California Tax Reform Association Analysis of Prop. 13

New data confirms continued shift of property tax burden to residential property

What has happened to the property tax in the Great Recession? In 2010, the California Tax Reform issued a study (click here) which showed a long-term historic reduction in the share of the property tax paid by commercial property, and a substantial increase in the share paid by residential property.

Our new data shows that, even in the wake of the housing implosion of 2008-2012, the long-term reduction in the share of the property tax paid by commercial property has continued, and has gotten more pronounced in many cases. And, in those counties hardest hit by the housing crash, the short-term reduction in the share paid by residential property was small compared to the overall shift away from commercial property since Proposition 13 was enactedin 1978.

The conclusion is inescapable: in the last 35 years, the share of the property tax burden paid bycommercial/industrial property has declined steadily. In the 1970s, residential property bore about 55% of the burden, and close to 50-50 in many counties. In 2011-12, residential propertybore between 70%and 75% of the roll. The Legislative Analyst reports that residential property is now 71% of the roll, business property is now 28% of the roll, with commercial/industrial at 22% and agricultural property at 6%.

Source: Legislative Analyst Office

The Legislative Analyst confirms in their reports (here and here) that, while this aggregate data is only recently available, the county-by-county historical data anecdotally shows a major shift. This report demonstrates this shift on a county-by-county basis: nearly every county has had a long-term reduction in the proportion of the property tax paid by commercial property. While the available data in some of the smaller counties is limited, the larger counties have very reliable data which show the shift on a year-over-year basis.

1

Los Angeles

Los Angeles County represents about 25% of all the property tax paid in the state, and they have kept excellent data over time. Los Angeles represents a good microcosm of the state since1975: suburban residential expansion, substantial economic growth, two major recessions which hit Los Angeles hard, and the growth of high-end housing and commercial development.

Los Angeles County distribution of the property tax roll over time:

Source: Los Angeles County Assessor Annual Report

This chart shows that property tax revenues from housing have increased at more than twice the rate that commercial property has increased. The total residential roll at $44.4 billion is close to commercial-industrial values at $38.8 billion. It has increased since 1975 by $745 billion while the commercial/industrial roll has increased by $302 billion. That increase was greatest in single-family homes, which increased by 19.4 times while commercial-industrial increased by 8.8 times, or less than half the rate of increase.

Housing in Los Angeles County was hit particularly hard in the early 1990s, when defense industry cutbacks led to a recession in the housing market, as well as the 2008-09 recession where Los Angeles County home prices declined considerably and for a substantial period of time. Yet the share of the property tax paid by housing continued to grow steadily and commercial industrial continues to lag considerably. While there were slight reversals in two periods, and most recently during the housing collapse, that trend has turned around again.

2

Santa Clara

Santa Claras story is perhaps more dramatic. Again, the assessors office has excellent long-term data. The period since the passage of Proposition 13 showed a world-class explosion of high-tech industry in Santa Clara, adding some of the worlds largest companies that had not even existed before this time ((Google, Apple). Yet commercial property has paid a steadily reduced share of the property tax. San Francisco

San Francisco presents an unusual case because its population has not grown very much but it has seen substantial commercial development. That should provide a counter-example. But it does not: housingcontinues to represent a greater and greater share of the tax roll, despite the lack of substantial population growth over this period. It has experienced a recent reversal, so it remains to be seen whichdirection it will take in the future, with the prospect of substantially increased commercial development along with recovering housing values.

San Bernardino and Riverside

In this new report we also wanted to examine the impact of the housing crisis since our last report. To some extent, some part of the shift to residential property is likely to stem from a highly-inflated housing market as a result of the housing bubble. We expected that there would be somewhat of a shiftback, demonstrated by counties at the center of the housing crisis. But even with the implosion of the housing market in those counties, only a small part of the shift is accounted for. It remains to be seen what directions these counties will take in the future.

Some other counties demonstrate a shift back as well, but none of provides a major reversal of the direction. See the statistical tables, below, for every county in the state.

Is there a counter-argument? Examining the claims of Cal-Tax

There are many potential reasons for this shift, and further research is needed to explain it. Below, we suggest a number of potential explanations to be examined. This data has been available for several years and its accuracy has never been contested, since it is based on all publicly-available data sources. The Board of Equalization is finally collecting data in greater detail on a regular basis, so we will be able to follow, year over year, the direction of the change. At an overall 22% of the roll, we would be

3

surprised if the share held by commercial property can continue to drop significantly more, although there may be variations among counties.

However, defenders of the current system of property taxation have never acknowledged these figures nor sought to explain them. The California Taxpayers Association, representing large businesses, recently issued a report (here) which in no way challenges these numbers. Instead, they provide an alternate set of numbers which claim that no shift has occurred. How can we explain the differences?

Cal-Tax uses statewide data solely on the percentage of the roll occupied by single-family homeowners who have claimed homeowners exemptions. While there has been somewhat of a burden shiftfrom 32% of the tax roll, up to 40%, now currently 38% for houses with homeowners exemptionit has been smaller than the overall shift away from commercial property.

There are several flaws in this approach. First, their data does not even look at pre-Prop 13they look only at data beginning in 1980, after reassessment to 1975 values for current homeowners occurred andafter post-Prop. 13 transfers began. Beyond that, however, Cal-Tax has acknowledged that all other single-family homes, duplexes, rented condos, and second homes, as well as apartments, are consideredbusiness property. The only property they identify as residential are owner-occupied homes which have filed homeowners exemptions. Further, the data does not examine each county but only looks statewide.

Also, their data never examines each county. Rather, they take an aggregate number on a statewide basis, use a favorable base year, define residential property as business if there is no homeowners exemption, and attempt to argue that the shift has been limited. In the Cal-Tax story, the role between homeowners and other property, starting after Prop. 13, has grown relatively equally. The charts above from Los Angeles or from any other counties, are completely ignored.

But those who have examined the roll in any detail knows that a good share15%-20%--are single family homes without homeowner exemptions. What are these properties? In some cases they are homeowners who have not filed a homeowner exemption. In others, family members rather than the homeowner may be living there. They may be a single rental of a former family home. They may be owned by landlords owning only one home or companies that own many homes. They may be second homes and vacation homes. But for most of these properties, when they are sold, they cannot avoid reassessment. For whatever reason, the growth in the residential role, particularly single-family residential (as demonstrated by the Los Angeles data), has been undeniable.

Unlike Cal-Tax, the assessors, the Board of Equalization and importantly, the Legislative Analyst make a clear delineation: commercial and industrial vs. residential. Cal-Tax has ignored the distinctions made bythe official data. The result is that their numbers about assessment are equally wrongthey fail to use the standard definition of commercial/industrial and instead claim that people renting their home, have a second home, rent a unit of their home, have their family living there instead of themselves, have duplexes or triplexes or fail to file an HOE are the same as commercial and industrial property.

4

The problem with this misrepresentation of the data (i.e. residential considered to be business) is that it denies the ability to have a discussion about underlying causes. There is no confusion about the reality of the data on a county-by-county basis. It may be possible to show, based on research, that the reasons for the shift are economic and not based on the property tax system. We intend to keep researching those questions. That is, the debate should be over causes of the shift, not the denial of factual reality.

Why the shift?

This data does not answer the question with regard to why this shift is happening. We have a hypothesis about this data which has not yet been proven, and needs further discussion.

