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: ‘World Beyond War’ idea deserves consideration

Editor, As a 90-year-old who has learned all of the lessons in… Continue reading

Letter: Needed improvements made at Greenbank Farm

Editor, Cheers to the Port of Coupeville staff. This past year, several… Continue reading

Letter: If you’re a skeptic, read new Climate Assessment

Editor, Whatever your opinion about climate change, the report issued last Friday… Continue reading

Letter: Yes, many people knew flight path, but Growlers came later

Editor, I love jet noise that I am able to quickly get… Continue reading

Letter: Learn more about climate change, what you can do

Editor, About the last thing I thought I’d be writing about this… Continue reading

Letter: Initiative 1634 was a win for state’s small business owners

Editor, A guest column in the newspaper recapping the election results mentions… Continue reading

Letter: Candidate appeared to break rule on uniforms

Editor, Having recognized another Armistice Day — Veterans’ Day — it is… Continue reading

Letter: Hoping culprits return and remove garbage

Editor, Sometime in the last few days some persons — I am… Continue reading

Letter: An open letter to U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen on Navy’s EIS

Editor, The following is a letter to U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen: As… Continue reading

Most Read