Now is not the time to add new taxes. For the next year or so I don't think taxing is going to be friendly to voters. The cause may be noble, but it'll have to wait until the economy turns. Hold tight DeAnza-Foothill...you'll just have to make due in these tough times just like the rest of us.

New parcel taxes (and new assessment)should only be paid by owners of property whose assessed (property) value is less than its market value and are therefore paying taxes based on an "old" Prop 13 assessment.

Example

If you own a property with a market value of $650,000, but pay less than $6,500 a year in property taxes and assessments (due to having an "old" Prop 13 assessment), you would pay any new parcel taxes and assessments that get approved - until such time as your total tax bill was equal to 1% of the market value of the property. Property taxes, parcel taxes and assessments would be capped at 1% of market value for "old" assessments.

If you own a property worth $650,000 and pay over $6,500 in taxes, you would not be responsible for paying any new parcel taxes or assessments.

The current MV assessment rate is approximately 1.10%, so the tax bill for a property assessed at a market value of $650,000 is approximately $6,565. Property owners with "current" assessments would continue to take their lumps, paying property taxes, existing parcel taxes and existing assessments at current rates - but they would not be responsible for any new parcel taxes or assessments.

Interesting proposal, as it attempts to address the imbalance generated by years of Prop 13 influence.

I think that's a good thing, that will bring in additional revenue to the State, while balancing the burden of property tax on frequently adjacent properties whose only difference lies in when the property was transferred to a new owner.

As most new parcel taxes are relatively small compared to the 1% market value of most homes in this area, these increases would serve as a gradual method for correcting what Prop 13 has made askew.

Taxes are unfair. I have not been able to dream up any tax that's fair. KD's proposal for parcel taxes is about as fair/unfair as the parcel tax proposed in Measure E.

I believe Foothill-DeAnza need more tax money, so I have voted for Measure E. If it had been proposed KD's way, I would still vote for it, even though I'm one of the many property-owners who are paying "old" Prop 13 assessments.

I keep hearing the $69/parcel figure bandied about, but I am not certain if the owner of a stand-alone, million dollar house would pay the same as the owner of a $400k condo.

Can anyone explain this??

Keep raising taxes until all our problems are solved. Rather than mess around with these piddly piece-meal increases, let's just double our taxes now. Surely, politicians would then be able to fix everything broken in society. With enough money, it wouldn't take very long, and I'm certain they would return anything left over.

Better yet...

Keep LOWERING taxes until all our problems are solved. Rather than mess around with these piddly piece-meal increases, let's just HALVE our taxes now. Surely, TAXPAYERS would then be able to fix everything broken in society. With enough money, it wouldn't take very long, and I'm certain they would not be self-serving, but rather contribute their dollars to the welfare of general public, volunteer for public service, vote in every election, and participate in civic life so that politicians wouldn't be needed.

Heck, who needs a representative government, let's go back to direct democracy and cut out the middle man...

...

This tax is wrong. It's like keep providing drugs to a drug addict. The state fiscal structure needs to be completely reformed. Such taxes will mask the real problem and prolong the chronic disease of the system.

@Steve from North Whisman: I believe that everyone pays the $69 per parcel. It's not legal for parcel taxes to be "ad valorem" - based on property value. They can do graduated parcel taxes based on size of the parcel. The MVW School District's parcel tax is done this way, but even there there is a maximum. And property owners with contiguous large parcels (apartments, for one example) can treat the contiguous parcels as one parcel for the purpose of the tax. So owners of enormous, income-generating parcels don't pay any more than individual homeowners who are on very large single-family lots, I think. Most parcel taxes are just a flat per-parcel rate, with every owner paying the same amount. It's regressive, but it's harder to pass the graduated ones, so agencies needing the parcel tax funds have to make the formula as simple as possible.

Good Luck Mountain View voters - yet another parcel tax for your consideration. It's frankly unbelievable to me that another entity wants to levy a special tax on residents. What's even more crazy is that it actually has a decent chance of passing - and you may be forced to pay it. Personnally, I'm just rubber necking. I left the state a few years ago to escape this fiscal death spiral- but still feel sorry for those that remain.

It's amazing so many local government entities can propose tax on property owners. On this ballot alone we have:

Santa Clara County Children's Health Protection Tax by the County
Traffic Congestion Relief and Road Improvement Tax by VTA
Foothill-De Anza Community College Tax by CC District

And then, in the past and in future, we may have more of:

City tax
County tax
Library tax
Elementary School District tax
High School District tax
El Camino Hospital tax
Water District tax
Sewage tax
Garbage tax
School/Utility/Whatever Supposedly One-Time Remodel Tax
Quarter/Half cent sales tax
Mosqiuto abasement tax
Flood prevention tax
Clean Creek tax

etc., etc.

All in addition to the baseline property tax.

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?