We are a grassroots organization which represents a variety of united special interest groups dedicated to Amending Proposition 13 OF 1978 through the Fair Property Assessment Plan. We also support Phil Ting, and all other efforts to amend proposition 13.

1. WWW.AMENDPROP13.COMWWW.AMENDPROP13.COM
We are a grassroots organization which represents aWe are a grassroots organization which represents a
variety of united special interest groups dedicated tovariety of united special interest groups dedicated to
Amending Proposition 13 OF 1978 through the FairAmending Proposition 13 OF 1978 through the Fair
Property Assessment Plan. We also support Phil Ting,Property Assessment Plan. We also support Phil Ting,
and all other efforts to amend proposition 13.and all other efforts to amend proposition 13.

2. Omar VenturaDaniel VillanuevaPresent
Spring 2006:
California Politics
-SFSU

3. The FairProperty
Assessment Plan

4. Presentation Outline
 Brief summary of the Genesis of proposition
13.
 The role of Howard Jarvis in passing proposition
13.
 The Aftermath of proposition 13.
 Recent efforts to revise proposition 13.
 Our Plan:
 steps to get it implemented.
 Our supporters.
 Lessons learned.

5. The Genesis of Prop 13The Genesis of Prop 13
 In Serrano v. Priest,In Serrano v. Priest, the California state supreme court declared California'sthe California state supreme court declared California's
property-tax-based school finance system unconstitutional and a violation ofproperty-tax-based school finance system unconstitutional and a violation of
equal protection principals. The court ordered the state legislature to changeequal protection principals. The court ordered the state legislature to change
the way that California schools were financed. The legislature came up withthe way that California schools were financed. The legislature came up with
bill (AB 65) designed to equalize school revenues by increasing state fundsbill (AB 65) designed to equalize school revenues by increasing state funds
for poor communities while putting a cap on per-pupil revenues in wealthyfor poor communities while putting a cap on per-pupil revenues in wealthy
districts and redistributing some of their local property taxes to poor districts.districts and redistributing some of their local property taxes to poor districts.
 Many Tax paying Voters did not agree with the courts ruling. Many argued:Many Tax paying Voters did not agree with the courts ruling. Many argued:
why increase property taxes if the money is not going to their schools? Thiswhy increase property taxes if the money is not going to their schools? This
made voters decline to vote for tax increases, because they were convincedmade voters decline to vote for tax increases, because they were convinced
government officials would not spend the money properly.government officials would not spend the money properly.
 Also, After the Assessors' scandal of 1966, which revealed disproportionateAlso, After the Assessors' scandal of 1966, which revealed disproportionate
assessments, the Ca Legislature enacted reform bill (AB 80) to keepassessments, the Ca Legislature enacted reform bill (AB 80) to keep
assessments at a uniform percentage of market value. As a result, duringassessments at a uniform percentage of market value. As a result, during
the 1970s, when real estate values escalated rapidly, so did homethe 1970s, when real estate values escalated rapidly, so did home
assessments, resulting in large increases in assessed value for manyassessments, resulting in large increases in assessed value for many
taxpayers. By 1978, with home ownership threatened by escalatingtaxpayers. By 1978, with home ownership threatened by escalating
property tax bills, proposition 13 began to sound more enticing to tax payers.property tax bills, proposition 13 began to sound more enticing to tax payers.
 Increasing property values concerned voters who were on fixed incomes,Increasing property values concerned voters who were on fixed incomes,
they feared that they would not be able to pay the property taxes on theirthey feared that they would not be able to pay the property taxes on their
homes.homes.
 The tax revolt was born.The tax revolt was born.

