Measure A FAQ: Could a Regular Homeowner Still Pay the $10,000 Tax?

Supporters of Measure A want regular homeowners to think they have nothing to worry about.

They say primary residences are exempt.

They say the tax is aimed only at “empty homes.”

They say ordinary San Diegans will not be affected.

But they wrote Measure A, they are responsible for the language, and the clear reading of the text shows that every homeowner is at risk of paying the $10,000 tax.

Whether or not their intention was aimed directly at a San Diegan who owns and lives in one home doesn't matter. The text of the proposed tax law does.

Your Primary Residence Is Only Exempt if you Can Prove It

Measure A creates a new tax system based on whether a home is considered “empty.”

That means City Hall will have to decide which homes are taxable and which homes qualify for exemptions or exclusions.

But the biggest problem with Measure A is that it clearly states that EVERY exemption and exclusion in the Measure requires the person claiming it to prove they are entitled to it, every year, with a filing to the new City Bureaucracy.

Any what is one of the these exemptions/exclusions? The primary homeowner occupying their own home.

That's right, Measure A does not say "primary homeowners are exempt." It says, effectively, primary homeowners are exempt only if you can prove you occupied your own home for 183 every day. And the burden of proof is on you. What's more, the rules of how you prove your occupancy in your own home have not been written yet.

The Experience in Other Cities Is Not Good

Cities in Canada have been the most aggressive in implementing these "vacancy" taxes. And the record has not been good for homeowners who lived in their own home and are supposedly "exempt" there too.

The City of Vancouver talked about using secret, advanced "data mining" techniques to supposedly catch tax cheats. Dozens of stories show instances of people caught up in the bureaucracy and paying taxes they didn't owe.

Residents in Toronto said they had not idea it would become, as they called it, "an annual chore to prove they lived in their own home."

In one year alone in Toronto, 55,000 people who lived in their own homes were sent vacancy tax assessments by the City when it erroneously decides they had left their homes vacanct or did not file the complicated paperwork correctly.

In Windsor, Canada, the City set up a process that encouraged residents to count the number of days their neighbors were in their home and report them.

And in Ottawa, the system was called "red-tape heavy" and that it "captured too many people" it shouldn't have.

That's the system San Diego politicians want to throw us into.

Life Changes — And Measure A May Not Keep Up

And all of those examples are for people in the most simple category. What about people whose life circumstances change or don't fit neatly in what should be a simple exemption.

You may inherit a parent’s home.

You may buy a small condo for an aging relative.

You may keep a former home during a transition.

You may move for work but plan to return.

You may have to care for a sick family member out of town.

You may leave temporarily after a fire, flood, disaster, or major repair.

You may need time to sell a home after a death, divorce, relocation, or family crisis.

In those situations, the question becomes: will City Hall agree that you qualify for an exemption or exclusion?

And if they do not, you could face the tax.

Inherited Homes Could Be Especially Complicated

Many regular families never think of themselves as owning “extra” homes.

But when a parent or relative dies, a family may suddenly inherit a property.

That property may sit vacant while the family deals with grief, probate, repairs, legal issues, financial decisions, or the question of whether to sell, rent, or keep the home.

As with all exemptions in Measure A, the owner still has to prove they qualify.

That means more paperwork during one of the most difficult moments a family can face.

And if the City decides the paperwork is late, incomplete, or not good enough, the family could still be dragged into the tax bureaucracy.

Disaster Rebuilding Can Take Years

A fire, flood, or other disaster can force a family out of a home for a long time.

Rebuilding is rarely quick.

Families may be dealing with insurance, contractors, permits, debris removal, financing, and delays outside their control.

What does the City of San Diego say under Measure A?

You'd like to think they'd ask, how can we get you a permit to rebuild quickly?

But No, under Measure A, the first thing San Diego asks is, "Did you burn down your own home to avoid the Measure A tax?" Seriously.

Then they tell you that you have a strict, two-year limit to rebuild, and we know from recent wildfires in San Diego and Los Angeles that two-years is a best case scenario.

Families should not have to worry that City Hall will start a tax clock while they are still trying to rebuild their lives.

The Rules Still Come Later

This is one of the biggest problems with Measure A.

The City is asking voters to approve the tax now.

But the detailed rules, forms, regulations, interpretations, and documentation requirements come later.

That means regular homeowners do not yet know exactly what they would have to file, what proof the City would demand, or how difficult it would be to fix a mistake.

For a $10,000 tax, that is unacceptable.

“Not the Target” Is Not the Same as “Protected”

City Hall may say regular homeowners are not the target.

But that is not enough.

A badly written tax can still hurt people who were not supposed to be affected.

A complicated bureaucracy can still trap people who did nothing wrong.

A City mistake can still become a homeowner’s problem.

And a future life event can still put an ordinary family into Measure A’s paperwork maze.

That is why voters should not simply ask, “Am I the target?”

They should ask:

Could I still get caught in the bureaucracy?

With Measure A, the answer is yes.

San Diegans Deserve Better

San Diego needs real housing solutions.

But Measure A creates a new tax bureaucracy, gives City Hall broad enforcement power, sends the money into the General Fund, and leaves too many questions unanswered.

Regular homeowners should not have to trust that City Hall will always get it right.

They should not have to prove they are exempt from a tax they should never owe.

They should not have to worry that a family crisis, inheritance, disaster, or paperwork error could pull them into a $10,000 tax fight.

Even if you do not owe the tax, you may still have to prove it.

Vote No on Measure A.

‍