window.__IS_SSR__=true
window.__INITIAL_STATE__={
"attachmentsReducer": {
"audio_0": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_0",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background0.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_1": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_1",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background1.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_2": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_2",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background2.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_3": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_3",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background3.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_4": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_4",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background4.jpg"
}
}
},
"placeholder": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "placeholder",
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium_large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-768x512.jpg",
"width": 768,
"height": 512,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"small": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 32,
"height": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 50,
"height": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 64,
"height": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 96,
"height": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 128,
"height": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
}
},
"news_11701238": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11701238",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11701238",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11701223,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-520x347.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 347
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 107
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-960x640.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 640
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-375x250.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 250
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-e1540560127903.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 680
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1200x800.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 800
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 533
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-timothy-portrait-240x160.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 160
}
},
"publishDate": 1540491769,
"modified": 1540491901,
"caption": "Timothy Mom owner of Lee’s Donuts in Oakland, has been running the business since 1990. He pays his landlord $135/month in property taxes. ",
"description": null,
"title": "Timothy Mom owner of Lee’s Donuts in Oakland, CA.",
"credit": "Sean Havey/California Dream",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11701067": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11701067",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11701067",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11701044,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-520x347.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 347
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 107
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-960x640.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 640
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-375x250.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 250
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-e1540491060816.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 680
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1200x800.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 800
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 533
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/edu-woodsons-portrait-240x160.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 160
}
},
"publishDate": 1540421416,
"modified": 1540512096,
"caption": "Oakland parents Charles and Sarah Woodson had to choose between sending their son to the neighborhood school or to a private school.",
"description": "Oakland parents Charles and Sarah Woodson had to choose between sending their son to the neighborhood school or to a private school.",
"title": "edu-woodsons-portrait",
"credit": "Sean Havey/California Dream",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11700803": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11700803",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700803",
"found": true
},
"parent": 0,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-520x347.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 347
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 107
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-960x640.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 640
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-375x250.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 250
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait.jpg",
"width": 5472,
"height": 3648
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 680
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1200x800.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 800
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 533
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-jas-portrait-240x160.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 160
}
},
"publishDate": 1540339899,
"modified": 1540340023,
"caption": "Jas Johl in the living room of her home in North Oakland. Johl pays about $13,000 a year in property taxes, far more than many of her neighbors.",
"description": "Jas Johl in the living room of her home in North Oakland. Johl pays about $13,000 a year in property taxes, far more than many of her neighbors.",
"title": "Jas Johl 56th St",
"credit": "Sean Havey for California Dream",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11700625": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11700625",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700625",
"found": true
},
"parent": 0,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-520x347.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 347
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 107
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-960x640.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 640
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-375x250.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 250
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-e1540408005836.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 680
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1200x800.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 800
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 533
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-michelle-portrait-240x160.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 160
}
},
"publishDate": 1540320013,
"modified": 1540320099,
"caption": "Michelle Krasowksi would like to buy a home one day, but she knows that day is a long way off.",
"description": "Michelle Krasowksi would like to buy a home one day, but she knows that day is a long way off.",
"title": "housing-shortage-michelle-portrait",
"credit": "Sean Havey for California Dream",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11700619": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11700619",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700619",
"found": true
},
"parent": 0,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-520x410.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 410
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-160x126.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 126
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-960x757.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 757
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-375x296.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 296
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting.jpg",
"width": 3000,
"height": 2367
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1020x805.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 805
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1180x931.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 931
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1200x947.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 947
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-800x631.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 631
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1920x1515.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1515
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1180x931.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 931
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-1920x1515.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1515
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/prop-5-ken-sitting-240x189.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 189
}
},
"publishDate": 1540319679,
"modified": 1540322719,
"caption": "Even if Proposition 5 passes, longtime owner Kenneth Wilkins doesn’t plan on selling.",
"description": "Even if Proposition 5 passes, longtime owner Kenneth Wilkins doesn’t plan on selling.",
"title": "prop-5-ken-sitting",
"credit": "Sean Havey for California Dream",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11700636": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11700636",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700636",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11700609,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-520x347.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 347
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 107
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-960x640.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 640
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-375x250.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 250
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-e1540321539216.jpg",
"width": 1500,
"height": 1000
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 680
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1200x800.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 800
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 533
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1180x787.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 787
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1280
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior-240x160.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 160
}
},
"publishDate": 1540320871,
"modified": 1540321274,
"caption": "Proposition 13 has helped keep Dorothy in her home since 1956. But in this neighborhood, she’s an exception. According to census data, only about 10 percent of residents moved into the area before or during the 1980s.",
"description": null,
"title": "gentrification-dorothy-home-exterior",
"credit": "Sean Havey/California Dream",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11678042": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11678042",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11678042",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11677374,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-520x337.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 337
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-160x104.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 104
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-960x623.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 623
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-375x243.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 243
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464.jpg",
"width": 4800,
"height": 3114
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1020x662.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 662
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1180x766.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 766
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1200x779.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 779
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-800x519.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 519
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1920x1246.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1246
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1180x766.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 766
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-1920x1246.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1246
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/GettyImages-967878464-240x156.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 156
}
},
"publishDate": 1530228375,
"modified": 1530228426,
"caption": "A woman casts her vote at a polling station inside the Alhambra Fire Department in Alhambra, Los Angeles County, California on June 5, 2018.",
"description": null,
"title": "US-POLITICS-ELECTION-VOTE",
"credit": "Frederic J. Brown/AFP/Getty Images",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11676301": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11676301",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11676301",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11676299,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-520x329.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 329
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-160x101.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 101
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-960x608.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 608
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-375x238.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 238
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-e1529707863861.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1216
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1020x646.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 646
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1180x747.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 747
},
"complete_open_graph": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1200x760.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 760
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-800x507.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 507
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1920x1216.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1216
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1180x747.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 747
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-1920x1216.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1216
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/06/gasprices20121008-240x152.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 152
}
},
"publishDate": 1529611228,
"modified": 1529707921,
"caption": "Republicans are hoping that high gas prices will fuel a tax revolt in November.",
"description": "Republicans are hoping that high gas prices will fuel a tax revolt in November.",
"title": "US-CALIFORNIA-GAS-PRICES",
"credit": "FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/GettyImages",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11627340": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11627340",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11627340",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11624431,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-520x298.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 298
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-160x92.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 92
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-960x550.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 550
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-375x215.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 215
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1100
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-1020x584.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 584
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-1180x676.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 676
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-800x458.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 458
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-1920x1100.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1100
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-1180x676.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 676
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-1920x1100.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1100
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/JarvisFist-240x138.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 138
}
},
"publishDate": 1509499283,
"modified": 1509499353,
"caption": "Orange County businessman Howard Jarvis, the architect of Proposition 13.",
"description": "Orange County businessman Howard Jarvis, the architect of Proposition 13.",
"title": "JarvisFist",
"credit": "RetroReport/YouTube",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11574589": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11574589",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11574589",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11574585,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-520x316.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 316
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-160x97.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 97
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-960x584.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 584
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-375x228.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 228
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1167
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-1020x620.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 620
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-1180x717.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 717
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-800x486.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 486
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-1920x1167.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1167
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-1180x717.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 717
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-1920x1167.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1167
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/07/SFHouses-240x146.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 146
}
},
"publishDate": 1500411153,
"modified": 1505846063,
"caption": "Houses line a street in San Francisco's Mission District. ",
"description": "Houses line a street in San Francisco's Mission District. The highest property tax gains are being recorded in the Bay Area, thanks to its red-hot economy and property markets.",
"title": "SFHouses",
"credit": "Sean Gallup/Getty Images",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_11439022": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_11439022",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11439022",
"found": true
},
"parent": 11438840,
"imgSizes": {
"small": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-520x349.jpg",
"width": 520,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 349
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 107
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-960x644.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 644
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-375x252.jpg",
"width": 375,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 252
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1288
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-1020x684.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 684
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-1180x792.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 792
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-50x50.jpg",
"width": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 50
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-800x537.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 537
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-1920x1288.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1288
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-1180x792.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 792
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-1920x1288.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1288
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-150x150.jpg",
"width": 150,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 150
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/05/RefineryFlaring-240x161.jpg",
"width": 240,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 161
}
},
"publishDate": 1493851197,
"modified": 1493851360,
"caption": "A few words buried within a decision affirming the constitutionality of California’s policy of charging polluters are causing a stir among some state budget experts.",
"description": "A few words buried within a decision affirming the constitutionality of California’s policy of charging polluters are causing a stir among some state budget experts.",
"title": "RefineryFlaring",
"credit": "Craig Miller/KQED",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_10508407": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_10508407",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "10508407",
"found": true
},
"parent": 10508403,
"imgSizes": {
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 576
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-400x300.jpg",
"width": 400,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 300
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-960x720.jpg",
"width": 960,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 720
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 372
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-e1430439102550.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1440
},
"large": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-1440x1080.jpg",
"width": 1440,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1080
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-96x96.jpg",
"width": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 96
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-800x600.jpg",
"width": 800,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 600
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-64x64.jpg",
"width": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 64
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-32x32.jpg",
"width": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 32
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-1180x885.jpg",
"width": 1180,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 885
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-75x75.jpg",
"width": 75,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 75
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2015/05/IMG_3008-128x128.jpg",
"width": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 128
}
},
"publishDate": 1430439005,
"modified": 1434149993,
"caption": "State Capitol",
"description": "State Capitol",
"title": "IMG_3008",
"credit": "John Myers/KQED",
"status": "inherit",
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
}
},
"audioPlayerReducer": {
"postId": "stream_live",
"isPaused": true,
"isPlaying": false,
"pfsActive": false,
"pledgeModalIsOpen": true,
"playerDrawerIsOpen": false,
"liveAudioPlayStartedAt": 0,
"liveAudioPlayContext": ""
},
"authorsReducer": {
"byline_news_11701223": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11701223",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11701223",
"name": "\u003cstrong>David Wagner\u003cbr />KPCC\u003c/strong>",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_11700810": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11700810",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11700810",
"name": "\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/matt-levin/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Matt Levin/CALmatters\u003c/a>",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_11700683": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11700683",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11700683",
"name": "\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/matt-levin/\" rel=\"noopener\" target=\"_blank\">Matt Levin/CALmatters\u003c/a>",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_11700609": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11700609",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11700609",
"name": "Adriene Hill",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_11624431": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11624431",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11624431",
"name": "Manuel Pastor, University of Southern California – Dornsife College, for The Conversation",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_11574585": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11574585",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11574585",
"name": "\u003cstrong>\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/dan-walters/\">Dan Walters\u003c/a>\u003cbr>\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/category/commentary/\">CALmatters Commentary\u003c/a>\u003c/strong>",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_11438840": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_11438840",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_11438840",
"name": "\u003cstrong>\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/ben-christopher/\">Ben Christopher\u003c/a>\u003c/strong>",
"isLoading": false
},
"gmarzorati": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "227",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "227",
"found": true
},
"name": "Guy Marzorati",
"firstName": "Guy",
"lastName": "Marzorati",
"slug": "gmarzorati",
"email": "gmarzorati@KQED.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Correspondent",
"bio": "Guy Marzorati is a correspondent on KQED's California Politics and Government Desk, based in San Jose. A graduate of Santa Clara University, Guy joined KQED in 2013. He reports on state and local politics and produces KQED's digital voter guide.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "guymarzorati",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "elections",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Guy Marzorati | KQED",
"description": "Correspondent",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/gmarzorati"
},
"jmyers": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "232",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "232",
"found": true
},
"name": "John Myers",
"firstName": "John",
"lastName": "Myers",
"slug": "jmyers",
"email": "jmyers@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": null,
"bio": "John Myers is Senior Editor of KQED's new California Politics and Government Desk. A veteran of almost two decades of political coverage, he was KQED's longest serving statehouse bureau chief and recently was political editor for Sacramento's ABC affiliate, News10 (KXTV). John was moderator of the only 2014 gubernatorial debate, and was named by \u003cem>The Washington Post\u003c/em> to two \"Best Of\" lists: the 2015 list of top state politics reporters and 2014's list of America's most influential statehouse reporters.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c0ac98482caf0b8229a792662b38722a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "johnmyers",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "John Myers | KQED",
"description": null,
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c0ac98482caf0b8229a792662b38722a?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c0ac98482caf0b8229a792662b38722a?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/jmyers"
},
"scottshafer": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "255",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "255",
"found": true
},
"name": "Scott Shafer",
"firstName": "Scott",
"lastName": "Shafer",
"slug": "scottshafer",
"email": "sshafer@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Scott Shafer is a senior editor with the KQED Politics and Government desk. He is co-host of Political Breakdown, the award-winning radio show and podcast with a personal take on the world of politics. Scott came to KQED in 1998 to host the statewide\u003cem> California Report\u003c/em>. Prior to that he had extended stints in politics and government\u003cem>.\u003c/em> He uses that inside experience at KQED in his, reporting, hosting and analysis for the politics desk. Scott collaborated \u003cem>Political Breakdown a\u003c/em>nd on \u003cem>The Political Mind of Jerry Brown, \u003c/em>an eight-part series about the life and extraordinary political career of the former governor. For fun, he plays water polo with the San Francisco Tsunami.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a62ebae45b79d7aed1a39a0e3bf68104?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "scottshafer",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Scott Shafer | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a62ebae45b79d7aed1a39a0e3bf68104?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a62ebae45b79d7aed1a39a0e3bf68104?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/scottshafer"
},
"mlagos": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "3239",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "3239",
"found": true
},
"name": "Marisa Lagos",
"firstName": "Marisa",
"lastName": "Lagos",
"slug": "mlagos",
"email": "mlagos@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Marisa Lagos is a correspondent for KQED’s California Politics and Government Desk and co-hosts the award-winning show and podcast, Political Breakdown. At KQED, Lagos also conducts reporting, analysis and investigations into state, local and national politics for radio, TV, online and onstage. In 2022, she and co-host, Scott Shafer, moderated the only gubernatorial debate in California. In 2020, the \u003ci>Washington Post\u003c/i> named her one of the top political journalists in California; she was nominated for a Peabody and won several other awards for her work investigating the 2017 California wildfires. She has worked at the \u003ci>San Francisco Chronicle\u003c/i>, \u003ci>San Francisco Examiner\u003c/i> and \u003ci>Los Angeles Times\u003c/i>. A UC Santa Barbara graduate, she lives in San Francisco with her two sons and husband.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "@mlagos",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Marisa Lagos | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/mlagos"
},
"korr": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11200",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11200",
"found": true
},
"name": "Katie Orr",
"firstName": "Katie",
"lastName": "Orr",
"slug": "korr",
"email": "korr@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Katie Orr was a Sacramento-based reporter for KQED's Politics and Government Desk, covering the state Capitol and a variety of issues including women in politics, voting and elections and legislation. Prior to joining KQED in 2016, Katie was state government reporter for Capital Public Radio in Sacramento. She's also worked for KPBS in San Diego, where she covered City Hall.\r\n\r\nKatie received her masters degree in political science from San Diego State University and holds a Bachelors degree in broadcast journalism from Arizona State University.\r\n\r\nIn 2015 Katie won a national Clarion Award for a series of stories she did on women in California politics. She's been honored by the Society for Professional Journalists and, in 2013, was named by \u003cem>The Washington Post\u003c/em> as one of the country's top state Capitol reporters. She's also reported for the award-winning documentary series \u003cem>The View from Here \u003c/em>and was part of the team that won national PRNDI and Gabriel Awards in 2015. She lives in Sacramento with her husband. Twitter: @1KatieOrr",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/41a40b25845adc78f50808670860449e?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "1katieorr",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Katie Orr | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/41a40b25845adc78f50808670860449e?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/41a40b25845adc78f50808670860449e?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/korr"
},
"vrancano": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11276",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11276",
"found": true
},
"name": "Vanessa Rancaño",
"firstName": "Vanessa",
"lastName": "Rancaño",
"slug": "vrancano",
"email": "vrancano@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Reporter, Housing",
"bio": "Vanessa Rancaño is a features reporter for KQED. She’s also covered homelessness and education for the station and reported from the Central Valley. Her work has aired across public radio, from flagship national news shows to longform narrative podcasts. Before taking up a mic, she worked as a freelance print journalist. She’s been recognized with a number of national and regional awards. Vanessa grew up in California's Central Valley. She's a former NPR Kroc Fellow, and a graduate of the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b3a383dfb0e7ee1c17568f2cf067904ab654d6e3de9743fc661f3c788ade1bed?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "vanessarancano",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"contributor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Vanessa Rancaño | KQED",
"description": "Reporter, Housing",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b3a383dfb0e7ee1c17568f2cf067904ab654d6e3de9743fc661f3c788ade1bed?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b3a383dfb0e7ee1c17568f2cf067904ab654d6e3de9743fc661f3c788ade1bed?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/vrancano"
}
},
"pagesReducer": {
"news_tag_proposition-13": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_725",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "725",
"score": 9.8895445
},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Proposition 13",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Proposition 13 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 734,
"slug": "proposition-13",
"isLoading": false,
"title": "Proposition 13",
"pageMeta": {
"site": "news",
"WpPageTemplate": "page-topic-editorial",
"currentPage": 2
},
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "kqed/post-list",
"attrs": {
"layout": "cardArticle2",
"query": "posts/news?tag=proposition-13",
"seeMore": false,
"paginated": true,
"page": 2
}
},
{
"blockName": "kqed/ad"
}
]
}
},
"pfsSessionReducer": {},
"postsReducer": {
"stream_live": {
"type": "live",
"id": "stream_live",
"audioUrl": "https://streams.kqed.org/kqedradio",
"title": "Live Stream",
"excerpt": "Live Stream information currently unavailable.",
"link": "/radio",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "KQED Live",
"link": "/"
}
},
"stream_kqedNewscast": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "stream_kqedNewscast",
"audioUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/RDnews/newscast.mp3?_=1",
"title": "KQED Newscast",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "88.5 FM",
"link": "/"
}
},
"news_11701223": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11701223",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11701223",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1540562765000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news",
"term": 72
},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1540562765,
"format": "standard",
"disqusTitle": "Should California Businesses Pay More in Property Taxes?",
"title": "Should California Businesses Pay More in Property Taxes?",
"headTitle": "The California Dream | The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>A measure that would fundamentally alter Proposition 13 already has enough signatures to qualify for the November 2020 ballot. It’s known as “split roll” and here’s how it would work:\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>California property owners – whether homes or businesses – have benefited equally for 40 years from the passage of Proposition 13. That measure limits annual increases on property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Now a progressive coalition, including housing advocates and teachers unions, wants to split homes and businesses onto separate tax rolls.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Owners holding more than $2 million in commercial property would no longer be taxed based on the original price they paid. Instead, they would pay based on the property’s regularly re-assessed market value.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This would generate over $10 billion a year for our schools and local communities, without having to continue to increase taxes on individuals,” says Ben Grieff, campaign director for Evolve California, one of the groups pushing for the \u003ca href=\"https://www.oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/17-0055%20%28Funding%20for%20Schools%20and%20Communities%29_2.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">split roll measure\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>On this block in North Oakland, where we’ve been examining the legacy of Proposition 13, business owners have seen some of the same impacts of homeowners. Newer entrepreneurs often end up paying much more in property tax than established business owners, in part because those who’ve owned property the longest benefit the most.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>The Challenges of Running a New Business in a Hot Market\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Noah Kinner owns a gym at the end of the block. It’s in an industrial building that once housed a biker bar. This is Kinner’s second gym location, and his first time owning commercial property. He says many of the people who come here to workout live close by.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11701236\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11701236\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-800x533.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-160x107.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-960x640.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-240x160.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-375x250.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Gym owner Noah Kinner says the predictability he gets from Proposition 13 helps him keep his business in the neighborhood. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>As long as the market value of Kinner’s building stays below $2 million, he would not be subject to the proposed split roll changes. But the way Oakland prices keep rising, he wonders how long he’d be able to qualify as an exempt small business.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"I know the value of the building has appreciated significantly since we bought it,” Kinner says. “But that doesn't translate into anything for me and my day-to-day business.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under Proposition 13, Kinner’s property tax bill works pretty much the same way it does for his neighbors who own homes. It’s based on the price he paid for the building back in 2015 — not its market value today.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Considering all the other costs associated with running his gym, Kinner appreciates the stability.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>If he lost that predictability, he says, staying open would be trickier. “If every year my valuation — like the Bay Area — is exceeding the rate that I'm able to grow my business, then I'm just incentivized to sell.”\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Why Supporters Are for Split Roll\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>The idea of taxing commercial property differently than homes appeals to many Californians. Oakland resident Samuel Drew, who lives near the gym, likes the idea of keeping Proposition 13 in place for homeowners. But he says many businesses don’t need it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"I think it's good for working people to lower their taxes,” Drew says. “But when you're making millions and billions, it just doesn't hit me as fair.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But statewide, support for split roll has been declining, according to polling from the Public Policy Institute of California. Some 60 percent of likely voters were in favor of split roll back in 2012. That support has \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/press-release/newsom-villaraigosa-virtual-tie-feinstein-leads-de-leon-double-digits/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">dropped to 46 percent\u003c/a> today.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>PPIC President Mark Baldassare says public support is likely to dip when the economy is strong and the state’s budget is healthy.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I think that many voters look to the split roll as a possibility to help the state out of a financial crisis,” Baldassare says. “But we're not in a financial crisis at the moment.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Perhaps the biggest selling point for proponents of split roll is how much it would raise in new tax revenue. A \u003ca href=\"https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/Getting_Real_About_Reform_2017_Update.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">USC study\u003c/a> found that it could bring in an additional $11.4 billion per year statewide.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"That could pay for a lot of services, health care workers and teachers,” says USC researcher and study co-author Jennifer Ito. Alameda County alone would take in about $550 million more each year, she says. “Every county in California would get additional revenue to go toward our local government and schools.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Split roll backers question why Proposition 13 lets large, older corporations benefit from much lower tax assessments than newer companies right next door.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For instance, Intel owns a plot of land in the heart of Silicon Valley with an assessed value of about $2.50 per square foot. Meanwhile, just across the street, a professional office center is sitting on land with a recently assessed value of about $126 per square foot.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Split Roll Critics Say Employers Already Pay Enough\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>But taxpayer groups say split roll would only make the cost of doing business in California more burdensome.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you talk to business owners and ask them if they're getting a pretty good deal on taxes in California, they will unanimously say 'no,' ” says David Kline, vice president of communications and research at the California Taxpayers Association.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11701237\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11701237\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-800x533.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-160x107.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-960x640.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-240x160.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-375x250.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">As long as the market value of Noah Kinner’s building stays below $2 million, he would not be subject to the proposed split roll changes. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Business groups often describe property taxes as one bright spot for companies in a state that otherwise levies some of the highest taxes in the country.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>A \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2017-055\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2018 split roll analysis\u003c/a> from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office concluded that raising business taxes relative to other states could “influence some businesses' decisions about whether to expand in or move to California.” But overall effects on the health of the state’s economy would be uncertain, according to the report.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Kline says if split roll passes it’s not clear other taxes would come down.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This particular initiative doesn't have any tax cuts to the sales tax or income tax to mitigate the problem,” he says. “It just has a punitive tax specifically targeted at California employers.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13 has benefited some long-term property owners in this rapidly changing Oakland neighborhood.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Just down the street from Kinner’s gym, there’s a donut shop. Cambodian immigrant Timothy Mom has been running it since 1990. He rents the space, but he pays property taxes to his landlord as part of his lease agreement. Mom says that bill comes to about $135 a month.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He says that he’d have a much harder time starting his donut shop in this neighborhood today, especially if his taxes were tied to current property prices.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"Right now it's very expensive to open a new business,” he says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg%20https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11701223 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11701223",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2018/10/26/should-california-businesses-pay-more-in-property-taxes/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 1282,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 36
},
"modified": 1540562765,
"excerpt": "In 2020, California voters could raise property tax bills for their business-owning neighbors.\r\n",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "In 2020, California voters could raise property tax bills for their business-owning neighbors.\r\n",
"title": "Should California Businesses Pay More in Property Taxes? | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Should California Businesses Pay More in Property Taxes?",
"datePublished": "2018-10-26T07:06:05-07:00",
"dateModified": "2018-10-26T07:06:05-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "should-california-businesses-pay-more-in-property-taxes",
"status": "publish",
"nprByline": "\u003cstrong>David Wagner\u003cbr />KPCC\u003c/strong>",
