Napa County Taxpayers Association

09/15/2020

November 3, 2020 Election endorsements and recommendations:

Endorsements:

Doris Gentry for mayor of the city of Napa

Bernie Narvaez for Napa City Council Area 4

James Hinton for Napa City Council Area 2

Recommendations on the following Propositions:

Vote NO" on 15, 18, 19 and 21.

07/22/2020

Election Candidates are invited to present their campaign issues to the Napa County Taxpayers Association at our general meetings on August 4 and September 1 at Barwick Law Offices located at 2005 Delpha Dr, Napa., corner of Solano Ave. Show up for the meeting which starts at 5:30 PM and each candidate may make a 6 minute presentation.

07/18/2020

KNOW THE OPPOSITION
Opposition to Proposition 13 and to taxpayers’ interests in general comes primarily from three sources.
Politicians whose political power is based on providing transfer payments (transferring money from taxpayers to tax receivers) to their constituents.
Government-employee unions who see additional revenue as an opportunity to press for enhanced wages and benefits.
Wealthy and superwealthy political dilettantes who see new taxes as a way to compel others to fund programs that are a part of their vision for society.

POLITICIANS

At the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association we are often asked for a list of those politicians who oppose Proposition 13. Politicians are usually too wily to come right out and say they oppose Proposition 13. They can read polls and they know that the tax-limiting measure is still overwhelmingly popular with average Californians.

Often a politician will phrase their opposition to Proposition 13 indirectly. For example, they will say they support it, but that the two-thirds vote for tax increases — one of its most important protections — should be changed in the name of democratic fairness. Others may say they back Proposition 13 but it’s not fair that some owners of similar homes pay different amounts. On questioning, taxpayers usually find that these politicians’ idea of fairness is to raise everyone’s taxes to the same higher level. Usually office holders will describe their proposed changes to Proposition 13 as mere “tweaking” when, in fact, their actual goal is to gut it. These are the same folks who can be heard to say, “I hate to raise taxes, but…”

Taxpayers find the best way to gauge a lawmaker’s levels of commitment to Proposition 13 and the well-being of taxpayers is to ignore what they say and look at their voting record.

Annually, HJTA evaluates legislators’ voting records and publishes the Legislative Report Card. The latest Report Card is available by clicking here. Those lawmakers not receiving at least a “B” rating are unworthy of the taxpayers’ confidence. Those receiving a “B,” but not an “A,” are on the edge and should be carefully watched and encouraged to take more taxpayer-friendly positions on the issues.

An additional tool for evaluating lawmakers is to see who is introducing anti-taxpayer legislation. For a look at the most dangerous bills currently in the Legislature click here.

GOVERNMENT-EMPLOYEE UNIONS

While most government workers may be dedicated, the unions that represent them are interested in only one thing: More money for their members.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, California has the highest paid public employees in the nation. Still, it is never enough as far as the union leaders are concerned. For this reason, taxpayers find that these public-employee unions are usually in the forefront in promoting new taxes and damaging modifications to Proposition 13.

In 2004 it was these government unions that put Proposition 56 on the ballot. Proposition 56 would have reduced Proposition 13’s requirement that new state taxes receive a two-thirds vote of the Legislature for approval.

Fortunately for taxpayers and the economy of California, in a hard-fought campaign taxpayers defeated Proposition 56 at the polls.

One of the standout unions in the effort to undermine taxpayer protections has been the California Teachers Association (CTA). Twice in a recent two-year period the union collected signatures in an effort to qualify ballot measures to increase property taxes, although each time, for various reasons, they failed to submit the signatures they gathered.

Then CTA president, Barbara Kerr, was quoted as calling taxpayers who oppose new levies, “cheap.” To government-employee union leaders, taxpayers are a limitless source of money.

Union efforts are now under way to make higher sales tax rates permanent and to do away with Proposition 13’s requirement of a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to approve new or higher state taxes.

