Perhaps property values should be based on senority

Editor,

In his Nov. 15 letter, Tim Verschuyl notes how property assessments are so radically subject to opinionated argument. It’s not a new or isolated problem. California dealt with it by adopting their famous — or infamous —“Proposition 13” that among other things froze assessments at their purchase price.

This, of course, takes any argument out of assessed values, but it sure elicited dire predictions of calamity and chaos from frightened officials from other states. Nevertheless the “evil legislation” withstood court challenges all the way to the nation’s Supreme Court and to date has been in place for almost 40 years without California falling into the ocean as naysayers insisted would happen.

Oak Harbor’s Boyer property scandal is a valid case in point. It seems that just a few years ago the well connected Mr. Boyer sold acreage to a government consortium for some five times the perennial assessed value. How on earth did that happen? But of course that has long been swept under the rug.

So except for inheritances, gifts, or new construction, why not let purchase price be the set assessed value and get rid of humbug property reassessing altogether? It sure would end disagreements and produce some other sensible benefits too.

Some county assessors, Jefferson County for one, have even argued for this change.

One benefit would be providing a seniority edge for our longtime residents who bought at more sensible prices. Heck, they are our pioneers anyway.

“Unfair to newcomers” you say?

Well aren’t newcomers the ones causing government cost increases?

Why should those who maintain their property — to the benefit of the whole neighborhood — be penalized by assessment increases?

Another thing: as far as government is concerned, unlike California’s Proposition 13, this approach is completely revenue neutral. Who wants to argue against that?

Just think of the savings to taxpayers when the cost of everlasting property reassessments is abolished?

It sounds like a win-win situation for everyone– except maybe the real estate industry. Who knows, it could be a selling point for them too.

Al Williams

Oak Harbor

More in Letters to the Editor

Letter: Has the Navy looked at impact on Sound’s orcas?

Editor, Knowing how deeply the increase in OLF flights off Central Whidbey… Continue reading

Letter: Oak Harbor Key Club’s Trivia Night is nearing

Editor, I am writing this letter in regards to our First Annual… Continue reading

Letter: Democracy depends on exercising right to vote

Editor, Tuesday, Sept. 25 is National Voter Registration Day. Across the nation,… Continue reading

Letter: Sharpe’s Corner a job well done

Editor, There was a good bit of opposition when the Washington State… Continue reading

Letter: A poor design for the big trucks

Editor, As one who spoke up against the roundabout traffic circle plans,… Continue reading

Letter: Letter writer is not an expert, Navy is

Editor, I think the U.S. Navy knows a bit more about the… Continue reading

Letter: Reasons are many to go see ‘Daddy Long Legs’

Editor, My husband and I greatly enjoyed the current production at Whidbey… Continue reading

Letter: Please help to re-open city’s swimming pool

Editor, It’s beyond embarrassing that a city the size of Oak Harbor… Continue reading

Letter: Growler noise will turn Coupeville a ghost town

Editor, I love living in Coupeville. My daughter thrives in school. It’s… Continue reading

Most Read