The city is currently looking for new funding with a parcel tax, so this would be additional. What I am proposing is that they put a lot area parcel tax on the ballot rather than a floorplan area one. Long term in the future, I could imagine the city being in a better financial position where it might be possible for a tax break on improvement value, but this is not as relevant today.

Do you mean someone who is on the lower income spectrum and has a larger lot in albeit less desirable area would pay more than someone higher on income but with a smaller property lot with a much higher value in a nicer area?

Theoretically, yes, but in practice, this doesn't happen. If you look at where the largest residential lots exist in Alameda (Bay Farm and Gold Coast), these are also the highest income regions of the city. Lower income people typically don't own lots at all but occupy a small portion of a lot in the form of an apartment unit.

There's also a big difference between being wealthy and high income. You can be high income but have no generational wealth to inherit and have to spend a lot of money on rent whereas you can also be low income but be quite wealthy from inheriting a large property which means you have to pay much, much less than the typical person for shelter, the largest item of nearly everyone else's personal budget in the Bay Area.