Another election, and the local ballot offers many additional ways to increase our property taxes. Santa Cruz County is one of the most unaffordable places to live in the U.S.; high rent and housing prices, high gasoline prices (due in large part to our highest state gasoline tax in the U.S. and the California only requirements on formulation), and we rank highest in the country in average electricity rates. My property insurance rates have increased over $100/month (fortunately I can still get insurance), and the Soquel Creek Water District rate increases have averaged over 10% per year for the past seven years with no end in sight.

We’re told that Proposition 13 has caused major funding shortfalls since its passage, but California still ranks 15th in the country in property tax revenue per capita. We’re also told that residents and businesses in Santa Cruz County are penalized by the Prop. 13 formula for allocating state money back to the county, so in order to make up the difference we must pass local taxes. Prop. 13 was passed in 1978, so our locally elected (past and present) state assembly and Senate representatives have had over 45 years to get the state to backfill the shortfalls to make it more equitable for counties like ours. It appears it’s easier to increase our local taxes than fix the state inequity.

Regarding the ballot:

State bonds – it’s interesting that the state wants to issue new bonds when we’re potentially in a $70 million structural deficit. Does this mean they’ll need to raise taxes to pay for it?

Measure Q (Water and Wildlife Protection Initiative) – The uses for this money are so vague, that it’s really just a simple increase in property taxes by simple majority, not the 2/3 required by Prop. 13. There’s nothing to prevent this money from being used to pay existing salaries, benefits and existing programs from the general funds. If you don’t believe me, look at the massive list of public employees and public unions that endorsed this measure. If this passes, we’ll see measures like this on every ballot moving forward. Oversight means having the county appoint members to oversee the spending. Because the measure is so vague, there’s nothing to oversee.

School and local district bonds – Local school districts get very little facility maintenance and construction money from the State of California, hence the need to pass bond measures. The districts have an obligation to inform you regarding the reasons why you need to increase your property taxes for 25-40 years forward. How do the district facility master plans deal with declining enrollment, and how do we know the money is being spent wisely? Is there state match, or do local taxpayers have to pay for 100% of the needs. Why do districts request new money well before prior measures are paid off? Pajaro Valley USD taxpayers are still obligated to pay off $40 million on previously issued bonds till at least 2043 while the district is asking residents and businesses to pay new taxes until 2053.

In summary, we get new ballot measures every election from local agencies that provide valuable services. However, many of us have fixed incomes, so we don’t have the ability to raise our incomes to cover increased expenses. Tax increases come out of our standard of living. Public agencies need to figure out a way to manage their expenses to the rate of inflation so that rates and tax increases are in line with residents’ incomes. Also, local property tax increases are passed directly on to local businesses (many of which are already struggling). These tax increases pass straight through to these businesses in addition to their base rent. This affects the cost of everything from your haircut to the price of your groceries.

It wouldn’t surprise me if residential rent agreements change to mirror commercial leases where taxes, insurance and utilities are a separate charge from base rent and are adjusted annually based on actual increases.

Doug Deaver is an Aptos resident.