HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09281999 - C92 m
TO- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CON
TA
FROM'. Kenneth J. Corcoran, Auditor-Controller 'may ::` rr,,, 'a`. rCOSTA
',\7- COUNTY
8
DATE; September 28, 1999
Y'
+
�i��gi•ge
SUBJECT. Acknowledge Receipt of Property Tax �A
Audit Report.
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S)& BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
Acknowledge receipt of the State Controller's Audit Report concerning Contra sesta County's Property
Tax Apportionment and Allocation System for the three year period July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1998.
BACKGROUND/REASOMSIfQR RECOMMENDATIONfSt
By low, property tax apportionment and allocation is the responsibility of the Auditor-Controller's Office
in each county. Thousands of local agencies count on the revenues from this process each year, and
the complex laws governing these allocations are constantly changing. Daae to the complexity of this
work, and the significance of the funds involved (we allocate more than $900 Million. of property taxes
each year in Contra Coote County alone), California law requires the State Controller to audit the
property tax apportionment and allocation system of each county on e specified schedule. In Contra
Costa County, we are audited every three years.
The objective of the audit is to reviews the County's apportionment and allocation of property tax
revenues to local agencies and public schools within its jurisdiction in order to determine whether the
County complied with Revenue and Taxation Code requirements. The scope of the audit includes
interviewing staff, reviewing county work papers and reports, and testing calculations in each area of
the apportionment and allocation process,
The Controller concluded that, during the three year audit period, Contra Costa County complied with
all requirements related to the allocation and apportionment of property taxes, property taxes allocated
and apportioned during this period totaled approximately $2.7 Billion, With: respect to the calculation
and apportionment of in excess of $34.8 Million of property tax administration costs; the Controller
noted that an error had been made during fiscal year 1995-96, requiring a reallocation of$21,600.
A copy of the edit report is attached for your information.
kM € YES SIGNATURE. z
_72�_RECOMIMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMENDATION O"OARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
ACTION OF BOARD ON
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED ZOTHeR
€ HEREBY CERTIFY FRAY THIS IS A
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED
ON MINUTES OF T BOARD OF
UNANIMOUS A :m
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
AYES,_ NOES.
ABSENT ABSTAIN-
ATTESTED - a �
.
PHIL oHEL R,C_E
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Contact; Ken Corcoran,048-1636 � �. ..
DEPUTY
4
C
f
e i
CONTRA COSTA COUNTTY
Audit Report
5
PROPERTY TAX APPORTIONMENT
ALLOCATION SYSTEM
July 1, 1995, through June 30, 1998
THE
titgbi
V C 0,
i
KATHLEEN CON HELL
Califomia State Controller
August. 1999
f
f �
Y�Cp am4f p
KATHLEEN CONNELL
outran of fp tae of CITaIif0TAia----
_. 3 _i?c: _°w.,._
August 23, 1999
Honorable Kenneth.-;. Corcoran
Auditor-Controller
Contra Costa County
Finance Bolding,Room 103
625 Court Street
Martinez, California 94553
Dear Mr. Corcoran:
The following is the State Controller's Office (SCCA) final audit report ori the methods employed by
Contra Costa County to apportions and allocate property tax revenues for the period July 1, 1995,
through June 30, 1998.
'11-hank you for the courtesy and cooperation; extended to SCCA staff during the audit. you. have any
questions,please contact Greg am-.els, audit manager, at(916) 322-8397.
Sincerely,
S
i
i
a
Patn, cia.1, Ranao hie'
Compliannce A lits Bureau
Division of Audits
P.lR/k
cc: Mat Newman,,Joint Legislative Budget Committee
Peter Detwiler, Senate Housing and Land use Commit
Jane Brown, Senate Local Government Comanittee
Dixie Martineau-Petty,Assembly Local Government Committee
Martin Hei' hike, Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee
an melore Wosika,Assembly Revetrue and Taxation Committee
Sana lull, Department of Finance
California Special District Association
Contra Costa County Property Tax Apportionment and A.flocation System
udit "Ford
c
Summary The State controller's Office (SCO) audited the methods employed by
Contra Costa County to apportion and allocate property tax revenues for the period
of5uly 1, 1995,through June 30, 1998.