"path": "/news/11701223/should-california-businesses-pay-more-in-property-taxes",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>A measure that would fundamentally alter Proposition 13 already has enough signatures to qualify for the November 2020 ballot. It’s known as “split roll” and here’s how it would work:\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>California property owners – whether homes or businesses – have benefited equally for 40 years from the passage of Proposition 13. That measure limits annual increases on property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Now a progressive coalition, including housing advocates and teachers unions, wants to split homes and businesses onto separate tax rolls.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Owners holding more than $2 million in commercial property would no longer be taxed based on the original price they paid. Instead, they would pay based on the property’s regularly re-assessed market value.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This would generate over $10 billion a year for our schools and local communities, without having to continue to increase taxes on individuals,” says Ben Grieff, campaign director for Evolve California, one of the groups pushing for the \u003ca href=\"https://www.oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/17-0055%20%28Funding%20for%20Schools%20and%20Communities%29_2.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">split roll measure\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>On this block in North Oakland, where we’ve been examining the legacy of Proposition 13, business owners have seen some of the same impacts of homeowners. Newer entrepreneurs often end up paying much more in property tax than established business owners, in part because those who’ve owned property the longest benefit the most.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>The Challenges of Running a New Business in a Hot Market\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Noah Kinner owns a gym at the end of the block. It’s in an industrial building that once housed a biker bar. This is Kinner’s second gym location, and his first time owning commercial property. He says many of the people who come here to workout live close by.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11701236\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11701236\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-800x533.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-160x107.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-960x640.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-240x160.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-375x250.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-portrait-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Gym owner Noah Kinner says the predictability he gets from Proposition 13 helps him keep his business in the neighborhood. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>As long as the market value of Kinner’s building stays below $2 million, he would not be subject to the proposed split roll changes. But the way Oakland prices keep rising, he wonders how long he’d be able to qualify as an exempt small business.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"I know the value of the building has appreciated significantly since we bought it,” Kinner says. “But that doesn't translate into anything for me and my day-to-day business.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under Proposition 13, Kinner’s property tax bill works pretty much the same way it does for his neighbors who own homes. It’s based on the price he paid for the building back in 2015 — not its market value today.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Considering all the other costs associated with running his gym, Kinner appreciates the stability.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>If he lost that predictability, he says, staying open would be trickier. “If every year my valuation — like the Bay Area — is exceeding the rate that I'm able to grow my business, then I'm just incentivized to sell.”\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Why Supporters Are for Split Roll\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>The idea of taxing commercial property differently than homes appeals to many Californians. Oakland resident Samuel Drew, who lives near the gym, likes the idea of keeping Proposition 13 in place for homeowners. But he says many businesses don’t need it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"I think it's good for working people to lower their taxes,” Drew says. “But when you're making millions and billions, it just doesn't hit me as fair.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But statewide, support for split roll has been declining, according to polling from the Public Policy Institute of California. Some 60 percent of likely voters were in favor of split roll back in 2012. That support has \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/press-release/newsom-villaraigosa-virtual-tie-feinstein-leads-de-leon-double-digits/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">dropped to 46 percent\u003c/a> today.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>PPIC President Mark Baldassare says public support is likely to dip when the economy is strong and the state’s budget is healthy.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I think that many voters look to the split roll as a possibility to help the state out of a financial crisis,” Baldassare says. “But we're not in a financial crisis at the moment.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Perhaps the biggest selling point for proponents of split roll is how much it would raise in new tax revenue. A \u003ca href=\"https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/Getting_Real_About_Reform_2017_Update.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">USC study\u003c/a> found that it could bring in an additional $11.4 billion per year statewide.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"That could pay for a lot of services, health care workers and teachers,” says USC researcher and study co-author Jennifer Ito. Alameda County alone would take in about $550 million more each year, she says. “Every county in California would get additional revenue to go toward our local government and schools.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Split roll backers question why Proposition 13 lets large, older corporations benefit from much lower tax assessments than newer companies right next door.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For instance, Intel owns a plot of land in the heart of Silicon Valley with an assessed value of about $2.50 per square foot. Meanwhile, just across the street, a professional office center is sitting on land with a recently assessed value of about $126 per square foot.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Split Roll Critics Say Employers Already Pay Enough\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>But taxpayer groups say split roll would only make the cost of doing business in California more burdensome.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you talk to business owners and ask them if they're getting a pretty good deal on taxes in California, they will unanimously say 'no,' ” says David Kline, vice president of communications and research at the California Taxpayers Association.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11701237\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11701237\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-800x533.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-160x107.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-960x640.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-240x160.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-375x250.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/biz-noah-working-at-table-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">As long as the market value of Noah Kinner’s building stays below $2 million, he would not be subject to the proposed split roll changes. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Business groups often describe property taxes as one bright spot for companies in a state that otherwise levies some of the highest taxes in the country.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>A \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2017-055\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2018 split roll analysis\u003c/a> from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office concluded that raising business taxes relative to other states could “influence some businesses' decisions about whether to expand in or move to California.” But overall effects on the health of the state’s economy would be uncertain, according to the report.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Kline says if split roll passes it’s not clear other taxes would come down.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This particular initiative doesn't have any tax cuts to the sales tax or income tax to mitigate the problem,” he says. “It just has a punitive tax specifically targeted at California employers.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13 has benefited some long-term property owners in this rapidly changing Oakland neighborhood.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Just down the street from Kinner’s gym, there’s a donut shop. Cambodian immigrant Timothy Mom has been running it since 1990. He rents the space, but he pays property taxes to his landlord as part of his lease agreement. Mom says that bill comes to about $135 a month.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He says that he’d have a much harder time starting his donut shop in this neighborhood today, especially if his taxes were tied to current property prices.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"Right now it's very expensive to open a new business,” he says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg%20https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11701223/should-california-businesses-pay-more-in-property-taxes",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11701223"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_6188",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_725"
],
"featImg": "news_11701238",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11701044": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11701044",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11701044",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1540491087000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news",
"term": 72
},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1540491087,
"format": "standard",
"disqusTitle": "How Proposition 13 Transformed Neighborhood Public Schools Throughout California",
"title": "How Proposition 13 Transformed Neighborhood Public Schools Throughout California",
"headTitle": "The California Dream | The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>When Sarah and Charles Woodson moved into their middle-class North Oakland neighborhood, their son was just a baby, but their new neighbors already had questions about his education.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California Dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003cbr>\n\u003c/p>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>\"They would ask, 'What are you going to do when it comes time to enroll in elementary school?'\" she says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The couple didn’t think too much of it until their son turned 4, and they could no longer avoid the question. As they learned about their local public school system, they began to understand why the subject was such a source of anxiety for neighbors. They stayed up late, weighing their options in emotional conversations that dredged up their own school days.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California’s 40-year-old Proposition 13 never came up in those discussions, but its profound effect on the state’s education system helped shape them nonetheless.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>This decision by voters in 1978 dramatically changed how the state funds education. It intertwined with key court decisions in the 1970s to transform a system of local control that had existed in California for more than 100 years. Decisions once made by local officials, over how to spend funds for schools and how to educate and evaluate students, shifted to state policymakers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Before Proposition 13, local property taxes were the main source of K-12 funding. California school districts had a great deal of autonomy. They had their own tax bases and set their own tax rates. The state guaranteed a base level of funding for each pupil and districts used their local taxes to increase funding to the desired level.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>On average, local property taxes made up 60 percent of school funding, while the state kicked in around 30 percent, according to UC Davis professor Thomas Timar. The quality of public schools was determined by local preference and how much a district could pay.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the late 1960s, for instance, the Baldwin Park Unified School District in Los Angeles County spent $577 per pupil. Meanwhile, Beverly Hills spent $1,231, though it taxed itself at half the rate. The reason for the disparity was clear: In Baldwin Park, total assessed property value translated to less than $4,000 per child, while in Beverly Hills, it equaled over $50,000 per child.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>By the 1970s, California’s Supreme Court found this system of funding violated the state’s Constitution. To bring the system into compliance, the state stepped in to reduce disparities between districts.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>‘They Cut Maintenance, Assistant Principals, Librarians’\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Legislators were working to follow the court’s order when voters approved Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Because Proposition 13 slashed the tax rate, property tax revenue dropped by almost 60 percent in the year after it passed. “In one fell swoop it really decimated the amount of money available to schools at the local level,” says San Diego State University professor Jennifer Imazeki, who studies the economics of K-12 education.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The state stepped in to make up some lost local funding, and though a hefty budget surplus cushioned the blow initially, cuts were inevitable. “They immediately dropped summer schools and adult education,” says State Board of Education President Michael Kirst, who was also at the board’s helm in 1978 when Proposition 13 passed. “Then they cut vocational education and counseling. They cut maintenance, assistant principals, librarians.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Charles Woodson was an elementary school student in Oakland in the years after Proposition 13 passed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“School back then was really, really rough,” he says. “There wasn’t a lot of structure. Each year I had a different principal.” He remembers teachers coming and going, and an exasperated substitute teacher telling his class: “I’m never coming back here again!”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I learned how to survive,” Charles says, “but I can't tell you that I learned how to read and write and do arithmetic.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Denise Saddler was president of the Oakland teachers union from 1986 to 1992 and worked as a teacher in the district for years before that.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Prior to Proposition 13 we had a robust music program, we had funded libraries — there was also a city library in every neighborhood that was open all the time and had summer programs,” she says. “There were a lot of after-school programs for kids. There were many more opportunities.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After the proposition passed, school dance and art programs were axed, she says, and so were school-funded field trips.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There were at least two teachers’ strikes in Oakland in the ‘80s.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Many had imagined the court’s mandate to reduce disparities would raise poor districts up, but Proposition 13 changed the calculation. Spending did begin to level, but it leveled down.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“One might say it was ironic,” says Bill Koski, director of Stanford Law School’s Youth and Education Law Project. “We saw this equalization, but we also saw a relative decrease in school district revenues, especially compared to the rest of the United States.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When adjusted for inflation, California spent about $7,400 per pupil in 1977, about $1,000 above the national average, according to data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics. By 1983, California’s per pupil spending had dropped to $6,700, dipping below the national average, where it has generally stayed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Between 1970 and 1997, per pupil spending in California fell more than 15 percent relative to spending in other states, according to a report from the Public Policy Institute of California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Koski says education spending in California has never really recovered from the enactment of Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We went from among the highest-funded school districts in the country to among the lowest-funded school districts,” Koski says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The California Budget & Policy Center ranked California 41st in the nation in per pupil spending, when taking into account cost of living in each state. During the 2015-2016 school year, California schools spent $10,291 per student, about $1,900 lower than the national average, according to the center.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11701069\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11701069\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-800x461.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"461\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-800x461.png 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-160x92.png 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-1020x588.png 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-960x553.png 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-240x138.png 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-375x216.png 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-520x300.png 520w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM.png 1050w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Per pupil spending for fall enrollment, California vs. U.S. average 1969-70 through 2014-15, adjusted for inflation. \u003ccite>(SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13’s limits on local funding are a key reason other states outspend California, according to Kirst.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They have a three-legged stool of funding,” Kirst says of other states. “They have federal, they have state and they have local property tax. We have a two-legged stool.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Today, California’s districts get about 60 percent of their funding from the state and a little over 30 percent from local sources, according to a recent report by Imazeki.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"http://gettingdowntofacts.com/publications/what-does-it-cost-educate-californias-students-professional-judgment-approach\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">New work\u003c/a> from the American Institutes for Research estimates California would need to boost K-12 funding by 32 percent, or about $22 billion, in order for the state to meet its education targets.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>‘We Brought It on Ourselves’\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Imazeki says coming up with that money is a tall order.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“People can't expect that there will be easy answers,” she says. “But I do think that making adjustments to Proposition 13 is at least a start. It's not a panacea, it's not a silver bullet, but it is a start.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For his part, Kirst doubts voters will mess with Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s a bedrock of California political culture,” says Kirst, who sympathizes with today’s voters, and those of 1978.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We brought it on ourselves,” he says, arguing that as long as policymakers fail to address the underlying issue of sky-high housing costs, voters will cling to Proposition 13’s protections.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Kirst thinks the state will likely need to find money somewhere else. His vote: Extend sales taxes to services, especially services used by higher-income Californians.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But even more money for schools won’t undo all the changes wrought by Proposition 13. Because as the state assumed responsibility for funding schools, it also assumed control.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“He who has the gold sets the rules,” says Kirst. “We created from Proposition 13 a massive centralization of California's state education policy.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An overhaul of the school finance system in 2013 aimed to shift control back to local communities. But it has yet to undo what Kirst sees as another important part of Proposition 13’s legacy: a loss of confidence in public education.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“People lost a feeling of ownership in their schools,” Kirst says. “We have this strong tradition of local public education. Nobody else has anything like the American local school board, and, therefore, once you begin to remove power from that base you begin to erode public confidence.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the decades after Proposition 13, \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_200JSR.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">private school attendance rose\u003c/a>: From 1970 to 1990, private school enrollments increased among California’s well-off families from 14 to 21 percent.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>‘What Are Our Options Now?’\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>When it came time to pick a school for their son, Sarah and Charles Woodson were wary of their local elementary school, Sankofa Academy. On paper it did not look good: Only 7 percent of students meet state math standards, and 12 percent meet English standards.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sarah toured the school anyway. She loved the beautiful library, but there was no librarian. She learned the school had been relying on an interim principal, and she talked to a teacher who sounded frustrated and overwhelmed. The teachers she liked told her they didn’t know if they’d stick around for the next year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After the tour, Sarah and the other parents stood on the front steps with crinkled brows.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“You could tell they're all kind of trying to act like they're really considering the school,” Sarah says. “But you can tell that they're really not. And they're thinking, ‘Oh my gosh, what are our options now?’ ”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sarah and Charles say they want better for their local school. They just don’t know how to make that happen.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I love this community,” Sarah says. “I think it's important to invest in a community, and I think one of those big investments is sending your child to the local public school.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But in the end, she and Charles made the difficult decision to send their son to a private school. They hope one day they’ll feel confident enough in their local schools to move him into public education.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg%20https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg%20\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11701044 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11701044",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2018/10/25/how-proposition-13-transformed-neighborhood-public-schools-throughout-california/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 1878,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 53
},
"modified": 1540512106,
"excerpt": "After the 1978 measure, decisions once made by local officials over how to spend funds for schools and how to educate and evaluate students shifted to state policymakers.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "After the 1978 measure, decisions once made by local officials over how to spend funds for schools and how to educate and evaluate students shifted to state policymakers.",
"title": "How Proposition 13 Transformed Neighborhood Public Schools Throughout California | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "How Proposition 13 Transformed Neighborhood Public Schools Throughout California",
"datePublished": "2018-10-25T11:11:27-07:00",
"dateModified": "2018-10-25T17:01:46-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "how-proposition-13-transformed-neighborhood-public-schools-throughout-california",
"status": "publish",
"path": "/news/11701044/how-proposition-13-transformed-neighborhood-public-schools-throughout-california",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>When Sarah and Charles Woodson moved into their middle-class North Oakland neighborhood, their son was just a baby, but their new neighbors already had questions about his education.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California Dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003cbr>\n\u003c/p>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>\"They would ask, 'What are you going to do when it comes time to enroll in elementary school?'\" she says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The couple didn’t think too much of it until their son turned 4, and they could no longer avoid the question. As they learned about their local public school system, they began to understand why the subject was such a source of anxiety for neighbors. They stayed up late, weighing their options in emotional conversations that dredged up their own school days.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California’s 40-year-old Proposition 13 never came up in those discussions, but its profound effect on the state’s education system helped shape them nonetheless.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>This decision by voters in 1978 dramatically changed how the state funds education. It intertwined with key court decisions in the 1970s to transform a system of local control that had existed in California for more than 100 years. Decisions once made by local officials, over how to spend funds for schools and how to educate and evaluate students, shifted to state policymakers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Before Proposition 13, local property taxes were the main source of K-12 funding. California school districts had a great deal of autonomy. They had their own tax bases and set their own tax rates. The state guaranteed a base level of funding for each pupil and districts used their local taxes to increase funding to the desired level.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>On average, local property taxes made up 60 percent of school funding, while the state kicked in around 30 percent, according to UC Davis professor Thomas Timar. The quality of public schools was determined by local preference and how much a district could pay.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the late 1960s, for instance, the Baldwin Park Unified School District in Los Angeles County spent $577 per pupil. Meanwhile, Beverly Hills spent $1,231, though it taxed itself at half the rate. The reason for the disparity was clear: In Baldwin Park, total assessed property value translated to less than $4,000 per child, while in Beverly Hills, it equaled over $50,000 per child.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>By the 1970s, California’s Supreme Court found this system of funding violated the state’s Constitution. To bring the system into compliance, the state stepped in to reduce disparities between districts.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>‘They Cut Maintenance, Assistant Principals, Librarians’\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Legislators were working to follow the court’s order when voters approved Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Because Proposition 13 slashed the tax rate, property tax revenue dropped by almost 60 percent in the year after it passed. “In one fell swoop it really decimated the amount of money available to schools at the local level,” says San Diego State University professor Jennifer Imazeki, who studies the economics of K-12 education.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The state stepped in to make up some lost local funding, and though a hefty budget surplus cushioned the blow initially, cuts were inevitable. “They immediately dropped summer schools and adult education,” says State Board of Education President Michael Kirst, who was also at the board’s helm in 1978 when Proposition 13 passed. “Then they cut vocational education and counseling. They cut maintenance, assistant principals, librarians.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Charles Woodson was an elementary school student in Oakland in the years after Proposition 13 passed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“School back then was really, really rough,” he says. “There wasn’t a lot of structure. Each year I had a different principal.” He remembers teachers coming and going, and an exasperated substitute teacher telling his class: “I’m never coming back here again!”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I learned how to survive,” Charles says, “but I can't tell you that I learned how to read and write and do arithmetic.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Denise Saddler was president of the Oakland teachers union from 1986 to 1992 and worked as a teacher in the district for years before that.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Prior to Proposition 13 we had a robust music program, we had funded libraries — there was also a city library in every neighborhood that was open all the time and had summer programs,” she says. “There were a lot of after-school programs for kids. There were many more opportunities.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After the proposition passed, school dance and art programs were axed, she says, and so were school-funded field trips.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There were at least two teachers’ strikes in Oakland in the ‘80s.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Many had imagined the court’s mandate to reduce disparities would raise poor districts up, but Proposition 13 changed the calculation. Spending did begin to level, but it leveled down.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“One might say it was ironic,” says Bill Koski, director of Stanford Law School’s Youth and Education Law Project. “We saw this equalization, but we also saw a relative decrease in school district revenues, especially compared to the rest of the United States.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When adjusted for inflation, California spent about $7,400 per pupil in 1977, about $1,000 above the national average, according to data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics. By 1983, California’s per pupil spending had dropped to $6,700, dipping below the national average, where it has generally stayed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Between 1970 and 1997, per pupil spending in California fell more than 15 percent relative to spending in other states, according to a report from the Public Policy Institute of California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Koski says education spending in California has never really recovered from the enactment of Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We went from among the highest-funded school districts in the country to among the lowest-funded school districts,” Koski says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The California Budget & Policy Center ranked California 41st in the nation in per pupil spending, when taking into account cost of living in each state. During the 2015-2016 school year, California schools spent $10,291 per student, about $1,900 lower than the national average, according to the center.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11701069\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11701069\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-800x461.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"461\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-800x461.png 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-160x92.png 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-1020x588.png 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-960x553.png 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-240x138.png 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-375x216.png 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM-520x300.png 520w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-24-at-3.31.40-PM.png 1050w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Per pupil spending for fall enrollment, California vs. U.S. average 1969-70 through 2014-15, adjusted for inflation. \u003ccite>(SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13’s limits on local funding are a key reason other states outspend California, according to Kirst.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“They have a three-legged stool of funding,” Kirst says of other states. “They have federal, they have state and they have local property tax. We have a two-legged stool.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Today, California’s districts get about 60 percent of their funding from the state and a little over 30 percent from local sources, according to a recent report by Imazeki.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"http://gettingdowntofacts.com/publications/what-does-it-cost-educate-californias-students-professional-judgment-approach\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">New work\u003c/a> from the American Institutes for Research estimates California would need to boost K-12 funding by 32 percent, or about $22 billion, in order for the state to meet its education targets.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>‘We Brought It on Ourselves’\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Imazeki says coming up with that money is a tall order.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“People can't expect that there will be easy answers,” she says. “But I do think that making adjustments to Proposition 13 is at least a start. It's not a panacea, it's not a silver bullet, but it is a start.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For his part, Kirst doubts voters will mess with Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s a bedrock of California political culture,” says Kirst, who sympathizes with today’s voters, and those of 1978.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We brought it on ourselves,” he says, arguing that as long as policymakers fail to address the underlying issue of sky-high housing costs, voters will cling to Proposition 13’s protections.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Kirst thinks the state will likely need to find money somewhere else. His vote: Extend sales taxes to services, especially services used by higher-income Californians.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But even more money for schools won’t undo all the changes wrought by Proposition 13. Because as the state assumed responsibility for funding schools, it also assumed control.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“He who has the gold sets the rules,” says Kirst. “We created from Proposition 13 a massive centralization of California's state education policy.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An overhaul of the school finance system in 2013 aimed to shift control back to local communities. But it has yet to undo what Kirst sees as another important part of Proposition 13’s legacy: a loss of confidence in public education.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“People lost a feeling of ownership in their schools,” Kirst says. “We have this strong tradition of local public education. Nobody else has anything like the American local school board, and, therefore, once you begin to remove power from that base you begin to erode public confidence.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In the decades after Proposition 13, \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_200JSR.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">private school attendance rose\u003c/a>: From 1970 to 1990, private school enrollments increased among California’s well-off families from 14 to 21 percent.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>‘What Are Our Options Now?’\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>When it came time to pick a school for their son, Sarah and Charles Woodson were wary of their local elementary school, Sankofa Academy. On paper it did not look good: Only 7 percent of students meet state math standards, and 12 percent meet English standards.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sarah toured the school anyway. She loved the beautiful library, but there was no librarian. She learned the school had been relying on an interim principal, and she talked to a teacher who sounded frustrated and overwhelmed. The teachers she liked told her they didn’t know if they’d stick around for the next year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After the tour, Sarah and the other parents stood on the front steps with crinkled brows.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“You could tell they're all kind of trying to act like they're really considering the school,” Sarah says. “But you can tell that they're really not. And they're thinking, ‘Oh my gosh, what are our options now?’ ”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Sarah and Charles say they want better for their local school. They just don’t know how to make that happen.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I love this community,” Sarah says. “I think it's important to invest in a community, and I think one of those big investments is sending your child to the local public school.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But in the end, she and Charles made the difficult decision to send their son to a private school. They hope one day they’ll feel confident enough in their local schools to move him into public education.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg%20https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg%20\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11701044/how-proposition-13-transformed-neighborhood-public-schools-throughout-california",
"authors": [
"11276"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_18540",
"news_8"
],
"tags": [
"news_725",
"news_2998",
"news_17041"
],
"featImg": "news_11701067",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11700810": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11700810",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700810",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1540418429000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "similar-homes-different-taxes-is-proposition-13-fair-to-new-homeowners",
"title": "Similar Homes, Different Taxes: Is Proposition 13 Fair to New Homeowners?",
"publishDate": 1540418429,
"format": "image",
"headTitle": "Similar Homes, Different Taxes: Is Proposition 13 Fair to New Homeowners? | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"term": 72,
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>Like so many younger Californians, Jas Johl struggled to buy her first house.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During a yearlong hunt for something in her budget, she placed bids on about 10 houses in the Bay Area. She was outbid with all-cash offers nearly every time.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">‘I feel like it’s just the price I pay for living here.’\u003ccite>Jas Johl, North Oakland homeowner\u003c/cite>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Johl, who works for the tech giant Salesforce, finally found a place in a neighborhood in North Oakland in 2016. It was pricey — $850,000 — but she thought it was a pretty good bargain for the area.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She also knew that a hefty property tax bill would accompany the price tag. And because Johl was a new homeowner, she’d be paying a lot more than many of her neighbors.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I was expecting it, but I wasn’t expecting how much it would be, I guess,” says Johl.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Johl paid nearly $13,000 in property taxes last year. It put a crimp in her budget — she rents out a room to help her afford her mortgage. But she was OK with paying that much because she knew the local schools needed tax dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California Dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>“I feel like it’s just the price I pay for living here,” says Johl.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Just around the corner, less than 300 feet from Johl’s house, is a duplex owned by Don Weinger.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The properties are about the same square size — Johl’s house is 1,400 square feet, while Weinger’s is 1,600, including the downstairs rental unit. The real estate listing site Zillow estimates both houses are worth around $900,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But because of Proposition 13, Weinger’s property taxes are 40 percent lower than Johl’s — he paid a little over $7,000 last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That’s because Weinger bought his house in 2002, for $365,000. Under Proposition 13, homeowners pay property taxes based on the original purchase price, not the current market value.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Weinger and Johl were unaware that they were paying wildly different property taxes than their neighbors. Weinger, a speech pathologist for the Oakland Unified School District, says he couldn’t really afford to pay property taxes on what his duplex is currently worth. But at the same time, he’s not sure that his discount is fair.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I absolutely sympathize,” says Weinger. “I’m happy to benefit from [Proposition 13], but I don’t think it’s good for California as a whole.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Weinger’s property tax bill is by no means an outlier in this neighborhood. One decades-long owner of a 1,300-square-foot home up the street paid only $1,168 in taxes last year. Zillow estimates that house to be worth more than $700,000. Several other longtime homeowners who no longer live in the neighborhood, but instead rent their properties, are paying less than $2,000 in property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700802\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700802\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"don-home\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Because of Proposition 13, Don Weinger pays 40 percent less in property taxes than Johl, even though both of their homes are worth about $900,000 today. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“How strict the assessment limits are is what makes California unique,” says Richard Auxier, a research associate with the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Policy Center. “You could have two neighbors earning the same amount of income, in roughly the same value home. And one is paying exponentially more in taxes.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When voters passed Proposition 13 in 1978, part of the rationale was to protect older homeowners from rising property taxes they couldn’t afford. Defenders of Proposition 13 argue that it’s still an essential tool to preserve neighborhood stability.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It allows people to remain in their homes who otherwise might be driven out by taxes,” says David Kline, a spokesman for the California Taxpayers Association. “The low-income homeowner is the most at risk of not being able to afford escalating property taxes. It’s the biggest help to those at risk.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But as California home prices reach staggering new highs, the growing disparity between what newer and older homeowners pay on similarly valued property has renewed a problematic question: Is Proposition 13 fair?\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Who Benefits From Proposition 13?\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Overall, polling suggests Californians like Proposition 13, at least in theory. \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/publication/proposition-13-40-years-later/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">About 57 percent\u003c/a> of Californians say Proposition 13 has been mostly good for the state, according to a Public Policy Institute of California survey conducted in March.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>‘This version of property tax relief is very poorly targeted.’\u003ccite>Richard Auxier, Tax Policy Center\u003c/cite>\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>But voters are more conflicted about how Proposition 13 treats newer and older homeowners. Only \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/california-proposition-13-approval-rating/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">41 percent\u003c/a> of Californians believe someone who recently bought a home should pay higher property taxes than someone who bought an identical home decades ago.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California isn’t the only place that provides major property tax breaks to longtime homeowners. Many other states limit how much local governments can tax homes, especially for low-income or senior homeowners.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But property tax relief in other states is typically more tailored to vulnerable populations than it is here, says Auxier. Proposition 13 provides benefits to anyone fortunate enough to own a home, regardless of their income.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This version of property tax relief is very poorly targeted,” says Auxier. “The problem is that it does nothing but reward homeowners who have been in their homes a long time, no matter who those homeowners are.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Because homeownership is generally correlated with higher incomes, and because Proposition 13 provides more benefits in the long term to more expensive homes, the vast majority of tax relief goes to higher-income households.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/publications/report/3497#Do_Proposition_13.2019s_Benefits_for_Property_Owners_Vary_With_Income.3F\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">estimates\u003c/a> that roughly 50 percent of the tax savings provided by Proposition 13 goes to households that make over $120,000. Those estimates don’t take into account any tax benefit landlords may pass on to renters, however.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Defenders of Proposition 13 say that’s the wrong way of looking at who is benefiting most from the measure.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In gentrifying neighborhoods like this one in North Oakland, some of the biggest beneficiaries of Proposition 13 are not higher-income households, but middle-class families who bought decades earlier when houses in the area were much more affordable.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700806\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700806\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"scenes-garages\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The median property value on this North Oakland block was three quarters of a million dollars last year. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>That’s part of the reason why Johl feels mostly OK about paying higher property taxes than some of her neighbors.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I don’t think it would be fair to ask a family down the street who bought their house 20 years ago to pay more,” says Johl. “Because how would you know if they could afford it?”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Auxier concedes that some truly middle-class families from traditionally marginalized communities may benefit from Proposition 13. But he stresses that it’s more an exception to the rule, and to remember the costs associated with that benefit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Those are tax dollars that aren’t going to education programs or health care programs that could help other parts of those communities that don’t own incredibly expensive homes,” says Auxier.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Certainty for New Homeowners, at a Cost\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>New homeowners like Johl may be paying way more in property taxes this year than their neighbors. But Proposition 13 provides a great deal of certainty for her going forward. Regardless of how much her home’s value rises, Johl knows her property tax base will not increase more than 2 percent per year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Prop. 13 provides certainty for every property owner,” says Kline. “So when you buy your property you know exactly what your tax is going to be that year and what it’s going to be for years to come. And you can put those numbers in your budget and know what your bills will be going forward.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Critics say those savings are mitigated by other taxes state and local governments levy to make up for lost property tax revenue. California has some of the highest income and sales taxes in the country.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>A Proposition 13 Poster Child (Who Loathes It)\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>In 1988, Stephanie Nordlinger became a first-time homeowner. She bought a small house in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Baldwin Hills for $170,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">‘It’s not fair. It’s clearly not fair.’\u003ccite>Stephanie Nordlinger, homeowner\u003c/cite>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Nordlinger, an attorney, was never a fan of Proposition 13. When it passed, she feared that government services like parks and schools would suffer. But she also thought it was fundamentally wrong that she was paying more in property taxes than richer residents of the city, just because of when she bought.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After Nordlinger got her first property tax bill, she sued on the grounds that Proposition 13 violated the 14th Amendment: equal protection under the law.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Someone is paying a lot more than another for getting the same services from government agencies,” says Nordlinger. “It’s not fair. It’s clearly not fair.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700805\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700805\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"stephanie\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Stephanie Nordlinger’s challenge to Proposition 13 went all the way to the Supreme Court. She’s pictured here in the backyard of her home. \u003ccite>(Adriene Hill/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/90-1912\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Nordlinger’s case\u003c/a> went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. While multiple justices expressed concern that Proposition 13 was unwise policy, Nordlinger lost her case.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Thirty years later, still at her Baldwin Hills home, Nordlinger is in many ways a poster child for the type of Californian Proposition 13 defenders say the initiative helps the most.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She’s a senior citizen on a limited income. Her house is valued around $900,000, but she pays just $3,400 in property taxes. She benefits enormously from Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Nordlinger’s attitude toward the initiative hasn’t changed. She would welcome being taxed at a rate the new homeowners down the street are taxed, if it meant local government services would improve.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“When I was a kid, California was on top,” says Nordlinger. “Some parts of California are perfect, and very nice, and as good as anything in the world. But other parts of California are just not what they should be.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "Defenders say the law was intended to protect older homeowners from rising property taxes. But with property values skyrocketing, there's a growing disparity among taxpayers.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1721117874,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 48,
