would need to be regularly reassessed, and how would this be done? Taxing income and investments held in cash (or cash equivalents) is fairly simple to quantify -- you already have a dollar value. But buildings and land?

Then, you have the issue of double taxation (this also comes up if you are proposing to tax accrued income) -- if someone has made improvements to their real property, in many areas, they are paying permit fees to local agencies based on the estimated value of those improvements -- so now, they are gonna be taxed by the state on the improvements they were already taxed by their city/county on, and they paid to make them! "No wonder everything here is so fucking expensive! Why would anyone in their right mind want to build anything here?!"

sarahell, Friday, 27 March 2020 15:11 (one week ago) link

idk could always try abolishing private property entirely

silby, Friday, 27 March 2020 15:38 (one week ago) link

though what you could do -- seriously, I no longer have a social life, so discussing and formulating a progressive and practical taxation / economic policy is a great use of my time rn -- what you could do is greatly increase the homeowner's exemption for property tax. (as in, if it's your house and you live in it vs. you own the property and it's only a rental) Right now it's $7000 (maybe that's just Alameda County?) -- as in only $7000 of your property value is not taxable.

Another option would be increasing cash assistance benefits to the poor such that fixed income grandma could afford the increased property taxes on her house. Fixed income grandma was the imperiled heroine in the Prop 13 issue back in the 70s. Today's fixed income grandma (at least in gentrifying cities like Oakland) is a non-white grandma who owns her house in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood, such that, if property taxes were assessed at current value, she would possibly have to sell her house, and the neighborhood would become whiter. In other words, there is a racial component to this issue (on the side of not repealing Prop 13) that wasn't there back in the 70s

sarahell, Friday, 27 March 2020 15:50 (one week ago) link

I think any removal of Prop 13 would need to be phased in over >20 years.

DJI, Friday, 27 March 2020 15:53 (one week ago) link

there would definitely need to be a phase in for residential (and probably a lot of commercial property too)

sarahell, Friday, 27 March 2020 15:57 (one week ago) link

Here's the other side of the argument:

the thing is, it isn't that real property isn't being taxed based on its value -- it's that people have locked in rates based on how long they have held the property. It's basically rent control for property owners. Should the state abolish rent control for tenants?


No, but thanks to Costa-Hawkins we currently have very little rent control at the state level anyway. And the topic of rent control is a total non-sequitur.

And, another thing is, real property values are also volatile in CA (some areas less so than others). So, the technical issue would be, to be equitable, property values would need to be regularly reassessed, and how would this be done? Taxing income and investments held in cash (or cash equivalents) is fairly simple to quantify -- you already have a dollar value. But buildings and land?


They manage to reassess property values all over the world including in other states in the US. It’s demonstrably a solved problem.

Then, you have the issue of double taxation (this also comes up if you are proposing to tax accrued income) -- if someone has made improvements to their real property, in many areas, they are paying permit fees to local agencies based on the estimated value of those improvements -- so now, they are gonna be taxed by the state on the improvements they were already taxed by their city/county on, and they paid to make them! "No wonder everything here is so fucking expensive! Why would anyone in their right mind want to build anything here?!"


So you don’t double tax? Seriously this is basic tax code stuff that the rest of the world has solved by moving out of the 1950s. The US is special but it’s not that special that it has nothing to learn from the developed world.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Friday, 27 March 2020 17:40 (one week ago) link

No, but thanks to Costa-Hawkins we currently have very little rent control at the state level anyway. And the topic of rent control is a total non-sequitur.

not really a non-sequitur -- if a tenant in a rental property has rent control, and the property is reassessed at a much higher tax rate, could the owner pass that on to the tenants?

There's a lot more rent control in northern CA cities btw

sarahell, Friday, 27 March 2020 19:20 (one week ago) link

if a tenant in a rental property has rent control, and the property is reassessed at a much higher tax rate, could the owner pass that on to the tenants?

so... apply rent control so that doesn't happen? i don't get what you're saying here. are you saying that eliminating prop 13 would be hard or that it would be unfair? or something else?

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Friday, 27 March 2020 21:00 (one week ago) link

I am basically reiterating arguments that I hear from other people.

Here's one example:
A rental property that is subject to rent control provisions and is the primary income stream for "fixed income grandma." Grandma has owned this property for 40 years. The property taxes are low because of Prop 13. Grandma's tenants have been there a long time, too, and are also low income. If Prop 13 is eliminated and her rental property is reassessed at a much higher rate, what should she do?