The audit disclosed that the county did not comply with California statutes in the
following instance:
Th.-county did not include all of the required revenue offsets within their fiscal
year(FY) 1995®96 calculations for property tax administrative cost recovery.
The audit identifies procedural changes necessary to ensure that the county
cornp les with the legislative requirements for the apportionment and allocation of
property tax revenues.
Background After the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, the California State Legislature
enacted neer methods for allocating and apportioning property tai rovenues to local
government agencies and public schools. The main objective was to provide local
government agencies with a property tax base that would grown as assessed property,
values increase. These methods have been further refined in subsequent lawns
passed by the Legislature.
One key law was Assembly Bill 8, which -established the method of allocating
proper `.axes for FY 1973-80 (base year) and subsequent fiscal years. The
methodology is commonly referred to as the AB 8 process or the AB 8 system.
The property tax revenues local governrnent agencies receive each fiscal year are
based on the amount received in the prior year plus a share of the property tax
growth within their boundaries. Property tax revenues are then apportioned and
y allocated to local agencies and schools using prescribed formulas and methods
defined in the revenue and Taxation Code.
he AB 8 base process involved numerous steps, including the transfer of revenues
from schools to local agencies(AB 8 shift)and the development of the tax rate area
annual tax increment apportionment factors "Al' factors), which determine the
amount of property tax revenues to be allocated to each jurisdiction.
The total amount to be allocated to each jurisdiction is then divided by the total
amount to be allocated to all entities to determine the AB 8 apportion-ment factor
(percentage share)for each entity for the year. The AB 8 factors az*e computed each
year for all entities using the revenue amounts established in the prior year. These
y amounts are adjusted for growth annually using ATI factors.
Subsequent legislation removed revenues generated by unitary and operating
nonunitary property from the AB 8 system. This revenue is now allocated and
apportioned under a separate system,
Kathleen Connell a Cali(orma Stale Controller I
1
Contra Volta County Property Ta,:Apportionment and Aldcctaiion System
Cather legislation established an Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund IERAF)
in each county. Most local govern-Tient agencies are required to transfer a portion
of their property tax revenues to the fund. The nand is subsequently allocated and
apportioned to schools by the county auditor according to instructions received
corn the local superintendent of schools or chancellor afcoe n nunity colleges.
Revenues generated by the different types of property tax are apportioned and
allocated to local agencies and schools using prescribed formulas and methods as
defined in the Revenue and Taxation Code. Taxable property includes land,
improvements, and other properties that are accounted for on the property tax rolls
maintained pr:r arily by the county assessor. Tax rolls contain an. entry for each
parcel of land, including parcel number, owner's name, and value. The types of
property tax rolls are:
'ecured Roll— Property that, in the opinion of the assessor,has sufficient value to
guarantee payment of the tax levies and that, if unpaid, can be satisfied by the sale
of the property by the tax collector.
Unsecured Kull—Property that, in the opinion of the assessor, does asst constitute
sufficient "permanence," or have other intrinsic qualities to guarantee payment of
taxes levied against it.
State-Assessed Roll—Utility properties, composed of unitary and nonunitary
value,assessed by the State Board of Equalization.
upplemental Roll----Property that laas been reassessed due to a charge in
ownership or the completion of new construction, arid. the resulting change in
assessed value is-sot reflected in other tax rolls.
To mitigate problems associated with the apportionment and allocation of property
taxes, legislation (SB 418) was enacted in 1.985, requiring the State Controller to
audit the counties' apportionment and allocation methods and report the results to
the California State Legislature.
J dive, The obiective of tsh-e audit was to review the county's apportionment and allocation
Scope, and of property tax revenues to local government agencies and public schools within its
Methodology jurisdiction in order to determine whether the county complied with Revenue and
Taxation Code requirements.
in order to meet the objective, the SCCA auditor reviewed the systems for
apportioning and allocating property tax revenues used by the county auditor and
the subsystems used by the tax collector and assessor.