"wordCount": 1863
},
"headData": {
"title": "Similar Homes, Different Taxes: Is Proposition 13 Fair to New Homeowners? | KQED",
"description": "Defenders say the law was intended to protect older homeowners from rising property taxes. But with property values skyrocketing, there's a growing disparity among taxpayers.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Similar Homes, Different Taxes: Is Proposition 13 Fair to New Homeowners?",
"datePublished": "2018-10-24T15:00:29-07:00",
"dateModified": "2024-07-16T01:17:54-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"sticky": false,
"nprByline": "\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/matt-levin/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Matt Levin/CALmatters\u003c/a>",
"path": "/news/11700810/similar-homes-different-taxes-is-proposition-13-fair-to-new-homeowners",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Like so many younger Californians, Jas Johl struggled to buy her first house.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>During a yearlong hunt for something in her budget, she placed bids on about 10 houses in the Bay Area. She was outbid with all-cash offers nearly every time.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">‘I feel like it’s just the price I pay for living here.’\u003ccite>Jas Johl, North Oakland homeowner\u003c/cite>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Johl, who works for the tech giant Salesforce, finally found a place in a neighborhood in North Oakland in 2016. It was pricey — $850,000 — but she thought it was a pretty good bargain for the area.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She also knew that a hefty property tax bill would accompany the price tag. And because Johl was a new homeowner, she’d be paying a lot more than many of her neighbors.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I was expecting it, but I wasn’t expecting how much it would be, I guess,” says Johl.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Johl paid nearly $13,000 in property taxes last year. It put a crimp in her budget — she rents out a room to help her afford her mortgage. But she was OK with paying that much because she knew the local schools needed tax dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California Dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>“I feel like it’s just the price I pay for living here,” says Johl.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Just around the corner, less than 300 feet from Johl’s house, is a duplex owned by Don Weinger.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The properties are about the same square size — Johl’s house is 1,400 square feet, while Weinger’s is 1,600, including the downstairs rental unit. The real estate listing site Zillow estimates both houses are worth around $900,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But because of Proposition 13, Weinger’s property taxes are 40 percent lower than Johl’s — he paid a little over $7,000 last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That’s because Weinger bought his house in 2002, for $365,000. Under Proposition 13, homeowners pay property taxes based on the original purchase price, not the current market value.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Weinger and Johl were unaware that they were paying wildly different property taxes than their neighbors. Weinger, a speech pathologist for the Oakland Unified School District, says he couldn’t really afford to pay property taxes on what his duplex is currently worth. But at the same time, he’s not sure that his discount is fair.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I absolutely sympathize,” says Weinger. “I’m happy to benefit from [Proposition 13], but I don’t think it’s good for California as a whole.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Weinger’s property tax bill is by no means an outlier in this neighborhood. One decades-long owner of a 1,300-square-foot home up the street paid only $1,168 in taxes last year. Zillow estimates that house to be worth more than $700,000. Several other longtime homeowners who no longer live in the neighborhood, but instead rent their properties, are paying less than $2,000 in property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700802\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700802\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"don-home\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-don-home-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Because of Proposition 13, Don Weinger pays 40 percent less in property taxes than Johl, even though both of their homes are worth about $900,000 today. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“How strict the assessment limits are is what makes California unique,” says Richard Auxier, a research associate with the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Policy Center. “You could have two neighbors earning the same amount of income, in roughly the same value home. And one is paying exponentially more in taxes.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When voters passed Proposition 13 in 1978, part of the rationale was to protect older homeowners from rising property taxes they couldn’t afford. Defenders of Proposition 13 argue that it’s still an essential tool to preserve neighborhood stability.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It allows people to remain in their homes who otherwise might be driven out by taxes,” says David Kline, a spokesman for the California Taxpayers Association. “The low-income homeowner is the most at risk of not being able to afford escalating property taxes. It’s the biggest help to those at risk.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But as California home prices reach staggering new highs, the growing disparity between what newer and older homeowners pay on similarly valued property has renewed a problematic question: Is Proposition 13 fair?\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Who Benefits From Proposition 13?\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Overall, polling suggests Californians like Proposition 13, at least in theory. \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/publication/proposition-13-40-years-later/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">About 57 percent\u003c/a> of Californians say Proposition 13 has been mostly good for the state, according to a Public Policy Institute of California survey conducted in March.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>‘This version of property tax relief is very poorly targeted.’\u003ccite>Richard Auxier, Tax Policy Center\u003c/cite>\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>But voters are more conflicted about how Proposition 13 treats newer and older homeowners. Only \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/california-proposition-13-approval-rating/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">41 percent\u003c/a> of Californians believe someone who recently bought a home should pay higher property taxes than someone who bought an identical home decades ago.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California isn’t the only place that provides major property tax breaks to longtime homeowners. Many other states limit how much local governments can tax homes, especially for low-income or senior homeowners.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But property tax relief in other states is typically more tailored to vulnerable populations than it is here, says Auxier. Proposition 13 provides benefits to anyone fortunate enough to own a home, regardless of their income.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This version of property tax relief is very poorly targeted,” says Auxier. “The problem is that it does nothing but reward homeowners who have been in their homes a long time, no matter who those homeowners are.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Because homeownership is generally correlated with higher incomes, and because Proposition 13 provides more benefits in the long term to more expensive homes, the vast majority of tax relief goes to higher-income households.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/publications/report/3497#Do_Proposition_13.2019s_Benefits_for_Property_Owners_Vary_With_Income.3F\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">estimates\u003c/a> that roughly 50 percent of the tax savings provided by Proposition 13 goes to households that make over $120,000. Those estimates don’t take into account any tax benefit landlords may pass on to renters, however.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Defenders of Proposition 13 say that’s the wrong way of looking at who is benefiting most from the measure.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In gentrifying neighborhoods like this one in North Oakland, some of the biggest beneficiaries of Proposition 13 are not higher-income households, but middle-class families who bought decades earlier when houses in the area were much more affordable.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700806\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700806\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"scenes-garages\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-garages-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The median property value on this North Oakland block was three quarters of a million dollars last year. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>That’s part of the reason why Johl feels mostly OK about paying higher property taxes than some of her neighbors.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I don’t think it would be fair to ask a family down the street who bought their house 20 years ago to pay more,” says Johl. “Because how would you know if they could afford it?”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Auxier concedes that some truly middle-class families from traditionally marginalized communities may benefit from Proposition 13. But he stresses that it’s more an exception to the rule, and to remember the costs associated with that benefit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Those are tax dollars that aren’t going to education programs or health care programs that could help other parts of those communities that don’t own incredibly expensive homes,” says Auxier.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>Certainty for New Homeowners, at a Cost\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>New homeowners like Johl may be paying way more in property taxes this year than their neighbors. But Proposition 13 provides a great deal of certainty for her going forward. Regardless of how much her home’s value rises, Johl knows her property tax base will not increase more than 2 percent per year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Prop. 13 provides certainty for every property owner,” says Kline. “So when you buy your property you know exactly what your tax is going to be that year and what it’s going to be for years to come. And you can put those numbers in your budget and know what your bills will be going forward.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Critics say those savings are mitigated by other taxes state and local governments levy to make up for lost property tax revenue. California has some of the highest income and sales taxes in the country.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>A Proposition 13 Poster Child (Who Loathes It)\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>In 1988, Stephanie Nordlinger became a first-time homeowner. She bought a small house in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Baldwin Hills for $170,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">‘It’s not fair. It’s clearly not fair.’\u003ccite>Stephanie Nordlinger, homeowner\u003c/cite>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Nordlinger, an attorney, was never a fan of Proposition 13. When it passed, she feared that government services like parks and schools would suffer. But she also thought it was fundamentally wrong that she was paying more in property taxes than richer residents of the city, just because of when she bought.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>After Nordlinger got her first property tax bill, she sued on the grounds that Proposition 13 violated the 14th Amendment: equal protection under the law.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Someone is paying a lot more than another for getting the same services from government agencies,” says Nordlinger. “It’s not fair. It’s clearly not fair.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700805\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700805\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"stephanie\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/fairness-stephanie-portrait-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Stephanie Nordlinger’s challenge to Proposition 13 went all the way to the Supreme Court. She’s pictured here in the backyard of her home. \u003ccite>(Adriene Hill/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/90-1912\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Nordlinger’s case\u003c/a> went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. While multiple justices expressed concern that Proposition 13 was unwise policy, Nordlinger lost her case.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Thirty years later, still at her Baldwin Hills home, Nordlinger is in many ways a poster child for the type of Californian Proposition 13 defenders say the initiative helps the most.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She’s a senior citizen on a limited income. Her house is valued around $900,000, but she pays just $3,400 in property taxes. She benefits enormously from Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But Nordlinger’s attitude toward the initiative hasn’t changed. She would welcome being taxed at a rate the new homeowners down the street are taxed, if it meant local government services would improve.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“When I was a kid, California was on top,” says Nordlinger. “Some parts of California are perfect, and very nice, and as good as anything in the world. But other parts of California are just not what they should be.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11700810/similar-homes-different-taxes-is-proposition-13-fair-to-new-homeowners",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11700810"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_6266",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_20191",
"news_1775",
"news_34054",
"news_23484",
"news_725",
"news_137"
],
"affiliates": [
"news_18481"
],
"featImg": "news_11700803",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11700683": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11700683",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700683",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1540407934000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "too-few-homes-is-proposition-13-to-blame-for-californias-housing-shortage",
"title": "Too Few Homes: Is Proposition 13 to Blame for California's Housing Shortage?",
"publishDate": 1540407934,
"format": "image",
"headTitle": "Too Few Homes: Is Proposition 13 to Blame for California’s Housing Shortage? | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"term": 72,
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>Michelle Krasowski is the most glass-half-full victim of California’s housing shortage you’ll ever meet.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>She has decked out her converted basement apartment on this block in North Oakland like an eclectic bohemian loft. Boutique fabrics and artwork adorn the walls, and craft supplies and a film projector from the 1970s are scattered about the living room.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Krasowski loves the neighborhood, which she moved to about a year and a half ago. The friendly neighbors that know each other by name, the old church down the street, the taqueria and pizza place a few blocks away. It fits her.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s not as new and shiny as some of the other places that have been converted around the East Bay, and I really like that,” Krasowksi says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But like so many Californians these days, Krasowski doesn’t know how much longer she can afford to stay here. She pays nearly $2,000 a month in rent, which she says is nearly two-thirds of her take-home pay as a librarian for Contra Costa County.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I feel like it’s the new normal, and actually like a good value for the Bay Area,” says Krasowski, 38, “which is insane.”\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>By one estimate, the state needs to build 1.8 million units over the next seven years just to keep pace with population growth.\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>California, and particularly the Bay Area, hasn’t built enough housing to keep up with demand. By one estimate from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the state needs to build 1.8 million units over the next seven years just to keep pace with population growth. Right now, California isn’t close to building that quickly.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There are lots of reasons for the state’s deep housing shortage. You can blame broken state housing laws, high construction costs and recalcitrant “not-in-my-backyard” communities that oppose new building across the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But experts say some unintended consequences of Proposition 13 help explain why the state doesn’t build housing like it used to.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>The Vacant Lot Problem\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Just around the corner from Krasowski sits an undeveloped lot, overgrown with weeds and surrounded by a chain-link fence.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>Oakland, where the average house is now worth $750,000, has more than 3,000 vacant residential lots.\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Brian Smith has lived next door to the empty lot since he bought his house in 2004. It used to be owned by his neighbors two lots down, who had it for decades before selling last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We always assumed somebody would develop it at some point, but it’s been sitting here the whole time,” says Smith, who reported the lot to the city after the weeds had grown to near eye level.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>With houses up the street now fetching million-dollar offers, Smith marveled at how long it took for someone to snatch it up and start building. He knew that land had to be incredibly valuable.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700624\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700624\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"empty-lot\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">All California properties — even vacant ones — are taxed based on the original purchase price, not their current value. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>That’s where an unintended consequence of Proposition 13 may be at play. After Proposition 13, all California properties — even vacant ones — are taxed based on the original purchase price, not their current value. That makes it relatively inexpensive to hold onto land, even when the market is hot.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“In other markets where Prop. 13 policies aren’t in effect, the taxes on that property would continue to go up with land value,” says Ralph McLaughlin, a housing economist with Veritas Urbis Economics and former chief economist for the real estate website Trulia. “And that incentivizes development, it increases holding costs, it makes it more expensive to hold it vacant.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>A report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/publications/report/3497#Does_Proposition_13_Alter_Property_Owners.2019_Development_Decisions.3F\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">vacant lots in California were less likely to be developed\u003c/a> the longer they were owned, even when compared to similar vacant lots in the same neighborhood. Oakland, where the average house is now worth $750,000, has \u003ca href=\"http://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/uploads/H.Raetz_Vacant_Parcels_Final.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">more than 3,000 vacant residential lots\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Defenders of Proposition 13 argue that other regulatory barriers to new development — permitting fees and other bureaucratic hurdles that new construction must navigate — are far bigger impediments than Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Most people who own land don’t own land so that someday they can sell it,” says Michael Shires, an associate professor of public policy at Pepperdine University. “They own land because they want to do something with it someday. What prevents them is they can’t get permission for what they want to do.”\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Diluted Incentives for New Housing\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Less than two miles from the vacant lot stands another example of how Proposition 13 could be limiting the supply of new housing in California: a Target store. Next to a Best Buy. Next to a Home Depot. All stretched across a massive parking lot, on 40 acres of some of the priciest real estate in California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For the most part, cities decide what gets built within their borders. In an ideal world, they’d permit construction of what’s needed. So if housing prices got too high, they’d permit more housing, according to Jonathan Zasloff, a professor at UCLA School of Law who specializes in land use issues.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But cities have another, more immediate imperative to consider when deciding what gets built — revenue for city coffers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you’re a city, you’re going to want to have land uses in your city that provide a big revenue stream for services,” says Zasloff. “And in California, you want enterprises that generate sales taxes, which is basically retail.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13 changed how California cities get their money. Before the initiative passed, 90 percent of local government revenue came from property taxes. Today, that share is less than two-thirds — and has been replaced by things like sales taxes and hotel taxes, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Big-box stores also don’t generate the need for expensive things like schools and libraries and parks that accompany new housing. So when a city is deciding between allowing a Target or a new apartment building, the math isn’t so friendly to the apartment building.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If it’s gonna cost the city ‘X’ amount of tax dollars over time to provide services for the [apartment building], versus the tax revenue that it generates, Target is gonna win, hands down,” says McLaughlin, the housing economist.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>This phenomenon, known in urban planning circles as the “fiscalization of land use,” is more theory than empirically tested truth. And it’s also more descriptive of suburbs than well-established cities like Oakland, which were already mostly built out before Proposition 13 passed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But examples of cities deprioritizing housing in favor of retail and hotels is still quite common. Voters in Brisbane, a small Bay Area suburb south of San Francisco, will have a chance next month to approve a new 2,200-home development on vacant land. A consultant found that if the city decided to build a hotel instead, it would \u003ca href=\"http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-small-city-controls-big-housing-project-20170728-story.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">net $8 million more\u003c/a> annually in revenue.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Large Fees on New Development\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>At the corner of Broadway and 17th Street, the skeleton of a high-rise apartment building extends into downtown Oakland’s skyline. It’s one of two high-rises going up in the area amid a construction boom all over the city.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When those new housing developments come online, they’ll need additional infrastructure to serve new residents. Schools and roads, parks and police, fire and public transportation.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>‘It’s not really a buyer’s market right now.’\u003c/em>\u003cbr>\n\u003cem>\u003ccite>Michelle Krasowski, North Oakland resident\u003c/cite>\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Before Proposition 13, a good deal of that infrastructure was paid for with property taxes. After Proposition 13, and increasingly in recent years, cities have levied high “impact” fees on developers to pay for those costs.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Oakland currently levies a fee of at least $10,000 per unit, up to a max of $28,000 per unit. That money goes toward a fund for subsidized, below-market-rate housing. Critics of impact fees say those costs get passed onto renters or future homeowners, and only inflate housing prices.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And the fees in Oakland are low, at least compared to other cities.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“So the problem is if a fee is set too high, you could cause construction to slow down,” says Darin Ranelletti, policy director for housing security for Oakland. “So you’re contributing to the housing shortage.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The city of Irvine in Orange County, on average, charges more than $80,000 in impact fees on new single-family homes, according to an \u003ca href=\"https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/blog/it-all-adds-up-the-cost-of-housing-development-fees-in-seven-california-cit\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">analysis by the UC Berkeley Terner Center for Housing Innovation\u003c/a>. The city of Fremont, in the Bay Area, charges more than $140,000 per home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Back in North Oakland, Michelle Krasowksi — already stretching to pay her rent — has started looking into whether she can tap some affordable-housing dollars for help. One day she wants to buy a home. She even subscribes to some real estate newsletters. But she knows that realistically, that won’t happen for some time.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s not really a buyer’s market right now,” Krasowski says, smiling.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Meanwhile, her monthly rent of nearly $2,000 is more than what some of her neighbors pay a year in property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "Oakland has more than 3,000 vacant residential lots. Some say it's because Proposition 13 has made it too expensive to build. Defenders say other regulations are far bigger barriers to construction.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1721111871,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 42,
"wordCount": 1734
},
"headData": {
"title": "Too Few Homes: Is Proposition 13 to Blame for California's Housing Shortage? | KQED",
"description": "Oakland has more than 3,000 vacant residential lots. Some say it's because Proposition 13 has made it too expensive to build. Defenders say other regulations are far bigger barriers to construction.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Too Few Homes: Is Proposition 13 to Blame for California's Housing Shortage?",
"datePublished": "2018-10-24T12:05:34-07:00",
"dateModified": "2024-07-15T23:37:51-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"sticky": false,
"nprByline": "\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/matt-levin/\" rel=\"noopener\" target=\"_blank\">Matt Levin/CALmatters\u003c/a>",
"path": "/news/11700683/too-few-homes-is-proposition-13-to-blame-for-californias-housing-shortage",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Michelle Krasowski is the most glass-half-full victim of California’s housing shortage you’ll ever meet.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>She has decked out her converted basement apartment on this block in North Oakland like an eclectic bohemian loft. Boutique fabrics and artwork adorn the walls, and craft supplies and a film projector from the 1970s are scattered about the living room.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Krasowski loves the neighborhood, which she moved to about a year and a half ago. The friendly neighbors that know each other by name, the old church down the street, the taqueria and pizza place a few blocks away. It fits her.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s not as new and shiny as some of the other places that have been converted around the East Bay, and I really like that,” Krasowksi says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But like so many Californians these days, Krasowski doesn’t know how much longer she can afford to stay here. She pays nearly $2,000 a month in rent, which she says is nearly two-thirds of her take-home pay as a librarian for Contra Costa County.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I feel like it’s the new normal, and actually like a good value for the Bay Area,” says Krasowski, 38, “which is insane.”\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>By one estimate, the state needs to build 1.8 million units over the next seven years just to keep pace with population growth.\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>California, and particularly the Bay Area, hasn’t built enough housing to keep up with demand. By one estimate from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the state needs to build 1.8 million units over the next seven years just to keep pace with population growth. Right now, California isn’t close to building that quickly.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There are lots of reasons for the state’s deep housing shortage. You can blame broken state housing laws, high construction costs and recalcitrant “not-in-my-backyard” communities that oppose new building across the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But experts say some unintended consequences of Proposition 13 help explain why the state doesn’t build housing like it used to.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3>The Vacant Lot Problem\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Just around the corner from Krasowski sits an undeveloped lot, overgrown with weeds and surrounded by a chain-link fence.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>Oakland, where the average house is now worth $750,000, has more than 3,000 vacant residential lots.\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Brian Smith has lived next door to the empty lot since he bought his house in 2004. It used to be owned by his neighbors two lots down, who had it for decades before selling last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We always assumed somebody would develop it at some point, but it’s been sitting here the whole time,” says Smith, who reported the lot to the city after the weeds had grown to near eye level.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>With houses up the street now fetching million-dollar offers, Smith marveled at how long it took for someone to snatch it up and start building. He knew that land had to be incredibly valuable.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700624\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700624\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"empty-lot\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/housing-shortage-empty-lot-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">All California properties — even vacant ones — are taxed based on the original purchase price, not their current value. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>That’s where an unintended consequence of Proposition 13 may be at play. After Proposition 13, all California properties — even vacant ones — are taxed based on the original purchase price, not their current value. That makes it relatively inexpensive to hold onto land, even when the market is hot.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“In other markets where Prop. 13 policies aren’t in effect, the taxes on that property would continue to go up with land value,” says Ralph McLaughlin, a housing economist with Veritas Urbis Economics and former chief economist for the real estate website Trulia. “And that incentivizes development, it increases holding costs, it makes it more expensive to hold it vacant.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>A report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/publications/report/3497#Does_Proposition_13_Alter_Property_Owners.2019_Development_Decisions.3F\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">vacant lots in California were less likely to be developed\u003c/a> the longer they were owned, even when compared to similar vacant lots in the same neighborhood. Oakland, where the average house is now worth $750,000, has \u003ca href=\"http://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/uploads/H.Raetz_Vacant_Parcels_Final.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">more than 3,000 vacant residential lots\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Defenders of Proposition 13 argue that other regulatory barriers to new development — permitting fees and other bureaucratic hurdles that new construction must navigate — are far bigger impediments than Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Most people who own land don’t own land so that someday they can sell it,” says Michael Shires, an associate professor of public policy at Pepperdine University. “They own land because they want to do something with it someday. What prevents them is they can’t get permission for what they want to do.”\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Diluted Incentives for New Housing\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>Less than two miles from the vacant lot stands another example of how Proposition 13 could be limiting the supply of new housing in California: a Target store. Next to a Best Buy. Next to a Home Depot. All stretched across a massive parking lot, on 40 acres of some of the priciest real estate in California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>For the most part, cities decide what gets built within their borders. In an ideal world, they’d permit construction of what’s needed. So if housing prices got too high, they’d permit more housing, according to Jonathan Zasloff, a professor at UCLA School of Law who specializes in land use issues.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But cities have another, more immediate imperative to consider when deciding what gets built — revenue for city coffers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you’re a city, you’re going to want to have land uses in your city that provide a big revenue stream for services,” says Zasloff. “And in California, you want enterprises that generate sales taxes, which is basically retail.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13 changed how California cities get their money. Before the initiative passed, 90 percent of local government revenue came from property taxes. Today, that share is less than two-thirds — and has been replaced by things like sales taxes and hotel taxes, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Big-box stores also don’t generate the need for expensive things like schools and libraries and parks that accompany new housing. So when a city is deciding between allowing a Target or a new apartment building, the math isn’t so friendly to the apartment building.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If it’s gonna cost the city ‘X’ amount of tax dollars over time to provide services for the [apartment building], versus the tax revenue that it generates, Target is gonna win, hands down,” says McLaughlin, the housing economist.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>This phenomenon, known in urban planning circles as the “fiscalization of land use,” is more theory than empirically tested truth. And it’s also more descriptive of suburbs than well-established cities like Oakland, which were already mostly built out before Proposition 13 passed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But examples of cities deprioritizing housing in favor of retail and hotels is still quite common. Voters in Brisbane, a small Bay Area suburb south of San Francisco, will have a chance next month to approve a new 2,200-home development on vacant land. A consultant found that if the city decided to build a hotel instead, it would \u003ca href=\"http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-small-city-controls-big-housing-project-20170728-story.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">net $8 million more\u003c/a> annually in revenue.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Large Fees on New Development\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>At the corner of Broadway and 17th Street, the skeleton of a high-rise apartment building extends into downtown Oakland’s skyline. It’s one of two high-rises going up in the area amid a construction boom all over the city.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>When those new housing developments come online, they’ll need additional infrastructure to serve new residents. Schools and roads, parks and police, fire and public transportation.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">\u003cem>‘It’s not really a buyer’s market right now.’\u003c/em>\u003cbr>\n\u003cem>\u003ccite>Michelle Krasowski, North Oakland resident\u003c/cite>\u003c/em>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>Before Proposition 13, a good deal of that infrastructure was paid for with property taxes. After Proposition 13, and increasingly in recent years, cities have levied high “impact” fees on developers to pay for those costs.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Oakland currently levies a fee of at least $10,000 per unit, up to a max of $28,000 per unit. That money goes toward a fund for subsidized, below-market-rate housing. Critics of impact fees say those costs get passed onto renters or future homeowners, and only inflate housing prices.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And the fees in Oakland are low, at least compared to other cities.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“So the problem is if a fee is set too high, you could cause construction to slow down,” says Darin Ranelletti, policy director for housing security for Oakland. “So you’re contributing to the housing shortage.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The city of Irvine in Orange County, on average, charges more than $80,000 in impact fees on new single-family homes, according to an \u003ca href=\"https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/blog/it-all-adds-up-the-cost-of-housing-development-fees-in-seven-california-cit\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">analysis by the UC Berkeley Terner Center for Housing Innovation\u003c/a>. The city of Fremont, in the Bay Area, charges more than $140,000 per home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Back in North Oakland, Michelle Krasowksi — already stretching to pay her rent — has started looking into whether she can tap some affordable-housing dollars for help. One day she wants to buy a home. She even subscribes to some real estate newsletters. But she knows that realistically, that won’t happen for some time.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s not really a buyer’s market right now,” Krasowski says, smiling.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Meanwhile, her monthly rent of nearly $2,000 is more than what some of her neighbors pay a year in property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11700683/too-few-homes-is-proposition-13-to-blame-for-californias-housing-shortage",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11700683"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_6266",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_20013",
"news_20191",
"news_34054",
"news_23484",
"news_725"
],
"affiliates": [
"news_18481"
],
"featImg": "news_11700625",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11700626": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11700626",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700626",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1540397597000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "proposition-5-renews-californias-debate-over-property-taxes",
"title": "Proposition 5 Renews California's Debate Over Property Taxes",
"publishDate": 1540397597,
"format": "image",
"headTitle": "Proposition 5 Renews California’s Debate Over Property Taxes | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"term": 72,
