Glendale City Council candidates split on proposed changes to Prop. 13
Glendale’s City Council candidates espoused different opinions about a proposed November ballot initiative, billed as Schools and Communities First by proponents, that would remake the way commercial and industrial properties are taxed in California during a forum hosted last Thursday by the League of Women Voters.
A question about how they would spend what’s estimated to be billions of dollars that would result from the passage of a proposal to tax large commercial and industrial properties based on their market value rather than original purchase price, as required by Proposition 13, revealed varying levels of support and opposition among the eight City Council hopefuls for the controversial initiative, which is often referred to as a split-role tax.
If it qualifies for the ballot and is passed by voters, the initiative that would alter some aspects of Proposition 13 is expected to generate $11 billion annually, with half going to schools and the other half going to cities and counties. Passed in 1978, Proposition 13 rolled back property taxes to their 1976 levels and strictly limited the annual rate of increase.
Greg Astorian, a planning commissioner for the city, opposed the initiative outright, suggesting it could pave the way to change the way multifamily and single-family homes are taxed under Proposition 13 — a common slippery-slope argument made against the proposal.
“We’ve got to be able to see beyond the bend in the road,” Astorian said, adding that he thought the intentions driving the initiative were well-meaning.
Susan Wolfson, a finance professional, agreed that it is “a questionable proposition.”
“I think it’s an attack on the stability we have,” she said. “People rely on the stability of their taxes, and I think it will hit a lot of sectors in a negative way.”
However, if passed, she said she would prioritize spending the funds on creating more parks and open space in underserved areas of Glendale.
A former teacher, incumbent Councilwoman Paula Devine said she’s still undecided on whether she will support the initiative, citing concerns about smaller businesses.
Businesses with 50 or fewer full-time employees and are independently owned and operated are excluded from the proposed tax changes.
“If we had this money, what a windfall it would be for the city,” Devine said, adding that the money could be used for parks, affordable housing and other costly projects.
Ardy Kassakhian, Glendale’s city clerk, said schools could use the funds for mental health counselors, police officers and other resources, “so we can have a healthier city.”
He added, “Ultimately, we have to work on our kids,” citing anxieties about school violence and children impacted by the opioid crisis.
Business owner William Keshishyan said he never thought he would support an initiative that increases taxes for some entrepreneurs.
“But I think a good business man will always find a way to make money,” Keshishyan said, adding that he thinks the funds could be used to make improvements to local schools that will lead to better opportunities for students.
Former Planning Commissioner Leonard Manoukian came out strongly in favor of the initiative, rejecting the slippery-slope argument and saying it reverses some of the negative impacts of Proposition 13.
“This is not a windfall. This is our money, that we can invest in our own kids,” Manoukian said. “So why don’t we do that?”
Largely agreeing with Manoukian, Dan Brotman, an economics professor, said there is a lot of misinformation about the initiative which he said is going after large corporations paying unfair tax rates.
“Proposition 13 was meant to keep us in our homes as property prices went up. It was not meant to give a competitive advantage to some corporations,” said Brotman, who added that money generated from the initiative could be used to improve the city’s power grid, increase public safety and address homelessness.
Incumbent Councilman Vartan Gharpetian said that while Glendale’s schools are performing well and the city ranks as one of the nation’s safest, California is ranked low on how much money it invests per student.
“We need to close the loopholes,” Gharpetian said, suggesting at least some changes to Proposition 13 could be beneficial.
All of the candidates were provided the question about the initiative ahead of the forum.
Moderator Rita Zwern said that was not the league’s “standard process,” but an exception was made “in light of the importance of the question and to ensure the candidates have had sufficient time to consider their response.”
The proposed ballot initiative is a revised version of an initiative that has already qualified for the November ballot.
Several other topics were addressed during the forum, including affordable housing, sustainability and the best path forward for local development.
The candidates are vying for three seats on the council that will be on the March 3 ballot.