WEALTHY POLITICAL DILETTANTES

Wealthy and superwealthy political dilettantes have become a real menace to taxpayers in recent years. These public policy “dabblers,” whose only expertise is their checkbook, use the initiative process to try to force others to pay for implementing their expensive vision for society.

07/18/2020

Proposition 13 has something for everybody.
Homeowners benefit because Proposition 13 makes property taxes predictable and stable so homeowners can budget for taxes and remain in their homes.

The benefits of Proposition 13 -
Renters benefit because Proposition 13 makes property taxes predictable and stable for owners of residential rental property, and this reduces upward pressure on rent increases. Additionally, Proposition 13 increases the likelihood that renters, too, will be able to experience the American Dream of home ownership.

Business owners, especially small business owners, benefit because Proposition 13 makes property taxes predictable for businesses, and it helps owners budget and invest in growing their business. This helps create jobs and improves the economy.

Local government and schools benefit because Proposition 13 provides a reliable, stable and growing revenue source. Even when real property values drop, property tax revenues continue to grow.

Neighborhoods benefit because Proposition 13 stabilizes neighborhoods as residents are no longer driven out by unaffordable tax increases. (Keeping neighborhoods intactwas one of the reasons cited by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1992 decision upholding Proposition 13.)

All taxpayers benefit because Proposition 13 guarantees their right to vote on new local taxes, and it requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to increase state taxes.

07/03/2020

Napa County Taxpayers Association would like to provide the voters with the following information on the "Split Roll Tax" that will be on the November ballot.

https://napavalleyregister.com/opinion/columnists/thomas-d-elias-a-sure-loser-heads-to-the-november-ballot/article_8a0e5c12-0bb4-541f-b637-66ceb2417825.html

https://www.hjta.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/WHAT-IS-SPLIT-ROLL-Flyer.pdf

https://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/napa-county-farm-bureau-opposes-novembers-split-roll-initiative/article_604ede60-b5d6-5c1a-85a3-6e2eb61a80fb.html -source=home-top-story-1

https://californiaglobe.com/section-2/ca-commercial-property-owners-facing-pervasive-tax-increases-if-prop-13-split-roll-initiative-passes/

'California's assessable property is now worth $6.5 trillion with just last year’s increase resulting in $75 billion in revenue.'   Despite

06/30/2020

Get to know the Taxpayers Association

Some may think that the Napa County Taxpayers Association (NCTA) opposes all taxes. That is not the case, and we wanted the community to know more about our activities. And, we want to invite interested people to join us and to support us as tax watchdogs saving residents from outrageous taxes, wasteful school bonds and questionable parcel taxes.
The current Taxpayers Association was re-founded in January 2010. Prior to that date many of the members had been individually involved in ad hoc grassroots groups fighting tax proposals in Napa County. We organized in 2010 to more effectively educate the populace about new taxes; to oppose egregious new taxes and to meet with lawmakers to advise them of the advisability of placing new taxes on the ballot.
Members of our group did not oppose the following taxes in Napa County: 1997 – Measure A Flood Sales tax; 1997 – Measure Y Napa Valley Unified School district school bond tax.; 2002 – Measure N Napa Valley College school bond tax.; 2002 – Measure M Napa Valley Unified School district second school bond tax.; 2006 – Measure G Napa Valley Unified School District third school bond tax.; 2010 – St. Helena Unified school district second bond tax.

