I have heard this argument advanced against the estate tax. But even if you eliminate the reassessment loop hole the property tax rates are still cappped at the 1-ish percent level.

A family farm that can't afford 1% of its assessed value doesn't sound like a very viable business.

So if they're scraping by maybe due to lean years such as during the recent drought, you would be comfortable with the family business being shut down? Farming is typically a low-margin business.

Over taxation is one of the primary stated reasons some rural Californians are proposing to split the state.[1] So perhaps a solution is to allow farmers to govern themselves and tax land owners appropriately, and big city dwellers to govern themselves, taxing land owners appropriately.

(Note that I don't live in CA so I am neither for nor against. Simply stating facts.)

[1] https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/720c6a07-3594-44b7-8098-94f...

Are we talking about real agribusiness in the Central Valley or are we talking about a couple "family farms" in Cupertino or wherever?

In the former case, are these people are at any competitive disadvantage relative to rural areas of other states?

As for the latter case....well how much sentimentality are you going to attach to land uses from the past? Sure, Silicon Valley is built on some of the highest quality farmland in the country but most of the farms are gone now. If you want to keep whatever few are left there are probably more targeted ways of doing that.

Agribusiness that is run by families passing down the family trade. I just updated my comment fleshing out my thoughts more, please have a look.

I see. I'm just not sure they have so much of a dog in the Prop 13 fight per se. Land values there haven't risen to nearly the levels as in coastal communities. And there are all sorts of special rules for ag taxes that I'm not really familiar with. The Central Valley farming community definitely leans very rightward and sees themselves as a somewhat aggrieved minority in California.