1. eat dog food because she now has to pay a lot more in property taxes
2. pass the property tax onto the tenants (which is legal in many jurisdictions) so the tenants end up homeless and/or eating dog food

sarahell, Friday, 27 March 2020 21:07 (one week ago) link

eliminating proposition 13 does not equate to increasing property taxes. it means you introduce reassessment on some reasonable frequency (year, decade, whatever) and you remove the hard upper limit of 1% or whatever it is. you could (and we should!) repeal prop 13 and at the same time reduce the rate such that the state revenue is unchanged (something like a state 0.1% rate would do this, given how much values have gone up since prop 13 passed). if you do this then, by definition, the average property owner's bill would not change (and about half of bills would go down!)

the goal of repealing prop 13 is not to increase total revenue. it's to allow us to get a bigger fraction of revenue from incredibly wealthy people who are literal millionaires, and less of it from incredibly poor people via the current flat state income tax. you can quibble about the proportions here, but even the principle of *attempting* to do this is *illegal* right now because of prop 13.

the people whose bills would go up to unnafordable levels if you eliminate prop 13 while reducing the state property tax to keep income constant are *incredibly wealthy*! if "grandma" owns a $2m bay area home that she is renting (i.e. she is a millionaire running a dang business!), and the property tax is high, she can sell up and get out of the business! the state does not owe millionaires a tax code that makes running a profitable business easy. now she has $2m in her savings account. she can live of the interest for the rest of her life. a 25 year old can live of the interest from that for the rest of their life, for that matter!

obviously if grandma *lives* in the house, that's a different issue (solved very easily by, for example, grandfathering (ha!) all property tax to be limited by prop 13 for current residents in their current home, or any one of dozens of other ways, e.g. incremental increase, age limits, etc., etc.)

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Friday, 27 March 2020 21:25 (one week ago) link

it's to allow us to get a bigger fraction of revenue from incredibly wealthy people who are literal millionaires, and less of it from incredibly poor people via the current flat state income tax.

flat in what sense? CA state income tax is not a flat tax, it is a progressive tax.

sarahell, Saturday, 28 March 2020 19:11 (one week ago) link

obviously if grandma *lives* in the house, that's a different issue (solved very easily by, for example, grandfathering (ha!) all property tax to be limited by prop 13 for current residents in their current home, or any one of dozens of other ways, e.g. incremental increase, age limits, etc., etc.)

Yeah, that is along the lines of what I would argue against the Pro-Prop 13-ers I encounter. Even something as simple as a larger homeowner exemption for the property. Instead of $7000, you can say $100,000 and potentially increase that based on years owned/lived in -- like an extra $100k for each 10 years.

sarahell, Saturday, 28 March 2020 19:14 (one week ago) link

So that -- let's say grandma has had her house for 40 years. Let's say she bought it for $50k and it is now worth $750k. And let's say that the taxable assessed value is $67k.

So: currently -- her tax is based on $67,000 - $7,000 = $60,000

With my proposal of $100k base exemption with an extra $10k exemption for each year owned, she would have: $750,000 - $400,000 = $350,000 -- which would be an increase, but her taxes would be way lower than Jerry Gentrifier who paid $750,000 for a similar house across the street last year.

sarahell, Saturday, 28 March 2020 19:19 (one week ago) link

Jerry Gentrifier, if he and his family lived in their house, would be taxed on $750,000 - $100,000 = $650,000, whereas Greedy Speculators Investment Trust who also bought a house in the neighborhood last year for $750,000 and operates it as a rental (or is holding it vacant) would pay tax on the entire $750k

sarahell, Saturday, 28 March 2020 19:21 (one week ago) link

/it's to allow us to get a bigger fraction of revenue from incredibly wealthy people who are literal millionaires, and less of it from incredibly poor people via the current flat state income tax./

flat in what sense? CA state income tax is not a flat tax, it is a progressive tax.


Flat relative to federal income tax or a wealth tax.

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Saturday, 28 March 2020 21:03 (one week ago) link

A wealth tax is de facto progressive in that the tax bill of people who earn more tends to be a larger proportion of their income (possibly more than 100% for the idle rich).

π” π”žπ”’π”¨ (caek), Saturday, 28 March 2020 21:08 (one week ago) link

why does being younger than your grandmother make jerry a gentrifier?

Larry Elleison (rogermexico.), Sunday, 29 March 2020 01:58 (one week ago) link

"I've not sourced [Nunes] for advice on pretty much any issue β€” I say that as respectfully as I can β€” but particularly on public health issues," Newsom said. "He's made some statements in the past that were not consistent with the advice from the experts. We’ll continue to listen to the experts, try to avoid some elected officials that frankly may not have the benefit of the insight many of us do here."

Newsom added that at the Emergency Operations Center, he and the state's health officials are constantly getting new information from around the world and anticipating trend lines.

"Not everyone has that benefit," Newsome continued, "so I’ll forgive him."

https://www.sfgate.com/coronavirus/article/newsom-the-view-nunes-coronavirus-schools-15177436.php

Still not a wholehearted fan of Newsom but this is a pretty great takedown of an ignorant clod.

Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Saturday, 4 April 2020 00:51 (four days ago) link

did they really misspell his name like that in the article?

sarahell, Saturday, 4 April 2020 16:07 (four days ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.