6. Howard JarvisHoward Jarvis
 In 1978, Howard Jarvis was a 75-year old owner of aIn 1978, Howard Jarvis was a 75-year old owner of a
small newspaper company turned manufacturing, rallyingsmall newspaper company turned manufacturing, rallying
a tax revolt in California with his reputation as a seasoneda tax revolt in California with his reputation as a seasoned
battler against higher taxes.battler against higher taxes.
 Jarvis pushed his initiative for a property-tax reductionJarvis pushed his initiative for a property-tax reduction
four times, and failed. To gain more signatures each time,four times, and failed. To gain more signatures each time,
Jarvis endorsed both of Regan’s campaign’s forJarvis endorsed both of Regan’s campaign’s for
Governor, and campaigned for Regan’s proposition 1 asGovernor, and campaigned for Regan’s proposition 1 as
well.well.
 Property values in 1978 were increasing from 50-100% inProperty values in 1978 were increasing from 50-100% in
one year alone, this also gave Jarvis plenty of signaturesone year alone, this also gave Jarvis plenty of signatures
and supporters for his initiative.and supporters for his initiative.
 Jarvis witnessed an Elderly woman die of a heart attackJarvis witnessed an Elderly woman die of a heart attack
because she discovered that she might not be able to paybecause she discovered that she might not be able to pay
her property taxes. This gave Jarvis the perfect publicher property taxes. This gave Jarvis the perfect public
image, as he said in the wake of the woman’s death:image, as he said in the wake of the woman’s death:
“Death and taxes may be inevitable, but being taxed to“Death and taxes may be inevitable, but being taxed to
death is not inevitable!”death is not inevitable!”
 Howard Jarvis died in 1986.Howard Jarvis died in 1986.

7. The Aftermath of Prop 13:
 Proposition 13 resulted in a dramatic reduction in the amount of local
property tax revenue available for cities, counties, and schools.
 In addition, Proposition 13 changed the governance structure of
California's education system by centralizing decision making from a
local system of local schools, to a state system (James Guthrie, First to
Worst).
 Because proposition 13 applied to all properties, properties that were
very high in property value, properties exclusively controlled by
corporations, benefited significantly over the years.
 Properties of equal size and worth, but purchased at different times,
would be taxed differently, placing the tax burden on new families and
business’s.
 Vague wording in the section regarding how the school money was
spent resulted in a overall non-compliance of that section of the
proposition.

8. Why We Need Change:
 Our Mission: To address California’s failing infrastructure
and educational system, as well as reduce California’s $8.5
billion debt.
 The status quo does not provide solutions to these
problems, which holds California back from its full potential.
 Continuing with the status quo will keep California on the
path towards “Mississippification”.
 California’s lack of revenue prevents California from
investing in improving itself, and instead, leads to budget
cuts and bonds that will cost California more money in the
long run.

9. Other Efforts to Revise
Proposition 13
• At least three studies have recommended a split roll. The California Policy
Seminar (CPS) study, published in 1993, recommended a split roll. The
Senate Resolution 42 Study Commission and the California Tax Reform
Association also recommended a split roll in 1991. A 1985 preliminary
report from Governor George Deukmejian's Tax Reform Advisory
Commission referenced the split-roll approach, but did not incorporate it
into the commission's final report.
• In 1988, proposition 98 was passed in hopes to ensure school funding was
provided for k-12 education. However, this only prevented school spending
from increasing.
• In 2000, proposition 39 was passed, to make it easier for schools to pass
bonds for improvements.
• In 1992, Lenny Goldberg wrote proposition 167, a split roll initiative
intending to generate a few billion dollars, which was rejected by a 2 to 1
vote.
• Other split roll initiatives have been proposed, but have failed.

10. The Fair Property Assessment Plan
 In short, the Fair Property Assessment Plan defines “commercial”,
“residential”, “residential-rental”, and “undeveloped” property, taxing
and assessing each group differently.
 “Commercial” property is to be assessed at “full cash value”
 There is no change to how “residential” properties are taxed or
assessed.
 “Residential-rental” properties are assessed as commercial
properties, since they generate revenue for the property owner, but
are taxed as “residential” properties.
 “Undeveloped” land is to be exempt from taxation, to promote the
usage of land that is already developed.
 Some of the Revenue goes to the general fund, while the rest is
placed in special funds for infrastructure, higher education, hiring
assessors, and funding potential sanctions.

11. Implementation
 With the aid our lawyers, an initiative can be fleshed out
and circulated for signatures. With enough signatures,
an initiative can be placed on the ballot for passage as
an amendment.
 After reading Stealing the Initiative, we learned that the
effectiveness of a proposition depends heavily on the
language, as well as the likely hood of sanctioning.
 By placing clauses within the amendment which clearly
defines compliance, as well as a special fund for
sanctioning, we hope to deter political actors from
refusing to comply with the amendment.
 By creating special funds, and mandating yearly audits
of the funds, we ensure that revenue is spent properly.
 2% or the revenue generated by this amendment is to
be allocated to higher assessors, 38.95% goes to
improving education, 39% goes to infrastructure, 20%
goes to the general fund, and .05% is set aside to
sanction non-compliance.