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>Kenneth Wilkins is walking down the block in North Oakland where he bought a home 42 years ago. As he strolls up to the front of his house, he talks about the single-family home he purchased in 1976.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>“Actually this house cost less than this car,” Wilkins says, pointing to a modest white Toyota parked in front of the house.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This car cost $21,000, I think. And this house was less than that. I never dreamed that a house would sell for over a million in this neighborhood. But they do.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Two years after Wilkins became a homeowner, California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 13, rolling back property taxes and putting a strict limit on annual increases. Wilkins isn’t sure, but he thinks he voted for it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“But still, you know, even with Prop. 13 your taxes go up every year,” he says. “I mean it is limited, but over time it adds up, especially for people who are on fixed incomes.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There is no question homeowners like Wilkins have benefited tremendously from Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to a \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/publications/report/3497#Are_Similar_Property_Owners_Taxed_Differently_Under_Proposition.A013.3F\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2016 analysis\u003c/a> from the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), Proposition 13 has led to vastly different property tax assessments within counties, or even blocks, depending on how long the home has been owned.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Our \u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">own analysis of real estate data from Zillow\u003c/a> found significant disparities across the state as well. On Wilkins’ block alone, we found that if everyone was taxed at the current value of their home, the block would have paid an additional $130,000 in property tax last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Wilkins’ tax bill, for example, is much lower than a nearby neighbor’s in a similar home who bought more recently.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That kind of disparity can be found even among homeowners with similar ages, incomes and overall wealth.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700620\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-11700620 size-medium\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"power-lines\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The share of properties sold in California each year has declined since Proposition 13 passed. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“Looking at 45- to 55-year-old homeowners with homes worth $575,000 to $625,000 and incomes of $80,000 to $90,000, property tax payments in 2014 ranged from $1,350 to $7,500,” the LAO report found in examining the San Francisco Bay Area.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That difference is based mostly on how long a property has been “protected” by annual tax increases by Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An unintended consequence is that the longer people benefit from lower property taxes, the harder it can be to afford a new home with taxes based on its new assessed value.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Indeed, the LAO report found that “the share of properties sold each year in California has been on the decline since the passage of Proposition 13.” While 16 percent of California properties were sold in 1977-78, this share declined to only 5 percent in 2014-15.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Expanding Proposition 13\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>California voters have modified Proposition 13 twice since they voted it in.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 1986, voters passed \u003ca href=\"http://ca-contracostacounty.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/817/Proposition-60?bidId=\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 60\u003c/a>. The measure allowed homeowners over the age of 55 to transfer the assessed value of their present home to a replacement home. There are conditions: The new home needs to be located in the same county and it has to be of equal or lesser value than the original home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Two years later, voters amended Proposition 13 again. \u003ca href=\"http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/prop60-90_55over.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 90\u003c/a> expanded on what Proposition 60 allowed, letting eligible homeowners keep their lower tax assessment if they buy a home of equal or lower value in another county, as long as county supervisors allowed it. Currently, about 11 counties, including Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego and Alameda, permit that lower assessment to be carried into their county.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>What’s allowed under Proposition 13 is back on the ballot again this November. \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=5&year=2018\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 5 seeks to expand Proposition 13\u003c/a> even farther and eliminate the requirement that county officials be on board before a lower tax assessment transfers across county lines. Under Proposition 5, that portability would extend to all 58 counties in California, whether or not local elected officials want it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under Proposition 5, a \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=5&year=2018\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">formula would be used to calculate the new property\u003c/a> tax based on the difference between the current assessed values of the old and new home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>It’s an idea that appeals to real estate agents like Linda Eisenman, whose territory is primarily north Orange County, including Brea, Placentia, Yorba Linda and Fullerton. According to \u003ca href=\"http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1400190&session=2017\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">state campaign finance reports\u003c/a>, the real estate industry has pumped more than $7 million into supporting Proposition 5.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[2018-prop prop=5]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 5 “would allow those people who have been in their homes for many years and have been able to benefit from Prop. 13, it would help them be able to transfer their property tax bases to the next property,” Eisenman says, adding it would be a huge benefit to baby boomers who want to move into a smaller place.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s also going to help younger people because it’s going to get some of the baby boomers who are staying put … out of their homes, freeing up their existing home for future homebuyers,” she says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And not incidentally, more homes bought and sold mean more commissions for real estate agents.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Renewing the debate\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>The measure has plenty of detractors who think Proposition 13 has been bad for California, and Proposition 5 does nothing to address that.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This new measure is the son of Prop. 13,” says San Francisco Assemblyman David Chiu, who strongly opposes Proposition 5.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">‘Supply is the real problem.’\u003cbr>\n\u003ccite>Alex Creel, California Association of Realtors\u003c/cite>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>The LAO reports that if Proposition 5 is approved, schools and local governments would lose property tax revenue — over $100 million each per year at first, growing over time to $1 billion each per year in today’s dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>However, the state would have to replace the $1 billion lost in revenue to schools to make them whole. So cities, counties and special districts would take the brunt of the financial hit if Proposition 5 passes, leaving them less money for everything from public safety to health care and libraries.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is simply going to allow longtime, wealthier homeowners to continue to receive additional tax breaks while doing nothing for millions of Californians who are struggling in our housing crisis,” Chiu said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700621\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-11700621 size-medium\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"three-plants\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">If Proposition 5 is approved, schools and local governments would lose significant property tax revenue. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>This includes people like Bryan Blythe. The 36-year-old renter has lived in a 1,000-square-foot apartment in San Francisco for nine years, all the while benefiting from the city’s rent control law. Now Blythe and his partner are thinking about buying a home in San Francisco or Oakland, if they can afford it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We grew up in the Bay Area,” Blythe says. “We both have family who are still here. And all of our friends are here. Our jobs are here. We don’t have any real desire to leave. We’d love to stay if it was possible financially.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Blythe says he and his partner earn good salaries, and they’ve saved for a down payment. But he says that buying instead of renting will triple their monthly costs for housing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Mortgage, property taxes, homeowners insurance, HOA fees — it’s gonna be a huge jump for us,” he says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There’s really nothing in Proposition 5 to help wannabe homeowners like Blythe afford their first home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Backers of Proposition 5 say it will help first-time buyers by freeing up homes sold by aging baby boomers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you sort of envision housing as a kind of ladder, you know the first rung of the ladder is rental housing,” says Alex Creel, senior vice president for government affairs with the California Association of Realtors, the main backer of Proposition 5. “As you move up the ladder, then pretty soon you’re into home ownership.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>So-called empty nesters might want to downsize and move into a smaller place, but Creel says that “under the current property tax rules you can’t do that. So you’re stuck and people are staying put.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Backers of Proposition 5 hope to convince voters that by giving older homeowners economic incentive to move, young families and first-time homebuyers will have more supply from which to choose.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But as almost everyone acknowledges, the real impediment to purchasing a home is cost, which is largely driven by supply and demand.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Supply is the real problem,” says Creel. While acknowledging that Proposition 5 does nothing to increase supply, “it moves us in the direction of making more housing available to families who need it.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Even if Proposition 5 passes, don’t count on Kenneth Wilkins’ home to be on the market anytime soon.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I don’t think we’ll sell the property,” he says. “I’d like to live here until I’m 99 or so,” he jokes. “Then I’d like to pass it on to the grandkids and their grandkids.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "The new measure once again revisits the 1978 law - the infamous Proposition 13 - that placed limits on annual property tax increases.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1721118364,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 47,
"wordCount": 1668
},
"headData": {
"title": "Proposition 5 Renews California's Debate Over Property Taxes | KQED",
"description": "The new measure once again revisits the 1978 law - the infamous Proposition 13 - that placed limits on annual property tax increases.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Proposition 5 Renews California's Debate Over Property Taxes",
"datePublished": "2018-10-24T09:13:17-07:00",
"dateModified": "2024-07-16T01:26:04-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"audioUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/RDnews/2018/10/ShaferProp5.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"audioTrackLength": 255,
"path": "/news/11700626/proposition-5-renews-californias-debate-over-property-taxes",
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Kenneth Wilkins is walking down the block in North Oakland where he bought a home 42 years ago. As he strolls up to the front of his house, he talks about the single-family home he purchased in 1976.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>“Actually this house cost less than this car,” Wilkins says, pointing to a modest white Toyota parked in front of the house.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This car cost $21,000, I think. And this house was less than that. I never dreamed that a house would sell for over a million in this neighborhood. But they do.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Two years after Wilkins became a homeowner, California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 13, rolling back property taxes and putting a strict limit on annual increases. Wilkins isn’t sure, but he thinks he voted for it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“But still, you know, even with Prop. 13 your taxes go up every year,” he says. “I mean it is limited, but over time it adds up, especially for people who are on fixed incomes.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There is no question homeowners like Wilkins have benefited tremendously from Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to a \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/publications/report/3497#Are_Similar_Property_Owners_Taxed_Differently_Under_Proposition.A013.3F\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2016 analysis\u003c/a> from the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), Proposition 13 has led to vastly different property tax assessments within counties, or even blocks, depending on how long the home has been owned.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Our \u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">own analysis of real estate data from Zillow\u003c/a> found significant disparities across the state as well. On Wilkins’ block alone, we found that if everyone was taxed at the current value of their home, the block would have paid an additional $130,000 in property tax last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Wilkins’ tax bill, for example, is much lower than a nearby neighbor’s in a similar home who bought more recently.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That kind of disparity can be found even among homeowners with similar ages, incomes and overall wealth.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700620\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-11700620 size-medium\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"power-lines\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-power-lines-overhead-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The share of properties sold in California each year has declined since Proposition 13 passed. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“Looking at 45- to 55-year-old homeowners with homes worth $575,000 to $625,000 and incomes of $80,000 to $90,000, property tax payments in 2014 ranged from $1,350 to $7,500,” the LAO report found in examining the San Francisco Bay Area.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That difference is based mostly on how long a property has been “protected” by annual tax increases by Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An unintended consequence is that the longer people benefit from lower property taxes, the harder it can be to afford a new home with taxes based on its new assessed value.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Indeed, the LAO report found that “the share of properties sold each year in California has been on the decline since the passage of Proposition 13.” While 16 percent of California properties were sold in 1977-78, this share declined to only 5 percent in 2014-15.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Expanding Proposition 13\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>California voters have modified Proposition 13 twice since they voted it in.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 1986, voters passed \u003ca href=\"http://ca-contracostacounty.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/817/Proposition-60?bidId=\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 60\u003c/a>. The measure allowed homeowners over the age of 55 to transfer the assessed value of their present home to a replacement home. There are conditions: The new home needs to be located in the same county and it has to be of equal or lesser value than the original home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Two years later, voters amended Proposition 13 again. \u003ca href=\"http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/prop60-90_55over.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 90\u003c/a> expanded on what Proposition 60 allowed, letting eligible homeowners keep their lower tax assessment if they buy a home of equal or lower value in another county, as long as county supervisors allowed it. Currently, about 11 counties, including Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego and Alameda, permit that lower assessment to be carried into their county.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>What’s allowed under Proposition 13 is back on the ballot again this November. \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=5&year=2018\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 5 seeks to expand Proposition 13\u003c/a> even farther and eliminate the requirement that county officials be on board before a lower tax assessment transfers across county lines. Under Proposition 5, that portability would extend to all 58 counties in California, whether or not local elected officials want it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under Proposition 5, a \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Proposition?number=5&year=2018\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">formula would be used to calculate the new property\u003c/a> tax based on the difference between the current assessed values of the old and new home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>It’s an idea that appeals to real estate agents like Linda Eisenman, whose territory is primarily north Orange County, including Brea, Placentia, Yorba Linda and Fullerton. According to \u003ca href=\"http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1400190&session=2017\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">state campaign finance reports\u003c/a>, the real estate industry has pumped more than $7 million into supporting Proposition 5.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 5 “would allow those people who have been in their homes for many years and have been able to benefit from Prop. 13, it would help them be able to transfer their property tax bases to the next property,” Eisenman says, adding it would be a huge benefit to baby boomers who want to move into a smaller place.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s also going to help younger people because it’s going to get some of the baby boomers who are staying put … out of their homes, freeing up their existing home for future homebuyers,” she says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And not incidentally, more homes bought and sold mean more commissions for real estate agents.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch3 class=\"story-subhed\">Renewing the debate\u003c/h3>\n\u003cp>The measure has plenty of detractors who think Proposition 13 has been bad for California, and Proposition 5 does nothing to address that.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This new measure is the son of Prop. 13,” says San Francisco Assemblyman David Chiu, who strongly opposes Proposition 5.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"pullquote alignright\">‘Supply is the real problem.’\u003cbr>\n\u003ccite>Alex Creel, California Association of Realtors\u003c/cite>\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>The LAO reports that if Proposition 5 is approved, schools and local governments would lose property tax revenue — over $100 million each per year at first, growing over time to $1 billion each per year in today’s dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>However, the state would have to replace the $1 billion lost in revenue to schools to make them whole. So cities, counties and special districts would take the brunt of the financial hit if Proposition 5 passes, leaving them less money for everything from public safety to health care and libraries.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is simply going to allow longtime, wealthier homeowners to continue to receive additional tax breaks while doing nothing for millions of Californians who are struggling in our housing crisis,” Chiu said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700621\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-11700621 size-medium\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"three-plants\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/scenes-three-plants-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">If Proposition 5 is approved, schools and local governments would lose significant property tax revenue. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey for California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>This includes people like Bryan Blythe. The 36-year-old renter has lived in a 1,000-square-foot apartment in San Francisco for nine years, all the while benefiting from the city’s rent control law. Now Blythe and his partner are thinking about buying a home in San Francisco or Oakland, if they can afford it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“We grew up in the Bay Area,” Blythe says. “We both have family who are still here. And all of our friends are here. Our jobs are here. We don’t have any real desire to leave. We’d love to stay if it was possible financially.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Blythe says he and his partner earn good salaries, and they’ve saved for a down payment. But he says that buying instead of renting will triple their monthly costs for housing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Mortgage, property taxes, homeowners insurance, HOA fees — it’s gonna be a huge jump for us,” he says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There’s really nothing in Proposition 5 to help wannabe homeowners like Blythe afford their first home.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Backers of Proposition 5 say it will help first-time buyers by freeing up homes sold by aging baby boomers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“If you sort of envision housing as a kind of ladder, you know the first rung of the ladder is rental housing,” says Alex Creel, senior vice president for government affairs with the California Association of Realtors, the main backer of Proposition 5. “As you move up the ladder, then pretty soon you’re into home ownership.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>So-called empty nesters might want to downsize and move into a smaller place, but Creel says that “under the current property tax rules you can’t do that. So you’re stuck and people are staying put.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Backers of Proposition 5 hope to convince voters that by giving older homeowners economic incentive to move, young families and first-time homebuyers will have more supply from which to choose.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But as almost everyone acknowledges, the real impediment to purchasing a home is cost, which is largely driven by supply and demand.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Supply is the real problem,” says Creel. While acknowledging that Proposition 5 does nothing to increase supply, “it moves us in the direction of making more housing available to families who need it.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Even if Proposition 5 passes, don’t count on Kenneth Wilkins’ home to be on the market anytime soon.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I don’t think we’ll sell the property,” he says. “I’d like to live here until I’m 99 or so,” he jokes. “Then I’d like to pass it on to the grandkids and their grandkids.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1867\" height=\"512\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1867px) 100vw, 1867px\">\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11700626/proposition-5-renews-californias-debate-over-property-taxes",
"authors": [
"255"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_6266",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_20013",
"news_20191",
"news_34054",
"news_24455",
"news_725",
"news_423",
"news_17041"
],
"featImg": "news_11700619",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11700609": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11700609",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11700609",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1540339787000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "proposition-13-promised-to-keep-our-neighborhoods-stable-did-it-work",
"title": "Proposition 13 Promised to Keep Our Neighborhoods Stable. Did It Work?",
"publishDate": 1540339787,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Proposition 13 Promised to Keep Our Neighborhoods Stable. Did It Work? | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"term": 72,
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\u003cp>It was an essential promise of Proposition 13: People would be able to keep their homes, neighborhoods would be stable.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California Dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>That promise played a role in the U.S. Supreme Court upholding Proposition 13 when it was challenged.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Because the State has a legitimate interest in local neighborhood preservation, continuity, and stability,” wrote Justice Harry A. Blackmun in the \u003ca href=\"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/1/#tab-opinion-1959053\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1992 opinion\u003c/a>, “it legitimately can decide to structure its tax system to discourage rapid turnover in ownership of homes and businesses.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13, however, has not stopped gentrification and displacement in neighborhoods across the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>It turns out that as prices soar, the tax benefits of Proposition 13 aren’t enough to stop owners from selling or renting their properties. As for stable property taxes: They offer no direct help to renters.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Which is not to say that there aren’t significant benefits for longtime homeowners.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Limited property tax increases have helped keep people like Dorothy in her three-bedroom, one-bath home in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy, whose last name is withheld to protect her privacy, says she bought her modest home back in 1956 for $10,000. Today it’s worth more than $500,000. According to county records, she pays less than $1,300 a year in property taxes. Someone buying that same home today would pay more than $5,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy says she’d struggle to pay more. So she’s appreciative of the low taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I’m good,” she says, “I’m still very blessed.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“When I look at how some people had to sell to leave and go other places to live, I’m doing good to still be sitting here since 1956.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy talks to us through her metal screen door; she says she wasn’t dressed for company. Another neighbor walks over. “I’m just checking on you,” he calls up.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy says her son is encouraging her to move someplace closer to him, someplace with cheaper housing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She’s not ready to go.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch4 style=\"text-align: center;\">\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/19922/the-taxpayers-revolt-how-proposition-13-changed-california-an-illustrated-explainer\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\u003cspan style=\"color: #000000;\">Prop. 13 Explained\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003c/h4>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/19922/the-taxpayers-revolt-how-proposition-13-changed-california-an-illustrated-explainer\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11700722 size-full\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"606\" height=\"302\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon.png 606w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-160x80.png 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-240x120.png 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-375x187.png 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-520x259.png 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 606px) 100vw, 606px\">\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>“My church is right around the corner up there, and when I get ready to go to the beauty shop I walk down the street.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Her neighbor, Donna, has lived on this block since 1989. She’s in her early 90s and equally rooted.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“More or less keeping on, keeping on, takes about all the energy I have really,” she laughs. “At my age, I wouldn’t dream of moving out, and I have no intention of living in an old person’s home, believe me.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But the Dorothys and Donnas may well be the exception — the outliers a generation after Proposition 13 fundamentally changed California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“In some cases it could help people hold on, dig in their heels,” says Dowell Myers, an urban planning professor at USC. “But against this tide of a [housing] shortage, you can’t stop change at all. It’s like a flood. It’ll overwhelm you eventually, it’ll break through your defenses.”\u003c/p>\n\u003ch4>What is the connection between Proposition 13 and gentrification?\u003c/h4>\n\u003cp>“We don’t know a lot, is the bottom line,” says Isaac William Martin, a professor of sociology at UC San Diego, who has studied the relationship between gentrification and limits on property taxes. “We couldn’t find any evidence that laws like Proposition 13 have any effect on the probability of displacement from gentrifying neighborhoods.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Darrell H. Brown has rented on this block since the mid-’80s. But his landlord has asked him to leave, and he can’t afford another place in the neighborhood.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>At some level, it comes down to renters vs. owners.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700635\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003ca href=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley.jpg\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-11700635 size-medium\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1920x1279.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1180x786.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-520x346.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/a>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Darrell H. Brown has rented on this block since the mid-’80s. But his landlord has asked him to leave, and he can’t afford another place in the neighborhood. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“When we think about gentrification,” Martin says, “there are people at risk of being displaced, and they are overwhelmingly renters.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Landlords, like other homeowners, benefit from Proposition 13. But, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office: “The extent to which landlords pass on their tax relief to renters is unclear.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Here’s what we do know: Neighborhoods in California’s in-demand coastal cities are changing quickly. Researchers found the number of gentrified neighborhoods in Los Angeles County jumped 16 percent between 1990 and 2015. San Diego County saw an 18 percent increase in gentrified neighborhoods in the same time period.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As the demand for housing in the Bay Area grows, Oakland neighborhoods like this are losing low-income residents, according to research from the Urban Displacement Project at UC Berkeley.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>On this block where we’ve based this reporting project, Dorothy and Donna are among the few remaining longtime residents. According to data from the 2016 American Community Survey, about 10 percent of residents moved into the area before or during the 1980s. Only 4 percent of the residents in this neighborhood lived here before 1970.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Back in 1970, homes in this neighborhood sold for about $13,800, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Even when you account for inflation, there is a massive gulf between then and now. The cost of a home then, adjusted for inflation, would be about $92,000 today. Median rent in the neighborhood was $86 a month in the 1970s, about $574 in today’s dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Today, homes on this block can sell for more than $1 million. A two-bed, two-bath apartment on the block rents for $3,000 a month.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And as the prices have changed, the demographics of the neighborhood have changed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700637\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003ca href=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM.png\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700637\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-800x282.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"282\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-800x282.png 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-160x56.png 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1020x360.png 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1200x423.png 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1920x678.png 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1180x416.png 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-960x339.png 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-240x85.png 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-375x132.png 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-520x183.png 520w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM.png 2046w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/a>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The North Oakland block’s census tract has seen rising home values and a high percentage of new residents in recent decades. \u003ccite>(SOURCE: 2016 American Community Survey)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Back in 1970, about 85 percent of the residents were black, according to U.S. Census data. As of 2016, about 40 percent of the population was white, 33 percent black, about 10 percent Hispanic and 8 percent Asian.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 1970, about 4 percent of adults had four years of college education or more. Now, more than four in 10 residents have earned at least a bachelor’s degree.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As real estate in the Bay Area has passed the boiling point, this once-modest neighborhood has also started attracting wealthier residents. According to 2016 census data, median household income was nearly $56,000 a year. Nearly a third of households made more than $100,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He hates that he has to leave.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“My neighbors are great to me,” says Brown. “They are brothers and sisters to me. They care about me like I care about them.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>His experience reflects the pain of gentrification.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700638\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003ca href=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux.jpg\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700638\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/a>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Darrell H. Brown wishes he could afford to to stay in the neighborhood. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“When a neighborhood gentrifies, longtime residents may start to move out, and that can really be disruptive for the feeling of community and for long-term relationships,” says Martin, the UC San Diego professor.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Still, what gentrification means for homeowners and renters is profoundly different. Homeowners often get to sell at a profit, says Martin. Renters are more often evicted or pushed out.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s important when we think about gentrification to distinguish between the way it can strain the fabric of community, and the way it can harm individuals,” says Martin, “because some of the way it strains the fabric of the community is by benefiting some people more than others.”\u003c/p>\n\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "Despite its promise, Proposition 13 has not stopped gentrification and displacement in neighborhoods across California.\r\n\r\n",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1721111880,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 43,
"wordCount": 1367
},
"headData": {
"title": "Proposition 13 Promised to Keep Our Neighborhoods Stable. Did It Work? | KQED",
"description": "Despite its promise, Proposition 13 has not stopped gentrification and displacement in neighborhoods across California.\r\n\r\n",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Proposition 13 Promised to Keep Our Neighborhoods Stable. Did It Work?",
"datePublished": "2018-10-23T17:09:47-07:00",
"dateModified": "2024-07-15T23:38:00-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"sticky": false,
"nprByline": "Adriene Hill",
"path": "/news/11700609/proposition-13-promised-to-keep-our-neighborhoods-stable-did-it-work",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>It was an essential promise of Proposition 13: People would be able to keep their homes, neighborhoods would be stable.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch3>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">The California Dream: The Oakland Block That Proposition 13 Built\u003c/a>\u003c/h3>\n\u003cfigure>\u003ca href=\"http://projects.scpr.org/prop-13/\">\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://u.s.kqed.net/2018/10/23/Prop13600.jpg\" alt=\"\">\u003c/a>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Since 1978, Proposition 13 has played an outsized role in who can afford to live in California. Did it save the California Dream, or spoil it? To answer that question, we focused on a single block in a middle-class neighborhood in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>That promise played a role in the U.S. Supreme Court upholding Proposition 13 when it was challenged.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Because the State has a legitimate interest in local neighborhood preservation, continuity, and stability,” wrote Justice Harry A. Blackmun in the \u003ca href=\"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/1/#tab-opinion-1959053\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1992 opinion\u003c/a>, “it legitimately can decide to structure its tax system to discourage rapid turnover in ownership of homes and businesses.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13, however, has not stopped gentrification and displacement in neighborhoods across the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>It turns out that as prices soar, the tax benefits of Proposition 13 aren’t enough to stop owners from selling or renting their properties. As for stable property taxes: They offer no direct help to renters.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Which is not to say that there aren’t significant benefits for longtime homeowners.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Limited property tax increases have helped keep people like Dorothy in her three-bedroom, one-bath home in North Oakland.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy, whose last name is withheld to protect her privacy, says she bought her modest home back in 1956 for $10,000. Today it’s worth more than $500,000. According to county records, she pays less than $1,300 a year in property taxes. Someone buying that same home today would pay more than $5,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy says she’d struggle to pay more. So she’s appreciative of the low taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I’m good,” she says, “I’m still very blessed.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“When I look at how some people had to sell to leave and go other places to live, I’m doing good to still be sitting here since 1956.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy talks to us through her metal screen door; she says she wasn’t dressed for company. Another neighbor walks over. “I’m just checking on you,” he calls up.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Dorothy says her son is encouraging her to move someplace closer to him, someplace with cheaper housing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>She’s not ready to go.\u003c/p>\n\u003caside class=\"alignright\">\n\u003ch4 style=\"text-align: center;\">\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/19922/the-taxpayers-revolt-how-proposition-13-changed-california-an-illustrated-explainer\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\u003cspan style=\"color: #000000;\">Prop. 13 Explained\u003c/span>\u003c/a>\u003c/h4>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/19922/the-taxpayers-revolt-how-proposition-13-changed-california-an-illustrated-explainer\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone wp-image-11700722 size-full\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"606\" height=\"302\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon.png 606w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-160x80.png 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-240x120.png 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-375x187.png 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/cartoon-520x259.png 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 606px) 100vw, 606px\">\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/aside>\n\u003cp>“My church is right around the corner up there, and when I get ready to go to the beauty shop I walk down the street.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Her neighbor, Donna, has lived on this block since 1989. She’s in her early 90s and equally rooted.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“More or less keeping on, keeping on, takes about all the energy I have really,” she laughs. “At my age, I wouldn’t dream of moving out, and I have no intention of living in an old person’s home, believe me.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But the Dorothys and Donnas may well be the exception — the outliers a generation after Proposition 13 fundamentally changed California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“In some cases it could help people hold on, dig in their heels,” says Dowell Myers, an urban planning professor at USC. “But against this tide of a [housing] shortage, you can’t stop change at all. It’s like a flood. It’ll overwhelm you eventually, it’ll break through your defenses.”\u003c/p>\n\u003ch4>What is the connection between Proposition 13 and gentrification?\u003c/h4>\n\u003cp>“We don’t know a lot, is the bottom line,” says Isaac William Martin, a professor of sociology at UC San Diego, who has studied the relationship between gentrification and limits on property taxes. “We couldn’t find any evidence that laws like Proposition 13 have any effect on the probability of displacement from gentrifying neighborhoods.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Darrell H. Brown has rented on this block since the mid-’80s. But his landlord has asked him to leave, and he can’t afford another place in the neighborhood.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>At some level, it comes down to renters vs. owners.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700635\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003ca href=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley.jpg\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-11700635 size-medium\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1920x1279.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-1180x786.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/gentrification-darrell-alley-520x346.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/a>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Darrell H. Brown has rented on this block since the mid-’80s. But his landlord has asked him to leave, and he can’t afford another place in the neighborhood. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“When we think about gentrification,” Martin says, “there are people at risk of being displaced, and they are overwhelmingly renters.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Landlords, like other homeowners, benefit from Proposition 13. But, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office: “The extent to which landlords pass on their tax relief to renters is unclear.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Here’s what we do know: Neighborhoods in California’s in-demand coastal cities are changing quickly. Researchers found the number of gentrified neighborhoods in Los Angeles County jumped 16 percent between 1990 and 2015. San Diego County saw an 18 percent increase in gentrified neighborhoods in the same time period.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As the demand for housing in the Bay Area grows, Oakland neighborhoods like this are losing low-income residents, according to research from the Urban Displacement Project at UC Berkeley.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>On this block where we’ve based this reporting project, Dorothy and Donna are among the few remaining longtime residents. According to data from the 2016 American Community Survey, about 10 percent of residents moved into the area before or during the 1980s. Only 4 percent of the residents in this neighborhood lived here before 1970.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Back in 1970, homes in this neighborhood sold for about $13,800, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Even when you account for inflation, there is a massive gulf between then and now. The cost of a home then, adjusted for inflation, would be about $92,000 today. Median rent in the neighborhood was $86 a month in the 1970s, about $574 in today’s dollars.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Today, homes on this block can sell for more than $1 million. A two-bed, two-bath apartment on the block rents for $3,000 a month.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And as the prices have changed, the demographics of the neighborhood have changed.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700637\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003ca href=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM.png\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700637\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-800x282.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"282\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-800x282.png 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-160x56.png 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1020x360.png 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1200x423.png 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1920x678.png 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-1180x416.png 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-960x339.png 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-240x85.png 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-375x132.png 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM-520x183.png 520w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/Screen-Shot-2018-10-23-at-11.38.02-AM.png 2046w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/a>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">The North Oakland block’s census tract has seen rising home values and a high percentage of new residents in recent decades. \u003ccite>(SOURCE: 2016 American Community Survey)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Back in 1970, about 85 percent of the residents were black, according to U.S. Census data. As of 2016, about 40 percent of the population was white, 33 percent black, about 10 percent Hispanic and 8 percent Asian.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 1970, about 4 percent of adults had four years of college education or more. Now, more than four in 10 residents have earned at least a bachelor’s degree.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As real estate in the Bay Area has passed the boiling point, this once-modest neighborhood has also started attracting wealthier residents. According to 2016 census data, median household income was nearly $56,000 a year. Nearly a third of households made more than $100,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He hates that he has to leave.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“My neighbors are great to me,” says Brown. “They are brothers and sisters to me. They care about me like I care about them.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>His experience reflects the pain of gentrification.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11700638\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003ca href=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux.jpg\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-11700638\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-800x533.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"533\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1200x800.jpg 1200w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1920x1280.jpg 1920w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-1180x787.jpg 1180w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-960x640.jpg 960w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-240x160.jpg 240w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-375x250.jpg 375w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/10/The-block-that-Prop.-13-built_-Neighborhood-in-flux-520x347.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/a>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Darrell H. Brown wishes he could afford to to stay in the neighborhood. \u003ccite>(Sean Havey/California Dream)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>“When a neighborhood gentrifies, longtime residents may start to move out, and that can really be disruptive for the feeling of community and for long-term relationships,” says Martin, the UC San Diego professor.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Still, what gentrification means for homeowners and renters is profoundly different. Homeowners often get to sell at a profit, says Martin. Renters are more often evicted or pushed out.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s important when we think about gentrification to distinguish between the way it can strain the fabric of community, and the way it can harm individuals,” says Martin, “because some of the way it strains the fabric of the community is by benefiting some people more than others.”\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11700609/proposition-13-promised-to-keep-our-neighborhoods-stable-did-it-work",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11700609"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_6266",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_3921",
