Jackie Colson-Smith posted her view on this I voted No by absentee ballot before I headed to Hawaii to teach this CLHMS class and attend Sellabration. I started writing a comment but as it got longer and longer, felt it was due a separate post.
I'm for tax improvement, but I think the current proposal is not the solution, and was a fast bandaid with aspects thrown in just to get the approval of certain voters.
The original intent of Save our Homes was to keep people from having to lost their home, often fully paid for, because they couldn't afford the taxes. As much as I'd enjoy portability personally, that wasn't the intent of the law, and is another aspect of the Entitlement mentality.
The realtor association caters to the majority of its members, who unfortunately are short term thinkers rather than long term planners. I hope it's PAC money they spent and not our dues!
Concerned about current inequities between one homeowner and his neighbor? This proposal will make it far worse. Will property taxes go down? If so, the burden will increase on second home owners and businesses, which may make they sell, and certainly will be an impediment to purchasing - so home values will go down, and both owners and the government will suffer from that.
SOH as proposed will probably be challenged as discriminatory under federal laws - and the challenge will probably win - which means we the voters will be stuck with the cost of defense as well as the costs the state has incurred to "sell" this proposal, and still be back to Square One.
Don't settle for patches - insist that the legislators really analyze the situation and come up with a GOOD solution.