When voters head to the polls November 6th, they’ll be confronted with a constitutional amendment that would authorize tax breaks to people who own waterfront property.
Should local governments be able to give tax breaks to people who own property that is prone to recurrent flooding? That’s an issue that will be before voters when they decide the fate of a constitutional amendment on the ballot.
Quentin Kidd at Christopher Newport University says supporters argue that it will help people prepare for the worst. “They have to do some improvements in their property to mitigate the losses they would suffer during tidal flooding and things like that. So there’s an argument in favor of it that says we’re trying to help people mitigate the problems of sea level rise,” Kidd explains.
But the amendment has come under harsh criticism as a tax break for wealthy people who own waterfront mansions.
Stephen Farnsworth at the University of Mary Washington says opponents argue the amendment forces people who don’t own, or could never afford to own, waterfront property to pay a kind of flood insurance for those who do. “The idea that folks who have really valuable waterfront property should somehow get additional tax breaks for the benefit that a lot of people can’t afford doesn’t strike me as particularly appealing to the vast majority of voters in Virginia,” Farnsworth says.
That is only one of two amendments. The other would allow spouses of disabled veterans to transfer property tax exemptions when they move from one house to another.
This report, provided by Virginia Public Radio, was made possible with support from the Virginia Education Association.
