Is your primary goal here to extract more revenue from timeshare owners and people who own a pied-à-terre? Don't those constitute negligible portion of California real estate market (as opposed to some places like Hawaii, where absentee ownership is significant and property taxes on timeshare / second home owners are very high)?
While it's probably not a bad idea, I don't see it moving the needle much.
> Is your primary goal here to extract more revenue from timeshare owners and people who own a pied-à-terre?
I'm discussing ways to achieve the goal upthread of insulating people from property tax uncertainty on their primary residence.
I would expect that the larger purpose of that is to allow full-value taxation on all other real property; of which non-primary-residence residential property is a subset (and a fairly small subset, at that.)
Remember that Prop 13 applies to all real property, not just residential property.
While it's probably not a bad idea, I don't see it moving the needle much.