"news_34054",
"news_725",
"news_17041"
],
"affiliates": [
"news_7055"
],
"featImg": "news_11700636",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11677374": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11677374",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11677374",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1530239012000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news",
"term": 72
},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1530239012,
"format": "standard",
"disqusTitle": "Here Are the 12 Statewide Measures on California's November Ballot",
"title": "Here Are the 12 Statewide Measures on California's November Ballot",
"headTitle": "The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>California voters will be asked to decide on 12 measures in November's election, on topics ranging from housing to health care to taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Secretary of State's office certified the final list of ballot measures on Thursday, after a series of last minute deals scrapped potential ballot measures on lead paint cleanup,\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11677975/california-bows-to-beverage-industry-blocks-soda-taxes\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> local taxes\u003c/a>, and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11676475/compromise-may-keep-privacy-initiative-off-november-ballot\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">internet privacy\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Here's what Californians will see on their ballot in the fall:\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Housing Bond:\u003c/strong> As part of last year's legislative push on affordable housing, state lawmakers placed this $4 billion \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11614489/california-lawmakers-reach-agreement-on-affordable-housing-bond\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">housing bond\u003c/a> on the ballot. If passed, the state will issue bonds that will largely fund the construction of low-income housing. Another billion will go to the Cal-Vet Loan Program, which provides home loans to veterans in the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Homeless Bond: \u003c/strong>In 2016, the legislature approved a $2 billion bond to fund new housing for homeless Californians, using money from a tax on millionaires. The bond has been held up by a legal challenge that contends that the money was originally earmarked by voters for mental health services. If approved, this measure will resolve the legal question and allow the money to be spent on housing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Rent Control: \u003c/strong>This measure would free California cities to expand \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11677380/is-rent-control-working-and-should-we-have-more-or-less-of-it\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">rent control\u003c/a> by repealing the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. For more than 20 years, that law has blocked cities from placing rent control on new buildings, and allows landlords to reset rents to market rate prices once a rent-controlled apartment is vacated. The initiative is being pushed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, after a bill to repeal Costa-Hawkins failed in the legislature earlier this year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Expand Proposition 13:\u003c/strong> When voters passed Prop. 13 in 1978, it rolled back property taxes and placed a cap on annual property tax increases until the property was sold. That keeps taxes relatively low. A typical longtime homeowner who sells his or her home and buys a new one in California often sees their property tax bill skyrocket, since it's based on current market value. This measure, backed by the California Association of Realtors, would allow some homeowners to take their existing tax savings with them to the new property they buy.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>3 Californias:\u003c/strong> Venture capitalist Tim Draper's ballot measure would divide the existing state of California into three new states with roughly equal numbers of people. Draper, who also backed a previous effort to divide California into six new states, has spent nearly $2 million on this one. Even if voters pass the measure in November, it would still face\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11674665/breaking-up-is-hard-to-do-what-the-proposal-to-split-california-could-learn-from-the-past\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> formidable legal and political hurdles\u003c/a>. Congress, the President and the State Legislature -- not to mention the courts -- would also need to approve it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Gas Tax Repeal: \u003c/strong>In 2017 Governor Jerry Brown signed off on \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11395314/in-big-win-for-gov-brown-state-legislature-oks-major-transportation-plan\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">legislation\u003c/a> increasing California's gas tax and vehicle fees to fund transportation improvements. The measure was projected to raise about $5 billion a year for 10 years. But the increased taxes angered Republicans who said there were other ways for the state to fund road repairs. They launched an effort to place a repeal of the tax on the November ballot. Now voters will decide whether to keep the increase or reject it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Water Bond: \u003c/strong>In June\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>California voters approved a $4 billion bond that included money for water infrastructure and flood protection projects. In November they'll get to decide if the state should spend an additional $8.9 billion on water projects. The November water bond would provide money for drinking and waste water treatment, groundwater sustainability and conservation programs \u003ca href=\"https://waterbond.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/short-summary.pdf\">among others\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Daylight Saving Time:\u003c/strong> Approval of this proposition would move California closer to being the first state with year-round daylight saving time. Proponents argue that more hours of daylight in the evening will mean fewer car accidents and more time for Californians to exercise outdoors. If the measure passes, the legislature would have to approve a bill to make the change official, and also gain a waiver from the U.S. Congress.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Farm Animal Confinement: \u003c/strong>In 2008 voters approved Proposition 2, which prohibited farm animals from being confined in crates that did not allow them to to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs. The 2018 proposition would ban the sale of meat and eggs from veal, breeding-pigs and egg-laying hens unless the animal's enclosures met specific square-footage requirements. For instance, meat from veal could not be sold if the animal was kept in an area with less than 43 square feet of usable floor space per calf.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Children's Hospital Bond: \u003c/strong>This measure would allow the state to issue $1.5 billion in bonds to fund improvements at the state's 13 children hospitals, as well as other hospitals that serve children in California. Those improvements could include new construction, expansions, remodeling, or refinancing of the hospital sites.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dialysis Regulation\u003c/strong>s: Health care unions are backing this measure that would cap the profits of companies providing dialysis, or blood filtering, for patients with kidney failure. The measure sets a baseline for the cost of the treatment, and then caps the companies' profits at 115 percent of the cost of care. Any revenue above that threshold would have to be sent back to private health insurers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>On-Call Breaks for Paramedics and EMTs:\u003c/strong> A 2016 State Supreme Court ruling found that requiring workers to remain on-call during their meal and rest breaks (a common practice among ambulance workers) was unconstitutional. This ballot measures seeks to codify that past practice and requires private-sector EMT workers and paramedics to remain on-call throughout their work day.\u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11677374 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11677374",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2018/06/28/here-are-the-12-statewide-measures-on-californias-november-ballot/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 953,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 17
},
"modified": 1530304715,
"excerpt": "Voters will face another wave of ballot measures in November, on topics ranging from rent control to kidney dialysis and even carving up California into three new states.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "Voters will face another wave of ballot measures in November, on topics ranging from rent control to kidney dialysis and even carving up California into three new states.",
"title": "Here Are the 12 Statewide Measures on California's November Ballot | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Here Are the 12 Statewide Measures on California's November Ballot",
"datePublished": "2018-06-28T19:23:32-07:00",
"dateModified": "2018-06-29T13:38:35-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "here-are-the-12-statewide-measures-on-californias-november-ballot",
"status": "publish",
"path": "/news/11677374/here-are-the-12-statewide-measures-on-californias-november-ballot",
"audioUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/tcr/2018/06/ShaferNovemberBallot.mp3",
"audioDuration": 96000,
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>California voters will be asked to decide on 12 measures in November's election, on topics ranging from housing to health care to taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Secretary of State's office certified the final list of ballot measures on Thursday, after a series of last minute deals scrapped potential ballot measures on lead paint cleanup,\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11677975/california-bows-to-beverage-industry-blocks-soda-taxes\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> local taxes\u003c/a>, and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11676475/compromise-may-keep-privacy-initiative-off-november-ballot\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">internet privacy\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Here's what Californians will see on their ballot in the fall:\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Housing Bond:\u003c/strong> As part of last year's legislative push on affordable housing, state lawmakers placed this $4 billion \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11614489/california-lawmakers-reach-agreement-on-affordable-housing-bond\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">housing bond\u003c/a> on the ballot. If passed, the state will issue bonds that will largely fund the construction of low-income housing. Another billion will go to the Cal-Vet Loan Program, which provides home loans to veterans in the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Homeless Bond: \u003c/strong>In 2016, the legislature approved a $2 billion bond to fund new housing for homeless Californians, using money from a tax on millionaires. The bond has been held up by a legal challenge that contends that the money was originally earmarked by voters for mental health services. If approved, this measure will resolve the legal question and allow the money to be spent on housing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Rent Control: \u003c/strong>This measure would free California cities to expand \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11677380/is-rent-control-working-and-should-we-have-more-or-less-of-it\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">rent control\u003c/a> by repealing the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. For more than 20 years, that law has blocked cities from placing rent control on new buildings, and allows landlords to reset rents to market rate prices once a rent-controlled apartment is vacated. The initiative is being pushed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, after a bill to repeal Costa-Hawkins failed in the legislature earlier this year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Expand Proposition 13:\u003c/strong> When voters passed Prop. 13 in 1978, it rolled back property taxes and placed a cap on annual property tax increases until the property was sold. That keeps taxes relatively low. A typical longtime homeowner who sells his or her home and buys a new one in California often sees their property tax bill skyrocket, since it's based on current market value. This measure, backed by the California Association of Realtors, would allow some homeowners to take their existing tax savings with them to the new property they buy.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>3 Californias:\u003c/strong> Venture capitalist Tim Draper's ballot measure would divide the existing state of California into three new states with roughly equal numbers of people. Draper, who also backed a previous effort to divide California into six new states, has spent nearly $2 million on this one. Even if voters pass the measure in November, it would still face\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11674665/breaking-up-is-hard-to-do-what-the-proposal-to-split-california-could-learn-from-the-past\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"> formidable legal and political hurdles\u003c/a>. Congress, the President and the State Legislature -- not to mention the courts -- would also need to approve it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Gas Tax Repeal: \u003c/strong>In 2017 Governor Jerry Brown signed off on \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11395314/in-big-win-for-gov-brown-state-legislature-oks-major-transportation-plan\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">legislation\u003c/a> increasing California's gas tax and vehicle fees to fund transportation improvements. The measure was projected to raise about $5 billion a year for 10 years. But the increased taxes angered Republicans who said there were other ways for the state to fund road repairs. They launched an effort to place a repeal of the tax on the November ballot. Now voters will decide whether to keep the increase or reject it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Water Bond: \u003c/strong>In June\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>California voters approved a $4 billion bond that included money for water infrastructure and flood protection projects. In November they'll get to decide if the state should spend an additional $8.9 billion on water projects. The November water bond would provide money for drinking and waste water treatment, groundwater sustainability and conservation programs \u003ca href=\"https://waterbond.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/short-summary.pdf\">among others\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Daylight Saving Time:\u003c/strong> Approval of this proposition would move California closer to being the first state with year-round daylight saving time. Proponents argue that more hours of daylight in the evening will mean fewer car accidents and more time for Californians to exercise outdoors. If the measure passes, the legislature would have to approve a bill to make the change official, and also gain a waiver from the U.S. Congress.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Farm Animal Confinement: \u003c/strong>In 2008 voters approved Proposition 2, which prohibited farm animals from being confined in crates that did not allow them to to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs. The 2018 proposition would ban the sale of meat and eggs from veal, breeding-pigs and egg-laying hens unless the animal's enclosures met specific square-footage requirements. For instance, meat from veal could not be sold if the animal was kept in an area with less than 43 square feet of usable floor space per calf.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Children's Hospital Bond: \u003c/strong>This measure would allow the state to issue $1.5 billion in bonds to fund improvements at the state's 13 children hospitals, as well as other hospitals that serve children in California. Those improvements could include new construction, expansions, remodeling, or refinancing of the hospital sites.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Dialysis Regulation\u003c/strong>s: Health care unions are backing this measure that would cap the profits of companies providing dialysis, or blood filtering, for patients with kidney failure. The measure sets a baseline for the cost of the treatment, and then caps the companies' profits at 115 percent of the cost of care. Any revenue above that threshold would have to be sent back to private health insurers.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>On-Call Breaks for Paramedics and EMTs:\u003c/strong> A 2016 State Supreme Court ruling found that requiring workers to remain on-call during their meal and rest breaks (a common practice among ambulance workers) was unconstitutional. This ballot measures seeks to codify that past practice and requires private-sector EMT workers and paramedics to remain on-call throughout their work day.\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11677374/here-are-the-12-statewide-measures-on-californias-november-ballot",
"authors": [
"227",
"255",
"3239",
"11200"
],
"programs": [
"news_72"
],
"categories": [
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_23591",
"news_20191",
"news_19542",
"news_19105",
"news_725",
"news_3924",
"news_17041"
],
"featImg": "news_11678042",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11676299": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11676299",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11676299",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1529913627000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news",
"term": 72
},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1529913627,
"format": "standard",
"disqusTitle": "Is the Gas Tax Repeal Measure the New Proposition 13?",
"title": "Is the Gas Tax Repeal Measure the New Proposition 13?",
"headTitle": "The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>\u003cem>Updated Monday June 25 at 3 p.m.: Reflects that the measure has qualified for the ballot.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Secretary of State Alex Padilla today announced that a measure to repeal the recent gas tax increase has qualified for the November ballot. Republican supporters of the initiative are hoping to hear an echo from another citizen tax revolt from 40 years ago: \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_13,_Tax_Limitations_Initiative_(1978)\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 13\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>That\u003c/em> measure, passed overwhelmingly by voters in 1978, significantly rolled back property taxes and placed strict limits on future annual increases on homeowners and commercial property owners. Some say it helped create the political climate that launched Ronald Reagan into the White House.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>So how do the politics of the gas tax repeal compare with those around Proposition 13? We know that anger over the tax hike was enough to get freshman Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton) recalled by his constituents for the vote he cast in favor of it. But will the issue help put Republicans over the finish line come November?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"I think it’s very similar to Prop. 13,\" said political consultant Dave Gilliard, who's running the gas tax repeal campaign.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"There’s a lot of building anger among the shrinking middle class and those who have aspirations to make it into the middle class but can’t because of the high cost of living in California. And I think this ballot measure is an outlet for that anger.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Compared with property taxes, which mostly affect homeowners, fuel taxes are \"a broad-based tax that hits literally everybody,\" noted GOP consultant Wayne Johnson. \"So (compared with Prop. 13) it's a much better motivator for people and it crystallizes people’s thinking because it’s easy to understand.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Johnson, who worked with anti-tax crusader and Proposition 13 co-author Paul Gann decades ago and is now working for Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox, said last year's passage of transportation measure \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SB 1\u003c/a> highlights how Democrats have contributed to the state's affordability crisis.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"It’s a very easy, recognizable example of the failure of the last eight years. There’s been a lot of prosperity that’s forgotten millions of Californians,\" Johnson said, adding that prosperity for coastal Californians allows Democratic politicians to \"sip their chardonnay on the deck of their $4 million home thinking everything is fine.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Johnson is hoping the gas tax repeal, if it qualifies for November, will help drive Republican voters to the polls.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There are similarities between the California political climate in 1978 and today, notably the large state budget surplus. Forty years ago the surplus was $2.9 billion, much larger as a percentage of the state budget than today's $9 billion surplus. It led many Republicans then — as now — to say the state should refund the money to taxpayers rather than spend it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>However, Mark Baldassare, who heads the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), said the differences between then and now outweigh the similarities.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"Proposition 13 came at a time when Californians were very anxious, not just about the cost of housing but about the cost of everything,\" Baldassare said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>By election day in 1978, the \u003ca href=\"http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">U.S. inflation rate\u003c/a> was nearly 9 percent.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"There was a general concern about prices spiraling out of control and the economy being in a place where it was difficult for people to know what they were going to need to live on,\" Baldassare said, because of both inflation and the lack of controls on property tax increases.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>By comparison, today's inflation rate is under 3 percent. And Baldassare said while housing prices have spiraled up quickly in recent years, leaving many unable to afford a home, \"most Californians feel they are generally in good shape financially.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>PPIC recently released a \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/publication/proposition-13-40-years-later/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">study\u003c/a> examining voter attitudes about Proposition 13 today. A majority of Californians (57 percent) and likely voters (65 percent) feel that Proposition 13 has been \"mostly a good thing for the state.\" Even among Californians ages 35 to 54, a slight majority think limiting property tax increases has been mostly a good thing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Not all Republicans see the gas tax as this year's version of Proposition 13. GOP consultant Rob Stutzman, who worked unsuccessfully to convince the Republican congressional delegation from California \u003cem>not\u003c/em> to support the repeal, said the two issues are fundamentally different.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"The gas tax is simply unpopular,\" Stutzman said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But, he added, \"It’s not costing anyone their home.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He said polling he has seen suggests support for repealing the tax increase is in the low 50s, with opinion pretty divided on the cost/benefit analysis of raising gas taxes to fund transportation improvements.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"The problem with that thinking is this repeal isn’t wildly popular — it's only moderately popular,\" Stutzman said. \"\u003cem>And\u003c/em> it will draw a $30 to $40 million campaign, some of it funded by Republican donors like road construction and engineering companies, to oppose it. That essentially works against Republican interests.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Stutzman adds there's no evidence that the gas tax could help a Republican candidate running statewide — like John Cox — overcome their large disadvantages in voter registration.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Then there's the current governor, Jerry Brown. In 2014, he told the Los Angeles Times that he'd learned from his failure to have a bank of campaign cash to draw upon to ward off political enemies.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Brown suggested that if he'd had such an account in 1978, he could have used it to promote an alternative measure to Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Four years ago he told the Times, \"There may be things to be done that will involve a ballot measure,\" adding, \"I do think having a credible war chest will overcome whatever infirmities lame-duck governors might ordinarily suffer from.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He learned the lesson well. Brown's political account is currently flush with $15 million — some of which could surely be spent to oppose the gas tax repeal on the November ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11676299 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11676299",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2018/06/25/is-the-gas-tax-repeal-measure-the-new-proposition-13/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 1007,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 29
},
"modified": 1529970281,
"excerpt": "Republicans are hoping the gas tax repeal stokes voter anger and turnout in November, but it's not clear that will happen.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "Republicans are hoping the gas tax repeal stokes voter anger and turnout in November, but it's not clear that will happen.",
"title": "Is the Gas Tax Repeal Measure the New Proposition 13? | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Is the Gas Tax Repeal Measure the New Proposition 13?",
"datePublished": "2018-06-25T01:00:27-07:00",
"dateModified": "2018-06-25T16:44:41-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "is-the-gas-tax-repeal-measure-the-new-proposition-13",
"status": "publish",
"path": "/news/11676299/is-the-gas-tax-repeal-measure-the-new-proposition-13",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>\u003cem>Updated Monday June 25 at 3 p.m.: Reflects that the measure has qualified for the ballot.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Secretary of State Alex Padilla today announced that a measure to repeal the recent gas tax increase has qualified for the November ballot. Republican supporters of the initiative are hoping to hear an echo from another citizen tax revolt from 40 years ago: \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_13,_Tax_Limitations_Initiative_(1978)\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Proposition 13\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>That\u003c/em> measure, passed overwhelmingly by voters in 1978, significantly rolled back property taxes and placed strict limits on future annual increases on homeowners and commercial property owners. Some say it helped create the political climate that launched Ronald Reagan into the White House.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>So how do the politics of the gas tax repeal compare with those around Proposition 13? We know that anger over the tax hike was enough to get freshman Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton) recalled by his constituents for the vote he cast in favor of it. But will the issue help put Republicans over the finish line come November?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"I think it’s very similar to Prop. 13,\" said political consultant Dave Gilliard, who's running the gas tax repeal campaign.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"There’s a lot of building anger among the shrinking middle class and those who have aspirations to make it into the middle class but can’t because of the high cost of living in California. And I think this ballot measure is an outlet for that anger.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Compared with property taxes, which mostly affect homeowners, fuel taxes are \"a broad-based tax that hits literally everybody,\" noted GOP consultant Wayne Johnson. \"So (compared with Prop. 13) it's a much better motivator for people and it crystallizes people’s thinking because it’s easy to understand.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Johnson, who worked with anti-tax crusader and Proposition 13 co-author Paul Gann decades ago and is now working for Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox, said last year's passage of transportation measure \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SB 1\u003c/a> highlights how Democrats have contributed to the state's affordability crisis.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"It’s a very easy, recognizable example of the failure of the last eight years. There’s been a lot of prosperity that’s forgotten millions of Californians,\" Johnson said, adding that prosperity for coastal Californians allows Democratic politicians to \"sip their chardonnay on the deck of their $4 million home thinking everything is fine.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Johnson is hoping the gas tax repeal, if it qualifies for November, will help drive Republican voters to the polls.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>There are similarities between the California political climate in 1978 and today, notably the large state budget surplus. Forty years ago the surplus was $2.9 billion, much larger as a percentage of the state budget than today's $9 billion surplus. It led many Republicans then — as now — to say the state should refund the money to taxpayers rather than spend it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>However, Mark Baldassare, who heads the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), said the differences between then and now outweigh the similarities.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"Proposition 13 came at a time when Californians were very anxious, not just about the cost of housing but about the cost of everything,\" Baldassare said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>By election day in 1978, the \u003ca href=\"http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">U.S. inflation rate\u003c/a> was nearly 9 percent.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"There was a general concern about prices spiraling out of control and the economy being in a place where it was difficult for people to know what they were going to need to live on,\" Baldassare said, because of both inflation and the lack of controls on property tax increases.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>By comparison, today's inflation rate is under 3 percent. And Baldassare said while housing prices have spiraled up quickly in recent years, leaving many unable to afford a home, \"most Californians feel they are generally in good shape financially.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>PPIC recently released a \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/publication/proposition-13-40-years-later/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">study\u003c/a> examining voter attitudes about Proposition 13 today. A majority of Californians (57 percent) and likely voters (65 percent) feel that Proposition 13 has been \"mostly a good thing for the state.\" Even among Californians ages 35 to 54, a slight majority think limiting property tax increases has been mostly a good thing.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Not all Republicans see the gas tax as this year's version of Proposition 13. GOP consultant Rob Stutzman, who worked unsuccessfully to convince the Republican congressional delegation from California \u003cem>not\u003c/em> to support the repeal, said the two issues are fundamentally different.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"The gas tax is simply unpopular,\" Stutzman said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But, he added, \"It’s not costing anyone their home.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He said polling he has seen suggests support for repealing the tax increase is in the low 50s, with opinion pretty divided on the cost/benefit analysis of raising gas taxes to fund transportation improvements.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\"The problem with that thinking is this repeal isn’t wildly popular — it's only moderately popular,\" Stutzman said. \"\u003cem>And\u003c/em> it will draw a $30 to $40 million campaign, some of it funded by Republican donors like road construction and engineering companies, to oppose it. That essentially works against Republican interests.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Stutzman adds there's no evidence that the gas tax could help a Republican candidate running statewide — like John Cox — overcome their large disadvantages in voter registration.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Then there's the current governor, Jerry Brown. In 2014, he told the Los Angeles Times that he'd learned from his failure to have a bank of campaign cash to draw upon to ward off political enemies.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Brown suggested that if he'd had such an account in 1978, he could have used it to promote an alternative measure to Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Four years ago he told the Times, \"There may be things to be done that will involve a ballot measure,\" adding, \"I do think having a credible war chest will overcome whatever infirmities lame-duck governors might ordinarily suffer from.\"\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>He learned the lesson well. Brown's political account is currently flush with $15 million — some of which could surely be spent to oppose the gas tax repeal on the November ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11676299/is-the-gas-tax-repeal-measure-the-new-proposition-13",
"authors": [
"255"
],
"programs": [
"news_6944",
"news_72"
],
"categories": [
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_23177",
"news_20191",
"news_19542",
"news_19105",
"news_30",
"news_20737",
"news_725",
"news_17041"
],
"featImg": "news_11676301",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11624431": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11624431",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11624431",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1509559236000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news",
"term": 72
},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1509559236,
"format": "standard",
"disqusTitle": "After Tax Cuts Derailed the 'California Dream,' Can the State Get Back on Track?",
"title": "After Tax Cuts Derailed the 'California Dream,' Can the State Get Back on Track?",
"headTitle": "The California Dream | The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/profiles/manuel-pastor-378283\">Manuel Pastor\u003c/a> is Professor of Sociology at \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-california-dornsife-college-of-letters-arts-and-sciences-2669\">University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. \u003c/a>\u003c/em>\u003cem>This article was originally published on \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com\">The Conversation\u003c/a>. Read the \u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track-77919\">original article\u003c/a>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 1978, the year I graduated from college with a degree in economics, most voters in my state chose to turn their backs on the “California dream.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Not unlike the American dream, California’s iteration focused on the limitless possibilities awaiting anyone who moved to the state. It was the state’s basic philosophic footing, a \u003ca href=\"https://www.russellsage.org/publications/immigrants-and-boomers-0\">social compact\u003c/a> that connected generations, geographies and economic classes in a common destiny.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13, which Californians approved in a referendum in June 1978, marked a turning point away from the kind of public investment in education, infrastructure and social services – as well as a shift in an attitude that welcomed all comers – that made the California dream a reality for so many.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[contextly_sidebar id=\"AgEvOMGuTdBnpmOt37Y2DzDNTZCWwsxc\"]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The \u003ca href=\"http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Prop-13-remains-controversial-after-a-quarter-of-2595918.php\">highly controversial measure\u003c/a> slashed property taxes, impoverished local governments and made it very hard for the state to raise new revenues. Besides ushering in an era of underinvestment, it spread the fantasy – since gone national – that governments can cut taxes without reducing services.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Almost 40 years later, California \u003ca href=\"https://www.thenation.com/article/have-california-voters-finally-had-enough-of-prop-13/\">is at a crossroads\u003c/a> and may finally be ready to begin to reverse Prop 13’s damage. As \u003ca href=\"https://stateofresistancebook.com/\">I explore in a forthcoming book\u003c/a>, the state is pushing against the national grain by protecting immigrants, tackling climate change and raising the minimum wage. And most significantly for the legacy of Proposition 13, more residents are coming to see how replenishing the state’s coffers is key to restoring prosperity.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>Pulling Up the Drawbridge\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Just days after Proposition 13 passed, I stood in front of my fellow graduates at the University of California, Santa Cruz, to give the student address. I chose to talk about the result of the vote – not because it had anything to do with my chosen field of study but because of the sharp rift with the past it represented.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California had invested in me, like millions of others, by funding quality public schools, a world-class university system and economic growth. Now, a majority of voters were seeking to selfishly pull up the drawbridge on future generations. So I spent my 15 minutes of fame in front of classmates, professors and parents explaining why I thought Prop 13 would shipwreck the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>I wish I had been wrong – and that I’d spent more of my allotted time thanking my parents, neither of whom had finished high school and were beaming with pride because the California dream had come true for their son. Sadly, Prop 13 meant that dream would be much less likely to come true for others.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11627344\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11627344\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-800x410.jpg\" alt=\"Proposition 13 backers celebrate the measure's passage in 1978.\" width=\"800\" height=\"410\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-800x410.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-160x82.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-1020x523.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-1180x605.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-960x493.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-240x123.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-375x192.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-520x267.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Proposition 13 backers celebrate the measure's passage in 1978. \u003ccite>(RetroReport/YouTube)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>At its core, Proposition 13 was written as an amendment to the state’s constitution with \u003ca href=\"https://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/on-understanding-proposition-13\">three key elements\u003c/a> and affected all types of property, from residential to commercial:\u003c/p>\n\u003cul>\n\u003cli>It rolled back assessed property values to their estimated market value in 1975 and limited annual increases to no more than 2 percent as long as the property wasn’t sold. With any new sale, the assessed value could climb to the actual sale price, essentially locking in the property tax for long-time homeowners and shifting the burden to newcomers.\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>It capped the property tax rate at 1 percent of the assessed value for city, county, school and other local governments, down from an \u003ca href=\"https://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/on-understanding-proposition-13\">average of 2.6 percent\u003c/a> before the measure, draining local coffers.\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>It mandated that any change in state taxes that would increase the tax take would require a two-thirds vote in the Legislature (while tax cuts required only a majority vote) and that any increase in designated or special purpose taxes by local governments would require two-thirds voter approval. This effectively staightjacketed the ability of a changing electorate to raise new revenues.\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\u003ch2>Prop 13 and its Racial Undertones\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>One reason for Prop 13’s popularity was that the median value of a house in California rose by over \u003ca href=\"http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/histcensushsg.html\">250 percent\u003c/a> from 1970 to 1980, more than twice as fast as \u003ca href=\"http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/Databank/Income/state1.xls\">median household income\u003c/a> in the state. With reassessments triggering property tax hikes that outpaced family finances, the die was cast for a taxpayer rebellion.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But the roots of this \u003ca href=\"http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7634.html\">suburban-based revolt\u003c/a> were far deeper than a fight over taxes. The forces behind it were the same ones that fought against fair housing in the 1960s and busing to promote \u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266568\">school integration\u003c/a> throughout the 1970s. And they were goaded by a series of court decisions that mandated the \u003ca href=\"https://heydaybooks.com/book/game-changers/\">equalization of school spending\u003c/a> across districts, stirring white resentment that local property tax dollars were not being spent on “our kids.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Indeed, at the same time that property rates were soaring, the \u003ca href=\"https://usa.ipums.org/usa\">share of youths who were minorities\u003c/a> rose from 30 percent in 1970 to 44 percent by 1980 – the largest decadal change in California’s history. And while these racial undertones were, well, undertones, the resentment of the changing demography was clear when Prop 13’s main architect, Orange County businessman \u003ca href=\"https://www.hjta.org\">Howard Jarvis\u003c/a>, wrote after it passed that immigrants “\u003ca href=\"https://web.stanford.edu/%7Emrosenfe/Hanono_Thesis_California_Dreamin.pdf\">just come over here to get on the taxpayers’ gravy train\u003c/a>.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11627346\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11627346\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-800x398.jpg\" alt=\"Howard Jarvis\" width=\"800\" height=\"398\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-800x398.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-160x80.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-1020x507.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-1180x586.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-960x477.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-240x119.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-375x186.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-520x258.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Howard Jarvis \u003ccite>(RetroReport/YouTube)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>In essence, Proposition 13 became the first shot across the bow in a series of referendums some dubbed “\u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266643\">racial propositions\u003c/a>” that reached their apogee with \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_187,_Illegal_Aliens_Ineligible_for_Public_Benefits_(1994)\">Proposition 187\u003c/a>, the famous 1994 measure that sought to cut off nearly all public services, including education, to undocumented immigrants.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That was followed by voter-approved measures to ban affirmative action, eliminate bilingual education and expand a prison system \u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266643\">marred by racial disproportionality\u003c/a> in its sentencing and rates of incarceration.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That Prop 13 itself was a sort of generational warfare with overtones of race was clear in its structure. Since the assessment didn’t increase more than 2 percent unless property changed hands, incumbent homeowners (\u003ca href=\"https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html\">who were older and whiter\u003c/a>) wouldn’t see their tax burden change much as long as they didn’t sell. Meanwhile, \u003ca href=\"http://popdynamics.usc.edu/pdf/2009_Myers_Demographics-Prop-13.pdf\">new homeowners\u003c/a> (more likely to be younger, minority and eventually immigrant) would have to pay higher tax rates and thus bear a disproportionate share of the costs of local services.