05/28/2026
I totally agree…enough is enough!
The argument that property taxes fund schools and roads and services is true.
The argument that an 85-year-old on a fixed income should be paying $15,000 a year to keep living in their own paid-off house is where that logic starts to break down.
Property taxes are one of the oldest and most stable sources of government funding in America. They pay for things that matter.
Public schools, local infrastructure, emergency services, and community resources are all largely funded by property tax revenue. That part of the system is real and it works.
But the system has a flaw that nobody designed intentionally and almost nobody is fixing.
Property tax bills go up as home values go up. Assessments rise with the market. And the person living in that home doesn't have to have sold anything, made anything, or received any new income for their bill to increase. Their wealth is theoretical. Their tax bill is due in January.
A retired couple who bought their home in New Jersey in 1988 for $120,000 is now sitting in a house assessed at $650,000.
Their property tax bill has climbed from $2,000 a year to $12,000. Their Social Security income is $2,800 a month combined.
They are paying $1,000 a month in property taxes on a house they own outright and haven't changed in 30 years.
They're not rich. They're house-rich and cash-poor. And the bill keeps going up.
Most states have some version of senior property tax relief. Homestead exemptions, senior freezes, circuit breaker credits.
The problem is that these programs are income-limited, require active enrollment, are chronically underfunded, and get quietly cut when state budgets tighten.
The people who need them most are often the least equipped to navigate the paperwork to access them.
You can believe in property taxes as a funding mechanism and still believe the system needs meaningful reform for people on fixed incomes who have nowhere left to go.
Those two things are not in conflict.