Clearing up confusion over Prop. 13 — and why Modesto voters should support it

The only statewide measure on the March 3 ballot, Proposition 13, enjoys widespread political support and deserves a green light from voters because it could bring money to our schools for repair and upgrades. Also, Prop. 13 could help boost the sort of rental housing that is direly lacking throughout California.

Unfortunately, a fair amount of misinformation — whether intended or accidental — surrounds this measure. Readers have called and sent notes to The Modesto Bee Editorial Board asking for clarification. This editorial is meant to clear things up, as much as to establish why Prop. 13 is a good idea.

Some of the confusion stems from its name. Make no mistake — this measure has nothing to do with the landmark Prop. 13 embraced by California voters back in 1978, which provided protection to homeowners by capping property tax. The two ballot items ended up with the same name by coincidence; the secretary of state simply followed sequencing rules for giving titles to such measures.

Neither does this Prop. 13 have anything to do with another initiative yet to receive a number that will confront California voters on the November ballot, which does have to do with the 1978 Prop. 13. Supporters say it will close a loophole on corporate taxes and provide more revenue for schools, cities and counties, while opponents contend that the measure would raise prices on everything, hurting consumers. The Bee will issue a recommendation regarding that initiative in the fall.

This is what’s important to know about the Prop. 13 on Tuesday’s ballot:

• It would provide $15 billion in school bonds: $9 billion would go to K-12 public schools, and $6 billion to community colleges and four-year universities. The bonds would be repaid over 35 years with state general fund money.
• It also would give a break on developer fees for multifamily housing like apartments and duplexes, and also for homes constructed near transit such as bus stops or train depots.
• The State Legislature put this measure on the ballot with support from Republicans and Democrats. You don’t see that kind of bipartisan cooperation every day.
• It’s structured to be more fair than Prop. 51, a similar $9 billion statewide school bond measure in 2016 that favored large and sophisticated school districts by approving grants on a first-come, first-serve basis. That left many small districts behind. For example, Ceres schools wanted a share of the money from Prop. 51, but could not get in line fast enough and missed out.

Some critics claim that Prop. 13 will raise taxes. That’s indirectly true, because competing for such state grants often requires a local match of cash that’s raised through local bonds, and those are repaid with higher property taxes.

Opponents also complain about a “hidden” higher tax provision that increases the amount local school districts are allowed to borrow. There’s nothing hidden about it; this has been widely reported.

Against that backdrop, the Modesto City Schools Board looks very smart. In 2018, they put before local voters Measures D and E, with capacity to raise a combined $131 million. They haven’t spent most of it, so the district is in good shape to leverage far more state money for improvements needed to give our students quality education — without raising local taxes at all.

In early February, the Modesto City Schools Board endorsed Prop. 13 on a 6-1 vote, with John Walker dissenting because of pressure from “many members of the community,” he said.

Fortunately, his colleagues recognize the potential goldmine they’re sitting on; the state can provide up to 60% of local school costs for upgrades, and 50% of new construction. The board’s resolution in support of Prop. 13 cites a need for $760 million in upgrades for our schools.

The Bee trusts readers not to confuse this Prop. 13 with the one from 1978 or the related initiative coming this fall. Some people were anxious when a pair of Turlock school bonds in 2016 were assigned the measure names “N” and “O,” but voters easily saw beyond the unfortunate coincidence and embraced both bonds.

Prop. 13 is worth supporting because it reforms how school bonds are spent and lowers fees for the dense housing development California critically needs. And it gives local school districts the flexibility to borrow more money for big projects — with approval from local voters, which Modesto already has.

This story was originally published February 16, 2020 at 5:00 AM.