What are the possible reasons:

1. Our hypothesis: the re-assessment of commercial property lags the re-assessment of residential property in the change of ownership system. Thus the assessment ratio, that is, the ratio of commercial property to market value is lower the than ratio of housing value to market value. That number is more difficult to examine, because market values are not well known. But we have seen many cases of wildly varying land values in the same locations for commercial property, and less for residential. This hypothesis requires further examination

2. The relative values of housing and commercial property have changed. It is possible that housing has become much more valuable than commercial property, and that a higher percentage of our economy isgoing into residential property than commercial. The huge variation in land values may contradict this, but it would appear that the speculative bubble that occurred in housing values did not affect commercial in the same way. However, even post-speculative bubble, the shift continued. This hypothesis also merits examination, in terms of commercial growth vs. housing growth.

3. It is possible that similar changes have occurred in other states in the property tax, and that housing takes up a far larger percentage of the property tax roll everywhere. We have so far not found historicaldata on the division of the roll in other states, but further research will be needed.

4. We will also need to further examine the data on the commercial roll in terms of how it reflects economic growth, in counties and localities as well as statewide. Adjusted for inflation, population growth, and economic growth, the property tax collects significantly less than it did prior to Proposition 13, which can explain the strain on the public sector and on other revenue sources. Again, this data will need to be developed in greater detail.

5

The data

The following provides the county-by-county data, as well as percentages, that we have organized for this report. The data is taken from public sources which are not entirely consistent but are always very close in terms of results. The most recent data comes from Board of Equalization reports, which in 2011began to collect far more detailed data about the assessment roll from the counties. Some county assessors, as cited in the data, kept very good records over time, while others were not as good. In different years, those counties reported this data to the BOE, which explains why the years cited are not all the same, and some do not pre-date Prop. 13. We also double-checked the accuracy of the public data with DataQuick, a private database which purchases assessors data, and generally found that the results were consistent, although there were occasional discrepancies. None of those discrepancies in any material way affect the outcomes. That is, the differences in the numbers were small.

We should note that there are some wide differences among the counties, which reflects their different histories and economic base. While most of the large counties show similar patterns, it is our intent to look more carefully at this data in terms of what may account for some of those differences. The questions of development and land use over this period need examination.

County Start Year-End Year

StartYear %

Residential

End Year %Residential

End YearMinus

Start Year

Start Year% Non-

Residential

End Year %Non-

Residential

End YearMinus Start

Year

Alameda 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 54.98% 73.20% 18.22% 45.02% 26.80% -18.22%Alpine 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 53.61% 86.45% 32.84% 46.39% 13.55% -32.84%Amador 1983-1984 to 2011-2012 60.98% 76.08% 15.10% 39.02% 23.92% -15.10%Butte 1983-1984 to 2011-2012 62.26% 71.90% 9.64% 37.74% 28.10% -9.64%Calaveras 1974-1975 to 2011-2012 52.73% 89.32% 36.59% 47.27% 10.68% -36.59%Colusa 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 16.86% 28.52% 11.66% 83.14% 71.48% -11.66%Contra Costa 1969-1970 to 2011-2012 48.00% 74.80% 26.80% 52.00% 25.20% -26.80%Del Norte 1984-1985 to 2011-2012 57.51% 78.45% 20.94% 42.49% 21.55% -20.94%El Dorado 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 54.90% 86.38% 31.48% 45.10% 13.62% -31.48%Fresno 1981-1982 to 2011-2012 53.21% 62.05% 8.84% 46.79% 37.95% -8.84%Glenn 1971-1972 to 2009-2010 12.10% 34.33% 22.23% 87.90% 65.67% -22.23%Humboldt 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 31.68% 73.26% 41.58% 68.32% 26.74% -41.58%Imperial 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 26.31% 46.13% 19.82% 73.69% 53.87% -19.82%Inyo 1976-1977 to 2011-2012 25.51% 32.52% 7.01% 74.49% 67.48% -7.01%Kern 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 27.44% 37.02% 9.58% 72.56% 62.98% -9.58%Kings 1976-1977 to 2011-2012 22.49% 47.55% 25.06% 77.51% 52.45% -25.06%Lake 1972-1973 to 2011-2012 55.66% 74.24% 18.58% 44.34% 25.76% -18.58%Lassen 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 30.02% 67.34% 37.32% 69.98% 32.66% -37.32%Los Angeles 1974-1975 to 2012-2013 53.37% 69.85% 16.48% 46.63% 30.15% -16.48%

6

Madera 1974-1975 to 2011-2012 25.79% 52.40% 26.61% 74.21% 47.60% -26.61%Marin 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 81.10% 87.09% 5.99% 18.90% 12.91% -5.99%Mariposa 1973-1974 to 2009-2010 34.14% 88.28% 54.14% 65.86% 11.72% -54.14%Mendocino 1970-1971 to 2011-2012 36.65% 54.33% 17.68% 63.35% 45.67% -17.68%Merced 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 26.56% 50.99% 24.43% 73.44% 49.01% -24.43%Modoc 1982-1983 to 2011-2012 37.00% 15.64% -21.36% 63.00% 84.36% 21.36%Mono 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 45.61% 83.78% 38.17% 54.39% 16.22% -38.17%Monterey 1972-1973 to 2011-2012 50.66% 71.54% 20.88% 49.34% 28.46% -20.88%Napa 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 52.94% 57.70% 4.76% 47.06% 42.30% -4.76%Nevada 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 64.45% 89.47% 25.02% 35.55% 10.53% -25.02%Orange 1977-1978 to 2011-2012 59.42% 73.56% 14.14% 40.58% 26.44% -14.14%Placer 1976-1977 to 2011-2012 51.84% 81.44% 29.60% 48.16% 18.56% -29.60%Plumas 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 36.23% 79.46% 43.23% 63.77% 20.54% -43.23%Riverside 1968-1969 to 2011-2012 54.97% 70.99% 16.02% 45.03% 29.01% -16.02%Sacramento 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 67.65% 72.60% 4.95% 32.35% 27.40% -4.95%San Benito 1972-1973 to 2011-2012 21.60% 67.72% 46.12% 78.40% 32.28% -46.12%San Bernardino 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 50.74% 68.89% 18.15% 49.26% 31.11% -18.15%

San Diego 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 72.63% 75.59% 2.96% 27.37% 24.41% -2.96%San Francisco 1974-1975 to 2012-2013 56.21% 67.70% 11.49% 43.79% 32.30% -11.49%

San Joaquin 1967-1968 to 2011-2012 34.79% 62.26% 27.47% 65.21% 37.74% -27.47%San Luis Obispo 1969-1970 to 2011-2012 52.21% 76.12% 23.91% 47.79% 23.88% -23.91%

San Mateo 1972-1973 to 2011-2012 64.81% 78.56% 13.75% 35.19% 21.44% -13.75%Santa Barbara 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 53.08% 73.29% 20.21% 46.92% 26.71% -20.21%

