Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTIONS - 08042003 - 70-466 IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA In the Matter of Changes } of the Assessment Roti } RESOLUTION NO. 74/466 of Contra Costa County } WHEREAS, the County Assessor having filed with,this Board requests for correction of erroneous assessments, said requests having been consented to by the District Attorney; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV'E'D that the County Auditor is authorized to correct the following assessments: For the Fiscal Year cx 1970-71 It has been ascertained from the assessment roll and from papers in the assessor's office what was intended and what should have been assessed; and, therefore, pursuant to Revenue and Taxa- tion Code 4831, the following defects in description and/or form and clerical errors of the assessor on the roll should be cor- rected: Code 79187 - Assessment No. 2047, Walter J. Imfeld is assessed for personalroperty with assessed valuation of $200 plus 10 percent penalty of $20 (penalties added in accordance with section 463 of the Revenue & Taxation Code) and .net assessed value $220. There has been an assessor'=e error in spelling of asse3sseees name. It should be corrected to read: "Jolter Infield, Jr. , with values remaining the some. Cade 02020 _ Assessment No. 23.49, Roos/Atkins, Inc. is erroneously assessed for personal property with assessed valuation. $99,710 and improvements 1$36,990, less business inventory exemption of $23,076, and net assessedvalue Of *113o624. Inasmuch as a portion of the improvement value was also assessed on the secured assessment roll this assessment should be corrected to read; improvements *24,950 with no change in the personal property or business inventory exemption, making a net assessed values of $101,58}x. R. 0. ea cin', ss sunt ssessor July 28, 1970 cc: assessor (G. Giese) :��udi.tor Page Z ofd Tax Collector RESOLUTION NO. 70/466 It has been ascertained by the assessor from an audit of the assessee's books of account or other papers that there has been a defect of description or clerical error of the assessee in his property statement or in ;other information or records furnished., to the assessor which caused the assessor to assess personal property which should not have been assessed or to >assess it at a substan- tially higher valuation than. he would have entered can the roll if the information had been: correctly furnished; and, therefore, pur- suant to the Revenue and Taxation Code.$ Section 4831.5> the assessor certifies to the auditor that the following correction should be made on the 'assessment rol • Code 09000 - Assessment No. 2993, ',Robert B, Hansen is erroneously assessed for personal' property with assessed valuation of $1,090 and improvements of $680, less business inventory exemp- tion $120 and net assessed value $1,75$. The assessee wrongly reported a sign that had been disposed of prior to the lien date; therefore the roll should be ''corrected to> read. improvements $150' with no change in the personal property or business inventory` exemptiono making a net assessed value of ''$10228. It has been ascertained from the assessment roll and from records in the assessor's office that taxes have been levied or charged erroneously or illegally .for the reasons as stated below; and, therefore, pursuant to the Revenue and Taxation Code, Section. 4986 (1) (a) , the following uncollected tax, penalty, or costs heretofore or hereafter levied or charged should be cancelled' in whole or in, part on the following assessments: code 05001 - Assessment No.. 2057, Jackee D. St angbelini is erroneously assessed for personal property with. a valuation of $470 and improvements of $1,180. This assessment has been levied more than once, ''being a duplicate of Assessment No. 14010-23190 AN, FUURT"EIER, under Section 4986 (1) (b) Cade 01001 - Assessment Yo, 2012.. Lifton,, ,'Inc . is errone- ously assessed for personal property with assessed valuation of $9,060. This assessment< was processed in an incorrect' tai:' area code and should be cancelled. A new assessment has been, levied in the 'correct tax area code. Cade 53002 - Assessment Iia. 2010., Robert ', McGlune and ' Wayne nther are erroneously assessed for pose ssory interest in land with a valuation of $670, since the lease was terminated by States Land Coamaission prior to the lien dated Therefore, this assessment 'should be cancelled. <wr....r ea tan, ss s "ant '_ ssessor July 28, 1970 - Page , of RESOLUTION NO, 70/466 Code ' - �ssesament Not �'�?�#9� Nick' GZ+ ies and, Louis A Janeyare errooeOns17 assessed Vo.r po ses aarg �t+e +ds� in i and with as,36 sed V cation r�� � ansa 3.mprOvMents of *90 and not assessed vs ,ue exert �sr nested reeide �� with3 a six months of the lien date:. flu month t - onth. reta' l Po $eeSorg interest is icon sIdered to be of n. bolus if Qo"'up eg �erm�t�ate lass thin six months of ter t 3 lie'a dates :or prl er toAtmst 31 1970. Terminatibn of adou. an Iey meter assessment has been meds and within six months of the 1 .ext date. aoe stiuutes an c�p�n�oz Pf no value, Therefore, in speord oe with> a.ssessor�S: �x this assessment should, be cancelled. I here+ z nt to the oc�rroetions and ehanxes in the :above re,solutiens'* By I d,4 b �#�&t�t3 ,� ss s int 1#sse�ser <��eptxt� ul P-8, 1970 Adapted by the Board this 128th day of Xuly, 1970. RESOLUTION vo3 70/466 'age of