Claims of Unfairness to Homeowners on Tax Issues Ring Hollow

chalkboardCOMMENTARY – It seems like every election we get the invariable argument over who is entitled to vote on matters of taxation.

So here is the argument, as a letter writer lays it out in the local newspaper: “Oh, did I mention? This November also brings another school tax; Measure E. As a homeowner in Davis, this measure concerns only those who own property, for it is us who will have to ‘foot the bill!’ “

He quickly adds, “Alas and alack, once again, homeowners will be outnumbered and outvoted by those who will vote come November and be gone come December, perhaps with a degree in hand or to a city with cheaper rent.”

First of all, I have to take issue with the premise here.  This measure concerns ONLY those who own property?  Really?  So the people who live in this community who value education have no concern?  The people who live in this community who have kids in school have no concern?

This individual might want to check a calendar, because I think it has been a long time since we disqualified non-property owners from voting in the election.

But the kicker is that the letter writer appears to have forgotten that we have Proposition 13.  Proposition 13, for better or for worse, actually took this argument into consideration.

That was the whole logic of the two-thirds vote requirement, to protect the landowners against the marauding masses of people just waiting to cut into their wealth and force them to pay taxes in order to educate the children of this or any other California community.

But not once does the letter writer acknowledge this fact.

So, are the homeowners outnumbered?  That is an interesting question.  On the surface the answer appears to be yes.  The most recent census found that 29,954 Davis residents live in owner-occupied housing units whereas 39,029 people live in renter-occupied housing units.

That means just over 57% of residents in Davis are actually renters.

However, doing a simple mathematical comparison shows that 57% is far less than the two-thirds vote needed to pass a parcel tax.

But it is actually a good deal worse than that.  We do not have access to the statistics of the percentage of renters versus homeowners vote, but we do know that nearly 70% of all renters are under the age of 34, which means that a very large percentage of them are students.

And we know, by and large, that a very low percentage of students vote – and if they do vote they will mostly vote for the President and maybe a few other top of the ticket elections.

The bottom line is that for Measure C, the overall population of Davis approved it by a 72.3% to 27.7% margin.  That’s not quite 3 to 1, but it is well over the 2 to 1 margin required by Proposition 13 to pass it.

We do not have the exact numbers, but we do know that the percentage of people voting for Measure C was far greater than the percentage of renters that reside in Davis.

So it appears quite likely that, rather than the homeowners being outnumbers, the homeowners came out and supported Measure C in large numbers.  In fact, when we look at some of the precincts far from the university, that appear to have few rental units, the support does not appear to drop.

Measure C did not carry every precinct, but it did have more votes than the no side in every precinct that cast more than 20 votes.

For me at least, the two-thirds vote requirement should be the equalizer in this argument.  Now, I don’t happen to agree with a two-thirds vote requirement.  I do not believe that your no vote should count twice as much as my yes vote.

That goes against the very principles that underlie our democracy – one person one vote, as well as our recognition that more than just property owners have the right to enfranchisement.

But as long as we have this onerous rule, it should at least immunize us against any reasonable claim that the property owners are being overwhelmed and outnumbered.

The math here shows that this is not correct.  The problem is that homeowners do not have a singular interest to oppose taxation.  Some homeowners have kids.  Some homeowners support education.

The problem that the letter writer faces is not that homeowners are outnumbered, it’s that they are outnumbered by a more than two to one margin by people in this community.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Author

  • David Greenwald

    Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

    View all posts

Categories:

Elections

18 comments

  1. David wrote:

    > We do not have the exact numbers, but we do
    > know that the percentage of people voting for
    > Measure C was far greater than the percentage
    > of renters that reside in Davis.

    The last parcel tax barely passed and I don’t think that anyone thinks it would have passed if it was fair and required older homeowners to pay it (the people that could vote yes and not pay pushed the tax over the 2/3 number needed to win).

    I know some young couples with no equity in their homes that have had a hard time with every new parcel tax and some older people in Davis with homes owned free and clear worth millions that have never paid the tax.

    It is interesting that David is supporting a new tax that millionaires don’t have to pay. Should we always exempt older millionaires from paying taxes, or should we just do it when we need their vote to get our friends in the teachers union more money?

  2. [i]”…some older people in Davis with homes owned free and clear worth millions that have never paid the tax.”
    [/i]
    If they own their homes, they pay the parcel tax. I’m not understanding what you’re trying to say.

  3. Don wrote:

    > If they own their homes, they pay the parcel tax.
    > I’m not understanding what you’re trying to say.

    Davis seniors don’t have to pay the school parcel taxes.

    The Davis Enterprise wrote:

    “Davis senior citizens who own the home they live in may apply for an exception to Measure C, the school parcel tax that was recently approved by local voters.”