Santa Clara 1977-1978 to 2012-2013 49.78% 75.80% 26.02% 50.22% 24.20% -26.02%Santa Cruz 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 50.80% 81.94% 31.14% 49.20% 18.06% -31.14%Shasta 1974-1975 to 2011-2012 30.25% 62.32% 32.07% 69.75% 37.68% -32.07%Sierra 1972-1973 to 2011-2012 25.98% 61.76% 35.78% 74.02% 38.24% -35.78%Siskiyou 1971-1972 to 2011-2012 26.74% 66.51% 39.77% 73.26% 33.49% -39.77%Solano 1975-1976 to 2011-2012 48.22% 66.82% 18.60% 51.78% 33.18% -18.60%Sonoma 1984-1985 to 2011-2012 66.30% 72.26% 5.96% 33.70% 27.74% -5.96%Stanislaus 1968-1969 to 2011-2012 33.93% 57.83% 23.90% 66.07% 42.17% -23.90%Sutter 1982-1983 to 2011-2012 33.25% 55.42% 22.17% 66.75% 44.58% -22.17%Tehama 1973-1974 to 2011-2012 26.62% 60.80% 34.18% 73.38% 39.20% -34.18%Trinity 1985-1986 to 2011-2012 39.52% 86.25% 46.73% 60.48% 13.75% -46.73%Tulare 1969-1970 to 2011-2012 24.10% 55.44% 31.34% 75.90% 44.56% -31.34%Tuolumne 1982-1983 to 2011-2012 70.90% 78.38% 7.48% 29.10% 21.62% -7.48%Ventura 1976-1977 to 2011-2012 64.45% 75.29% 10.84% 38.55% 24.71% -13.84%Yolo 1970-1971 to 2011-2012 38.89% 60.51% 21.62% 61.11% 39.49% -21.62%Yuba 1969-1970 to 2011-2012 34.50% 64.96% 30.46% 65.50% 35.04% -30.46%

7

Alameda County

Share of Alameda County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property

Roll Year Residential Residential % Non-residential Non-residential % Total

1973-1974 $8,068,562,600 55.0% $6,607,672,160 45.0% $14,676,234,760

1985-1986 $24,233,000,000 62.5% $14,556,000,000 37.5% $38,789,000,000

1990-1991 $44,939,722,838 70.2% $19,121,535,452 29.8% $64,061,258,290

2002-2003 $80,008,388,000 70.7% $33,195,268,000 29.3% $113,203,656,000

2005-2006 $103,803,391,000 72.7% $38,956,540,000 27.3% $142,759,931,000

2009-2010 $143,372,499,000 74.2% $49,760,658,000 25.8% $193,133,157,000

2011-2012 $140,479,280,168 73.2% $51,421,493,458 26.8% $191,900,773,626

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Alameda County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Alpine County

Share of Alpine County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property

Roll Year Residential Residential % Non-residential Non-residential % Total

1975-1976 $30,769,573 53.6% $26,626,648 46.4% $57,396,221

1980-1981 $42,600,000 56.8% $32,400,000 43.2% $75,000,000

1985-1986 $68,800,000 57.4% $51,000,000 42.6% $119,800,000

1990-1991 $94,638,921 63.7% $53,837,203 36.3% $148,476,124

2002-2003 $266,008,000 72.2% $102,306,000 27.8% $368,314,000

8

2009-2010 $622,684,000 81.0% $146,529,000 19.0% $769,213,000

2011-2012 $542,731,231 86.0% $85,041,400 14.0% $627,772,631

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Alpine County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Amador County

Share of Amador County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property

Roll Year Residential Residential % Non-Residential Non-Residential % Total

1983-1984 $447,000,000 61.0% $286,000,000 39.0% $733,000,000

1988-1989 $745,149,152 67.6% $357,317,553 32.4% $1,102,466,705

2002-2003 $1,725,803,000 68.1% $807,144,000 31.9% $2,532,947,000

2004-2005 $2,313,983,575 77.6% $668,432,587 22.4% $2,982,416,162

2009-2010 $3,161,958,000 68.5% $1,452,069,000 31.5% $4,614,027,000

2011-2012 $3,035,478,285 76.1% $954,567,627 23.9% $3,990,045,912

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Amador County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Butte County

9

Share of Butte County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1983-1984 $2,499,000,000 62.3% $1,515,000,000 37.7% $4,014,000,000

1988-1989 $3,297,661,261 61.0% $2,107,530,728 39.0% $5,405,191,989

2002-2003 $7,165,060,000 67.1% $3,509,686,000 32.9% $10,674,746,000

2009-2010 $13,206,873,000 72.0% $5,128,275,000 28.0% $18,335,148,000

2011-2012 $11,800,072,840 71.9% $4,611,662,715 28.1% $16,411,735,555

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Butte County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Calaveras County

Share of Calaveras County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $195,030,266 52.7% $174,826,023 47.3% $369,856,289

1983-1984 $740,000,000 75.2% $244,000,000 24.8% $984,000,000

1988-1989 $1,034,831,179 68.9% $467,411,142 31.1% $1,502,242,321

2000-2001 $2,122,766,601 67.1% $1,043,097,441 32.9% $3,165,864,042

2009-2010 $5,527,442,000 81.1% $1,291,705,000 18.9% $6,819,147,000

2011-2012 $7,092,267,174 89.3% $848,083,648 10.7% $7,940,350,822

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Calaveras County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

10

Colusa County

Share of Colusa County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1973-1974 $60,900,000 16.9% $300,350,000 83.1% $361,250,000

1985-1986 $161,000,000 19.0% $687,000,000 81.0% $848,000,000

1990-1991 $179,437,344 17.0% $878,924,015 83.0% $1,058,361,359

2002-2003 $304,879,000 19.5% $1,257,344,000 80.5% $1,562,223,000

2009-2010 $822,997,000 34.8% $1,543,562,000 65.2% $2,366,559,000

2011-2012 $641,042,790 28.5% $1,606,690,459 71.5% $2,247,733,249

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Colusa County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Contra Costa County

Share of Contra Costa County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


11

1969-1970 $3,661,268,000 53.9% $3,134,701,000 46.1% $6,795,969,000

1975-1976 $7,731,224,443 63.7% $4,401,670,779 36.3% $12,132,895,222

1980-1981 $12,332,000,000 69.1% $5,509,000,000 30.9% $17,841,000,000

1986-1987 $23,378,000,000 70.2% $9,946,000,000 29.8% $33,324,000,000

2002-2003 $72,602,106,213 75.5% $23,549,627,474 24.5% $96,151,733,687

2009-2010 $107,687,504,000 73.7% $38,448,490,000 26.3% $146,135,994,000

2011-2012 $101,074,777,919 74.8% $34,059,154,404 25.2% $135,133,932,323

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Contra Costa County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Del Norte County

Share of Del Norte County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1984-1985 $209,500,000 45.9% $246,900,000 54.1% $456,400,000

1989-1990 $292,222,332 52.9% $260,448,000 47.1% $552,670,332

2002-2003 $800,251,000 74.4% $275,298,000 25.6% $1,075,549,000

2005-2006 $929,722,076 74.0% $326,570,210 26.0% $1,256,292,286

2009-2010 $1,272,612,000 73.0% $471,574,000 27.0% $1,744,186,000

2011-2012 $1,295,214,662 78.5% $355,725,650 21.5% $1,650,940,312

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Del Norte County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

12

El Dorado County

Share of El Dorado County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $786,000,000 63.4% $453,100,000 36.6% $1,239,100,000

1980-1981 $2,071,400,000 73.6% $742,200,000 26.4% $2,813,600,000

1985-1986 $3,442,500,000 77.2% $1,016,500,000 22.8% $4,459,000,000

1990-1991 $5,873,988,515 80.3% $1,441,546,854 19.7% $7,315,535,369

2002-2003 $12,638,021,000 85.1% $2,208,738,000 14.9% $14,846,759,000

2009-2010 $22,686,654,000 83.7% $4,423,112,000 16.3% $27,109,766,000

2011-2012 $21,729,542,080 86.4% $3,427,237,595 13.6% $25,156,779,675

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, El Dorado County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Fresno County

Share of Fresno County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1981-1982 $6,458,000,000 53.2% $5,679,000,000 46.8% $12,137,000,000

