California Prop 88 - $50 per Week tax Increase

[jbercu Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close jbercu]

California proposition 88 proposes $50 per real property parcel tax increase for education. Since each timeshare parcel is one week, 52 weeks translates to $2600 for a unit increase, and timeshare owners cannot vote on this.
Do I read this proposition right?
Is there any Timeshare exclusion?

Thanks,
Jake

[Gary1998 Member Find all posts View Profile Close Gary1998]

Whether true or not regarding timeshare owners, California voters should vote NO on Prop 88 since it is simply another poorly-disguised tax increase. I'll cast a NO vote for you....

[short Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close short]

Statewide Parcel Tax

For purposes of the measure, a parcel is defined as any unit of real property in the state that currently receives a seperate local property tax bill.

The new tax exempts any parcel owner who
1. resides on the parce.
2. is eligible for the states existing homeowner's property tax exemption,

and
3. is either 65 years of age or older or a severly and permanently disabled person.




It does not look like timeshares would be exempt.

I would give it a less than 50 percent chance of passing.

Why?
People generally vote no if they cannot understand the proposition and it raises taxes.

The money goes to the state with no guarantee that any will make it back to your local school district.

School administrators, teachers and parents are on both sides of the issue so the prop has no clear group backing it.

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association(Prop 13) is against it.

Short

[love2fly Member Find all posts View Profile Close love2fly]

Please go and vote no!

For purposes of the measure, a parcel is defined as any unit of real property in the state that currently receives a seperate local property tax bill.

The new tax exempts any parcel owner who
1. resides on the parce.
2. is eligible for the states existing homeowner's property tax exemption,

and
3. is either 65 years of age or older or a severly and permanently disabled person.




It does not look like timeshares would be exempt.

I would give it a less than 50 percent chance of passing.

Why?
People generally vote no if they cannot understand the proposition and it raises taxes.

The money goes to the state with no guarantee that any will make it back to your local school district.

School administrators, teachers and parents are on both sides of the issue so the prop has no clear group backing it.

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association(Prop 13) is against it.

Short

Thanks or the info. I'm glad it seems unlikely to pass, but I wont take any chances. I'll go an vote NO. I have 2 timeshares that qualify, and I'll spend 15 minutes to go vote if it saves me $100 each year.

I would have assumed that the politically connected ARDA would have taken a position on this, but I could not find it on the web

[lawren2 Malibu Beach Barbie & A Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close lawren2]

I'm sure my Dad will vote NO but I will call and remind him as I also have a timeshare that could be affected by this.

[Lydkid Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Lydkid]

Well, I'll be sure to vote no. I think there are about four propositions calling for tax increases so hopefully this will work against all of the propositions. I say vote no, no, no, no!

[short Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close short]

email from RCI today saying vote NO.

I received an email from RCI today asking me to vote no on this prop. Possibly only going to folks who live in CA.

Short

[travelfan Member Find all posts View Profile Close travelfan]

Two NO!!!!! votes from me and Steve. We have an EOY and receive a tax bill each year. Does this mean we would have to pay $50 per year? = $100 for 1 week? Just a thought.

[JWC Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close JWC]

My wife and I have already voted. We both voted NO on Prop 88.

[taffy19 Gold Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close taffy19]

Whether true or not regarding timeshare owners, California voters should vote NO on Prop 88 since it is simply another poorly-disguised tax increase. I'll cast a NO vote for you....

My DH and I will vote "no" too. Even II and RCI sent us a reminder as it will affect you if you own a timeshare in CA. We pay our taxes separately in CA and we see them going up every year already.

[JWC Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close JWC]

My DH and I will vote "no" too. Even II and RCI sent us a reminder as it will affect you if you own a timeshare in CA. We pay our taxes separately in CA and we see them going up every year already.

Emma,

Have the taxes risen on your timeshares? We own 2 in California and the taxes have stayed the same for the past several years. The property tax on our house has gone up but not very much. Thank god for Prop 13. It it wasn't for that our property tax on our house would have more than doubled in the past 4 years.

[taffy19 Gold Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close taffy19]

Emma,

Have the taxes risen on your timeshares? We own 2 in California and the taxes have stayed the same for the past several years. The property tax on our house has gone up but not very much. Thank god for Prop 13. It it wasn't for that our property tax on our house would have more than doubled in the past 4 years.

John, I don't know but will ask my DH. We no longer own at the MDSV-I but only at the Laguna Surf. I don't think it went up too much because I didn't hear him comment about it.

[4ARedOctober Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close 4ARedOctober]

We voted NO already....from what I have read this prop has little chance of passing. Even the promoters gave up putting money into trying to pass it some time ago.