The SCCA auditor performed the :allowing procedures:
Performed tests to determine whether there has been any incorrect
apportionment and allocation of property tax,
Kathleen Connell. Cciliforrxu State C'r»uroller 2
Contra Costa County Properol Tax Apportionment and Allocatzcn System
Interviewed key personnel and reviewed supporting documentat:oto to gain. an
understanding of the county's property tax apportionment and av ocation
processes; �
Reviewed apportionment and allocation reports prepared by the county f
i
showing the computations used to develop the property tax distribution factors;
Reviewed tax rate area JR-A) reports to verify that the annual tax incren ent
was computed properly;
Reviewed county unitary and operating nonunitary reports and. Board of
Equalization reports tracing the computations used by fhe county to develop
the unitary and operating nonunitary property tax distribution factors;
* reviewed RDA reports prepared by the county tracing the computations used
to develop the project base amount and the tax increment distributed to the
RDA;
* Reviewed property tax administration cost reports prepared by the county
tracing administrative costs associated with procedures used for apportioning
and allocating property tax to local goverment agencies and school districts;
and
* Reviewed L;RAR reports prepared by the county tracing the computations used
to dete€m:ne the shift of property taxes from local agencics to the ERAF and,
subsequently,to public schools.
The .audit was perfo<rm.ed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards,
issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and covered the period of
4 y 1, 1995, through .lune 30, 1998. However, the SCG did not audit the county's
financial statements. The scope of the audit was limited to the following:
* Reviewing operational procedures and significant applicable controls over the
apportionment and allocation process;
* Examining selected property tax apportionment and allocation records; and
* Reviewing related property tax revenue data used to determine the
apportionment and allocation computation process,
Review of the county's management controls was limited to gaining an
understanding of the transaction flow in order to develop appropriate auditing
procedures. The auditor did not evaluate the effectiveness of all internal
management controls.
In addition, the auditor tested transactions used to apportion and allocate property
taxes and any other procedures deemed necessary. This report relates solely to the
method :used by the county for the apportionment and allocation of property taxes.
KaMleen Con€of e Ca1Vbrnica Sz air controller 3
Contra Costa Counry Property+Tar Apportionment and Allocation System
Conclusion The audit disclosed that, except for the item. discussed in the "Finding and
Recommendation" section of this report, Contra Costa County corrip.fec with
California statutes for tlae apportionment and allocation of property tax revenues
for the period of.hilly 1, 1995, through June 30, :998. The item discussed in the
"Finding and Recommendation," section must be corrected. The audit identifies
procedural changes necessary to ensure that the county complies with the
'eg dative requirements for the apportionment and allocation of property tax
revenues,
Views of A fax copy of the draft audit report was provided to Contra Costa County or
Responsible August 11, 1999The County Auditor-Controller,Kenneth Corcoran, responded by
Official telephone on August 12, 1999, agreeing with the finding and again resting that
orrective action had already bee n taker.
4,0CBEX. ,Chief
Division of Audits
March 1€, 1999
Patricia d. Samos, CPA, Bureau Chief
Coreg Brummels,Audit Manager
Telephone: (916)322-8397
Audit Star: Ray Blau, Audit Specialist
f
I
Kathleen Ctrr mdl, C'califor a State controller 4
Contra Costo County Proper,'y Tax Apportionment and.41lcoation System
Finding and Kecommendation
FINDING— Contra Costa County did not include $69,510 in required revenue offsets in, its
Propel tax FY 1995-96 cos: recovery calculations. It should be noted that this issue was
administrative corrected prior to the final day of fieldwork.
costs
Requirements for the reimbursement of county property tax administrative casts
are found. in Revenue and Taxotion Code Section 95.3. County property tax
administrative oasts are incurred by the assessor, tax collector, assessment appeals
board, and auditor. The county is allowed, depending on the fiscal year and any
correspond ng exclusions, to be reimbursed by local agencies and public schools
for these administrative assts.
Recommendation
Due to the corrective action taken,no recommendation is required on this issue.
Kathleen C'onneu ('californica State('ontrolh?r �
Contra Costa County Property Tom;Apportionment and Allocation.System
servation — Prior Audit Findings
Findings noted L-- the prier audit report, dated December 10, 19965 have been satisfactorily resolved by the
county.
Kathleen Connefl,c alivornia State Controller 6