A ballot initiative has been filed to change California's Prop 13 for businesses (commercial and industrial property) while leaving it for residential and agricultural property. I strongly oppose Prop 13, but this initiative has enough quirks that I'm hesitant to support it.
John Fensterwald @jfenster
19 Jan 2018
Coalition to take on CA's untouchable Prop 13 on its 40th anniversary; split-roll initiative would raise property taxes on biz by $11 b by reassessing commercial/industrial properties more often; schools to benefit bit.ly/2DiWPvS @EdSource
1
This initiative seems to handle mixed use correctly, and it also seems to handle residential property in an industrial or commercial zone correctly. But I worry it has far too many exceptions that could exempt commercial property.
1
Commercial or industrial property that's zoned for residential use seems to get an exception. This would give an edge to properties nonconformant to (later) zoning. I also worry it creates an opportunity for corruption by pushing to change zoning to residential.
1
1
Proposition also creates a large number of distorting (and corrupting?) exceptions for small businesses. $500K of property exempt from tax, all property exempt from tax for businesses with <50 employees, exception from reassessment for property owners who own <$2M of property.
1
Agricultural exceptions also seem unusual, but I'm not sure what current policy is for agriculture. However, it seems like many farms are businesses, and they ought to be subject to reassessment.
1
Fundamentally, though, the biggest fault of Prop 13 is with its taxation of residential property. It encourages empty-nesters to stay in homes that are too big, and more generally prevents the younger generation from getting reasonable housing in much of California.

Jan 22, 2018 · 10:34 PM UTC
1
3