Members opposed the following taxes which failed: 2006 – Napa County Measure H road sales tax. (Failed); 2008 – Calistoga Unified School bond tax. (Passed) ; 2008 – Napa Valley College school bond tax. (Failed).
2014 - Napa Valley College school bond tax. (Failed). Members attended every public meeting, debating the college officials in the League of Women Voters debates and worked directly with the college president attempting to make the bond viable. We were unsuccessful working with them, opposed the tax and it was defeated.;
2016 - San Francisco Bay parcel tax. (Passed) but we helped organize a nine-county opposition committee and we wrote opposition ballot arguments.
2016 – Napa Valley Unified School District fourth school bond tax. – (Passed). We met with the superintendent and other officials many times attempting to encourage them to negotiate developer agreements for large developments and to mitigate the problems of their toxic capital appreciation bonds. We encouraged them to carefully plan and execute their plans and constructions. We offered many suggestions to make their needs acceptable to the electorate. We opposed the most recent Measure H school bond and wrote ballot opposition arguments.;
2016 - Napa County combined new sales tax for a new jail and children’s program. (Failed). We met with proponents and explained that their plans were confusing and uncertain. We noticed their limited support in the polls. We offered suggestions and ultimately opposed this tax and wrote opposition ballot arguments and this tax was defeated.
2016 - Napa County Parks and Open Space sales tax. (Failed) We met with proponents and noticed their limited support in the polls. We wrote ballot opposition arguments against this tax and it was defeated.

The tax measures that were opposed by the taxpayers association and defeated by voters since 2010 have resulted in avoiding a total of over $400 million in local taxes in Napa County.

We have extensive community involvement as well: 2012 - Members of the NCTA were asked by county supervisors to work with the Napa Action Committee to help create a road tax that would be acceptable to the electorate. We helped create Proposition T, a half-cent sales tax road tax in which 99 percent of all funds go to road repairs and only 1 percent to administration with no new bureaucracy nor government employees and a very strong citizens oversight committee. Members of NCTA care that local government spends our tax dollars wisely.

Our members regularly attend meetings of all county, city and district organizations when taxing proposals are being developed. Our goal is to ensure that the tax measures presented to voters are clear, understandable and reflect actual needs of the community. Our members are watchful of government spending.

Our members have served on citizen oversight committees for School bond Measures A, M, G, and H; both the Calistoga and St. Helena bonds and on Measure A, the flood control tax, and will be on the Measure T Road Tax committee.
We have had a member on the MTC advisory committee and on the Measure T Napa Action Committee. Several Members are Rotary past presidents, several are members of the Republican Central Committee. One member is a past mayor of American Canyon.
You are welcome to join us. We meet monthly on the first Tuesday of the month at 5:30 p.m. at the law offices at 2005 Delpha Drive.

06/16/2020

STOP HIGHER PROPERTY TAXES Fight for Prop 13!
Prop 13 Has Helped All Californians for Over 40 Years For more than 40 years, Prop 13 has provided property tax certainty to homeowners, renters and businesses. Under Prop 13, general property taxes for both residential and business properties are calculated based on 1% of the purchase price. Annual increases in property valuations are capped at 2% per year, which helps provide certainty to homeowners and businesses that they will be able to afford their property in the future. Prop 13 also benefits renters, small businesses and all Californians – higher property taxes get passed along to tenants and consumers in the form of higher rent and higher costs for goods and services.
Organized Efforts Are Underway to Undercut Prop 13 There are a number of serious, well-organized attempts to undermine Prop 13 and increase property taxes in California on homeowners and businesses. Current attacks on Prop 13 include: • State and local ballot measures that would increase property taxes on residents and businesses, including measures to tax business property at a higher level. • State legislation that would make it easier to raise property taxes at the local level or increase the state tax rate on homes or businesses. • Lawsuits attempting to make it easier to pass measures implementing higher local property taxes. Undermining Proposition 13 Will Drive Up the Cost of Living We should reject attempts to undermine Prop 13 that would impose higher property taxes on residents and businesses. Undermining Prop 13 protections will: • Increase costs for all Californians. Increased property taxes on businesses will just be passed along to all of us. We’ll be forced to pay billions of dollars more for rent, housing, groceries, utilities, restaurants, prescriptions, clothing, day care, health care and even gas – just about everything we buy or use will cost more! • Make our cost of living and tax burden even worse. Californians are struggling to afford housing, food and transportation, and more people are living in poverty than any other state. Even worse, California has the highest state income and sales taxes in the nation. At a time when too many families are living paycheck to paycheck, we simply cannot afford higher property taxes and higher costs for the goods and services we buy. • Eliminate tax certainty. Every Californian who buys a home should be confident they will not be forced out of their home later in life due to rising property taxes and every business deserves to know with certainty what their taxes will be so they can keep their doors open, meet payroll and continue to grow. • Hurt small businesses and cost jobs. Many small businesses lease their stores, offices, and shops. Property owners will simply pass along higher property taxes to small businesses by raising rents - cutting into their ability to stay in business and increasing costs for all of us as small businesses pass along higher costs. • Disproportionately hurt minorities and low-income families. Higher costs for housing, food and other goods and services disproportionately impact low-income and minority families struggling to make ends meet. Furthermore, the revenues generated from increased property taxes on homes or businesses will largely go to communities with the strongest economies and higher property values. Wealthy coastal communities will get the majority of new revenues, while Inland and Central California communities will be disadvantaged.

