This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Remember Proposition 13?

Those words, drilled into the public's consciousness in 1978, have become the rallying cry for homeowners around the state who are fed up with rising property taxes. They figure if Californians could limit the government's ability to reach into their bank accounts, then Utahns can do it, too.

"Something's gone wrong in Utah County, and now I discover it's happening all over the state," said Provo resident Paul Perry, who is working with dozens of other area homeowners to launch a Utah Proposition 13 effort.

Perry saw the assessed value of his $245,000 home jump to $615,000 this year.

"My 2,300-square-foot house was built in 1932. It has a roof that leaks, no basement and a garage with no electrical outlets," Perry said.

He immediately appealed the new value with the Utah County assessor and got it dropped to $355,000.

"But I disagree with that value as well," Perry said. He plans to pay $700 for a professional appraisal and appeal the county's revised assessment.

However, he hopes for broader tax reform statewide.

"The median homeowner is surprised at this jump in values. We're not opposed to our property being worth more, but we want to stay in our homes," Perry said. "We're thinking, 'Why isn't new growth funding the need for new services?' "

Jay Hurst, a senior citizen in North Salt Lake, saw his property-tax bill jump $1,000 this year. An owner of California property as well, Hurst has been a fan of Proposition 13-type thinking for several years.

"That's how it started in California - citizens felt they were being abused," Hurst said, adding that thousands of Utahns are concerned enough to seek change, and petitions are circulating in many areas throughout the state.

On Ogden-Valley.blogspot. com, former California residents Larry and Sharon Zini, who now reside in Huntsville, posted their views on the good and bad of California's Proposition 13.

The good: a cap on your present property tax and only minor increases in the future, as long as you stay in your home.

The bad: inequities in taxes on identical or similar homes due to bumps in valuations when homes sell.

The overall positive effect: forcing tax-supported entities to live within a budget, the Zinis blogged.

However, a more-thorough analysis reveals a host of ill effects traceable to Proposition 13. That's the view of Peter Schrag, columnist for The Sacramento Bee and author of Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America's Future.

"It changed the whole structure of government in California," Schrag said. "It greatly reduced the ability of small local governments to control their own conditions, and it shifted that control to the state. It's been there ever since."

The citizen-drafted law also had a long-term effect on land-use decisions, Schrag reasoned. To bolster budgets, cities pursued big-box retail, malls and other beefy sales-tax producers - rather than seeking more balanced develop- ment.

"Around here it's called the 'fiscalization of land use,' " he said. "There have been all kinds of efforts to correct that, so far with no success."

Higher education and social programs also suffered in the Golden State due to Proposition 13, Schrag said.

"I'd say look very carefully before you leap," was Schrag's recommendation to Utahns pondering similar action.

Royce Van Tassell, vice president of the Utah Taxpayers Association, said that in recent weeks, his office has received many calls from residents upset over higher property taxes.

So far, the association has not taken a position on Proposition 13, but Van Tassell reasoned that legislating from the ballot box on something as complex as the tax system might not be the best solution.

Bountiful resident Ronald Mortensen, co-founder of CitizensForTaxFairness.org, agrees that duplicating Proposition 13 might not be the right fit for the Beehive State.

"I think we need a Utah solution," Mortensen said. "We need to really take a look and work with the Legislature first . . . rather than through the ballot box."

However, he said he wouldn't take Proposition 13 entirely off the table. "It's a safety valve if you can't work something out."

In the face of public outcry over sizable tax bumps in Davis County, Commissioner Bret Millburn pledged to explore alternatives with lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

"I'm open to looking at any and all options," Millburn said. "On the surface, Proposition 13 may sound good, but we need to dig deep and do a thorough analysis."

What is Proposition 13?

In 1978, California voters approved an initiative that capped property-tax rates at 1 percent of assessed value, and also limited the rise in property valuations to no more than 2 percent per year. Only when a home sold would the valuation jump significantly to reflect the sales price.

How initiatives work in Utah

Petitioners must file an initiative application with the lieutenant governor's office, which can accept or reject.

Then, seven public hearings must be held throughout the state prior to circulating petition for signatures.

Petitioners must collect 94,201 valid voter signatures statewide (10 percent of those who voted in the last gubernatorial election).

Signatures are submitted to county clerks by June 1. They will verify those who are registered voters. If the correct number of valid signatures are verified, the initiative is placed on the November general-election ballot

Source: Web site for State Elections Office, http://elections.utah.gov