12. What This AmendmentWhat This Amendment
Intends to Resolve:Intends to Resolve:
 California’s budget deficit.California’s budget deficit.
 California’s under funded higherCalifornia’s under funded higher
education.education.
 The tax burden on newer homeThe tax burden on newer home
and business owners.and business owners.
 Fill the widening wage gap withFill the widening wage gap with
middle class jobs.middle class jobs.
 Improve California’sImprove California’s
infrastructure.infrastructure.

13. How This Amendment Does It:How This Amendment Does It:
• This amendment creates middle class jobs with state fundedThis amendment creates middle class jobs with state funded
infrastructure improvements, such as engineering jobs, constructioninfrastructure improvements, such as engineering jobs, construction
jobs, and transportation jobs. The demand for assessors wouldjobs, and transportation jobs. The demand for assessors would
increase, and provide jobs for existing California residents as well.increase, and provide jobs for existing California residents as well.
• Split-roll initiatives proposed so far are estimated to generate $5Split-roll initiatives proposed so far are estimated to generate $5
billion, and only propose yearly assessments. The fair propertybillion, and only propose yearly assessments. The fair property
assessment plan not only includes yearly assessments, it taxesassessment plan not only includes yearly assessments, it taxes
commercial properties at their “real cash value”, which wouldcommercial properties at their “real cash value”, which would
generate even more revenue for the state.generate even more revenue for the state.
• In the long run, this amendment would dedicate 20% of property taxIn the long run, this amendment would dedicate 20% of property tax
generated to help reduce the $8.5 billion budget deficit.generated to help reduce the $8.5 billion budget deficit.
• Despite having to pay more in taxes, companies will benefit byDespite having to pay more in taxes, companies will benefit by
having an improved infrastructure and educated workforce.having an improved infrastructure and educated workforce.
• Lower rents for “rental-residential” properties helps families inLower rents for “rental-residential” properties helps families in
California make ends meet.California make ends meet.

14. Our OppositionOur Opposition
 Larry McCarthy. (TaxpayersLarry McCarthy. (Taxpayers
association).association).
 L.A. County assessor (only becauseL.A. County assessor (only because
current amendments do not includecurrent amendments do not include
compliance mechanisms).compliance mechanisms).
 The Governator.The Governator.
 Valley industry & CommerceValley industry & Commerce
association.association.
 Majority of Republicans.Majority of Republicans.

15. Reasons For OppositionReasons For Opposition
Some groups fear that counties will beSome groups fear that counties will be
overwhelmed with annual re-assessments.overwhelmed with annual re-assessments.
Some groups believe that the changesSome groups believe that the changes
would not generate sufficient revenue.would not generate sufficient revenue.
Some groups argue that an increase inSome groups argue that an increase in
commercial taxes will hurt California’scommercial taxes will hurt California’s
economy, as well as raise prices foreconomy, as well as raise prices for
consumers.consumers.

16. Our Supporters
• Wayne Ordos and Local Law enforcement (Tax
Fairness Act of 2005).
• Robin Johansen and the California Teachers
Association.
• Lenny Goldberg, Executive Director of the
California Tax Reform Association (CTRA) and
President of Lenny Goldberg and Associates, a
public interest economic and political consulting
and lobbying firm based in Sacramento .
• Remco, Johansen & Purcell Law Firm.
• California Correctional Police Officers Association
• California school administrators.
• Former president of San Jose firefighters union.

17. Lessons LearnedLessons Learned
 While it is difficult to pass this amendment, persistence andWhile it is difficult to pass this amendment, persistence and
political climate can create the right conditions for an amendmentpolitical climate can create the right conditions for an amendment
to pass, such as proposition 13, which was rejected four times,to pass, such as proposition 13, which was rejected four times,
and took Jarvis years of signature gathering.and took Jarvis years of signature gathering.
 Poor wording can impact the effectiveness of an amendmentPoor wording can impact the effectiveness of an amendment
severely.severely.
 Smart, aggressive, and dirty tactics, such as Jarvis’ ruse thatSmart, aggressive, and dirty tactics, such as Jarvis’ ruse that
proposition 13 was to protect Senior citizens, as well as passingproposition 13 was to protect Senior citizens, as well as passing
proposition 62 to ensure that proposition 13 would never beproposition 62 to ensure that proposition 13 would never be
repealed, are effective methods in passing an initiative.repealed, are effective methods in passing an initiative.
 Contrary to popular belief, there are many supporters for the splitContrary to popular belief, there are many supporters for the split
roll.roll.