1986-1987 $7,009,000,000 41.7% $9,795,000,000 58.3% $16,804,000,000

13

1992-1993 $14,749,671,287 58.6% $10,418,134,428 41.4% $25,167,805,715

2002-2003 $21,239,278,411 61.5% $13,275,562,016 38.5% $34,514,840,427

2009-2010 $35,384,989,000 61.8% $21,903,764,000 38.2% $57,288,753,000

2011-2012 $32,942,707,419 62.1% $20,145,785,803 37.9% $53,088,493,222

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Fresno County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Glenn County

Share of Glenn County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $40,828,000 12.1% $296,341,000 87.9% $337,169,000

1975-1976 $73,100,000 13.7% $462,400,000 86.3% $535,500,000

1981-1982 $146,000,000 20.2% $575,539,000 79.8% $721,539,000

1986-1987 $224,500,000 22.7% $763,500,000 77.3% $988,000,000

1992-1993 $360,284,673 31.2% $794,647,578 68.8% $1,154,932,251

2003-2004 $567,948,389 36.8% $976,933,938 63.2% $1,544,882,327

2009-2010 $746,426,000 31.2% $1,643,174,000 68.8% $2,389,600,000

2011-2012 $800,002,860 34.3% $1,530,112,330 65.7% $2,330,115,190

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Glenn County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

14

Humboldt County

Share of Humboldt County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1975-1976 $614,757,125 31.7% $1,325,901,581 68.3% $1,940,658,706

1980-1981 $1,135,000,000 58.1% $817,000,000 41.9% $1,952,000,000

1986-1987 $1,695,000,000 53.7% $1,462,600,000 46.3% $3,157,600,000

1992-1993 $1,208,898,826 52.6% $1,091,199,463 47.4% $2,300,098,289

2001-2002 $3,454,984,642 55.5% $2,774,527,760 44.5% $6,229,512,402

2009-2010 $7,870,178,000 73.1% $2,898,544,000 26.9% $10,768,722,000

2011-2012 $8,361,827,404 73.3% $3,051,554,024 26.7% $11,413,381,428

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Humboldt County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Imperial County

Share of Imperial County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1975-1976 $332,997,521 26.3% $932,809,789 73.7% $1,265,807,310

1980-1981 $566,900,000 35.1% $1,050,300,000 64.9% $1,617,200,000

1985-1986 $927,000,000 41.0% $1,336,000,000 59.0% $2,263,000,000

1990-1991 $1,411,591,552 47.2% $1,577,652,893 52.8% $2,989,244,445

2005-2006 $3,703,489,630 52.8% $3,310,508,768 47.2% $7,013,998,398

15

2009-2010 $5,849,878,000 58.5% $4,153,791,000 41.5% $10,003,669,000

2011-2012 $4,652,051,592 46.1% $5,433,560,693 53.9% $10,085,612,285

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Imperial County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Inyo County

Share of Inyo County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1976-1977 $108,839,862 25.5% $317,775,746 74.5% $426,615,608

1981-1982 $193,000,000 26.4% $537,000,000 73.6% $730,000,000

1986-1987 $321,600,000 32.3% $673,400,000 67.7% $995,000,000

1993-1994 $427,041,137 19.0% $1,826,023,731 81.0% $2,253,064,868

2002-2003 $490,127,000 19.0% $2,084,219,000 81.0% $2,574,346,000

2004-2005 $792,837,208 32.8% $1,624,626,004 67.2% $2,417,463,212

2005-2006 $867,257,742 32.6% $1,794,361,144 67.4% $2,661,618,886

2006-2007 $933,054,615 31.9% $1,987,400,112 68.1% $2,920,454,727

2007-2008 $976,847,670 31.1% $2,163,125,332 68.9% $3,139,973,002

2008-2009 $972,996,308 30.0% $2,273,416,635 70.0% $3,246,412,943

2011-2012$1,081,575,13

1 32.5% $2,244,105,773 67.5% $3,325,680,904

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Inyo County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Kern County

16

Share of Kern County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1973-1974 $1,956,717,000 27.4% $5,173,300,000 72.6% $7,130,017,000

1983-1984 $5,471,000,000 49.1% $5,679,000,000 50.9% $11,150,000,000

1988-1989 $9,144,035,306 30.3% $21,000,510,659 69.7% $30,144,545,965

2002-2003 $13,945,306,000 34.1% $26,960,993,000 65.9% $40,906,299,000

2009-2010 $34,587,454,000 46.4% $39,934,511,000 53.6% $74,521,965,000

2011-2012 $31,004,420,838 37.0% $52,740,802,707 63.0% $83,745,223,545

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Kern County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Kings County

Share of Kings County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1976-1977 $227,483,000 22.5% $784,065,000 77.5% $1,011,548,000

1980-1981 $432,000,000 29.1% $1,054,000,000 70.9% $1,486,000,000

1986-1987 $790,519,762 36.6% $1,366,434,370 63.4% $2,156,954,132

1992-1993 $1,218,305,076 37.6% $2,023,564,465 62.4% $3,241,869,541

2002-2003 $1,859,031,000 42.2% $2,544,669,000 57.8% $4,403,700,000

2009-2010 $2,615,846,000 31.9% $5,591,794,000 68.1% $8,207,640,000

17

2011-2012 $4,369,410,682 47.6% $4,818,817,798 52.5% $9,188,228,480

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Kings County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Lake County

Share of Lake County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1972-1973 $266,400,000 55.7% $212,200,000 44.3% $478,600,000

1983-1984 $878,000,000 69.1% $392,000,000 30.9% $1,270,000,000

2004-2005 $3,396,347,084 73.6% $1,219,070,479 26.4% $4,615,417,563

2009-2010 $5,238,993,000 75.8% $1,674,902,000 24.2% $6,913,895,000

2011-2012 $4,962,846,132 74.2% $1,722,317,511 25.8% $6,685,163,643

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Lake County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Lassen County

18

Share of Lassen County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1973-1974 $74,150,000 30.0% $172,850,000 70.0% $247,000,000

1984-1985 $331,000,000 53.8% $284,000,000 46.2% $615,000,000

1989-1990 $377,448,863 41.0% $542,528,939 59.0% $919,977,802

2002-2003 $790,058,000 59.2% $544,645,000 40.8% $1,334,703,000

2009-2010 $1,351,796,000 63.6% $772,993,000 36.4% $2,124,789,000

2011-2012 $1,253,130,938 67.3% $607,779,736 32.7% $1,860,910,674

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Lassen County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Los Angeles County

Share of Los Angeles County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $44,400,000,000 53.4% $38,800,000,000 46.6% $83,200,000,000

1979-1980 $95,000,000,000 62.9% $56,000,000,000 37.1% $151,000,000,000

1984-1985 $148,400,000,000 60.5% $96,800,000,000 39.5% $245,200,000,000

1989-1990 $257,800,000,000 62.5% $155,000,000,000 37.5% $412,800,000,000

1994-1995 $315,500,000,000 64.8% $171,300,000,000 35.2% $486,800,000,000

1999-2000 $377,100,000,000 66.2% $192,500,000,000 33.8% $569,600,000,000

2004-2005 $576,300,000,000 70.0% $247,400,000,000 30.0% $823,700,000,000

2008-2009 $733,900,000,000 69.1% $328,300,000,000 30.9% $1,062,200,000,000

2012-2013 $789,300,000,000 69.8% $340,700,000,000 30.2% $1,130,000,000,000

19

Data Sources: Los Angeles County Assessors Office.

