Complexity, uncertainty, and fear
It is not hard to see why the wealthiest among us might be selfishly inclined to argue against almost any addition to the property tax rates—or why they might wish to make voters fear that any rise in property tax rates will drive us out of our homes and apartments. (Note that one of their arguments is that renters pay property taxes, too, because landlords pass the tax rise through to their renters.)
There is a reason Republican operatives like Rob Linebarger are fond of quoting large, scary numbers related to school bonds—while they avoid offering an estimate of the change in dollars in what the average property owner might owe once expirations and new levies and bonds are fully realized.
To be fair, the School Districts and the Spokesman articles didn’t do a very good job of this either. One must dig and read rather carefully to find—for Spokane Public Schools—any estimation of the actual dollar cost. At length, on the Explanatory Statement page for SPOKANE SCHOOL DISTRICT 81 – Proposition No. 2 in the Voter’s Pamphlet one finds:
If approved, the total tax rate for all district levies (Educational Programs & Operation and Bond) would increase by approximately $0.02 per $1,000 of assessed value, to $3.84, in 2025. Exemptions from taxes may be available, call Spokane County Assessor at (509) 477-3698.
They should have gone at least one step further and clearer, I think. Translated, this statement says that if both of the two District 81 levies (Proposition 1, the “Replacement of Expiring Educational Programs and Operation Levy” AND Proposition 2, the bond levy that failed because it didn’t reach 60%) had been passed by the voters then the overall change in the school part of your property taxes would be a rise of 2 pennies per thousand dollars of assessed value. The average home in our area has an assessed value of less than $400,000. The average homeowner would pay just EIGHT DOLLARS (400 X 0.02) more in 2025 than 2024 on their property tax bill for the support of public schools. That’s sixty-seven cents more a month per average homeowner to support public education. Eight dollars a year to support the common good. Eight dollars that doesn’t even cover intervening inflation.
When most of us look at a tax proposal what we really want to know is “What is it going to cost me??” not “What is the total budget of the local school system?” So why don’t they just tell us “About EIGHT DOLLARS for the average homeowner” instead of diving into budgets filled with large, scary numbers? School districts, I suppose, are reluctant to offer too firm a number because the cost that appears on any individual homeowner’s tax bill will vary. The number depends on changes in total assessed property value in the district (that could require a downward or upward recalculation of the levy rate) as well as changes in the assessed value of a given home.
The wealthy, as represented by Republican operatives like Rob Linebarger, are better served by hinting that your taxes might go through the roof or arousing suspicion that schools aren’t managing your tax dollars prudently. Fear of being driven from your home by rising property taxes and engendered distrust in government are great negative motivators.
Property tax, one of the oldest forms of taxation, is a form of wealth tax—it is leveled on what a taxpayer possesses rather on what one earns or spends. Paying eight dollars more in property taxes on a $400,000 average home is one thing. Having to pay taxes on investment property that is not currently producing any income is quite another. (Consider that, for the wealthy, paying tax on currently unproductive investment property would be equivalent to paying an annual tax on the value of owned stocks and bonds—whether they’re turning a profit or not.) Wealth taxes like the property tax are anathema to Republican trickle-down economic orthodoxy. Republican websites and text messages putting forward large, scary numbers and citing complicated formulas are a cynical tactic. Tell a friend.
We all need to do a better job of understanding the real world implications of defunding the public schools.
Keep to the high ground,
Jerry
P.S. The primary mission of the public schools system is to produce a literate and numerate citizenry and work force that is capable of critical thinking, a benefit to all. Defunded, substandard public schools will, in the long term affect society overall, rich and poor alike, but the wealthiest among us are affected least in the short term. The wealthy are the most capable of investing in private education for their children. Consequently they are less directly dependent on the quality of public education in the short term.
P.P.S. Taxation of wealth is the most direct means of tackling the problem of widening wealth inequality. Taxing wealth as the best solution was raised to prominence by the French economist Thomas Piketty in his 2013 best-selling book Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Property tax, as noted above, is one form of wealth tax.
P.P.P.S. Where property taxes get tricky, of course, is in the United States where much of middle class family equity is held in illiquid, mortgaged investments in large homes purchased in the conviction of ever-increasing value. Our love affair with this home ownership as investment part of the American Dream can leave us in perilous circumstances when cash flow is eaten into by an annual wealth tax on our biggest investment. Of course, when the growth of that wealth tax is shrouded in the complexity of its calculation it leaves the home owner vulnerable to the fear-mongering we saw in the February Special Election last week.