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And that wasn’t the only bias against the future. The requirement for a supermajority to pass legislation to raise taxes effectively constrained the ability of future state governments to pour in the sort of money that had built the state’s \u003ca href=\"http://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/171974/california-by-kevin-starr/9780812977530/\">famed transportation, water and university systems\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>The Consequences\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>The immediate damage from Prop 13, however, was masked. When local property tax revenues quickly fell by about 60 percent, the \u003ca href=\"https://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/on-understanding-proposition-13\">state government stepped in\u003c/a> to fill the gaps.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But over time, the damaging effects of Proposition 13 in terms of education spending and income inequality became increasingly apparent. In the 1960s, California \u003ca href=\"http://www.dailybreeze.com/article/zz/20130727/NEWS/130728685\">ranked among the top 10 states\u003c/a> in terms of per-pupil spending. By 2014, its ranking \u003ca href=\"http://www.edweek.org/media/2016/12/29/school-finance-education-week-quality-counts-2017.pdf\">had plunged to as low as 46\u003c/a>. And while California’s level of income inequality was in the middle of the pack nationally in 1969, it is now the \u003ca href=\"https://stateofresistancebook.com/\">fourth most unequal state in the country\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[contextly_sidebar id=\"ht7XVyAenz69bBdQY7t08y60z8JPdqyo\"]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>While Proposition 13 was the not the only culprit behind these trends, it didn’t help. About \u003ca href=\"http://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3497\">half of the total residential property tax relief\u003c/a> provided by Prop 13 went to homeowners with incomes in excess of US$120,000 a year – or about 15 percent of all households.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And because the property tax was no longer a growing source of revenue for local governments, cities and counties had more reason to chase sales taxes with retail development and less incentive to promote housing, helping to set in motion the \u003ca href=\"http://www.ocregister.com/2017/03/29/amending-prop-13-by-raising-property-taxes-could-help-solve-housing-affordability-crisis-expert-says/\">severe housing shortage that wracks the state today\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The final irony is that Prop 13 – a measure promoted by those in favor of smaller government – \u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266568\">pushed authority and decision-making to the state capitol\u003c/a>, which became the main source to bail out local municipalities.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>Efforts to Change It\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>So why has Proposition 13 not been overturned?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Its political appeal remains, particularly to older residents who vote and to businesses worried about any increase in taxes. Efforts to keep the protections for residential homeowners but allow commercial and industrial property to be assessed at market rates – a so-called “split roll” – have \u003ca href=\"https://www.boe.ca.gov/meetings/pdf/3a_101911_Split_Roll.pdf\">failed or stalled\u003c/a> and currently command the \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_515MBS.pdf\">thinnest possible majority in public polling\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>So while the split role remains \u003ca href=\"http://makeitfairca.com/\">a goal for some reformers\u003c/a>, many concerned about the effects of Prop 13 have simply tried to raise taxes elsewhere to offset the lost revenue. California voters approved a \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_30,_Sales_and_Income_Tax_Increase_(2012)\">temporary “millionaire’s tax”\u003c/a> in 2012 and its \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_55,_Extension_of_the_Proposition_30_Income_Tax_Increase_(2016)\">long-term extension\u003c/a> in 2016. And more than two-thirds of voting taxpayers in Los Angeles County approved sales tax hikes in 2008 and 2016 that will generate \u003ca href=\"http://prospect.org/article/great-los-angeles-revolt-against-cars\">$160 billion over the next 40 years\u003c/a> for transportation investments ranging from rail expansion to highway improvement to new bike paths.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But such tinkering does not solve the fundamental problems with Prop 13 that I’ve noted above. Addressing those will require a new set of conversations about optimal tax policy and how to address legitimate concerns such as how to protect older homeowners with a fixed income from the potential end of Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>California – and the Country – at a Crossroads\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Unfortunately, the same demographic shifts, economic anxieties and political polarization that spurred Prop 13 have since gone national. The president’s plan to “Make America Great Again” similarly involves slashing taxes while underinvesting in \u003ca href=\"http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/05/22/529534031/president-trumps-budget-proposal-calls-for-deep-cuts-to-education\">education\u003c/a> and social services – the kinds of investments that actually made America great in the 20th century.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California has the opportunity to show the nation how to get this right and invest in our future and our collective dreams rather than shortchange them. And a \u003ca href=\"http://makeitfairca.com/endorsements/\">growing number of voices\u003c/a>, including local governments, unions and political groups, are calling for reform.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg src=\"https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77919/count.gif\" alt=\"The Conversation\" width=\"1\" height=\"1\">So while the discussion about Prop 13 might seem to be about a few obscure tax rules, it is highly symbolic: At stake is the future of the state and, indeed, the nation. A day of reckoning for a measure that seems increasingly out of date may soon be upon us.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/profiles/manuel-pastor-378283\">Manuel Pastor\u003c/a> is Professor of Sociology at \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-california-dornsife-college-of-letters-arts-and-sciences-2669\">University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. \u003c/a>\u003c/em>\u003cem>This article was originally published on \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com\">The Conversation\u003c/a>. Read the \u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track-77919\">original article\u003c/a>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"219\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>http://bit.ly/kqedcadream\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp> \u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11624431 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11624431",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/11/01/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 1828,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 36
},
"modified": 1523647558,
"excerpt": "USC's Manuel Pastor argues Prop. 13, approved in '78, marked a turning away from the kind of public investment in education, infrastructure and social services that made the California dream a reality for so many.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "USC's Manuel Pastor argues Prop. 13, approved in '78, marked a turning away from the kind of public investment in education, infrastructure and social services that made the California dream a reality for so many.",
"title": "After Tax Cuts Derailed the 'California Dream,' Can the State Get Back on Track? | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "After Tax Cuts Derailed the 'California Dream,' Can the State Get Back on Track?",
"datePublished": "2017-11-01T11:00:36-07:00",
"dateModified": "2018-04-13T12:25:58-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track",
"status": "publish",
"nprByline": "Manuel Pastor, University of Southern California – Dornsife College, for The Conversation",
"path": "/news/11624431/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/profiles/manuel-pastor-378283\">Manuel Pastor\u003c/a> is Professor of Sociology at \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-california-dornsife-college-of-letters-arts-and-sciences-2669\">University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. \u003c/a>\u003c/em>\u003cem>This article was originally published on \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com\">The Conversation\u003c/a>. Read the \u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track-77919\">original article\u003c/a>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 1978, the year I graduated from college with a degree in economics, most voters in my state chose to turn their backs on the “California dream.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Not unlike the American dream, California’s iteration focused on the limitless possibilities awaiting anyone who moved to the state. It was the state’s basic philosophic footing, a \u003ca href=\"https://www.russellsage.org/publications/immigrants-and-boomers-0\">social compact\u003c/a> that connected generations, geographies and economic classes in a common destiny.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13, which Californians approved in a referendum in June 1978, marked a turning point away from the kind of public investment in education, infrastructure and social services – as well as a shift in an attitude that welcomed all comers – that made the California dream a reality for so many.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The \u003ca href=\"http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Prop-13-remains-controversial-after-a-quarter-of-2595918.php\">highly controversial measure\u003c/a> slashed property taxes, impoverished local governments and made it very hard for the state to raise new revenues. Besides ushering in an era of underinvestment, it spread the fantasy – since gone national – that governments can cut taxes without reducing services.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Almost 40 years later, California \u003ca href=\"https://www.thenation.com/article/have-california-voters-finally-had-enough-of-prop-13/\">is at a crossroads\u003c/a> and may finally be ready to begin to reverse Prop 13’s damage. As \u003ca href=\"https://stateofresistancebook.com/\">I explore in a forthcoming book\u003c/a>, the state is pushing against the national grain by protecting immigrants, tackling climate change and raising the minimum wage. And most significantly for the legacy of Proposition 13, more residents are coming to see how replenishing the state’s coffers is key to restoring prosperity.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>Pulling Up the Drawbridge\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Just days after Proposition 13 passed, I stood in front of my fellow graduates at the University of California, Santa Cruz, to give the student address. I chose to talk about the result of the vote – not because it had anything to do with my chosen field of study but because of the sharp rift with the past it represented.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California had invested in me, like millions of others, by funding quality public schools, a world-class university system and economic growth. Now, a majority of voters were seeking to selfishly pull up the drawbridge on future generations. So I spent my 15 minutes of fame in front of classmates, professors and parents explaining why I thought Prop 13 would shipwreck the state.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>I wish I had been wrong – and that I’d spent more of my allotted time thanking my parents, neither of whom had finished high school and were beaming with pride because the California dream had come true for their son. Sadly, Prop 13 meant that dream would be much less likely to come true for others.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11627344\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11627344\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-800x410.jpg\" alt=\"Proposition 13 backers celebrate the measure's passage in 1978.\" width=\"800\" height=\"410\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-800x410.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-160x82.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-1020x523.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-1180x605.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-960x493.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-240x123.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-375x192.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/Prop13Celebrants-520x267.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Proposition 13 backers celebrate the measure's passage in 1978. \u003ccite>(RetroReport/YouTube)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>At its core, Proposition 13 was written as an amendment to the state’s constitution with \u003ca href=\"https://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/on-understanding-proposition-13\">three key elements\u003c/a> and affected all types of property, from residential to commercial:\u003c/p>\n\u003cul>\n\u003cli>It rolled back assessed property values to their estimated market value in 1975 and limited annual increases to no more than 2 percent as long as the property wasn’t sold. With any new sale, the assessed value could climb to the actual sale price, essentially locking in the property tax for long-time homeowners and shifting the burden to newcomers.\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>It capped the property tax rate at 1 percent of the assessed value for city, county, school and other local governments, down from an \u003ca href=\"https://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/on-understanding-proposition-13\">average of 2.6 percent\u003c/a> before the measure, draining local coffers.\u003c/li>\n\u003cli>It mandated that any change in state taxes that would increase the tax take would require a two-thirds vote in the Legislature (while tax cuts required only a majority vote) and that any increase in designated or special purpose taxes by local governments would require two-thirds voter approval. This effectively staightjacketed the ability of a changing electorate to raise new revenues.\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\u003ch2>Prop 13 and its Racial Undertones\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>One reason for Prop 13’s popularity was that the median value of a house in California rose by over \u003ca href=\"http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/histcensushsg.html\">250 percent\u003c/a> from 1970 to 1980, more than twice as fast as \u003ca href=\"http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/Databank/Income/state1.xls\">median household income\u003c/a> in the state. With reassessments triggering property tax hikes that outpaced family finances, the die was cast for a taxpayer rebellion.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But the roots of this \u003ca href=\"http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7634.html\">suburban-based revolt\u003c/a> were far deeper than a fight over taxes. The forces behind it were the same ones that fought against fair housing in the 1960s and busing to promote \u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266568\">school integration\u003c/a> throughout the 1970s. And they were goaded by a series of court decisions that mandated the \u003ca href=\"https://heydaybooks.com/book/game-changers/\">equalization of school spending\u003c/a> across districts, stirring white resentment that local property tax dollars were not being spent on “our kids.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Indeed, at the same time that property rates were soaring, the \u003ca href=\"https://usa.ipums.org/usa\">share of youths who were minorities\u003c/a> rose from 30 percent in 1970 to 44 percent by 1980 – the largest decadal change in California’s history. And while these racial undertones were, well, undertones, the resentment of the changing demography was clear when Prop 13’s main architect, Orange County businessman \u003ca href=\"https://www.hjta.org\">Howard Jarvis\u003c/a>, wrote after it passed that immigrants “\u003ca href=\"https://web.stanford.edu/%7Emrosenfe/Hanono_Thesis_California_Dreamin.pdf\">just come over here to get on the taxpayers’ gravy train\u003c/a>.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_11627346\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-11627346\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-800x398.jpg\" alt=\"Howard Jarvis\" width=\"800\" height=\"398\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-800x398.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-160x80.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-1020x507.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-1180x586.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-960x477.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-240x119.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-375x186.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/11/HowardJarvis2-520x258.jpg 520w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Howard Jarvis \u003ccite>(RetroReport/YouTube)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>In essence, Proposition 13 became the first shot across the bow in a series of referendums some dubbed “\u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266643\">racial propositions\u003c/a>” that reached their apogee with \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_187,_Illegal_Aliens_Ineligible_for_Public_Benefits_(1994)\">Proposition 187\u003c/a>, the famous 1994 measure that sought to cut off nearly all public services, including education, to undocumented immigrants.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That was followed by voter-approved measures to ban affirmative action, eliminate bilingual education and expand a prison system \u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266643\">marred by racial disproportionality\u003c/a> in its sentencing and rates of incarceration.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That Prop 13 itself was a sort of generational warfare with overtones of race was clear in its structure. Since the assessment didn’t increase more than 2 percent unless property changed hands, incumbent homeowners (\u003ca href=\"https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html\">who were older and whiter\u003c/a>) wouldn’t see their tax burden change much as long as they didn’t sell. Meanwhile, \u003ca href=\"http://popdynamics.usc.edu/pdf/2009_Myers_Demographics-Prop-13.pdf\">new homeowners\u003c/a> (more likely to be younger, minority and eventually immigrant) would have to pay higher tax rates and thus bear a disproportionate share of the costs of local services.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And that wasn’t the only bias against the future. The requirement for a supermajority to pass legislation to raise taxes effectively constrained the ability of future state governments to pour in the sort of money that had built the state’s \u003ca href=\"http://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/171974/california-by-kevin-starr/9780812977530/\">famed transportation, water and university systems\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>The Consequences\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>The immediate damage from Prop 13, however, was masked. When local property tax revenues quickly fell by about 60 percent, the \u003ca href=\"https://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/on-understanding-proposition-13\">state government stepped in\u003c/a> to fill the gaps.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But over time, the damaging effects of Proposition 13 in terms of education spending and income inequality became increasingly apparent. In the 1960s, California \u003ca href=\"http://www.dailybreeze.com/article/zz/20130727/NEWS/130728685\">ranked among the top 10 states\u003c/a> in terms of per-pupil spending. By 2014, its ranking \u003ca href=\"http://www.edweek.org/media/2016/12/29/school-finance-education-week-quality-counts-2017.pdf\">had plunged to as low as 46\u003c/a>. And while California’s level of income inequality was in the middle of the pack nationally in 1969, it is now the \u003ca href=\"https://stateofresistancebook.com/\">fourth most unequal state in the country\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>While Proposition 13 was the not the only culprit behind these trends, it didn’t help. About \u003ca href=\"http://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3497\">half of the total residential property tax relief\u003c/a> provided by Prop 13 went to homeowners with incomes in excess of US$120,000 a year – or about 15 percent of all households.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>And because the property tax was no longer a growing source of revenue for local governments, cities and counties had more reason to chase sales taxes with retail development and less incentive to promote housing, helping to set in motion the \u003ca href=\"http://www.ocregister.com/2017/03/29/amending-prop-13-by-raising-property-taxes-could-help-solve-housing-affordability-crisis-expert-says/\">severe housing shortage that wracks the state today\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The final irony is that Prop 13 – a measure promoted by those in favor of smaller government – \u003ca href=\"https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520266568\">pushed authority and decision-making to the state capitol\u003c/a>, which became the main source to bail out local municipalities.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>Efforts to Change It\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>So why has Proposition 13 not been overturned?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Its political appeal remains, particularly to older residents who vote and to businesses worried about any increase in taxes. Efforts to keep the protections for residential homeowners but allow commercial and industrial property to be assessed at market rates – a so-called “split roll” – have \u003ca href=\"https://www.boe.ca.gov/meetings/pdf/3a_101911_Split_Roll.pdf\">failed or stalled\u003c/a> and currently command the \u003ca href=\"http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_515MBS.pdf\">thinnest possible majority in public polling\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>So while the split role remains \u003ca href=\"http://makeitfairca.com/\">a goal for some reformers\u003c/a>, many concerned about the effects of Prop 13 have simply tried to raise taxes elsewhere to offset the lost revenue. California voters approved a \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_30,_Sales_and_Income_Tax_Increase_(2012)\">temporary “millionaire’s tax”\u003c/a> in 2012 and its \u003ca href=\"https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_55,_Extension_of_the_Proposition_30_Income_Tax_Increase_(2016)\">long-term extension\u003c/a> in 2016. And more than two-thirds of voting taxpayers in Los Angeles County approved sales tax hikes in 2008 and 2016 that will generate \u003ca href=\"http://prospect.org/article/great-los-angeles-revolt-against-cars\">$160 billion over the next 40 years\u003c/a> for transportation investments ranging from rail expansion to highway improvement to new bike paths.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But such tinkering does not solve the fundamental problems with Prop 13 that I’ve noted above. Addressing those will require a new set of conversations about optimal tax policy and how to address legitimate concerns such as how to protect older homeowners with a fixed income from the potential end of Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>California – and the Country – at a Crossroads\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Unfortunately, the same demographic shifts, economic anxieties and political polarization that spurred Prop 13 have since gone national. The president’s plan to “Make America Great Again” similarly involves slashing taxes while underinvesting in \u003ca href=\"http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/05/22/529534031/president-trumps-budget-proposal-calls-for-deep-cuts-to-education\">education\u003c/a> and social services – the kinds of investments that actually made America great in the 20th century.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California has the opportunity to show the nation how to get this right and invest in our future and our collective dreams rather than shortchange them. And a \u003ca href=\"http://makeitfairca.com/endorsements/\">growing number of voices\u003c/a>, including local governments, unions and political groups, are calling for reform.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg src=\"https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77919/count.gif\" alt=\"The Conversation\" width=\"1\" height=\"1\">So while the discussion about Prop 13 might seem to be about a few obscure tax rules, it is highly symbolic: At stake is the future of the state and, indeed, the nation. A day of reckoning for a measure that seems increasingly out of date may soon be upon us.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/profiles/manuel-pastor-378283\">Manuel Pastor\u003c/a> is Professor of Sociology at \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-california-dornsife-college-of-letters-arts-and-sciences-2669\">University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. \u003c/a>\u003c/em>\u003cem>This article was originally published on \u003ca href=\"http://theconversation.com\">The Conversation\u003c/a>. Read the \u003ca href=\"https://theconversation.com/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track-77919\">original article\u003c/a>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/series/californiadream/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The California Dream series\u003c/a> is a statewide media collaboration of CALmatters, KPBS, KPCC, KQED and Capital Public Radio with support from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the James Irvine Foundation and the College Futures Foundation.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-11660142\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"219\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-800x219.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-160x44.jpg 160w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1020x280.jpg 1020w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1180x324.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-960x263.jpg 960w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-240x66.jpg 240w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-375x103.jpg 375w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-520x143.jpg 520w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner.jpg 1867w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>http://bit.ly/kqedcadream\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp> \u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11624431/after-tax-cuts-derailed-the-california-dream-can-the-state-get-back-on-track",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11624431"
],
"programs": [
"news_6944",
"news_72"
],
"series": [
"news_21879"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_21840",
"news_20397",
"news_725",
"news_423",
"news_17286"
],
"featImg": "news_11627340",
"label": "news_72"
},
"news_11574585": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11574585",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11574585",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1500413429000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1500413429,
"format": "audio",
"disqusTitle": "Despite Proposition 13, California Property Tax Revenue Has Soared",
"title": "Despite Proposition 13, California Property Tax Revenue Has Soared",
"headTitle": "The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>Much has been said and written -- mostly negatively -- about the effects of Proposition 13, California’s iconic law limiting property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Its critics say that Proposition 13, which restricts taxes to 1 percent of property values and caps increases in those values at 2 percent a year, has starved schools and local governments of vital revenue.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>However, the latest data on homes, farms and commercial and industrial property, compiled by county property assessors, tell a much different story.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Assessors completed their 2017-18 rolls of taxable property this month and are reporting about a 5 percent statewide gain to approximately $5.75 trillion -- yes, that’s trillion with a “t” -- in taxable value. That huge figure will translate into at least $65 billion in property taxes, including levies to repay bonds, which are exempt from the 1 percent limit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Not surprisingly, the highest gains are being recorded in the San Francisco Bay Area, thanks to its red-hot economy and property markets, topped by a nearly 11 percent gain in San Francisco itself.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The most eye-popping number, however, is the immense growth in property tax revenue -- well over 50 percent during the last decade alone and about 1,000 percent since 1978, when Proposition 13 was overwhelmingly passed by voters.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Legislature’s budget analyst, Mac Taylor, points out that “the property tax has grown faster than the economy” since then.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[contextly_sidebar id=\"tCV094YdHG05Mk2hqHUICiYRAEfxZTZT\"]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Personal income in California -- an approximate measure of the size of the state’s economy -- has grown at an average annual rate of 6.3 percent since 1979,” Taylor’s 2012 report says. “Over the same period, revenue from the 1 percent property tax rate has grown at an average annual rate of 7.3 percent.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>How is that possible?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>While Proposition 13 limits taxes on any particular piece of property as long as it remains under the same ownership, taxable values are upgraded when it changes hands. That, along with ever-rising market values, accounts for much of the steady increase.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Another big factor is new construction, both residential and commercial, added to the tax rolls as population increases. However it happens, property tax revenue keeps growing, currently by about $3 billion each year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13’s critics -- public employee unions and their political allies mostly -- have yearned for decades to repeal or modify it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Repeal would be a political impossibility; it remains very popular with voters, most of whom are homeowners and benefit from its limits. Critics, therefore, have tried to gain traction for a “split roll” that would eliminate the limits for commercial property, arguing that it changes hands less often than homes and its owners are getting an undeserved tax break.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>They’ve also sought to change laws governing change of ownership, claiming -- with some justification -- that they allow property owners to manipulate the system and avoid tax value upgrades by creative structuring of deals.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>One could argue, however, that Proposition 13 staved off what could have been a much larger tax revolt.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Had it not been enacted, and were local officials today using the same uncapped assessment practices and still taxing at the same rate as they did before 1978, property taxes would be three times as high, or about $200 billion a year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That would have been politically unsustainable, so some limit on property tax growth was inevitable. The Legislature had plenty of warning in the 1970s that a tax revolt was coming and ignored it, thus giving Howard Jarvis and other Proposition 13 proponents an opening.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Proposition 13 debate will continue, but arguing that it has undermined vital tax revenue is disingenuous, as the latest data prove.\u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11574585 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11574585",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/07/18/despite-proposition-13-california-property-tax-revenue-has-soared/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 632,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 21
},
"modified": 1500589730,
"excerpt": "Not surprisingly, the highest gains are being recorded in the Bay Area, thanks to its red-hot economy and property markets.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "Not surprisingly, the highest gains are being recorded in the Bay Area, thanks to its red-hot economy and property markets.",
"title": "Despite Proposition 13, California Property Tax Revenue Has Soared | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Despite Proposition 13, California Property Tax Revenue Has Soared",
"datePublished": "2017-07-18T14:30:29-07:00",
"dateModified": "2017-07-20T15:28:50-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "despite-proposition-13-california-property-tax-revenue-has-soared",
"status": "publish",
"sourceUrl": "https://calmatters.org/",
"audioUrl": "http://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/tcr/2017/07/2017-07-18f-tcr.mp3",
"nprByline": "\u003cstrong>\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/dan-walters/\">Dan Walters\u003c/a>\u003cbr>\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/category/commentary/\">CALmatters Commentary\u003c/a>\u003c/strong>",
"guestFields": "0",
"source": "CALmatters",
"path": "/news/11574585/despite-proposition-13-california-property-tax-revenue-has-soared",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Much has been said and written -- mostly negatively -- about the effects of Proposition 13, California’s iconic law limiting property taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Its critics say that Proposition 13, which restricts taxes to 1 percent of property values and caps increases in those values at 2 percent a year, has starved schools and local governments of vital revenue.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>However, the latest data on homes, farms and commercial and industrial property, compiled by county property assessors, tell a much different story.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Assessors completed their 2017-18 rolls of taxable property this month and are reporting about a 5 percent statewide gain to approximately $5.75 trillion -- yes, that’s trillion with a “t” -- in taxable value. That huge figure will translate into at least $65 billion in property taxes, including levies to repay bonds, which are exempt from the 1 percent limit.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Not surprisingly, the highest gains are being recorded in the San Francisco Bay Area, thanks to its red-hot economy and property markets, topped by a nearly 11 percent gain in San Francisco itself.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The most eye-popping number, however, is the immense growth in property tax revenue -- well over 50 percent during the last decade alone and about 1,000 percent since 1978, when Proposition 13 was overwhelmingly passed by voters.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Legislature’s budget analyst, Mac Taylor, points out that “the property tax has grown faster than the economy” since then.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Personal income in California -- an approximate measure of the size of the state’s economy -- has grown at an average annual rate of 6.3 percent since 1979,” Taylor’s 2012 report says. “Over the same period, revenue from the 1 percent property tax rate has grown at an average annual rate of 7.3 percent.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>How is that possible?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>While Proposition 13 limits taxes on any particular piece of property as long as it remains under the same ownership, taxable values are upgraded when it changes hands. That, along with ever-rising market values, accounts for much of the steady increase.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Another big factor is new construction, both residential and commercial, added to the tax rolls as population increases. However it happens, property tax revenue keeps growing, currently by about $3 billion each year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Proposition 13’s critics -- public employee unions and their political allies mostly -- have yearned for decades to repeal or modify it.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Repeal would be a political impossibility; it remains very popular with voters, most of whom are homeowners and benefit from its limits. Critics, therefore, have tried to gain traction for a “split roll” that would eliminate the limits for commercial property, arguing that it changes hands less often than homes and its owners are getting an undeserved tax break.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>They’ve also sought to change laws governing change of ownership, claiming -- with some justification -- that they allow property owners to manipulate the system and avoid tax value upgrades by creative structuring of deals.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>One could argue, however, that Proposition 13 staved off what could have been a much larger tax revolt.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Had it not been enacted, and were local officials today using the same uncapped assessment practices and still taxing at the same rate as they did before 1978, property taxes would be three times as high, or about $200 billion a year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That would have been politically unsustainable, so some limit on property tax growth was inevitable. The Legislature had plenty of warning in the 1970s that a tax revolt was coming and ignored it, thus giving Howard Jarvis and other Proposition 13 proponents an opening.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Proposition 13 debate will continue, but arguing that it has undermined vital tax revenue is disingenuous, as the latest data prove.\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11574585/despite-proposition-13-california-property-tax-revenue-has-soared",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11574585"
],
"programs": [
"news_6944",
"news_72"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_725",
"news_423",
"news_17286"
],
"affiliates": [
"news_18481"
],
"featImg": "news_11574589",
"label": "source_news_11574585"
},
"news_11438840": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_11438840",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "11438840",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1493881542000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1493881542,
"format": "image",
"disqusTitle": "Did a Court Just Create a New Pathway to 'Tax' Californians?",
"title": "Did a Court Just Create a New Pathway to 'Tax' Californians?",
"headTitle": "The California Report | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>Could a few words buried within a recent court ruling make it easier for the state to raise money from Californians?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The words -- contained within a decision \u003ca href=\"http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C075930.PDF\">affirming\u003c/a> the constitutionality of California’s policy of charging polluters -- are causing a stir among some state budget experts, who wonder if the ruling could be used to pry loose constitutional constraints that have long restricted lawmakers’ ability to increase taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In its 2-1 ruling, California’s 3rd District Court of Appeal declared that the state’s \u003ca href=\"https://vimeo.com/133691850\">cap-and-trade\u003c/a> climate program is neither a tax nor a fee -- the two categories into which state jurists have traditionally slotted all revenue raisers -- but falls into a mysterious \u003cem>none of the above\u003c/em> category.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Such semantic distinctions matter in California because the state constitution puts tight restrictions on lawmakers' ability to raise money from taxpayers. Voters in 1978 passed the most famous of these restrictions, property-tax-cutting \u003ca href=\"https://www.hjta.org/propositions/proposition-13/original-proposition-13/\">Proposition 13\u003c/a>, which also lifted the legislative threshold for new state and local tax hikes from a simple majority to a two-thirds “supermajority.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The suit, filed by the California Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, contended that when the Legislature created the cap-and-trade program in 2006, it introduced a new tax with only a simple majority vote -- violating the two-thirds vote requirements of Proposition 13. (Since then, the auctions have generated $4.4 billion for the state.)\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[contextly_sidebar id=\"iLj5jUbECqekfaKH9rqV3bc5RjwlKX2Q\"]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But what is a tax? In explaining its decision, the court offered a new, narrower definition of the word: “A tax has two hallmarks: (1) it is compulsory, and (2) it does not grant any special benefit to the payor.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to Tony Francois from the Pacific Legal Foundation, which represents one of the plaintiffs in the case, that definition leaves out many of the levies that most Californians would be surprised to learn aren’t “taxes.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Under (the court’s) analysis, any transaction-based tax, such as the sales tax or the gasoline tax, is voluntary instead of compulsory,” he says. “Anyone can choose whether to drive their own car and buy gas for it or not. And, all of these transaction taxes provide something of value to the payer.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Seemingly anticipating that broad interpretation, the court’s majority opinion insisted there was an obvious distinction between a payment made for a thing of value (in this case, an allowance for emitting greenhouse gases) and a sales tax, which one pays “but receives nothing of particular value for the tax.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But some conservatives find that distinction too blurry for comfort.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“All the Legislature has to do is say, ‘We’re not taxing the purchase of the commodity, we’re just selling you the right to purchase the commodity,’ ” says Mike Genest, who directed the Department of Finance under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and is the founding partner at Capitol Matrix Consulting. “If you take that logic and apply it liberally, you could probably apply it to any tax.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_10845734\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-10845734\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-800x518.jpg\" alt=\"A customer prepares to pump gas into his truck at a Valero gas station in Mill Valley.\" width=\"800\" height=\"518\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-800x518.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-400x259.jpg 400w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-768x497.jpg 768w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-1440x932.jpg 1440w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-1180x763.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-960x621.jpg 960w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">A customer prepares to pump gas into his truck at a Valero gas station in Mill Valley. \u003ccite>(Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The court has “invalidated the Proposition 13 two-thirds requirement,” he says. Even, he argues, as it applies to the income tax: “You just purchased the right to live and work in California for only 13 percent of your income -- congratulations!”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Many legal analysts, policy advocates and lawmakers disagree that the ruling is quite so earth-shattering. A spokesperson for the Department of Finance says that they are still reviewing the ruling and its implications. And although the offices of both Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León declined to comment, numerous legislative staff members around the Capitol said that they do not expect to see a raft of new tax-hiking legislation emerge on the basis of this ruling, both because the ruling was narrowly focused on cap and trade, and because the case is being \u003ca href=\"https://www.pacificlegal.org/releases/release-4/14/17-ab32-Morning-Star-1-1408\">appealed\u003c/a> to the California Supreme Court.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I wouldn’t take one appellate court ruling as a landslide,” says Danny Cullenward, a lawyer and energy economist at Stanford University and a research associate with the nonprofit Near Zero. “If one is convinced, as the plaintiffs are, that this fundamentally changes the line, I think there’s good reason to believe that the state Supreme Court would at least look into the question.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But many are not convinced that this ruling fundamentally changes anything.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is not some sort of revolution,” says Cara Horowitz, co-executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law, who also filed an amicus\u003ca href=\"https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/content/amicus_brief_nature_conservancy_final.pdf\"> brief\u003c/a> in support of the program.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s not really reversing what we used to think. It’s really just figuring out for the first time what a cap-and-trade auction really is in the context of tax law,” she says. The court may have broken from \u003ca href=\"http://www.caltax.org/sinclair.htm\">precedent\u003c/a> by establishing a “neither tax nor fee” classification of revenue generator, but Horowitz says that the cap-and-trade program is so unique it’s hard to imagine how this new third category could be applied to much else.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There are no instances that jump out at me of other California regulations that I now think of differently in light of this opinion,” she says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Plus, even if the ruling does undermine Proposition 13, there are other constraints on lawmakers’ ability to raise taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 2010, voters approved \u003ca href=\"http://www.boe.ca.gov/lawguides/property/current/ptlg/ccp/XIII-A-3.html\">Proposition 26\u003c/a>, a chamber-sponsored measure that significantly broadened the definition of tax, leaving only a few, specific exceptions. Prop. 26 didn’t enter into the court’s ruling this time around because the Legislature voted to enact the cap-and-trade program before voters approved the initiated constitutional amendment\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There’s so little case law developing the idea of how Proposition 26 defines a tax, it’s really hard to say what the courts will conclude,” says Horowitz.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That’s a question that will have to be answered before too long.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under current law, California’s cap-and-trade program phases out in 2020. As Democratic lawmakers in both chambers introduce various extension proposals, the Brown administration has demanded a two-thirds vote to put any questions about the legal validity of the program in the rear view mirror.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But even if Gov. Jerry Brown sees a supermajority as politically necessary, it might not be legally so.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Office of Legislative Counsel, which prepares summaries on all new bills and serves as the Legislature’s official lawyer, has designated the two \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB151\">extension\u003c/a> \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB378\">bills\u003c/a> in the Assembly as simple majority votes. Not coincidentally, a third \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB775\">bill\u003c/a>, introduced in the Senate this week, has been written to require a two-thirds vote.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In other words, even if the appellate court’s ruling does blow a hole in Proposition 13 and even if it is upheld by the Supreme Court, Proposition 26 still reigns. Or at the very least, that may be a question for a later day in court.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad floatright]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>CALmatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "11438840 https://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=11438840",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/05/04/did-a-court-just-create-a-new-pathway-to-tax-californians/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 1248,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 30