Madera County

Share of Madera County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $238,000,000 25.8% $685,000,000 74.2% $923,000,000

1984-1985 $936,000,000 38.9% $1,469,000,000 61.1% $2,405,000,000

1989-1990 $1,171,426,975 35.9% $2,091,596,369 64.1% $3,263,023,344

2002-2003 $2,438,916,268 41.0% $3,512,895,000 59.0% $5,951,811,268

2009-2010 $5,914,251,000 54.2% $4,991,972,000 45.8% $10,906,223,000

2011-2012 $5,649,876,499 52.4% $5,131,958,723 47.6% $10,781,835,222

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Madera County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Marin County

Share of Marin County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $2,306,847,870 81.1% $538,691,044 18.9% $2,845,538,914

20

1982-1983 $6,922,000,000 78.8% $1,859,000,000 21.2% $8,781,000,000

1987-1988 $9,985,587,637 74.6% $3,404,601,344 25.4% $13,390,188,981

1993-1994 $17,176,409,174 81.8% $3,817,332,691 18.2% $20,993,741,865

2001-2002 $27,748,793,039 85.6% $4,678,896,870 14.4% $32,427,689,909

2006-2007 $41,893,812,000 87.3% $6,108,702,000 12.7% $48,002,514,000

2009-2010 $48,668,867,000 85.2% $8,421,827,000 14.8% $57,090,694,000

2011-2012 $47,936,059,427 87.1% $7,107,162,645 12.9% $55,043,222,072

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Marin County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Mariposa County

Share of Mariposa County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1973-1974 $71,000,000 34.1% $136,950,000 65.9% $207,950,000

1984-1985 $233,200,000 52.6% $209,800,000 47.4% $443,000,000

1989-1990 $396,263,861 64.3% $219,698,081 35.7% $615,961,942

2002-2003 $810,069,000 68.4% $373,700,000 31.6% $1,183,769,000

2009-2010 $1,226,124,000 60.2% $811,572,000 39.8% $2,037,696,000

2011-2012 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Mariposa County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

21

Mendocino County

Share of Mendocino County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential


1970-1971 $268,452,792 36.7% $463,948,543 63.3% $732,401,335

1976-1977 $532,708,880 43.6% $689,260,232 56.4% $1,221,969,112

1981-1982 $955,000,000 52.8% $854,000,000 47.2% $1,809,000,000

1986-1987 $1,410,000,000 55.1% $1,149,000,000 44.9% $2,559,000,000

1992-1993 $2,270,964,880 59.7% $1,531,912,209 40.3% $3,802,877,089

2002-2003 $3,959,825,000 65.2% $2,113,080,000 34.8% $6,072,905,000

2009-2010 $5,490,159,000 54.7% $4,552,008,000 45.3% $10,042,167,000

2011-2012 $5,269,879,916 54.3% $4,430,002,645 45.7% $9,699,882,561

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Mendocino County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Merced County

Share of Merced County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property

Roll Year Residential Residential % Non-Residential Non-Residential Total

1971-1972 $317,887,286 26.6% $878,970,454 73.4% $1,196,857,740

1982-1983 $1,150,000,000 32.8% $2,352,000,000 67.2% $3,502,000,000

22

1987-1988 $1,702,665,152 37.3% $2,868,137,949 62.7% $4,570,803,101

1993-1994 $3,317,806,948 48.2% $3,561,515,253 51.8% $6,879,322,201

2002-2003 $5,003,801,000 50.3% $4,944,031,000 49.7% $9,947,832,000

2009-2010 $7,685,046,000 46.8% $8,718,665,000 53.2% $16,403,711,000

2011-2012 $7,158,482,981 51.0% $6,881,267,256 49.0% $14,039,750,237

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Merced County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Modoc County

Share of Modoc County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1982-1983 $138,000,000 37.0% $235,000,000 63.0% $373,000,000

1987-1988 $163,654,337 36.9% $279,594,182 63.1% $443,248,519

2002-2003 $156,856,576 36.1% $277,455,000 63.9% $434,311,576

2006-2007 $224,110,401 29.1% $545,041,922 70.9% $769,152,323

2009-2010 $105,635,000 12.8% $721,156,000 87.2% $826,791,000

2011-2012 $130,130,426 15.6% $701,823,193 84.4% $831,953,619

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Modoc County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

23

Mono County

Share of Mono County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1975-1976 $162,314,010 45.6% $193,586,076 54.4% $355,900,086

1980-1981 $369,200,000 62.0% $226,100,000 38.0% $595,300,000

1985-1986 $723,000,000 71.5% $288,000,000 28.5% $1,011,000,000

1990-1991 $910,261,434 74.7% $308,673,537 25.3% $1,218,934,971

2002-2003$1,787,565,00

0 68.0% $843,081,000 32.0% $2,630,646,000

2009-2010$3,190,171,00

0 54.5% $2,663,918,000 45.5% $5,854,089,000

2011-2012$3,816,463,88

0 84.0% $739,138,470 16.0% $4,555,602,350

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Mono County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Monterey County

Share of Monterey County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1972-1973 $1,646,700,000 50.7% $1,604,070,000 49.3% $3,250,770,000

1982-1983 $4,780,000,000 60.7% $3,093,000,000 39.3% $7,873,000,000

24

1987-1988 $7,037,879,654 58.6% $4,962,729,065 41.4% $12,000,608,719

1993-1994 $12,541,929,621 74.8% $4,224,801,440 25.2% $16,766,731,061

2002-2003 $19,190,645,687 66.3% $9,764,650,000 33.7% $28,955,295,687

2009-2010 $36,309,826,000 72.7% $13,620,841,000 27.3% $49,930,667,000

2011-2012 $34,624,091,120 71.5% $13,776,057,040 28.5% $48,400,148,160

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Monterey County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Napa County

Share of Napa County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $465,051,400 52.9% $413,371,800 47.1% $878,423,200

1982-1983 $1,819,000,000 59.7% $1,226,000,000 40.3% $3,045,000,000

1987-1988 $2,608,240,447 52.5% $2,362,091,355 47.5% $4,970,331,802

1993-1994 $4,779,792,764 56.1% $3,735,961,216 43.9% $8,515,753,980

2002-2003 $8,499,364,000 58.0% $6,165,420,000 42.0% $14,664,784,000

2006-2007 $10,391,353,431 46.5% $11,939,771,373 53.5% $22,331,124,804

2009-2010 $15,026,567,000 56.3% $11,645,527,000 43.7% $26,672,094,000

2011-2012 $14,831,962,822 57.7% $10,866,462,444 42.3% $25,698,425,266

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Napa County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

25

Nevada County

Share of Nevada County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1975-1976 $417,420,000 64.5% $230,200,000 35.5% $647,620,000

1984-1985 $1,920,000,000 75.1% $635,000,000 24.9% $2,555,000,000

2003-2004 $7,226,875,683 77.0% $2,162,691,570 23.0% $9,389,567,253

2009-2010 $14,042,214,000 83.7% $2,744,149,000 16.3% $16,786,363,000

2011-2012 $13,370,816,505 89.5% $1,574,221,719 10.5% $14,945,038,224

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Nevada County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Orange County

Share of Orange County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1977-1978 $18,574,989,860 59.4% $12,687,246,271 40.6% $31,262,236,131

