This is quite the ivory tower view (one I must admit that I'm privileged to share with most other tech workers). The median income of a California resident is about $29k. In a dual income household property taxes rising to 10k a year would be a pretty big deal. Particularly for those living paycheck to paycheck.
> The median income of a California resident is about $29k.
The median income California resident (even a dual-income household of such residents) is unlikely to have had a $200,000 home in the 1980s, or, if they managed it, to have its property value increase to $1 million in the intervening 30 years while remaining a median income California resident.
Heck, by a common guideline (reasonable house price = 2.5 times annual household income), a dual-median-income family at the current median level can't afford a $200,000 house today.
They weren't in a $200,000 house. They aren't in a million dollar house. That doesn't mean that a similar 5x increase in their property taxes would be affordable, but the 10k doesn't apply.
8k for someone on a fixed income is a must move. An example of this is the boom in western ND with rents going up $600 - $800 month which forced an issue with a lot of elderly people on fixed incomes.
Tax-duductible doesn't cover it for fixed income folks.
That said, the 5x increase in property taxes from 200k to 1 mill may really mean going from 2k a year to 10k a year.
That is probably not at the "can't stay" level for most people, not to mention it being tax-deductible