},
"modified": 1493859534,
"excerpt": "A few words buried in a decision affirming the constitutionality of cap-and-trade are causing a stir among some state budget experts.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "A few words buried in a decision affirming the constitutionality of cap-and-trade are causing a stir among some state budget experts.",
"title": "Did a Court Just Create a New Pathway to 'Tax' Californians? | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Did a Court Just Create a New Pathway to 'Tax' Californians?",
"datePublished": "2017-05-04T00:05:42-07:00",
"dateModified": "2017-05-03T17:58:54-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "did-a-court-just-create-a-new-pathway-to-tax-californians",
"status": "publish",
"sourceUrl": "https://calmatters.org/",
"nprByline": "\u003cstrong>\u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/articles/author/ben-christopher/\">Ben Christopher\u003c/a>\u003c/strong>",
"source": "CALmatters",
"path": "/news/11438840/did-a-court-just-create-a-new-pathway-to-tax-californians",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Could a few words buried within a recent court ruling make it easier for the state to raise money from Californians?\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The words -- contained within a decision \u003ca href=\"http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C075930.PDF\">affirming\u003c/a> the constitutionality of California’s policy of charging polluters -- are causing a stir among some state budget experts, who wonder if the ruling could be used to pry loose constitutional constraints that have long restricted lawmakers’ ability to increase taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In its 2-1 ruling, California’s 3rd District Court of Appeal declared that the state’s \u003ca href=\"https://vimeo.com/133691850\">cap-and-trade\u003c/a> climate program is neither a tax nor a fee -- the two categories into which state jurists have traditionally slotted all revenue raisers -- but falls into a mysterious \u003cem>none of the above\u003c/em> category.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Such semantic distinctions matter in California because the state constitution puts tight restrictions on lawmakers' ability to raise money from taxpayers. Voters in 1978 passed the most famous of these restrictions, property-tax-cutting \u003ca href=\"https://www.hjta.org/propositions/proposition-13/original-proposition-13/\">Proposition 13\u003c/a>, which also lifted the legislative threshold for new state and local tax hikes from a simple majority to a two-thirds “supermajority.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The suit, filed by the California Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, contended that when the Legislature created the cap-and-trade program in 2006, it introduced a new tax with only a simple majority vote -- violating the two-thirds vote requirements of Proposition 13. (Since then, the auctions have generated $4.4 billion for the state.)\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But what is a tax? In explaining its decision, the court offered a new, narrower definition of the word: “A tax has two hallmarks: (1) it is compulsory, and (2) it does not grant any special benefit to the payor.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>According to Tony Francois from the Pacific Legal Foundation, which represents one of the plaintiffs in the case, that definition leaves out many of the levies that most Californians would be surprised to learn aren’t “taxes.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Under (the court’s) analysis, any transaction-based tax, such as the sales tax or the gasoline tax, is voluntary instead of compulsory,” he says. “Anyone can choose whether to drive their own car and buy gas for it or not. And, all of these transaction taxes provide something of value to the payer.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Seemingly anticipating that broad interpretation, the court’s majority opinion insisted there was an obvious distinction between a payment made for a thing of value (in this case, an allowance for emitting greenhouse gases) and a sales tax, which one pays “but receives nothing of particular value for the tax.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But some conservatives find that distinction too blurry for comfort.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“All the Legislature has to do is say, ‘We’re not taxing the purchase of the commodity, we’re just selling you the right to purchase the commodity,’ ” says Mike Genest, who directed the Department of Finance under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and is the founding partner at Capitol Matrix Consulting. “If you take that logic and apply it liberally, you could probably apply it to any tax.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_10845734\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 800px\">\u003cimg class=\"size-medium wp-image-10845734\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-800x518.jpg\" alt=\"A customer prepares to pump gas into his truck at a Valero gas station in Mill Valley.\" width=\"800\" height=\"518\" srcset=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-800x518.jpg 800w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-400x259.jpg 400w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-768x497.jpg 768w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-1440x932.jpg 1440w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas.jpg 1920w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-1180x763.jpg 1180w, https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/01/PumpingGas-960x621.jpg 960w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\">\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">A customer prepares to pump gas into his truck at a Valero gas station in Mill Valley. \u003ccite>(Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>The court has “invalidated the Proposition 13 two-thirds requirement,” he says. Even, he argues, as it applies to the income tax: “You just purchased the right to live and work in California for only 13 percent of your income -- congratulations!”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Many legal analysts, policy advocates and lawmakers disagree that the ruling is quite so earth-shattering. A spokesperson for the Department of Finance says that they are still reviewing the ruling and its implications. And although the offices of both Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León declined to comment, numerous legislative staff members around the Capitol said that they do not expect to see a raft of new tax-hiking legislation emerge on the basis of this ruling, both because the ruling was narrowly focused on cap and trade, and because the case is being \u003ca href=\"https://www.pacificlegal.org/releases/release-4/14/17-ab32-Morning-Star-1-1408\">appealed\u003c/a> to the California Supreme Court.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“I wouldn’t take one appellate court ruling as a landslide,” says Danny Cullenward, a lawyer and energy economist at Stanford University and a research associate with the nonprofit Near Zero. “If one is convinced, as the plaintiffs are, that this fundamentally changes the line, I think there’s good reason to believe that the state Supreme Court would at least look into the question.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But many are not convinced that this ruling fundamentally changes anything.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is not some sort of revolution,” says Cara Horowitz, co-executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law, who also filed an amicus\u003ca href=\"https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/content/amicus_brief_nature_conservancy_final.pdf\"> brief\u003c/a> in support of the program.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s not really reversing what we used to think. It’s really just figuring out for the first time what a cap-and-trade auction really is in the context of tax law,” she says. The court may have broken from \u003ca href=\"http://www.caltax.org/sinclair.htm\">precedent\u003c/a> by establishing a “neither tax nor fee” classification of revenue generator, but Horowitz says that the cap-and-trade program is so unique it’s hard to imagine how this new third category could be applied to much else.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There are no instances that jump out at me of other California regulations that I now think of differently in light of this opinion,” she says.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Plus, even if the ruling does undermine Proposition 13, there are other constraints on lawmakers’ ability to raise taxes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In 2010, voters approved \u003ca href=\"http://www.boe.ca.gov/lawguides/property/current/ptlg/ccp/XIII-A-3.html\">Proposition 26\u003c/a>, a chamber-sponsored measure that significantly broadened the definition of tax, leaving only a few, specific exceptions. Prop. 26 didn’t enter into the court’s ruling this time around because the Legislature voted to enact the cap-and-trade program before voters approved the initiated constitutional amendment\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There’s so little case law developing the idea of how Proposition 26 defines a tax, it’s really hard to say what the courts will conclude,” says Horowitz.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>That’s a question that will have to be answered before too long.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Under current law, California’s cap-and-trade program phases out in 2020. As Democratic lawmakers in both chambers introduce various extension proposals, the Brown administration has demanded a two-thirds vote to put any questions about the legal validity of the program in the rear view mirror.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But even if Gov. Jerry Brown sees a supermajority as politically necessary, it might not be legally so.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The Office of Legislative Counsel, which prepares summaries on all new bills and serves as the Legislature’s official lawyer, has designated the two \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB151\">extension\u003c/a> \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB378\">bills\u003c/a> in the Assembly as simple majority votes. Not coincidentally, a third \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB775\">bill\u003c/a>, introduced in the Senate this week, has been written to require a two-thirds vote.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>In other words, even if the appellate court’s ruling does blow a hole in Proposition 13 and even if it is upheld by the Supreme Court, Proposition 26 still reigns. Or at the very least, that may be a question for a later day in court.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "floatright"
},
"numeric": [
"floatright"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>CALmatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/11438840/did-a-court-just-create-a-new-pathway-to-tax-californians",
"authors": [
"byline_news_11438840"
],
"programs": [
"news_6944",
"news_72"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_8",
"news_13",
"news_356"
],
"tags": [
"news_782",
"news_725",
"news_164",
"news_423",
"news_17286"
],
"affiliates": [
"news_18481"
],
"featImg": "news_11439022",
"label": "source_news_11438840"
},
"news_10517494": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_10517494",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "10517494",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1431068489000
]
},
"parent": 0,
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news",
"term": 7051
},
"blocks": [],
"publishDate": 1431068489,
"format": "audio",
"disqusTitle": "2016 Chess Moves: California Politics Podcast",
"title": "2016 Chess Moves: California Politics Podcast",
"headTitle": "Election 2016 | FaultLines | KQED News",
"content": "\u003cp>Political campaigns, especially those involving ballot initiatives in California, are often like a big chess board. You need to think about not just the move you're making now, but about what moves you might have to make toward the end.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>This week's California Politics Podcast starts off with a look at three potentially explosive topics that could all appear on the November 2016 statewide ballot: A $2 per pack tobacco tax, an increase in the homeowner's property tax exemption, and a long debated and closely watched effort that could ask voters to tinker with the legendary Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>We also look at the bitter fight to define what it means to be a Democrat in the East Bay's special state Senate election. And, with Gov. Jerry Brown's revised budget coming out next week, a quick look at what we'll be watching.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As always, I'm joined by Anthony York of the Grizzly Bear Project and Marisa Lagos of KQED News.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"disqusIdentifier": "10517494 http://ww2.kqed.org/news/?p=10517494",
"disqusUrl": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2015/05/08/2016-chess-moves-california-politics-podcast/",
"stats": {
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"hasAudio": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"wordCount": 168,
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"paragraphCount": 6
},
"modified": 1453922245,
"excerpt": "This week: big initiatives headed to the 2016 ballot, Democratic infighting and a state budget preview.",
"headData": {
"twImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twDescription": "",
"description": "This week: big initiatives headed to the 2016 ballot, Democratic infighting and a state budget preview.",
"title": "2016 Chess Moves: California Politics Podcast | KQED",
"ogDescription": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "2016 Chess Moves: California Politics Podcast",
"datePublished": "2015-05-08T00:01:29-07:00",
"dateModified": "2016-01-27T11:17:25-08:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "2016-chess-moves-california-politics-podcast",
"status": "publish",
"customPermalink": "2015/05/08/2016-chess-moves-california-politics-podcast/",
"audioUrl": "http://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/RDnews/2015/05/PoliticsPodcast050815.mp3",
"guestFields": "0",
"nprStoryId": "464591087",
"path": "/news/10517494/2016-chess-moves-california-politics-podcast",
"audioDuration": null,
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>Political campaigns, especially those involving ballot initiatives in California, are often like a big chess board. You need to think about not just the move you're making now, but about what moves you might have to make toward the end.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>This week's California Politics Podcast starts off with a look at three potentially explosive topics that could all appear on the November 2016 statewide ballot: A $2 per pack tobacco tax, an increase in the homeowner's property tax exemption, and a long debated and closely watched effort that could ask voters to tinker with the legendary Proposition 13.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>We also look at the bitter fight to define what it means to be a Democrat in the East Bay's special state Senate election. And, with Gov. Jerry Brown's revised budget coming out next week, a quick look at what we'll be watching.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>As always, I'm joined by Anthony York of the Grizzly Bear Project and Marisa Lagos of KQED News.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/10517494/2016-chess-moves-california-politics-podcast",
"authors": [
"232"
],
"programs": [
"news_7051"
],
"series": [
"news_19101"
],
"categories": [
"news_13",
"news_17793"
],
"tags": [
"news_402",
"news_17599",
"news_30",
"news_725",
"news_19960",
"news_17810",
"news_17812",
"news_423",
"news_2629",
"news_2561"
],
"featImg": "news_10508407",
"label": "news_7051"
}
},
"podcastsReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"podcasts": {}
},
"radioProgramsReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"radioPrograms": {}
},
"programsReducer": {
"all-things-considered": {
"id": "all-things-considered",
"title": "All Things Considered",
"info": "Every weekday, \u003cem>All Things Considered\u003c/em> hosts Robert Siegel, Audie Cornish, Ari Shapiro, and Kelly McEvers present the program's trademark mix of news, interviews, commentaries, reviews, and offbeat features. Michel Martin hosts on the weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 1pm-2pm, 4:30pm-6:30pm\u003cbr />SAT-SUN 5pm-6pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/All-Things-Considered-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/all-things-considered/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/all-things-considered"
},
"american-suburb-podcast": {
"id": "american-suburb-podcast",
"title": "American Suburb: The Podcast",
"tagline": "The flip side of gentrification, told through one town",
"info": "Gentrification is changing cities across America, forcing people from neighborhoods they have long called home. Call them the displaced. Now those priced out of the Bay Area are looking for a better life in an unlikely place. American Suburb follows this migration to one California town along the Delta, 45 miles from San Francisco. But is this once sleepy suburb ready for them?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/American-Suburb-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 19
},
"link": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/RBrW",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=1287748328",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/American-Suburb-p1086805/",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/feed/podcast",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMzMDExODgxNjA5"
}
},
"baycurious": {
"id": "baycurious",
"title": "Bay Curious",
"tagline": "Exploring the Bay Area, one question at a time",
"info": "KQED’s new podcast, Bay Curious, gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Bay-Curious-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Bay Curious",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/baycurious",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 3
},
"link": "/podcasts/baycurious",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bay-curious/id1172473406",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/500557090/bay-curious",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/category/bay-curious-podcast/feed/podcast",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9a90d476-aa04-455d-9a4c-0871ed6216d4/bay-curious",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/bay-curious",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6O76IdmhixfijmhTZLIJ8k"
}
},
"bbc-world-service": {
"id": "bbc-world-service",
"title": "BBC World Service",
"info": "The day's top stories from BBC News compiled twice daily in the week, once at weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9pm-10pm, TUE-FRI 1am-2am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/BBC-World-Service-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_world_service",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "BBC World Service"
},
"link": "/radio/program/bbc-world-service",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/global-news-podcast/id135067274?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/BBC-World-Service-p455581/",
"rss": "https://podcasts.files.bbci.co.uk/p02nq0gn.rss"
}
},
"californiareport": {
"id": "californiareport",
"title": "The California Report",
"tagline": "California, day by day",
"info": "KQED’s statewide radio news program providing daily coverage of issues, trends and public policy decisions.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareport",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 8
},
"link": "/californiareport",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-the-california-report/id79681292",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/26099305-72af-4542-9dde-ac1807fe36d5/kqed-s-the-california-report",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432285393/the-california-report",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-the-california-report-podcast-8838",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcram/feed/podcast"
}
},
"californiareportmagazine": {
"id": "californiareportmagazine",
"title": "The California Report Magazine",
"tagline": "Your state, your stories",
"info": "Every week, The California Report Magazine takes you on a road trip for the ears: to visit the places and meet the people who make California unique. The in-depth storytelling podcast from the California Report.",
"airtime": "FRI 4:30pm-5pm, 6:30pm-7pm, 11pm-11:30pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Magazine-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report Magazine",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareportmagazine",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 10
},
"link": "/californiareportmagazine",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-california-report-magazine/id1314750545",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM3NjkwNjk1OTAz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/564733126/the-california-report-magazine",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-california-report-magazine",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcrmag/feed/podcast"
}
},
"city-arts": {
"id": "city-arts",
"title": "City Arts & Lectures",
"info": "A one-hour radio program to hear celebrated writers, artists and thinkers address contemporary ideas and values, often discussing the creative process. Please note: tapes or transcripts are not available",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/cityartsandlecture-300x300.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.cityarts.net/",
"airtime": "SUN 1pm-2pm, TUE 10pm, WED 1am",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "City Arts & Lectures"
},
"link": "https://www.cityarts.net",
"subscribe": {
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/City-Arts-and-Lectures-p692/",
"rss": "https://www.cityarts.net/feed/"
}
},
"closealltabs": {
"id": "closealltabs",
"title": "Close All Tabs",
"tagline": "Your irreverent guide to the trends redefining our world",
"info": "Close All Tabs breaks down how digital culture shapes our world through thoughtful insights and irreverent humor.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/CAT_2_Tile-scaled.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Close All Tabs",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 1
},
"link": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/close-all-tabs/id214663465",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC6993880386",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/92d9d4ac-67a3-4eed-b10a-fb45d45b1ef2/close-all-tabs",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6LAJFHnGK1pYXYzv6SIol6?si=deb0cae19813417c"
}
},
"code-switch-life-kit": {
"id": "code-switch-life-kit",
"title": "Code Switch / Life Kit",
"info": "\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em>, which listeners will hear in the first part of the hour, has fearless and much-needed conversations about race. Hosted by journalists of color, the show tackles the subject of race head-on, exploring how it impacts every part of society — from politics and pop culture to history, sports and more.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em>, which will be in the second part of the hour, guides you through spaces and feelings no one prepares you for — from finances to mental health, from workplace microaggressions to imposter syndrome, from relationships to parenting. The show features experts with real world experience and shares their knowledge. Because everyone needs a little help being human.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510312/codeswitch\">\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/lifekit\">\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />",
"airtime": "SUN 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Code-Switch-Life-Kit-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/code-switch-life-kit",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/1112190608?mt=2&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnByLm9yZy9yc3MvcG9kY2FzdC5waHA_aWQ9NTEwMzEy",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3bExJ9JQpkwNhoHvaIIuyV",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510312/podcast.xml"
}
},
"commonwealth-club": {
"id": "commonwealth-club",
"title": "Commonwealth Club of California Podcast",
"info": "The Commonwealth Club of California is the nation's oldest and largest public affairs forum. As a non-partisan forum, The Club brings to the public airwaves diverse viewpoints on important topics. The Club's weekly radio broadcast - the oldest in the U.S., dating back to 1924 - is carried across the nation on public radio stations and is now podcasting. Our website archive features audio of our recent programs, as well as selected speeches from our long and distinguished history. This podcast feed is usually updated twice a week and is always un-edited.",
"airtime": "THU 10pm, FRI 1am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Commonwealth-Club-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.commonwealthclub.org/podcasts",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Commonwealth Club of California"
},
"link": "/radio/program/commonwealth-club",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/commonwealth-club-of-california-podcast/id976334034?mt=2",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21tb253ZWFsdGhjbHViLm9yZy9hdWRpby9wb2RjYXN0L3dlZWtseS54bWw",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Commonwealth-Club-of-California-p1060/"
}
},
"forum": {
"id": "forum",
"title": "Forum",
"tagline": "The conversation starts here",
"info": "KQED’s live call-in program discussing local, state, national and international issues, as well as in-depth interviews.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9am-11am, 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Forum-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Forum with Mina Kim and Alexis Madrigal",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/forum",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 9
},
"link": "/forum",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-forum/id73329719",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM5NTU3MzgxNjMz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432307980/forum",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-forum-podcast",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9557381633"
}
},
"freakonomics-radio": {
"id": "freakonomics-radio",
"title": "Freakonomics Radio",
"info": "Freakonomics Radio is a one-hour award-winning podcast and public-radio project hosted by Stephen Dubner, with co-author Steve Levitt as a regular guest. It is produced in partnership with WNYC.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/freakonomicsRadio.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://freakonomics.com/",
"airtime": "SUN 1am-2am, SAT 3pm-4pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/freakonomics-radio",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/freakonomics-radio/id354668519",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/Freakonomics-Radio-p272293/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/freakonomicsradio"
}
},
"fresh-air": {
"id": "fresh-air",
"title": "Fresh Air",
"info": "Hosted by Terry Gross, \u003cem>Fresh Air from WHYY\u003c/em> is the Peabody Award-winning weekday magazine of contemporary arts and issues. One of public radio's most popular programs, Fresh Air features intimate conversations with today's biggest luminaries.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Fresh-Air-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/fresh-air",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=214089682&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Fresh-Air-p17/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/381444908/podcast.xml"
}
},
"here-and-now": {
"id": "here-and-now",
"title": "Here & Now",
"info": "A live production of NPR and WBUR Boston, in collaboration with stations across the country, Here & Now reflects the fluid world of news as it's happening in the middle of the day, with timely, in-depth news, interviews and conversation. Hosted by Robin Young, Jeremy Hobson and Tonya Mosley.",
"airtime": "MON-THU 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Here-And-Now-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/here-and-now",
"subsdcribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=426698661",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Here--Now-p211/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510051/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hidden-brain": {
"id": "hidden-brain",
"title": "Hidden Brain",
"info": "Shankar Vedantam uses science and storytelling to reveal the unconscious patterns that drive human behavior, shape our choices and direct our relationships.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/hiddenbrain.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/423302056/hidden-brain",
"airtime": "SUN 7pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "NPR"
},
"link": "/radio/program/hidden-brain",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-brain/id1028908750?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Science-Podcasts/Hidden-Brain-p787503/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510308/podcast.xml"
}
},
"how-i-built-this": {
"id": "how-i-built-this",
"title": "How I Built This with Guy Raz",
"info": "Guy Raz dives into the stories behind some of the world's best known companies. How I Built This weaves a narrative journey about innovators, entrepreneurs and idealists—and the movements they built.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/howIBuiltThis.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this",
"airtime": "SUN 7:30pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/how-i-built-this",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/3zxy",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/how-i-built-this-with-guy-raz/id1150510297?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Arts--Culture-Podcasts/How-I-Built-This-p910896/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510313/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hyphenacion": {
"id": "hyphenacion",
"title": "Hyphenación",
"tagline": "Where conversation and cultura meet",
"info": "What kind of no sabo word is Hyphenación? For us, it’s about living within a hyphenation. Like being a third-gen Mexican-American from the Texas border now living that Bay Area Chicano life. Like Xorje! Each week we bring together a couple of hyphenated Latinos to talk all about personal life choices: family, careers, relationships, belonging … everything is on the table. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Hyphenacion_FinalAssets_PodcastTile.png",
"imageAlt": "KQED Hyphenación",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 15
},
"link": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hyphenaci%C3%B3n/id1191591838",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/2p3Fifq96nw9BPcmFdIq0o?si=39209f7b25774f38",
"youtube": "https://www.youtube.com/c/kqedarts",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/6c3dd23c-93fb-4aab-97ba-1725fa6315f1/hyphenaci%C3%B3n",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC2275451163"
}
},
"jerrybrown": {
"id": "jerrybrown",
"title": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"tagline": "Lessons from a lifetime in politics",
"info": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown brings listeners the wisdom of the former Governor, Mayor, and presidential candidate. Scott Shafer interviewed Brown for more than 40 hours, covering the former governor's life and half-century in the political game – and Brown has some lessons he'd like to share. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Political-Mind-of-Jerry-Brown-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 18
},
"link": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/790253322/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1492194549",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/jerrybrown/feed/podcast/",
"tuneIn": "http://tun.in/pjGcK",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/54C1dmuyFyKMFttY6X2j6r?si=K8SgRCoISNK6ZbjpXrX5-w",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/44420f75-3b0e-4301-ab3b-16da6b09e543/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown"
}
},
"latino-usa": {
"id": "latino-usa",
"title": "Latino USA",
"airtime": "MON 1am-2am, SUN 6pm-7pm",
"info": "Latino USA, the radio journal of news and culture, is the only national, English-language radio program produced from a Latino perspective.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/latinoUsa.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://latinousa.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/latino-usa",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/xtTd",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=79681317&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Latino-USA-p621/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510016/podcast.xml"
}
},
"marketplace": {
"id": "marketplace",
"title": "Marketplace",
"info": "Our flagship program, helmed by Kai Ryssdal, examines what the day in money delivered, through stories, conversations, newsworthy numbers and more. Updated Monday through Friday at about 3:30 p.m. PT.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 4pm-4:30pm, MON-WED 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Marketplace-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.marketplace.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "American Public Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/marketplace",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201853034&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/APM-Marketplace-p88/",
"rss": "https://feeds.publicradio.org/public_feeds/marketplace-pm/rss/rss"
}
},
"masters-of-scale": {
"id": "masters-of-scale",
"title": "Masters of Scale",
"info": "Masters of Scale is an original podcast in which LinkedIn co-founder and Greylock Partner Reid Hoffman sets out to describe and prove theories that explain how great entrepreneurs take their companies from zero to a gazillion in ingenious fashion.",
"airtime": "Every other Wednesday June 12 through October 16 at 8pm (repeats Thursdays at 2am)",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Masters-of-Scale-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://mastersofscale.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WaitWhat"
},
"link": "/radio/program/masters-of-scale",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "http://mastersofscale.app.link/",
"rss": "https://rss.art19.com/masters-of-scale"
}
},
"mindshift": {
"id": "mindshift",
"title": "MindShift",
"tagline": "A podcast about the future of learning and how we raise our kids",
"info": "The MindShift podcast explores the innovations in education that are shaping how kids learn. Hosts Ki Sung and Katrina Schwartz introduce listeners to educators, researchers, parents and students who are developing effective ways to improve how kids learn. We cover topics like how fed-up administrators are developing surprising tactics to deal with classroom disruptions; how listening to podcasts are helping kids develop reading skills; the consequences of overparenting; and why interdisciplinary learning can engage students on all ends of the traditional achievement spectrum. This podcast is part of the MindShift education site, a division of KQED News. KQED is an NPR/PBS member station based in San Francisco. You can also visit the MindShift website for episodes and supplemental blog posts or tweet us \u003ca href=\"https://twitter.com/MindShiftKQED\">@MindShiftKQED\u003c/a> or visit us at \u003ca href=\"/mindshift\">MindShift.KQED.org\u003c/a>",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Mindshift-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED MindShift: How We Will Learn",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/mindshift/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 12
},
"link": "/podcasts/mindshift",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mindshift-podcast/id1078765985",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM1NzY0NjAwNDI5",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/464615685/mind-shift-podcast",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/stories-teachers-share",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0MxSpNYZKNprFLCl7eEtyx"
}
},
"morning-edition": {
"id": "morning-edition",
"title": "Morning Edition",
"info": "\u003cem>Morning Edition\u003c/em> takes listeners around the country and the world with multi-faceted stories and commentaries every weekday. Hosts Steve Inskeep, David Greene and Rachel Martin bring you the latest breaking news and features to prepare you for the day.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3am-9am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Morning-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/morning-edition/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/morning-edition"
},
"onourwatch": {
"id": "onourwatch",
"title": "On Our Watch",
"tagline": "Deeply-reported investigative journalism",
"info": "For decades, the process for how police police themselves has been inconsistent – if not opaque. In some states, like California, these proceedings were completely hidden. After a new police transparency law unsealed scores of internal affairs files, our reporters set out to examine these cases and the shadow world of police discipline. On Our Watch brings listeners into the rooms where officers are questioned and witnesses are interrogated to find out who this system is really protecting. Is it the officers, or the public they've sworn to serve?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/On-Our-Watch-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "On Our Watch from NPR and KQED",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 11
},
"link": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1567098962",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5ucHIub3JnLzUxMDM2MC9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbD9zYz1nb29nbGVwb2RjYXN0cw",
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/onourwatch",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0OLWoyizopu6tY1XiuX70x",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-Our-Watch-p1436229/",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/show/on-our-watch",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510360/podcast.xml"
}
},
"on-the-media": {
"id": "on-the-media",
"title": "On The Media",
"info": "Our weekly podcast explores how the media 'sausage' is made, casts an incisive eye on fluctuations in the marketplace of ideas, and examines threats to the freedom of information and expression in America and abroad. For one hour a week, the show tries to lift the veil from the process of \"making media,\" especially news media, because it's through that lens that we see the world and the world sees us",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm-3pm, MON 12am-1am",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/onTheMedia.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/otm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wnyc"
},
"link": "/radio/program/on-the-media",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/on-the-media/id73330715?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-the-Media-p69/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/onthemedia"
}
},
"pbs-newshour": {
"id": "pbs-newshour",
"title": "PBS NewsHour",
"info": "Analysis, background reports and updates from the PBS NewsHour putting today's news in context.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PBS-News-Hour-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "pbs"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pbs-newshour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pbs-newshour-full-show/id394432287?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/PBS-NewsHour---Full-Show-p425698/",
"rss": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/feeds/rss/podcasts/show"
}
},
"perspectives": {
"id": "perspectives",
"title": "Perspectives",
"tagline": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991",
"info": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Perspectives_Tile_Final.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Perspectives",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/perspectives/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 14
},
"link": "/perspectives",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/id73801135",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432309616/perspectives",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/perspectives/category/perspectives/feed/",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93dzIua3FlZC5vcmcvcGVyc3BlY3RpdmVzL2NhdGVnb3J5L3BlcnNwZWN0aXZlcy9mZWVkLw"
}
},
"planet-money": {
"id": "planet-money",
"title": "Planet Money",
"info": "The economy explained. Imagine you could call up a friend and say, Meet me at the bar and tell me what's going on with the economy. Now imagine that's actually a fun evening.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/planetmoney.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/sections/money/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/planet-money",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/M4f5",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/planet-money/id290783428?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Business--Economics-Podcasts/Planet-Money-p164680/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510289/podcast.xml"
}
},
"politicalbreakdown": {
"id": "politicalbreakdown",
"title": "Political Breakdown",
"tagline": "Politics from a personal perspective",
"info": "Political Breakdown is a new series that explores the political intersection of California and the nation. Each week hosts Scott Shafer and Marisa Lagos are joined with a new special guest to unpack politics -- with personality — and offer an insider’s glimpse at how politics happens.",
"airtime": "THU 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Political-Breakdown-2024-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Political Breakdown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 5
},
"link": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/political-breakdown/id1327641087",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/e0c2d153-ad36-4c8d-901d-f1da6a724824/political-breakdown",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/572155894/political-breakdown",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/political-breakdown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/07RVyIjIdk2WDuVehvBMoN",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/political-breakdown/feed/podcast"
}
},
"possible": {
"id": "possible",
"title": "Possible",
"info": "Possible is hosted by entrepreneur Reid Hoffman and writer Aria Finger. Together in Possible, Hoffman and Finger lead enlightening discussions about building a brighter collective future. The show features interviews with visionary guests like Trevor Noah, Sam Altman and Janette Sadik-Khan. Possible paints an optimistic portrait of the world we can create through science, policy, business, art and our shared humanity. It asks: What if everything goes right for once? How can we get there? Each episode also includes a short fiction story generated by advanced AI GPT-4, serving as a thought-provoking springboard to speculate how humanity could leverage technology for good.",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Possible-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.possible.fm/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Possible"
},
"link": "/radio/program/possible",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/possible/id1677184070",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/730YpdUSNlMyPQwNnyjp4k"
}
},
"pri-the-world": {
"id": "pri-the-world",
"title": "PRI's The World: Latest Edition",
"info": "Each weekday, host Marco Werman and his team of producers bring you the world's most interesting stories in an hour of radio that reminds us just how small our planet really is.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-World-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pri.org/programs/the-world",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "PRI"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pri-the-world",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pris-the-world-latest-edition/id278196007?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/PRIs-The-World-p24/",
"rss": "http://feeds.feedburner.com/pri/theworld"
}
},
"radiolab": {
"id": "radiolab",
"title": "Radiolab",
"info": "A two-time Peabody Award-winner, Radiolab is an investigation told through sounds and stories, and centered around one big idea. In the Radiolab world, information sounds like music and science and culture collide. Hosted by Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich, the show is designed for listeners who demand skepticism, but appreciate wonder. WNYC Studios is the producer of other leading podcasts including Freakonomics Radio, Death, Sex & Money, On the Media and many more.",
"airtime": "SUN 12am-1am, SAT 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/radiolab1400.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/radiolab/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/radiolab",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/radiolab/id152249110?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/RadioLab-p68032/",
"rss": "https://feeds.wnyc.org/radiolab"
}
},
"reveal": {
"id": "reveal",
"title": "Reveal",
"info": "Created by The Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, Reveal is public radios first one-hour weekly radio show and podcast dedicated to investigative reporting. Credible, fact based and without a partisan agenda, Reveal combines the power and artistry of driveway moment storytelling with data-rich reporting on critically important issues. The result is stories that inform and inspire, arming our listeners with information to right injustices, hold the powerful accountable and improve lives.Reveal is hosted by Al Letson and showcases the award-winning work of CIR and newsrooms large and small across the nation. In a radio and podcast market crowded with choices, Reveal focuses on important and often surprising stories that illuminate the world for our listeners.",