1980-1981 $38,358,000,000 74.3% $13,238,000,000 25.7% $51,596,000,000

1985-1986 $60,601,000,000 66.3% $30,829,000,000 33.7% $91,430,000,000

1990-1991 $93,792,153,237 61.5% $58,667,117,872 38.5% $152,459,271,109

2002-2003 $183,087,492,000 73.4% $66,193,560,000 26.6% $249,281,052,000

2003-2004 $202,223,018,000 74.6% $68,842,518,000 25.4% $271,065,536,000

2004-2005 $223,183,830,000 75.5% $72,363,753,000 24.5% $295,547,583,000

26

2005-2006 $249,353,174,000 76.4% $77,157,795,000 23.6% $326,510,969,000

2006-2007 $227,879,918,000 72.8% $85,178,997,000 27.2% $313,058,915,000

2007-2008 $302,853,813,000 76.6% $92,319,634,000 23.4% $395,173,447,000

2009-2010 $295,156,514,000 72.1% $114,218,005,000 27.9% $409,374,519,000

2011-2012 $315,793,468,679 73.6% $113,484,027,379 26.4% $429,277,496,058

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Orange County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Placer County

Share of Placer County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1976-1977 $1,084,019,965 51.8% $1,006,892,289 48.2% $2,090,912,254

1982-1983 $3,513,000,000 76.2% $1,095,000,000 23.8% $4,608,000,000

1991-1992 $5,139,315,344 69.6% $2,247,577,523 30.4% $7,386,892,867

1993-1994 $10,188,885,239 69.9% $4,386,492,409 30.1% $14,575,377,648

2002-2003 $23,957,948,000 81.0% $5,609,211,000 19.0% $29,567,159,000

2003-2004 $28,214,608,384 81.3% $6,479,813,100 18.7% $34,694,421,484

2005-2006 $35,947,345,714 82.4% $7,661,902,197 17.6% $43,609,247,911

2006-2007 $42,446,253,236 83.3% $8,479,608,496 16.7% $50,925,861,732

2007-2008 $45,896,168,145 83.0% $9,432,802,197 17.0% $55,328,970,342

2008-2009 $46,352,223,647 75.5% $15,070,300,197 24.5% $61,422,523,844

2009-2010 $44,297,515,809 80.4% $10,811,526,809 19.6% $55,109,042,618

2011-2012 $42,494,447,320 81.4% $9,683,196,727 18.6% $52,177,644,047

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Placer County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Plumas County

27

Share of Plumas County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1973-1974 $115,432,000 36.2% $203,218,000 63.8% $318,650,000

1984-1985 $568,000,000 70.8% $234,000,000 29.2% $802,000,000

2002-2003 $1,571,297,000 75.2% $517,368,000 24.8% $2,088,665,000

2009-2010 $1,256,130,000 32.7% $2,588,511,000 67.3% $3,844,641,000

2011-2012 $2,320,990,227 79.5% $599,974,650 20.5% $2,920,964,877

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Plumas County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Riverside County

Share of Riverside County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1968-1969 $2,382,525,375 55.0% $1,951,807,992 45.0% $4,334,333,367

1984-1985 $15,180,000,000 59.8% $10,220,000,000 40.2% $25,400,000,000

1989-1990 $29,966,831,378 60.5% $19,533,588,694 39.5% $49,500,420,072

1995-1996 $50,190,484,365 70.0% $21,538,068,433 30.0% $71,728,552,798

2001-2002 $70,026,399,537 74.4% $24,152,873,031 25.6% $94,179,272,568

2005-2006 $116,312,254,986 72.1% $44,974,773,268 27.9% $161,287,028,254

2009-2010 $141,418,932,690 67.6% $67,686,459,615 32.4% $209,105,392,305

28

2011-2012 $139,915,964,167 71.0% $57,170,129,434 29.0% $197,086,093,601

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Riverside County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Sacramento County

Share of Sacramento County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $3,356,621,138 67.7% $1,604,798,881 32.3% $4,961,420,019

1983-1984 $14,095,000,000 70.2% $5,979,000,000 29.8% $20,074,000,000

1988-1989 $21,025,913,914 62.2% $12,792,883,141 37.8% $33,818,797,055

2002-2003 $44,835,952,489 68.9% $20,261,980,000 31.1% $65,097,932,489

2003-2004 $59,397,136,111 72.9% $22,059,504,965 27.1% $81,456,641,076

2008-2009 $98,487,105,728 74.5% $33,624,204,171 25.5% $132,111,309,899

2011-2012 $82,522,522,257 72.6% $31,142,722,208 27.4% $113,665,244,465

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Sacramento County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

San Benito County

29

Share of San Benito County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1972-1973 $68,400,000 21.6% $248,200,000 78.4% $316,600,000

1983-1984 $350,000,000 44.5% $436,000,000 55.5% $786,000,000

1988-1989 $686,492,137 52.0% $633,811,439 48.0% $1,320,303,576

2002-2003 $2,755,035,000 63.1% $1,612,813,000 36.9% $4,367,848,000

2006-2007 $4,524,574,564 73.2% $1,655,718,458 26.8% $6,180,293,022

2008-2009 $4,621,756,217 71.5% $1,844,593,456 28.5% $6,466,349,673

2011-2012 $3,698,498,911 67.7% $1,763,005,295 32.3% $5,461,504,206

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Benito County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

San Bernardino County

Share of San Bernardino County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1975-1976 $4,915,727,326 50.7% $4,772,616,537 49.3% $9,688,343,863

1980-1981 $11,975,000,000 70.9% $4,922,000,000 29.1% $16,897,000,000

1992-1993 $52,037,837,688 76.7% $15,821,342,580 23.3% $67,859,180,268

1997-1998 $49,050,876,519 67.8% $23,271,301,669 32.2% $72,322,178,188

2002-2003 $62,437,491,806 73.4% $22,583,814,773 26.6% $85,021,306,579

2004-2005 $76,162,905,113 73.6% $27,325,089,085 26.4% $103,487,994,198

2008-2009 $124,525,353,934 72.5% $47,271,208,185 27.5% $171,796,562,119

2011-2012 $107,726,583,390 68.9% $48,647,042,578 31.1% $156,373,625,968

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Bernardino County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

30

San Diego County

Share of San Diego County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1973-1974 $7,049,918,806 61.5% $4,405,904,806 38.5% $11,455,823,612

1983-1984 $33,625,000,000 60.4% $22,021,000,000 39.6% $55,646,000,000

1998-1999 $112,503,042,876 71.9% $44,063,885,955 28.1% $156,566,928,831

2002-2003 $164,875,669,000 76.0% $52,059,267,000 24.0% $216,934,936,000

2009-2010 $288,517,364,000 74.9% $96,935,444,000 25.1% $385,452,808,000

2011-2012 $285,269,204,524 75.6% $92,129,524,482 24.4% $377,398,729,006

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Diego County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

San Francisco County

Share of San Francisco County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $7,042,000,000 56.2% $5,486,000,000 43.8% $12,528,000,000

1980-1981 $10,322,000,000 57.6% $7,589,000,000 42.4% $17,911,000,000

31

1985-1986 $17,047,500,000 54.3% $14,339,200,000 45.7% $31,386,700,000

1990-1991 $26,205,768,871 53.9% $22,385,179,993 46.1% $48,590,948,864

1999-2000 $43,064,184,559 60.9% $27,642,409,736 39.1% $70,706,594,295

2005-2006 $67,540,166,527 63.3% $39,189,627,645 36.7% $106,729,794,172

2007-2008 $87,559,033,799 65.4% $46,398,717,330 34.6% $133,957,751,129

2009-2010 $101,807,190,000 67.0% $50,251,463,000 33.0% $152,058,653,000

2011-2012 $130,079,863,500 73.2% $47,723,486,290 26.8% $177,803,349,790

2012-2013 $106,657,352,024 67.7% $50,885,387,344 32.3% $157,542,739,368

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Francisco County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