History of Proposition 13
The Problem:
Out-of-Control Property Taxes In the 1970s, families, seniors and small businesses were faced with the possibility of losing their properties because they couldn’t afford 50-100% increases in their property taxes every year. Unpredictable property tax bills skyrocketed, often beyond owners’ ability to pay. As a result, many families were forced from their homes and small businesses were left with no choice but to raise prices on consumers.
The Solution: Creating Certainty Through Prop 13 California voters overwhelmingly passed Prop 13 in 1978 bring certainty to residents and businesses, allowing them to afford their property tax bills in the future. Specifically, Prop 13: • Limits general property taxes for residential and business properties to no more than 1% of their purchase price • Caps annual increases in general property taxes at 2% per year, which prevents sharp increases in property taxes, especially when property values rise quickly Prop 13 gives every Californian who buys a home confidence that they will not be forced out of their home later in life due to rising property taxes and every business certainty what their taxes will be so they can keep their doors open, meet payroll and continue to grow.
Who Benefits From Prop 13? Prop 13 benefits renters, small businesses and all Californians – higher property taxes get passed along to tenants and consumers in the form of higher rent and higher costs for goods and services. • Renters and homeowners. Prop 13’s limits, combined with current assessment practices, on average saved homeowners an estimated $13,700 and renters $4,400 in 2017. Prop 13 keeps property taxes affordable and prevents rents from rising even higher, making California’s housing crisis even worse. At a time when too many families are living paycheck-topaycheck, we simply cannot afford higher housing costs. • Small businesses. Many small businesses lease their stores, offices, and shops. Without Prop 13’s protections, property owners will simply pass along higher property taxes to small businesses by raising rents - cutting into their ability to stay in business and increasing costs for all of us as small businesses pass along these higher costs. • All Californians. Prop 13 prevents property tax bills from skyrocketing, increasing costs for all of us. In addition, Prop 13 prevents higher state taxes without a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and prevents local governments from enacting special taxes without a two-thirds vote of the people. Without Prop 13, higher property taxes will result in paying billions more for rent, housing, groceries, utilities, restaurants, prescriptions, clothing, day care, health care and even gas – just about everything we buy or use will cost more! • Minorities and low-income families. Prop 13 keeps property taxes affordable allowing minorities and low-income Californians to purchase a home, which is their primary means of building wealth and generational mobility. Prop 13 also helps families save for retirement and plan for the future.
Prop 13 Provides a Reliable and Growing Source of Revenue Prop 13 provides stability to the increasingly volatile tax structure in California. According to Board of Equalization data, property tax revenues grew from $5 billion in the year following Prop 13’s approval (1978-79) to $66 billion in 2017-18, an average of 6.9% annually. In fact, property tax revenues grew faster than overall growth in the economy, as measured by personal income growth at just 6.1% during this same period.

