Unveiling the Dark Money Influence: Prop 13 Initiatives Target Tennessee
Image Credit: Canva
By Rob Mitchell [Rutherford County Assessor of Property] –
In the intricate labyrinth of political strategy, Tennessee has become entangled in a complex network of undisclosed funding and covert organizations. These entities are advocating for the implementation of California’s notorious “Prop 13” tax cap initiatives.
The mysterious “TennCap” is leading this campaign, leveraging social media and text messages to manipulate public sentiment.
The mastermind behind this opaque operation is Dustin McIntyre, a financial virtuoso managing the operations of 43 super PACs from a mail drop in Alexandria, Virginia. Influence peddling by the “rich men North of Richmond” via his portfolio of PAC’s includes the Affordable Energy Fund PAC, which accumulated over a million dollars in the last election cycle, and the Build & Protect Oklahoma, deeply rooted in Republican/Conservative interests.
His sphere of influence extends even further, overseeing the Fund for a Working Congress.
The intrigue intensifies with the disclosure of TennCap’s association with Arthur Laffer, the progenitor of Prop 13.
Laffer, a former California resident, abandoned his state after witnessing the financial chaos caused by the initiative. Now, he is lending his expertise and influence to the Tennessee campaign, significantly enhancing its reach and impact.
TennCap has also engaged the services of two influential lobbyists, Katie Ashley and Nathan Poss.
As this web of undisclosed funding tightens its hold on Tennessee’s political landscape, it is imperative for citizens to stay alert.
The principles of transparency and accountability are crucial in preserving the integrity of our democratic process. We must resist the allure of power and instead demand honesty and fairness from those who aim to shape our future.
A Call to Action: Now, more than ever, it is crucial for the citizens of Tennessee to take action. Reach out to your representatives in the General Assembly. Urge them to reject these artificial revenue caps that have already proven disastrous in California. Stand united for a transparent and accountable political process. Our future depends on it.
Hmmm… I’m always suspicious of those who cry foul at anything that potentially helps We the People… As an ex-Californian, Prop 13 was one of the very few things that made homeownership possible. Knowing that your property tax would be capped at the value your home was assessed at purchase was a godsend. We’ve seen the horror stories of states like New Jersey that year after year get property tax increases that after time become impossible to pay.
Forcing government entities to be more efficient with generated tax revenues is a good thing. Sorry, I refuse to be an ATM for City/County taxes where they are already double dipping for services I never use!
As another CA transplant, I can say definitively that Prop 13 was a needed and effective tool to save people’s homes. There was no “chaos” from its implementation. I agree wholeheartedly with the prior post. Government needs not expand infinitely on the backs of the taxpayers. Keep government small and efficient, and prop 13 will work well. Otherwise, as what was happening in CA, retired folks on fixed incomes are forced out of their homes when they cannot pay the ever-thirsty government tithes for bureaucrats.
Prop 13 did not make housing more affordable, nor did it curb government spending. It caused financial difficulties state wide and it may be a reason that so many Californians now call Tennessee home. https://publications.csba.org/california-school-news/august-2022/new-report-analyzes-the-legacy-of-prop-13-on-education-funding-and-more/
I can’t believe we are even proposing a prop.13 in Tennessee. We have some of the lowest property taxes in the nation. WAKE UP PEOPLE, THERE IS A BIGGER AGENDA AT WORK HERE…
And what would that agenda be?
Randy,
What few understand is Prop 13’s ultimate impact is to shift a greater burden onto the backs of residential property owners. There are Legions of lobbyists fighting for corporations. Prop 13 benefits corporate interests.
Most folks do not realize that every revaluation year in Tennessee, 2/3 of all property either do not change or go down in value. That is a function of our state law. Who benefits if EVERY property goes up 2% every year? ( Thats Prop 13)
Jodie,
Thank you. Yes there is. Concurrently HB 1450 is seeking to remove tax credits from calculating property value for low-income housing developments. These types of bills can be made to sound reasonable to those not intimately familiar with what is going on. Thank you for recognizing this.
I was born and raised in TN. I moved to E. TN in 2016 after living in the SF Bay Area for 15 years.
The number of issues (statutory and cultural) that plague CA could fill a NYC metro phone book.
I must agree, however, with the other commenters here. Prop 13 was good news in a state devoid of advantages for homeowners. It capped the rate of increase for property taxes and was a welcome respite from the mounting greed in the Legislature which has only grown worse.
This opinion piece was long on concerns about “dark money” but short on any specifics. So the “call to action” falls short. What, exactly, would I say to my Representative? Finally, I have never heard nor considered Art Laffer some nefarious Soros-like manipulator. What am I missing?
A BIG spotlight needs to shine on this!
This story is written by a property assessor.
That makes it a bit suspicious. The bill is not linked? I want to see the bill
Yes. I am a property assessor. Therefore, I do understand a little bit about taxes from a broad perspective. As we all know, California is having a severe housing crisis. The median price of a house in California is 2.5 times higher than the national average. Why? Because housing isn’t affordable. Prop 13 didn’t stop that. Nearly 70 percent of poor Californians fork over more than half of their paychecks for rent. And this is only going to get worse, because they would need to build 180,000 homes each year to keep up with growth, they are only building half that amount. Each one of those new homes is valued at its sale price even if its market value decreases.
California’s Prop. 13, passed in 1978, which limited the property tax annual increase to 2 percent a year until a home is sold, is a major part of the problem. Before Prop. 13, new roads, schools and sewers were paid for by the whole community. In California, after Prop. 13 reduced the tax base, the government had to add significant fees to new construction to help pay for services, which raised the cost of new housing. Tennessee has constitutional limitations to the limitless expansion of fees which California does not. California transplants generally move here because they are tired of the rise in fees and the costs associated with providing services.
Property taxes and fees on new housing are still not enough to cover services such as police and fire. However, when governments approve retail construction, they receive sales tax revenue. Retail also requires fewer services. Therefore, local governments tend to subsidize retail locations at the expense of housing in order to generate sales tax revenue in an attempt to maximize returns.
Call your representatives and let them know you oppose Prop 13 property tax bills. It wasn’t good for California, and we sure don’t want it in Tennessee.
Having lived in CA for 50 years (ending in 2005) I am well aware of the results produced by the voters of CA passing Prop 13 in 1978 (I was one). The charges made by Rob Mitchell in this article are totally bogus. Prop 13 SAVED many retired and fixed income people from loosing their homes due to the rapid increase in property taxes. And NO it was not the cause of California’s terrible fiscal problems. California’s problems come from the liberal Democrats having had a super majority in both houses of the state legislature and the governor’s office as well for years. They spent themselves into their financial mess. And to charge that Arthur Laffer “abandoned his state” just shows the political perspective of Mr. Mitchell. I too left but it was because California has become unlivable!
Mr. Morton, Did your total expenditures to the government become measurably less or greater after 1978? In 1978 California enacted Prop. 13. In 1978 Tennessee adopted question 3, which is fractional assessments based on use. Today the tax burden by value in California is .71% of a property’s value while in Tennessee it is .58%. Prop 13 is little more than a political diversion designed to confuse citizens into believing their politicians are acting in their best interests while they continue to grow the size of government. I do not expect to convince you that artificial controls on taxation will decrease your financial obligation to local government. What I hope you might understand is that government, unchecked in pursuit of revenue, is much like a raging river. If you stop it at one spot the water will seek another path. Just as government will seek additional revenue from you, they just won’t call it a tax. It will be in a user tee, VAT or some other form. Welcome to Tennessee. We don’t need Prop 13. The results prove that.