Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07281992 - 2.3 2 * TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra Phil Batchelor, County Administrator ' FROM: r Costa cam_ — is County July 23, 1992 DATE: rJs +c�"iNn W RECOMMENDED REPEAL OF THE APPLICATION OF PROPOSITION 90 AND SUBJECT: PROPOSITION 110 IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: Introduce, waive reading, and fix August 4 , 1992, for adoption of the attached Ordinance repealing the application of Proposition 90 and Proposition 110 in Contra Costa County, effective November 8, 1993 . BACKGROUND: Proposition 90 was approved by the voters in 1988 . It allows a property owner in one county to transfer the base year property value from a residential property in one county to a newly purchased residential property in another county, providing that the Board of Supervisors in the second county agrees to make Proposition 90 applicable in that county. The condition was that the homeowner be 55 years of age or older. In 1990, the voters approved Proposition 110, which extended these same provisions to homeowners who are severely and permanently disabled. The Board of Supervisors adopted an Ordinance to make Proposition 90 applicable to Contra Costa County effective on and after November 8, 1988 . With the passage of Proposition 110 in 1990, the Board voted to also make it applicable in Contra Costa County, effective on and after June 6, 1990 . The State Board of Equalization reported recently that only 13 counties in California have implemented Proposition 90 . These 13 include Alameda, Contra Costa, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Marin, Modoc, Orange, Riverside, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Clara and Ventura. The other 45 counties have either officially voted to reject implementation of Proposition 90 in that county or have simply taken no action on the subject.X CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: as Z Z�S;�aee_. X, �C_ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE X APPROVE OTHER I SIGNATURES) ACTION OF BOARD ON— July 28, 1992 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER x REQUESTED the County Administrator to notify other taxing agencies of the Board's action on this matter. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT I I ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County Administrator ATTESTED July 28, 1992 County Assessor PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Auditor-Controller SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel M382 (10/88) BY- DEPUTY With the critical budget situation with which the Board of Supervisors is currently faced, every possible source of revenue is being examined. The Auditor-Controller reported that since the implementation of Proposition 90, 695 qualified homebuyers have participated. In addition, two homebuyers have qualified under the provisions of Proposition 110 . The average purchase price of the homes which qualified for the transfer of base value has been $228,957 . The average assessed value being brought forward from the homebuyers previous county has been $80, 719 . As a result, $148,238 in assessed value that would, in the absence of Proposition 90, be placed on Contra Costa' s tax roll is lost. Property taxes lost to all taxing jurisdictions is about $1 . 1 million per year. The loss to the County General Fund is about $300, 000 per year. While the implementation of Propositions 90 and 110 in Contra Costa County was a generous and appropriate step to take at the time, the County' s financial situation has changed substantially from 1988 . The annual loss of $300, 000 in property tax revenue now represents an amount which could maintain a number of community-based contracts for human services, or fund several law enforcement personnel, or maintain fire or library service in one or more areas of the County. The County Counsel ' s Office indicates that one of the requirements of Proposition 90 was that the Ordinance implementing it in this County had to be effective for a period of at least five years . The Ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors was effective November 8, 1988 . Therefore, the County Counsel ' s Office points out that while the Board of Supervisors can repeal the application of Proposition 90 and Proposition 110 immediately, the operative date of the repeal must be no earlier than November 8, 1993 . We are, therefore, recommending that the Board of Supervisors introduce the attached Ordinance which repeals the application of both Proposition 90 and Proposition 110 in Contra Costa County, waive reading of the Ordinance, and fix August 4, 1992 for adoption of the Ordinance, recognizing that the operative date of the Ordinance cannot be until November 8, 1993 . 2