Summary
Highlights
In 1978, Howard Jarvis, a 75-year-old millionaire, spearheaded Proposition 13 in California, successfully cutting property taxes in half. This measure was expected to reduce California’s state income by seven billion dollars and spark similar tax revolts across the United States. Proposition 13, though previously rejected three times, gained immense popularity due to soaring property taxes and growing dissatisfaction with government spending, especially in affluent areas like the San Fernando Valley. Voters approved it by a 2-1 margin.
For families like the Whittemores, Proposition 13 was a major victory. Their property taxes, which were $1,900 the previous year, would have trebled without the initiative. They expressed that the vote was a message to the government that citizens were tired of high taxes and supporting an oversized system. While acknowledging potential hardships like cuts to public services, they believed it would force citizens to work harder and be more united.
The approval of Proposition 13 created a major challenge for administrators. Los Angeles alone faced a nearly billion-dollar annual shortfall, leading to the expected loss of 28,000 jobs from city and county payrolls. Marvin Broud, chairman of the LA Finance Committee, described the consequences as a "major social, economic, and political revolution" that would result in substantially lower levels of service and program cuts. He conceded that while a 10-20% cut might be tolerable, 30-50% cuts signified a fundamental change, impacting society as a whole through dirtier streets and slower police response times.
The Los Angeles police force, already undermanned, was ordered to trim its budget by $38 million, leading to a recruitment freeze and the dismissal of a thousand officers. The police chief warned of a 'calamity' given the city's high crime rates. The fire service also expected severe setbacks, with its efficiency potentially regressing 50 years. Health and welfare services were also slated for significant cutbacks.
Schools bore the brunt of the economies, as property taxes funded almost three-quarters of California's state education bill. Proposition 13 resulted in an almost three-quarter billion dollar loss for education, threatening 18,000 teachers and 18,000 support staff in Los Angeles alone. A teachers' union leader, Mr. Springer, called it an 'absolute collapse of a school system,' threatening to close schools indefinitely until funding was restored, believing voters had acted out of anger without considering the consequences. He stated the union would make the people 'understand what they've done'.
The video concludes by questioning the long-term impact: whether it will prove that local and state governments were over-fat and wasteful. It suggests that while some inefficiency might be revealed, a 10-20% cut could be survived, but fundamental reforms are needed to make government more productive. This includes changing the civil service system and addressing mandated programs if a substantial reduction in government expenditures is desired, acknowledging the process will be 'slow and painful'.