"airtime": "SAT 4pm-5pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/reveal300px.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/reveal",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/reveal/id886009669",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Reveal-p679597/",
"rss": "http://feeds.revealradio.org/revealpodcast"
}
},
"rightnowish": {
"id": "rightnowish",
"title": "Rightnowish",
"tagline": "Art is where you find it",
"info": "Rightnowish digs into life in the Bay Area right now… ish. Journalist Pendarvis Harshaw takes us to galleries painted on the sides of liquor stores in West Oakland. We'll dance in warehouses in the Bayview, make smoothies with kids in South Berkeley, and listen to classical music in a 1984 Cutlass Supreme in Richmond. Every week, Pen talks to movers and shakers about how the Bay Area shapes what they create, and how they shape the place we call home.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Rightnowish-Podcast-Tile-500x500-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Rightnowish with Pendarvis Harshaw",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 16
},
"link": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/721590300/rightnowish",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/arts/programs/rightnowish/feed/podcast",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rightnowish/id1482187648",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/rightnowish",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMxMjU5MTY3NDc4",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/7kEJuafTzTVan7B78ttz1I"
}
},
"science-friday": {
"id": "science-friday",
"title": "Science Friday",
"info": "Science Friday is a weekly science talk show, broadcast live over public radio stations nationwide. Each week, the show focuses on science topics that are in the news and tries to bring an educated, balanced discussion to bear on the scientific issues at hand. Panels of expert guests join host Ira Flatow, a veteran science journalist, to discuss science and to take questions from listeners during the call-in portion of the program.",
"airtime": "FRI 11am-1pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Science-Friday-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/science-friday",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/science-friday",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=73329284&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Science-Friday-p394/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/science-friday"
}
},
"snap-judgment": {
"id": "snap-judgment",
"title": "Snap Judgment",
"tagline": "Real stories with killer beats",
"info": "The Snap Judgment radio show and podcast mixes real stories with killer beats to produce cinematic, dramatic radio. Snap's musical brand of storytelling dares listeners to see the world through the eyes of another. This is storytelling... with a BEAT!! Snap first aired on public radio stations nationwide in July 2010. Today, Snap Judgment airs on over 450 public radio stations and is brought to the airwaves by KQED & PRX.",
"airtime": "SAT 1pm-2pm, 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Snap-Judgment-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Snap Judgment",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 4
},
"link": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/snap-judgment/id283657561",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/449018144/snap-judgment",
"stitcher": "https://www.pandora.com/podcast/snap-judgment/PC:241?source=stitcher-sunset",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3Cct7ZWmxHNAtLgBTqjC5v",
"rss": "https://snap.feed.snapjudgment.org/"
}
},
"soldout": {
"id": "soldout",
"title": "SOLD OUT: Rethinking Housing in America",
"tagline": "A new future for housing",
"info": "Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Sold-Out-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/soldout",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 13
},
"link": "/podcasts/soldout",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/911586047/s-o-l-d-o-u-t-a-new-future-for-housing",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/introducing-sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america/id1531354937",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/soldout",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/38dTBSk2ISFoPiyYNoKn1X",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america",
"tunein": "https://tunein.com/radio/SOLD-OUT-Rethinking-Housing-in-America-p1365871/"
}
},
"spooked": {
"id": "spooked",
"title": "Spooked",
"tagline": "True-life supernatural stories",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Spooked-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Spooked",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 7
},
"link": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/spooked/id1279361017",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/549547848/snap-judgment-presents-spooked",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/76571Rfl3m7PLJQZKQIGCT",
"rss": "https://feeds.simplecast.com/TBotaapn"
}
},
"tech-nation": {
"id": "tech-nation",
"title": "Tech Nation Radio Podcast",
"info": "Tech Nation is a weekly public radio program, hosted by Dr. Moira Gunn. Founded in 1993, it has grown from a simple interview show to a multi-faceted production, featuring conversations with noted technology and science leaders, and a weekly science and technology-related commentary.",
"airtime": "FRI 10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Tech-Nation-Radio-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://technation.podomatic.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "Tech Nation Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tech-nation",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://technation.podomatic.com/rss2.xml"
}
},
"ted-radio-hour": {
"id": "ted-radio-hour",
"title": "TED Radio Hour",
"info": "The TED Radio Hour is a journey through fascinating ideas, astonishing inventions, fresh approaches to old problems, and new ways to think and create.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm, SAT 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/tedRadioHour.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?showDate=2018-06-22",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/ted-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/8vsS",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=523121474&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/TED-Radio-Hour-p418021/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510298/podcast.xml"
}
},
"thebay": {
"id": "thebay",
"title": "The Bay",
"tagline": "Local news to keep you rooted",
"info": "Host Devin Katayama walks you through the biggest story of the day with reporters and newsmakers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Bay-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Bay",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/thebay",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 2
},
"link": "/podcasts/thebay",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bay/id1350043452",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/d800ea4c-7a2c-42f2-b861-edaf78a5db0b/the-bay",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/586725995/the-bay",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-bay",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/4BIKBKIujizLHlIlBNaAqQ",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC8259786327"
}
},
"thelatest": {
"id": "thelatest",
"title": "The Latest",
"tagline": "Trusted local news in real time",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/The-Latest-2025-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Latest",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/thelatest",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 6
},
"link": "/thelatest",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-latest-from-kqed/id1197721799",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/1257949365/the-latest-from-k-q-e-d",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/5KIIXMgM9GTi5AepwOYvIZ?si=bd3053fec7244dba",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9137121918"
}
},
"theleap": {
"id": "theleap",
"title": "The Leap",
"tagline": "What if you closed your eyes, and jumped?",
"info": "Stories about people making dramatic, risky changes, told by award-winning public radio reporter Judy Campbell.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Leap-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Leap",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/theleap",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 17
},
"link": "/podcasts/theleap",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-leap/id1046668171",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/447248267/the-leap",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-leap",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3sSlVHHzU0ytLwuGs1SD1U",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/programs/the-leap/feed/podcast"
}
},
"the-moth-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-moth-radio-hour",
"title": "The Moth Radio Hour",
"info": "Since its launch in 1997, The Moth has presented thousands of true stories, told live and without notes, to standing-room-only crowds worldwide. Moth storytellers stand alone, under a spotlight, with only a microphone and a roomful of strangers. The storyteller and the audience embark on a high-wire act of shared experience which is both terrifying and exhilarating. Since 2008, The Moth podcast has featured many of our favorite stories told live on Moth stages around the country. For information on all of our programs and live events, visit themoth.org.",
"airtime": "SAT 8pm-9pm and SUN 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/theMoth.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://themoth.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "prx"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-moth-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-moth-podcast/id275699983?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/The-Moth-p273888/",
"rss": "http://feeds.themoth.org/themothpodcast"
}
},
"the-new-yorker-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"title": "The New Yorker Radio Hour",
"info": "The New Yorker Radio Hour is a weekly program presented by the magazine's editor, David Remnick, and produced by WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Each episode features a diverse mix of interviews, profiles, storytelling, and an occasional burst of humor inspired by the magazine, and shaped by its writers, artists, and editors. This isn't a radio version of a magazine, but something all its own, reflecting the rich possibilities of audio storytelling and conversation. Theme music for the show was composed and performed by Merrill Garbus of tUnE-YArDs.",
"airtime": "SAT 10am-11am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-New-Yorker-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/tnyradiohour",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1050430296",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/New-Yorker-Radio-Hour-p803804/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/newyorkerradiohour"
}
},
"the-sam-sanders-show": {
"id": "the-sam-sanders-show",
"title": "The Sam Sanders Show",
"info": "One of public radio's most dynamic voices, Sam Sanders helped launch The NPR Politics Podcast and hosted NPR's hit show It's Been A Minute. Now, the award-winning host returns with something brand new, The Sam Sanders Show. Every week, Sam Sanders and friends dig into the culture that shapes our lives: what's driving the biggest trends, how artists really think, and even the memes you can't stop scrolling past. Sam is beloved for his way of unpacking the world and bringing you up close to fresh currents and engaging conversations. The Sam Sanders Show is smart, funny and always a good time.",
"airtime": "FRI 12-1pm AND SAT 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-Sam-Sanders-Show-Podcast-Tile-400x400-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "KCRW"
},
"link": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feed.cdnstream1.com/zjb/feed/download/ac/28/59/ac28594c-e1d0-4231-8728-61865cdc80e8.xml"
}
},
"the-splendid-table": {
"id": "the-splendid-table",
"title": "The Splendid Table",
"info": "\u003cem>The Splendid Table\u003c/em> hosts our nation's conversations about cooking, sustainability and food culture.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Splendid-Table-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.splendidtable.org/",
"airtime": "SUN 10-11 pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-splendid-table"
},
"this-american-life": {
"id": "this-american-life",
"title": "This American Life",
"info": "This American Life is a weekly public radio show, heard by 2.2 million people on more than 500 stations. Another 2.5 million people download the weekly podcast. It is hosted by Ira Glass, produced in collaboration with Chicago Public Media, delivered to stations by PRX The Public Radio Exchange, and has won all of the major broadcasting awards.",
"airtime": "SAT 12pm-1pm, 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/thisAmericanLife.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wbez"
},
"link": "/radio/program/this-american-life",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201671138&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"rss": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/podcast/rss.xml"
}
},
"tinydeskradio": {
"id": "tinydeskradio",
"title": "Tiny Desk Radio",
"info": "We're bringing the best of Tiny Desk to the airwaves, only on public radio.",
"airtime": "SUN 8pm and SAT 9pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/300x300-For-Member-Station-Logo-Tiny-Desk-Radio-@2x.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/g-s1-52030/tiny-desk-radio",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tinydeskradio",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/g-s1-52030/rss.xml"
}
},
"wait-wait-dont-tell-me": {
"id": "wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"title": "Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!",
"info": "Peter Sagal and Bill Kurtis host the weekly NPR News quiz show alongside some of the best and brightest news and entertainment personalities.",
"airtime": "SUN 10am-11am, SAT 11am-12pm, SAT 6pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Wait-Wait-Podcast-Tile-300x300-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/wait-wait-dont-tell-me/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/Xogv",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=121493804&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Wait-Wait-Dont-Tell-Me-p46/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/344098539/podcast.xml"
}
},
"weekend-edition-saturday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-saturday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Saturday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Saturday wraps up the week's news and offers a mix of analysis and features on a wide range of topics, including arts, sports, entertainment, and human interest stories. The two-hour program is hosted by NPR's Peabody Award-winning Scott Simon.",
"airtime": "SAT 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-saturday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-saturday"
},
"weekend-edition-sunday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-sunday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Sunday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Sunday features interviews with newsmakers, artists, scientists, politicians, musicians, writers, theologians and historians. The program has covered news events from Nelson Mandela's 1990 release from a South African prison to the capture of Saddam Hussein.",
"airtime": "SUN 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-sunday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-sunday"
}
},
"racesReducer": {},
"racesGenElectionReducer": {},
"racesGenElection2026Reducer": {},
"radioSchedulesReducer": {},
"listsReducer": {
"posts/news?tag=proposition-13": {
"isFetching": false,
"latestQuery": {
"from": 12,
"size": 12
},
"vitalsOnly": false,
"totalRequested": 12,
"isLoading": false,
"isLoadingMore": true,
"total": {
"value": 26,
"relation": "eq"
},
"items": [
"news_11701223",
"news_11701044",
"news_11700810",
"news_11700683",
"news_11700626",
"news_11700609",
"news_11677374",
"news_11676299",
"news_11624431",
"news_11574585",
"news_11438840",
"news_10517494"
],
"complete": true
}
},
"recallGuideReducer": {
"intros": {},
"policy": {},
"candidates": {}
},
"savedArticleReducer": {
"articles": [],
"status": {}
},
"newslettersReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"newsletters": {},
"isSubscribing": false,
"isUnsubscribing": false,
"subscribedNewsletters": {}
},
"termsReducer": {
"about": {
"name": "About",
"type": "terms",
"id": "about",
"slug": "about",
"link": "/about",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"arts": {
"name": "Arts & Culture",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"description": "KQED Arts provides daily in-depth coverage of the Bay Area's music, art, film, performing arts, literature and arts news, as well as cultural commentary and criticism.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "arts",
"slug": "arts",
"link": "/arts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"artschool": {
"name": "Art School",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "artschool",
"slug": "artschool",
"link": "/artschool",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareabites": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareabites",
"slug": "bayareabites",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareahiphop": {
"name": "Bay Area Hiphop",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareahiphop",
"slug": "bayareahiphop",
"link": "/bayareahiphop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"campaign21": {
"name": "Campaign 21",
"type": "terms",
"id": "campaign21",
"slug": "campaign21",
"link": "/campaign21",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"careers": {
"name": "Careers",
"type": "terms",
"id": "careers",
"slug": "careers",
"link": "/careers",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"checkplease": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "checkplease",
"slug": "checkplease",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"education": {
"name": "Education",
"grouping": [
"education"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "education",
"slug": "education",
"link": "/education",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"elections": {
"name": "Elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "elections",
"slug": "elections",
"link": "/elections",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"events": {
"name": "Events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "events",
"slug": "events",
"link": "/events",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"event": {
"name": "Event",
"alias": "events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "event",
"slug": "event",
"link": "/event",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"filmschoolshorts": {
"name": "Film School Shorts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "filmschoolshorts",
"slug": "filmschoolshorts",
"link": "/filmschoolshorts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"food": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "food",
"slug": "food",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"forum": {
"name": "Forum",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/forum?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "forum",
"slug": "forum",
"link": "/forum",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"futureofyou": {
"name": "Future of You",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "futureofyou",
"slug": "futureofyou",
"link": "/futureofyou",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"jpepinheart": {
"name": "KQED food",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/food,bayareabites,checkplease",
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "jpepinheart",
"slug": "jpepinheart",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"liveblog": {
"name": "Live Blog",
"type": "terms",
"id": "liveblog",
"slug": "liveblog",
"link": "/liveblog",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"livetv": {
"name": "Live TV",
"parent": "tv",
"type": "terms",
"id": "livetv",
"slug": "livetv",
"link": "/livetv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"lowdown": {
"name": "The Lowdown",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/lowdown?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "lowdown",
"slug": "lowdown",
"link": "/lowdown",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"mindshift": {
"name": "Mindshift",
"parent": "news",
"description": "MindShift explores the future of education by highlighting the innovative – and sometimes counterintuitive – ways educators and parents are helping all children succeed.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "mindshift",
"slug": "mindshift",
"link": "/mindshift",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news": {
"name": "News",
"grouping": [
"news",
"forum"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "news",
"slug": "news",
"link": "/news",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"newsletters": {
"name": "newsletters",
"type": "terms",
"id": "newsletters",
"slug": "newsletters",
"link": "/newsletters",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"perspectives": {
"name": "Perspectives",
"parent": "radio",
"type": "terms",
"id": "perspectives",
"slug": "perspectives",
"link": "/perspectives",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"podcasts": {
"name": "Podcasts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "podcasts",
"slug": "podcasts",
"link": "/podcasts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pop": {
"name": "Pop",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pop",
"slug": "pop",
"link": "/pop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pressroom": {
"name": "Pressroom",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pressroom",
"slug": "pressroom",
"link": "/pressroom",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"quest": {
"name": "Quest",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "quest",
"slug": "quest",
"link": "/quest",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"radio": {
"name": "Radio",
"grouping": [
"forum",
"perspectives"
],
"description": "Listen to KQED Public Radio – home of Forum and The California Report – on 88.5 FM in San Francisco, 89.3 FM in Sacramento, 88.3 FM in Santa Rosa and 88.1 FM in Martinez.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "radio",
"slug": "radio",
"link": "/radio",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"root": {
"name": "KQED",
"image": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"imageWidth": 1200,
"imageHeight": 630,
"headData": {
"title": "KQED | News, Radio, Podcasts, TV | Public Media for Northern California",
"description": "KQED provides public radio, television, and independent reporting on issues that matter to the Bay Area. We’re the NPR and PBS member station for Northern California."
},
"type": "terms",
"id": "root",
"slug": "root",
"link": "/root",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"science": {
"name": "Science",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"description": "KQED Science brings you award-winning science and environment coverage from the Bay Area and beyond.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "science",
"slug": "science",
"link": "/science",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"stateofhealth": {
"name": "State of Health",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "stateofhealth",
"slug": "stateofhealth",
"link": "/stateofhealth",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"support": {
"name": "Support",
"type": "terms",
"id": "support",
"slug": "support",
"link": "/support",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"thedolist": {
"name": "The Do List",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "thedolist",
"slug": "thedolist",
"link": "/thedolist",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"trulyca": {
"name": "Truly CA",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "trulyca",
"slug": "trulyca",
"link": "/trulyca",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"tv": {
"name": "TV",
"type": "terms",
"id": "tv",
"slug": "tv",
"link": "/tv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"voterguide": {
"name": "Voter Guide",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "voterguide",
"slug": "voterguide",
"link": "/voterguide",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"guiaelectoral": {
"name": "Guia Electoral",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "guiaelectoral",
"slug": "guiaelectoral",
"link": "/guiaelectoral",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news_tag_proposition-13": {
"isLoading": true
},
"news_725": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_725",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "725",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Proposition 13",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Proposition 13 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 734,
"slug": "proposition-13",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/proposition-13"
},
"source_news_11574585": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_11574585",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "CALmatters",
"link": "https://calmatters.org/",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_11438840": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_11438840",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "CALmatters",
"link": "https://calmatters.org/",
"isLoading": false
},
"news_72": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_72",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "72",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/TCR-2-Logo-Web-Banners-03.png",
"name": "The California Report",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "The California Report Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6969,
"slug": "the-california-report",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/the-california-report"
},
"news_21879": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_21879",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "21879",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2017/10/interstate-1920x1080-tight-crop.jpg",
"name": "The California Dream",
"description": "\u003ch1>The California Dream\u003c/h1>\r\nYou became a Californian because someone in your family believed in a dream. A strong public education. The promise of a job. The weather. (Ahhh, the weather.) In its long history, the California Dream has meant different things to different people. Today, the state’s identity is in marked contrast to the rest of the country. The dream may still be alive, but it’s challenged at every corner.\r\n\r\nWhat does it mean today?\r\n\r\nKQED and mission-driven media organizations around the state will explore the California Dream starting this year. Reporters and producers will tell the personal stories and discuss the ideas that make up the history, future and current state of the California Dream.\r\n\r\nIs the dream still attainable for most people who live here? \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11671006/what-was-your-familys-california-dream\">\u003cstrong>Tell us your California Dream story\u003c/strong>\u003c/a>.\r\n\r\n\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11671006/what-was-your-familys-california-dream\">\u003cimg class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-11660152\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/04/CADreamBanner-1-800x219.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"800\" height=\"219\" />\u003c/a>",
"taxonomy": "series",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "The California Dream You became a Californian because someone in your family believed in a dream. A strong public education. The promise of a job. The weather. (Ahhh, the weather.) In its long history, the California Dream has meant different things to different people. Today, the state’s identity is in marked contrast to the rest of the country. The dream may still be alive, but it’s challenged at every corner. What does it mean today? KQED and mission-driven media organizations around the state will explore the California Dream starting this year. Reporters and producers will tell the personal stories and discuss the ideas that make up the history, future and current state of the California Dream. Is the dream still attainable for most people who live here? Tell us your California Dream story.",
"title": "The California Dream Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 21896,
"slug": "californiadream",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/series/californiadream"
},
"news_1758": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1758",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1758",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Economy",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Full coverage of the economy",
"title": "Economy Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2648,
"slug": "economy",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/economy"
},
"news_6188": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6188",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6188",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Law and Justice",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Law and Justice Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6212,
"slug": "law-and-justice",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/law-and-justice"
},
"news_8": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_8",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "8",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "News",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "News Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 8,
"slug": "news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/news"
},
"news_13": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_13",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "13",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Politics",
"slug": "politics",
"taxonomy": "category",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 13,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/politics"
},
"news_18540": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_18540",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "18540",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Education",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Education Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2595,
"slug": "education",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/education"
},
"news_2998": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_2998",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "2998",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "schools",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "schools Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 3016,
"slug": "schools",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/schools"
},
"news_17041": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17041",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17041",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "the-california-report-featured",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "the-california-report-featured Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17067,
"slug": "the-california-report-featured",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/the-california-report-featured"
},
"news_6266": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6266",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6266",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Housing",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Housing Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6290,
"slug": "housing",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/housing"
},
"news_20191": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20191",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20191",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "election 2018",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "election 2018 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20208,
"slug": "election-2018",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/election-2018"
},
"news_1775": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1775",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1775",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "housing",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "housing Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 1790,
"slug": "housing",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/housing"
},
"news_34054": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34054",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34054",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "oakland",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "oakland Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 34071,
"slug": "oakland",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/oakland"
},
"news_23484": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_23484",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "23484",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Prop 13",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Prop 13 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 23501,
"slug": "prop-13",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/prop-13"
},
"news_137": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_137",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "137",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "real estate",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "real estate Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 141,
"slug": "real-estate",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/real-estate"
},
"news_18481": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_18481",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "18481",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "CALmatters",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "affiliate",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "CALmatters Archives | KQED Arts",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 18515,
"slug": "calmatters",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/affiliate/calmatters"
},
"news_20013": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20013",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20013",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "education",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "education Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20030,
"slug": "education",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/education"
},
"news_24455": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_24455",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "24455",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "prop 2018",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "prop 2018 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 24472,
"slug": "prop-2018",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/prop-2018"
},
"news_423": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_423",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "423",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "taxes",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "taxes Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 432,
"slug": "taxes",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/taxes"
},
"news_3921": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_3921",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "3921",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "affordable housing",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "affordable housing Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 3940,
"slug": "affordable-housing",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/affordable-housing"
},
"news_7055": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_7055",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "7055",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "KPCC",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "affiliate",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "KPCC Archives | KQED Arts",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 7082,
"slug": "kpcc",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/affiliate/kpcc"
},
"news_23591": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_23591",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "23591",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "dialysis",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "dialysis Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 23608,
"slug": "dialysis",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/dialysis"
},
"news_19542": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19542",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19542",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "featured",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "featured Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19559,
"slug": "featured",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/featured"
},
"news_19105": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19105",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19105",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "gas tax",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "gas tax Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19122,
"slug": "gas-tax",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/gas-tax"
},
"news_3924": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_3924",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "3924",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Rent Control",
"slug": "rent-control",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Rent Control | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 3943,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/rent-control"
},
"news_6944": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6944",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6944",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/News-Fix-Logo-Web-Banners-04.png",
"name": "News Fix",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "The News Fix is a daily news podcast from KQED that breaks down the latest headlines and provides in-depth analysis of the stories that matter to the Bay Area.",
"title": "News Fix - Daily Dose of Bay Area News | KQED",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6968,
"slug": "news-fix",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/news-fix"
},
"news_23177": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_23177",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "23177",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California Republican Party",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Republican Party Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 23194,
"slug": "california-republican-party",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/california-republican-party"
},
"news_30": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_30",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "30",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Jerry Brown",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Jerry Brown Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 30,
"slug": "jerry-brown",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/jerry-brown"
},
"news_20737": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20737",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20737",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "john cox",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "john cox Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20754,
"slug": "john-cox",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/john-cox"
},
"news_21840": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_21840",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "21840",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California Dream",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Dream Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 21857,
"slug": "california-dream",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/california-dream"
},
"news_20397": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20397",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20397",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California history",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California history Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20414,
"slug": "california-history",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/california-history"
},
"news_17286": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17286",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17286",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "tcr",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "tcr Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17318,
"slug": "tcr",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/tcr"
},
"news_356": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_356",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "356",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Science",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Science Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 364,
"slug": "science",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/science"
},
"news_782": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_782",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "782",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "cap and trade",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "cap and trade Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 791,
"slug": "cap-and-trade",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/cap-and-trade"
},
"news_164": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_164",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "164",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Proposition 26",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Proposition 26 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 171,
"slug": "proposition-26",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/proposition-26"
},
"news_7051": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_7051",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "7051",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/Faultlines-2.png",
"name": "FaultLines",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "FaultLines Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 7077,
"slug": "faultlines",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/faultlines"
},
"news_19101": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19101",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19101",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/04/election2016_hor.png",
"name": "Election 2016",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "series",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Election 2016 Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19118,
"slug": "election-2016",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/series/election-2016"
},
"news_17793": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17793",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17793",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Politics Podcast",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Politics Podcast Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17827,
"slug": "politics-podcast",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/politics-podcast"
},
"news_402": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_402",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "402",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California budget",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California budget Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 410,
"slug": "california-budget",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/california-budget"
},
"news_17599": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17599",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17599",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "faultlines-featured",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "faultlines-featured Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17633,
"slug": "faultlines-featured",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/faultlines-featured"
},
"news_19960": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19960",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19960",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "public health",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "public health Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19977,
"slug": "public-health",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/public-health"
},
"news_17810": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17810",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17810",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Steve Glazer",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Steve Glazer Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17844,
"slug": "steve-glazer",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/steve-glazer"
},
"news_17812": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17812",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17812",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Susan Bonilla",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Susan Bonilla Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 17846,
"slug": "susan-bonilla",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/susan-bonilla"
},
"news_2629": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_2629",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "2629",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "tobacco",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "tobacco Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2645,
"slug": "tobacco",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/tobacco"
},
"news_2561": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_2561",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "2561",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "tobacco tax",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "tobacco tax Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2576,
"slug": "tobacco-tax",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/tobacco-tax"
}
},
"userPermissionsReducer": {
"wpLoggedIn": false
},
"eventsReducer": {},
"fssReducer": {},
"tvDailyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvWeeklyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvPrimetimeScheduleReducer": {},
"tvMonthlyScheduleReducer": {},
"userAccountReducer": {
"user": {
"email": null,
"emailStatus": "EMAIL_UNVALIDATED",
"loggedStatus": "LOGGED_OUT",
"loggingChecked": false,
"articles": [],
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"phoneNumber": null,
"fetchingMembership": false,
"membershipError": false,
"memberships": [
{
"id": null,
"startDate": null,
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"familyNumber": null,
"memberNumber": null,
"memberSince": null,
"expirationDate": null,
"pfsEligible": false,
"isSustaining": false,
"membershipLevel": "Prospect",
"membershipStatus": "Non Member",
"lastGiftDate": null,
"renewalDate": null,
"lastDonationAmount": null
}
]
},
"authModal": {
"isOpen": false,
"view": "LANDING_VIEW"
},
"error": null
},
"youthMediaReducer": {},
"checkPleaseReducer": {
"filterData": {
"region": {
"key": "Restaurant Region",
"filters": [
"Any Region"
]
},
"cuisine": {
"key": "Restaurant Cuisine",
"filters": [
"Any Cuisine"
]
}
},
"restaurantDataById": {},
"restaurantIdsSorted": [],
"error": null
},
"userAgentReducer": {
"userAgent": "Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)",
"isBot": true
}
}
