[njarboe]

Prop 13 and rent control both highly encourage NIMBYism and I would say are more important factors than property values. If a large apartment is built next to your house and you don't like the extra noise, the big shadow, and lots of people looking into your back yard, you could decide to move. Without prop 13 selling your house and moving a few blocks over to a location you like better is a pain in the ass and you have to pay off the realtors, but once you move, you just get on with your life. With prop 13 your property tax could double or triple, say going from $1000 a month to $3000 a month. This $2000 a month, every month, is going to make you mad and hurt you financially constantly for the rest of your life. No wonder people fight so hard to keep things like it was when they moved in.

People with rent control are under the same incentives. Have a $2000 rent controlled apartment that would rent for $4000? If something changes in your neighborhood the makes you want to move, you don't really have that option. So you fight really hard against changes.

The longer Prop 13 is around the worse it gets and California has just passed statewide rent control. Things will continue to get worse on this front and I don't see a way for California society to change the situation.

[mdavidn]

This is the problem. Prop 13 creates perverse incentives that are not obvious to owners in other states.

One doesn't need to live in California long before they see a community leaflet opposing a local housing development. These developments, on the surface, all look like great ideas. The stated reasons to oppose the permit all seem thin: Accusing the developer of greed, or claiming that traffic will get worse. Homes closer to work and a local discount store do increase traffic on surrounding streets but decrease cross-town traffic in the wider area. They might even encourage people to walk!

[rayiner]

> California has just passed statewide rent control. Things will continue to get worse on this front and I don't see a way for California society to change the situation.

They did just change the situation. They made it worse!

[njarboe]

The beatings will continue until moral improves.

[hashouseincali]

This logic makes no sense and people like myself can afford to keep our houses mainly because of prop 13. Since buying my house almost 8 years ago the market has double at no fault of my own. This would double my taxes making a good portion unable to be written off thanks to new IRS rules. Yet, you want to call that locked-in? I love my house and where I live but it would be painful with that extra $2k a month tax bill you mentioned.

[njarboe]

This is an unfortunate result of how California deals with property tax. In many places the property taxes go mostly/all to the school district and the city/county. When property values go up a lot there is no reason that they have to keep the property tax at the same rate. They could lower it to keep the expenditures the same. In some places they even just figure out a budget for the year and then set the property tax accordingly.

California property tax mostly goes to the state and it funds schools by giving money back to the local districts (except about 60 really rich ones that opted out!) based on the number of student days/school. I'm not really sure, but I think that prop 13 passed after the state started taking property tax money. That would make sense as people like to have control of how there taxes are spent.

[mdavidn]

When someone proposes a four plus one housing development around the corner from your house to help address the state's housing shortage, would you oppose it? You can't move if you don't like it, after all, since you'd lose your property tax break.

If you oppose such developments, then the higher value of your home _is your fault_.

[hashouseincali]

Im in favor of any housing that makes sense but dont espouse the logic that just because someone wants to move to a town everyone has to agree to let giant apartment blocks get put up. I did indeed buy where Im at because I enjoyed the small town culture but I understand the need for managed growth. My town is already overwhelmed with infrastructure and water issues that poorly planned growth will exacerbate. There is a lot of land in Cali we dont all need to live on the coast. Being here is a privilege not a right and Im not being selfish wanting to keep that for which Ive worked hard. Growth is inevitable ... Poorly planned cities are not. Just look at Daly city if you want to see the ugly side of unhindered housing expansion and poor infrastructure. Further, your argument still doesnt engender the need to get rid of prop 13...

[mdavidn]

All of your arguments have the side effect of increasing the value of your home, thereby making you more dependent on Prop 13.

[hashouseincali]

So youre for poorly planned cities or gentrification? The value of my property is simply that it is the house in which my family and I live. I gain no benefit from the market increase until I actually sell my house (I suppose there is financial wrangling that could be done but I dont have the money or time for that). Anyone that buys my house or any house in a high value area is going to be paying a higher tax rate simply based on the cost. Prop 13 insulates me from that and encourages/allows me to stay put while still setting the tax rate for all new purchases. I will indeed resist poorly planned additions to my town and will insist on proper infrastructure in place before conceding to any mass buildings. Im not interested in living in an Oakland'esque place with ghost ships everywhere. Ill let you do that elsewhere. Further, you still havent reasonably outlined how getting rid of prop 13 is going to fix things. There are plenty of wealthy people around to pay the taxes assessed on a home purchase ... plus, they can probably afford CPA's to dodge taxes otherwise. Youd be better off trying to fix the socioeconomic disparities so prevalent in our society ... and if you think eliminating prop 13 is going to help toward that end then I got a bridge in Arizona for ya ...

[mdavidn]

Each time you interact with anyone employed in your area, you should ask about their commute. There's a good chance that the staff who care for your children, the staff who stocks your groceries, the staff that cleans your workplace, all have soul-crushing commutes. Your "managed growth" policy forces _them_ to pay for your "small town culture" with their time. That's gentrification, by definition.

[hashouseincali]

Another point tho ... where I live doubling the taxes and pricing out those holding on with fingernails will only speed the gentrification. I would have no problem selling my house right now at market value and the buyers from the valley wouldnt bat an eye at the taxes ... not even including the foreign buyers coming in to hide the peoples squandered moneys. Prop 13 aids those like myself by keeping us out of the market loop ... I feel no pressure to sell and have no interest in buying again.

[mdavidn]

Prop 13 does keep you in that home, true, but a more stable home value would also keep taxes low. One way to keep home values low is to build high-density housing in the area. Such projects are opposed by local home owners in California.

[BurningFrog]

Yeah, the lock-in effect of both Prop 13 and rent control deserve a lot more awareness!

Reminds me of what I've heard about working in the academic world: Since people often have a job for life, workplace conflict can't be resolved as everywhere else, where someone switches job or gets fired. Instead people make each other's life hell forever.

Just a story I've heard, I have no personal experience. But I've heard it several times.