It’s fascinating what you can find on Google.
Proposition K, the anti-tax proposal in Kansas to standardize property tax hikes at 2 percent, was the subject of a Google search today as I sought to learn more about it.
Imagine my surprise to find this Proposition K that went to the ballot last year in San Francisco.
Hmmmmmm. Anyway, here’s a good capsule on what Kansas’ Proposition K covers, and it’s not prostitution.
Let’s get a discussion going on Kansas’ version. Is this normalizing property taxes? Or is it a thinly-veiled attempt to shift property tax burdens off the affluent?
What do you think?
5 Comments
One impact is that it guarantees a tax increase for older properties that may not increase in value. Another is that it limits the increase on a property that may greatly increase in value. It does make those who can least afford it to pay for those who can more easily afford an increase.
“It does make those who can least afford it to pay for those who can more easily afford an increase.”
I thought the whole country was turning socialist. LonnythePlumber makes it sound like the reverse. Those not able to pay actually pay for those who can?
First thing wrong with this is that it came from Johnson county and K.U. What is good for Johnson county is bad for the rest of the State.
In the parts of the state where values are actually falling your taxes would still increase yearly. And if you buy a house that has increased in value you will get to keep paying taxes on the old value.
So if in Johnson county were values have been climbing you buy an older home being taxed lets say at $70,000 and you pay $140,000 you pay taxes on a $70,000 home.
Now lets go to western Kansas and you buy a house being taxed at $70,000 and you pay $50,000 for it you are going to be paying taxes on a $70,000 house.
What is fair?
Charles Koch thinks that is very fair … to him!
I went to the meeting on proposition K. I agree sedgwick co.property tax structuring need some work, but I am not in favor of proposition K in no way.