San Joaquin County

Share of San Joaquin County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1967-1968 $934,045,152 34.8% $1,750,888,425 65.2% $2,684,933,577

1984-1985 $5,938,000,000 57.3% $4,425,000,000 42.7% $10,363,000,000

1989-1990 $8,009,809,791 51.0% $7,700,349,791 49.0% $15,710,159,582

2002-2003 $18,508,551,000 64.9% $10,018,374,000 35.1% $28,526,925,000

2004-2005 $28,223,482,538 69.1% $12,607,879,270 30.9% $40,831,361,808

2009-2010 $35,365,008,000 65.0% $19,065,939,000 35.0% $54,430,947,000

2011-2012 $30,580,120,659 62.3% $18,533,601,912 37.7% $49,113,722,571

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Joaquin County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

32

San Luis Obispo County

Share of San Luis Obispo County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1969-1970 $569,074,249 52.2% $520,822,678 47.8% $1,089,896,927

1980-1981 $1,876,000,000 54.1% $1,594,000,000 45.9% $3,470,000,000

1985-1986 $3,732,000,000 62.3% $2,254,000,000 37.7% $5,986,000,000

1990-1991 $7,663,949,410 66.9% $3,783,588,908 33.1% $11,447,538,318

2002-2003 $15,293,073,000 69.1% $6,822,806,000 30.9% $22,115,879,000

2009-2010 $30,151,729,000 76.4% $9,323,446,000 23.6% $39,475,175,000

2011-2012 $29,791,974,961 76.1% $9,346,343,140 23.9% $39,138,318,101

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Luis Obispo County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

San Mateo County

Share of San Mateo County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1972-1973 $5,993,933,000 63.6% $3,426,140,000 36.4% $9,420,073,000

1983-1984 $16,268,000,000 66.1% $8,349,000,000 33.9% $24,617,000,000

1988-1989 $25,060,565,609 64.9% $13,561,913,024 35.1% $38,622,478,633

33

1998-1999 $46,749,608,000 78.7% $12,656,686,000 21.3% $59,406,294,000

2002-2003 $67,894,879,000 78.0% $19,157,197,000 22.0% $87,052,076,000

2009-2010 $105,909,311,000 76.2% $33,162,112,000 23.8% $139,071,423,000

2011-2012 $109,083,301,374 78.6% $29,778,432,319 21.4% $138,861,733,693

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, San Mateo County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Santa Barbara County

Share of Santa Barbara County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $1,672,800,000 53.1% $1,478,900,000 46.9% $3,151,700,000

1982-1983 $5,785,000,000 61.6% $3,611,000,000 38.4% $9,396,000,000

1987-1988 $9,649,222,413 64.9% $5,224,826,993 35.1% $14,874,049,406

2002-2003 $25,221,087,000 70.8% $10,412,633,000 29.2% $35,633,720,000

2007-2008 $42,295,144,646 74.4% $14,541,682,400 25.6% $56,836,827,046

2009-2010 $43,683,072,000 72.1% $16,898,920,000 27.9% $60,581,992,000

2011-2012 $45,951,867,436 73.3% $16,748,291,686 26.7% $62,700,159,122

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Santa Barbara County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

34

Santa Clara County

Share of Santa Clara County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1984-1985 $33,193,000,000 61.2% $21,045,000,000 38.8% $54,238,000,000

1989-1990 $51,789,286,747 56.3% $40,197,397,171 43.7% $91,986,683,918

1996-1997 $70,995,121,291 59.0% $49,237,101,932 41.0% $120,232,223,223

2002-2003 $128,229,709,462 66.6% $64,300,251,631 33.4% $192,529,961,093

2009-2010 $208,745,804,000 70.7% $86,637,985,000 29.3% $295,383,789,000

2011-2012 $217,006,573,200 75.8% $69,278,762,090 24.2% $286,285,335,290

2012-2013 $227,759,846,507 75.8% $72,714,885,032 24.2% $300,474,731,539

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Santa Clara County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Santa Cruz County

Share of Santa Cruz County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $973,041,000 50.8% $942,404,342 49.2% $1,915,445,342

1982-1983 $4,048,000,000 70.5% $1,694,000,000 29.5% $5,742,000,000

1987-1988 $5,995,325,302 67.0% $2,950,986,150 33.0% $8,946,311,452

1993-1994 $9,981,365,358 71.7% $3,938,450,142 28.3% $13,919,815,500

2002-2003 $15,352,642,039 74.2% $5,332,751,000 25.8% $20,685,393,039

35

2008-2009 $27,614,526,957 83.6% $5,428,873,616 16.4% $33,043,400,573

2009-2010 $27,327,281,000 81.7% $6,114,510,000 18.3% $33,441,791,000

2011-2012 $27,144,435,980 81.9% $5,984,510,777 18.1% $33,128,946,757

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Santa Cruz County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Shasta County

Share of Shasta County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $368,524,667 30.3% $849,583,021 69.7% $1,218,107,688

1984-1985 $2,082,000,000 59.7% $1,405,000,000 40.3% $3,487,000,000

1989-1990 $2,596,743,961 51.7% $2,424,448,312 48.3% $5,021,192,273

2002-2003 $4,996,683,000 55.7% $3,980,949,000 44.3% $8,977,632,000

2009-2010 $9,191,360,000 59.9% $6,144,187,000 40.1% $15,335,547,000

2011-2012 $8,624,832,294 62.3% $5,214,107,584 37.7% $13,838,939,878

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Shasta County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Sierra County

36

Share of Sierra County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1972-1973 $17,200,000 26.0% $49,000,000 74.0% $66,200,000

1989-1990 $74,780,459 32.9% $152,855,604 67.1% $227,636,063

2002-2003 $154,842,000 42.2% $212,361,000 57.8% $367,203,000

2009-2010 $363,314,000 66.6% $182,009,000 33.4% $545,323,000

2011-2012 $305,644,279 61.8% $189,280,796 38.2% $494,925,075

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Sierra County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Siskiyou County

Share of Siskiyou County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1971-1972 $142,642,000 26.7% $390,858,000 73.3% $533,500,000

1981-1982 $477,800,000 46.1% $559,700,000 53.9% $1,037,500,000

1986-1987 $716,000,000 50.8% $693,000,000 49.2% $1,409,000,000

1992-1993 $862,285,176 48.5% $915,985,369 51.5% $1,778,270,545

2002-2003 $1,329,229,000 52.9% $1,182,144,000 47.1% $2,511,373,000

2009-2010 $2,609,121,000 63.1% $1,523,162,000 36.9% $4,132,283,000

37

2011-2012 $2,685,379,424 66.5% $1,352,331,385 33.5% $4,037,710,809

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Siskiyou County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Solano County

Share of Solano County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1975-1976 $1,267,890,000 48.2% $1,361,430,000 51.8% $2,629,320,000

1980-1981 $2,939,000,000 60.1% $1,950,000,000 39.9% $4,889,000,000

1986-1987 $5,434,000,000 68.2% $2,531,000,000 31.8% $7,965,000,000

1992-1993 $12,123,907,835 74.1% $4,239,687,734 25.9% $16,363,595,569

2002-2003 $19,377,413,000 77.6% $5,604,107,000 22.4% $24,981,520,000

2005-2006 $26,772,553,028 76.8% $8,109,187,487 23.2% $34,881,740,515

2009-2010 $27,128,562,000 67.9% $12,817,196,000 32.1% $39,945,758,000

2011-2012 $25,327,543,331 66.8% $12,575,112,884 33.2% $37,902,656,215

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Solano County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Sonoma County