    Read more at:

    http://www.davisenterprise.com/local-news/schools-news/senior-homeowners-may-apply-for-measure-c-exemption-2/

  4. “The last parcel tax barely passed and I don’t think that anyone thinks it would have passed if it was fair and required older homeowners to pay it (the people that could vote yes and not pay pushed the tax over the 2/3 number needed to win). “

    I think you’re referring to the second to last tax – Measure A in 2011. I’m referring to Measure C in 2012.

    “if it was fair”

    I don’t know if that’s an objective view. THe same Proposition 13 that requires a 2/3rds vote allows the senior exemption. It’s worth noting that the vast majority of seniors do not opt for the exemption.

    “It is interesting that David is supporting a new tax that millionaires don’t have to pay. “

    I’m not following you here.

  5. [quote]But most do. [/quote]Please cite your source… appears to be unsubstantiated. Is the list of ‘seniors’ asking for exemptions public record? Just total # of exemptions? Number of Seniors who vote on school tax measures? Where are your “facts”?

  6. I did a public records request last year and I have the full list of exemptions as of April 2011. That number was 986. I would estimate that is less than 20 percent of the senior population. I’m trying to get the current figure for exemptions.

  7. Isn’t a logged exemption a household exemption? How many voting seniors per exempt household?

    The tax is not proportional – proportionality being a popular topic these days.

    And it is still the case that your one vote is equal to everyone elses one vote. They are in fact equal. But I understand what you are [i]trying[/i] to say.

  8. That’s a good point. It’s tricky to estimate the real percentage – you would have to figure out seniors per household, some people have more than one parcel, etc.

  9. The law does not allow the district to assess property proportional to the value. Even if it did, there would be issues of fairness over which value to assess the property — property at purchase date or current value?

    The law also does not allow school districts to assess based on income — only the state gets to do that.

    SoD: [i]I know some young couples with no equity in their homes that have had a hard time with every new parcel tax…[/i]

    Young couples in my neighborhood bought their homes either with kids or with the intention of starting a family soon. They support the school parcel tax because their kids (will) benefit.

    Good schools support local home values. Lose funding that supports programs in the schools, then schools are not as attractive and home values drop. Davis homes have retained a greater percentage of their value in this housing crisis than have homes in any other Sacramento area community based on a survey at [url]zillow.com[/url]. If you are worried about equity in your home, then this is one way to not lose more of your home’s value.

  10. I wrote:

    > It is interesting that David is supporting a new tax that millionaires
    > don’t have to pay. Should we always exempt older millionaires from
    > paying taxes, or should we just do it when we need their vote to get
    > our friends in the teachers union more money?

    Then David wrote:

    > I’m not following you here.

    The title of today’s post was “Claims of Unfairness to Homeowners on Tax Issues Ring Hollow” I support the parcel tax to raise money for schools but I’m honest and admit that it is “unfair” to exempt some homeowners and not others.

    If you are not following me see if you can answer this question:

    Is a parcel tax to improve area golf courses that allows seniors to not pay the tax fair (or would any claims of unfairness “ring hollow”)?

    Then wdf1 wrote:

    > Young couples in my neighborhood bought their homes either with
    > kids or with the intention of starting a family soon. They support the
    > school parcel tax because their kids (will) benefit.
    > Good schools support local home values.

    We are on the same page here and as I’ve posted on this site (and recently explained to a guy who sends his kids to St. James) that good schools are good for real estate values. Just because both David and I support a tax does not make the fact that older millionaires can opt out of paying the tax “fair”…

  11. wdf, my notion of proportionality has to do with how much one is assessed based on what sort of dwelling unit they occupy. Analogous to water meter size and water rates. But I accept your point that the law limits how this assessment is apportioned. It does not however mandate that an apartment be assessed less (or not at all depending on which Measure we are talking about) than a single family detached home, regardless the fact that the square footage and livable space may be the same.

  12. Toad: A no vote is not counted twice while your yes vote is counted only once. It takes twice as many total yes votes to pass the measure. David’s democratic principal of one person one vote stands. It just takes a super majority to pass.

  13. David wrote:

    > I did a public records request last year and I have
    > the full list of exemptions as of April 2011.
    > That number was 986.

    Since Measure A passed by about 100 votes and Measure C passed by about 1,000 votes it looks like both would have lost without the yes votes from the people that didn’t have to pay (all the seniors in town don’t live alone so the number of votes for the 986 exemptions may be as high as 2,000)…

  14. The current number is still around 1000 according to the district.

    We don’t actually know how they would have voted without the exemption, nor do we know how they voted with the exemption.

Leave a Comment