Monday, December 26, 2011

California's Prop 13 Redux (Californie imposition foncière redux)

In 1978, Californians, via the initiative process, enacted Proposition 13. Proposition 13 basically froze real property tax rates in place for the next 30-plus years.  Now, a group has brought a lawsuit to challenge Proposition 13 on constitutional grounds.

The group -- led by notable public figures including a retired Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judge -- is arguing that Proposition 13 is unconstitutional because it was approved as an amendment to California's constitution whereas it was a revision to California's constitution.  The process to approve a revision of California's constitution is far more stringent than the actions required to approve a constitutional amendment.

The group challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 13 seems to have a solid case; and Californians, by now, should know very well the deleterious effects of Proposition 13.  Standby for one-heck of a brouhaha.

The Los Angeles Times op-ed -- "Newton: Could Prop. 13 fall?" -- provides more details on this legal matter of the first order.

Newton, Jim. "Newton: Could Prop. 13 fall?."  Los Angeles Times 26 December, 2011: online edition.

Related information:

California Constitution, Article 18 (Please note Section Three; it permits the initiative process to only amend the constitution, not revise it.).

No comments:

Post a Comment