Share of Sonoma County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1984-1985 $6,848,000,000 66.3% $3,487,000,000 33.7% $10,335,000,000

38

1989-1990 $13,194,856,440 75.3% $4,320,128,989 24.7% $17,514,985,429

2002-2003 $24,665,320,000 68.8% $11,191,136,000 31.2% $35,856,456,000

2009-2010 $49,067,508,000 72.8% $18,363,585,000 27.2% $67,431,093,000

2011-2012 $46,766,019,421 72.3% $17,953,799,892 27.7% $64,719,819,313

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Sonoma County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Stanislaus County

Share of Stanislaus County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1974-1975 $1,181,162,849 38.2% $1,913,403,330 61.8% $3,094,566,179

1980-1981 $2,964,700,000 50.4% $2,915,500,000 49.6% $5,880,200,000

1985-1986 $3,664,634,702 43.4% $4,783,337,362 56.6% $8,447,972,064

1990-1991 $7,727,512,673 55.1% $6,287,378,286 44.9% $14,014,890,959

2002-2003 $12,931,544,000 57.3% $9,649,092,000 42.7% $22,580,636,000

2004-2005 $17,821,718,410 62.5% $10,680,778,658 37.5% $28,502,497,068

2009-2010 $22,364,638,000 61.3% $14,148,169,000 38.7% $36,512,807,000

2011-2012 $18,194,987,749 57.8% $13,268,210,791 42.2% $31,463,198,540

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Stanislaus County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

39

Sutter County

Share of Sutter County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1982-1983 $629,000,000 33.2% $1,263,000,000 66.8% $1,892,000,000

1987-1988 $946,000,000 46.1% $1,107,000,000 53.9% $2,053,000,000

1993-1994$1,667,077,73

5 49.3% $1,715,066,814 50.7% $3,382,144,549

2002-2003$2,483,258,00

0 52.2% $2,278,433,000 47.8% $4,761,691,000

2007-2008$4,494,416,12

4 58.8% $3,143,697,176 41.2% $7,638,113,300

2009-2010$3,995,226,00

0 50.5% $3,918,356,000 49.5% $7,913,582,000

2011-2012$3,856,517,87

7 55.0% $3,102,300,046 45.0% $6,958,817,923

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Sutter County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Tehama County

Share of Tehama County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


40

1973-1974 $139,283,944 26.6% $383,871,269 73.4% $523,155,213

1983-1984 $445,000,000 39.3% $687,000,000 60.7% $1,132,000,000

1988-1989 $745,356,365 52.8% $666,529,432 47.2% $1,411,885,797

2002-2003 $1,500,297,000 54.9% $1,233,307,000 45.1% $2,733,604,000

2009-2010 $2,629,483,000 56.6% $2,013,489,000 43.4% $4,642,972,000

2011-2012 $2,573,977,748 60.8% $1,658,535,477 39.2% $4,232,513,225

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Tehama County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Trinity County

Share of Trinity County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1985-1986 $166,000,000 39.5% $254,000,000 60.5% $420,000,000

1990-1991 $276,730,182 53.8% $237,280,014 46.2% $514,010,196

2002-2003 $570,695,257 82.2% $123,244,476 17.8% $693,939,733

2009-2010 $1,014,584,000 85.1% $177,346,000 14.9% $1,191,930,000

2011-2012 $1,079,610,081 86.2% $172,133,077 13.8% $1,251,743,158

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Trinity County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

41

Tulare County

Share of Tulare County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1969-1970 $481,778,400 24.1% $1,516,956,500 75.9% $1,998,734,900

1972-1973 $658,900,000 30.3% $1,515,400,000 69.7% $2,174,300,000

1983-1984 $2,310,000,000 40.1% $3,450,000,000 59.9% $5,760,000,000

1988-1989 $3,921,182,971 49.0% $4,079,019,903 51.0% $8,000,202,874

2002-2003 $7,476,553,000 47.8% $8,167,414,000 52.2% $15,643,967,000

2009-2010 $15,175,941,000 57.6% $11,174,252,000 42.4% $26,350,193,000

2011-2012 $14,660,781,677 55.4% $11,785,543,960 44.6% $26,446,325,637

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Tulare County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Tuolumne County

Share of Tuolumne County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1982-1983 $809,000,000 70.9% $332,000,000 29.1% $1,141,000,000

1987-1988 $1,223,749,561 65.8% $637,371,037 34.2% $1,861,120,598

1993-1994 $2,242,386,857 76.5% $688,843,265 23.5% $2,931,230,122

42

1997-1998 $2,021,087,000 59.7% $1,365,894,000 40.3% $3,386,981,000

2002-2003 $2,896,354,000 75.0% $967,792,000 25.0% $3,864,146,000

2009-2010 $5,123,808,000 78.5% $1,404,395,000 21.5% $6,528,203,000

2011-2012 $4,440,412,117 78.4% $1,225,106,797 21.6% $5,665,518,914

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Tuolumne County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Ventura County

Share of Ventura County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1976-1977 $4,971,081,582 61.4% $3,118,788,686 38.6% $8,089,870,268

1982-1983 $10,600,000,000 64.7% $5,787,000,000 35.3% $16,387,000,000

1987-1988 $17,410,858,406 66.5% $8,786,270,447 33.5% $26,197,128,853

1993-1994 $28,295,855,343 67.3% $13,769,383,210 32.7% $42,065,238,553

2002-2003 $43,455,580,000 68.9% $19,651,517,000 31.1% $63,107,097,000

2009-2010 $77,602,018,000 75.4% $25,313,134,000 24.6% $102,915,152,000

2011-2012 $76,159,491,247 75.3% $24,991,991,811 24.7% $101,151,483,058

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Ventura County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

43

Yolo County

Share of Yolo County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1970-1971 $406,766,205 38.9% $639,150,887 61.1% $1,045,917,092

1981-1982 $1,488,000,000 50.7% $1,445,000,000 49.3% $2,933,000,000

1987-1988 $2,386,900,831 54.3% $2,005,885,203 45.7% $4,392,786,034

1993-1994 $3,848,282,310 53.6% $3,325,847,175 46.4% $7,174,129,485

1997-1998 $4,191,185,622 51.4% $3,960,511,191 48.6% $8,151,696,813

2002-2003 $6,461,921,190 57.7% $4,732,303,468 42.3% $11,194,224,658

2009-2010 $13,069,190,000 64.1% $7,332,308,000 35.9% $20,401,498,000

2011-2012 $11,207,646,805 60.5% $7,314,625,403 39.5% $18,522,272,208

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Yolo County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

Yuba County

Share of Yuba County Property Tax Burden: Residential vs. Non-Residential Property


1969-1970 $111,221,136 34.5% $210,711,911 65.5% $321,933,047

1976-1977 $173,000,000 37.7% $286,000,000 62.3% $459,000,000

1981-1982 $378,000,000 43.4% $492,000,000 56.6% $870,000,000

1986-1987 $551,000,000 44.7% $681,000,000 55.3% $1,232,000,000

44

2002-2003 $1,435,026,000 64.2% $799,951,000 35.8% $2,234,977,000

2009-2010 $3,083,869,000 65.3% $1,635,620,000 34.7% $4,719,489,000

2011-2012 $2,863,818,946 65.0% $1,544,627,015 35.0% $4,408,445,961

Data Sources: BOE County Survey Report Data, Yuba County Assessors Office, Data Quick.

45

Documents

California Tax Reform Association Analysis of Prop. 13