06/15/2020

06/13/2020

A Primer on Proposition 13:
Property taxes on our homes, apartments, shopping centers, doctors’ offices, vineyards and every other type of real estate are under attack again. Joel Fox was instrumental in placing controls on property tax reassessments in California with Howard Jarvis 4o+ years ago. In the late 1970’s people were losing their homes because the “Market value” reassessments caused their taxes to skyrocket for no reason. People on fixed incomes, the elderly, renters and people who planned to stay in their homes for the long term were forced to sell or move out of state.
Fox and Jarvis placed an initiative on the statewide California Ballot in 1978 which stopped the wildly out of control reassessment of property taxes. And, the voters approved Prop 13 by a landslide!
Before Prop 13 the property taxes on your home and every other property in the area was reassessed to reflect “Market Value” which means your property taxes would increase because of a sale of another local property. if you bought your home 20 years ago for $150,000 and your taxes were now $1,500 and the house down the street sold for $800,000; your taxes would be re-assessed to reflect a “MUCH” higher “Market Value” even though it was not your house that sold. Could you afford an $8,000 property tax bill? The same goes for commercial property such as grocery stores, gas stations, medical offices and vacant land and factories. If Prop 13 protections are destroyed, commercial property owners will have to raise prices and lower wages to pay their property taxes.
Proposition 13 stopped the “Market Value” Reassessments. It allowed a 2% annual increase plus reassessment for additions, something one can plan for. It also requires market value reassessment of homes that sell, which again is something people can plan for. Over the past 40+ years, the property tax in California has gradually increased year after year providing stable income that local government can predict and rely on.
But now, taxers and spenders are attacking Proposition 13 because they want more money. Their first attack is to split commercial property off of Prop 13 by creating a so called “Split Roll” which causes a “Market Value” reassessment of commercial property…and then they will come back again and try to repeal all of Prop 13 on our homes too.
Schools in California are funded by the state through Proposition 98 which gives the schools approximately 50% of the state budget annually (how much more do they need?). Prop 13 has no effect on school funding but schools and unions are blaming it. Prop 13 is a local tax process collected by each county. We don’t know why schools are attacking Prop 13. If the schools need more money there is no need to destroy Prop 13. The process for schools to follow to increase funding is to request it from the state.
Renters, home owners, and all citizens should beware of efforts to defeat stable taxation. We cannot go back to the chaos of “Market Valuation” reassessments on our homes, apartments, grocery stores and others. The cost will displace the people least able to survive.

06/13/2020

We have questions about tax exemptions shifting property taxes onto ordinary citizens in Napa County.

We are interested in knowing about how, why and how much in property taxes is shifted away from certain entities onto the ordinary citizen/taxpayer/property owner by various means such as:

1. Land trusts and open space districts
2. Welfare tax exemptions and other tax exemptions
3. Properties owned by government at every level
4. Excess land held by public schools or any government entity
5. Is it fair to taxpayers that entities receiving tax preferences may also restrict the use of and fence off those properties to the very taxpayers who take on the tax burden shifted to them.
6. What amount of property taxes, school bonds, and other taxes are reduced or fully exempted and shifted to the ordinary taxpayer because of all combined property tax exemptions and reductions.
7. What protections are there against abuse of property tax exemptions and tax shifts? Who administers the protections?
8. Is an Irrevocable Dedication for a Welfare Exemption to property taxes revocable at any time?

06/13/2020

How many times has the Napa County Regional Parks and Open Space District failed in their ballot attempts to receive voter support for funding for the district?
According to LAFCO Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence December 2010, Page 13, Paragraph 2.1 Formation (See attached link below):

• The first failed election asking for a sales tax was in 1992 - rejected by voters.
• The 2nd failed election asking for an increase in TOT tax to fund the district was in 2000 - rejected by voters.
Since the LAFCO 2010 publication:
• The 3rd failed election asking for a sales tax was Measure Z in November 2016 – rejected by voters.
• The 4th failed election asking for a sales tax was Measure K in March 2020 – rejected by voters.