Union chief vows to fight tax-limit plan

CARSON CITY -- Union leader Danny Thompson vowed Tuesday to file a legal challenge to former Reno Assemblywoman Sharron Angle's latest petition that would allow voters to decide whether to limit property tax increases to 2 percent a year.

"Since it violates the equal taxation provision (in the state constitution) we will challenge it," said Thompson, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO. "Based on what we know about the petition, it still doesn't address that concern."

Moments later, Angle walked into the secretary of state's office and filed her tax- limitation petition, patterned after California's Proposition 13 law, that includes a provision that could lead to neighbors living in identical homes paying different amounts of property tax.

Under the petition, property taxes on any type of property could not be increased more than 2 percent a year.

But if a home or other property is sold, the taxes paid by the new owner would be figured on the sale price of the property. That would mean someone who has lived for years in a home that has been appreciating would pay less in property tax than a person who just purchased an identical home.

Thompson contends that situation violates the Nevada Constitution and could lead to a person paying four times the property taxes paid by a neighbor.

A 2005 state law, however, stipulates that when someone sells property to another person, the taxes remain unchanged. Angle was the only legislator to vote against the law.

That law permits 3 percent annual increases in property taxes on owner-occupied residences and 8 percent increases on other types of property. Thompson maintains the state law is far better than Angle's proposal.

Angle withdrew a similar 2 percent tax-limitation petition in October, after the AFL-CIO and the Nevada State Education Association filed a lawsuit charging it violated the equal-taxation provision in the state constitution.

She also failed in 2004 and 2006 to collect enough signatures on petitions to place similar proposals before voters.

To qualify the petition for next year's election ballot, her We The People Nevada organization needs to collect 58,836 signatures by May 20. Voters then must approve it as a ballot question during general elections in 2008 and 2010.

If they do, the state constitution would be amended and the 2 percent limit on property taxes would begin in 2011.

The new petition fixes a typographical error and changes some sentences in the one Angle withdrew. But it retains the fundamental provisions of all three previous tax-limit petitions.

Don Gustavson, another former Reno assemblyman, complained that the constant legal challenges filed by "unions and groups with unlimited resources" obstruct the right of people to petition for changes in taxation.

Angle said she submitted the new petition in advance to Thompson and asked if it addressed his concerns, but he refused to respond. "It is not my job to fix the problems in their initiative," he said in a telephone interview.

Angle said she has the $50,000 in donations she figures is needed to fight a lawsuit from the AFL-CIO.

She would like additional donations of at least $300,000. If she secures sufficient donations, paid circulators will collect signatures.

Angle pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Proposition 13 in 1992 -- even though neighbors might pay different amounts of property taxes on similar homes. Proposition 13 was circulated by tax rebel Howard Jarvis and passed by California voters in 1978 at a time when increasing property taxes were causing people to lose their homes.

Despite the 2005 Nevada law limiting tax increases, Gustavson said a similar situation now exists here.

"Taxes are going up," he said. "It is coming to the point where people are being forced to sell their homes."

He said the Legislature could at any time change the current law and allow taxes to increase significantly. But under the Angle petition, the 2 percent annual limit could not be changed without a vote of the people.

Angle said it is fair for people who buy homes to pay higher taxes than longtime residents in a neighborhood.

"You have been paying taxes all along for services," she said. "The new guy comes in and gets the benefit of all the taxes you have paid. Shouldn't growth pay for itself?"

She said her petition is an impact fee of sorts since it would require new homeowners to pay taxes based on their true impact on services.

Contact Review-Journal Capital Bureau chief Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or (775) 687-3901.