HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08092011 - C.17RECOMMENDATION(S):
SUPPORT Assembly Bill 946 (Butler): Property Tax Administration: Loan Program, a bill
that reauthorizes the State-County Property Tax Administration Program to allow counties
to elect to participate in the program to receive a loan in each fiscal year from the 2011-12
fiscal year to the 2015-16 fiscal year, as recommended by the Legislation Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The bill would provide Contra Costa County $2,661,514.92 for fiscal years 2011-12 through
2015-16.
BACKGROUND:
AB 946, by Assembly Member Betsy Butler, was amended on July 12 to restart the
State-County Property Tax Administration Program, affectionately known as "PTAP."
Under the program, counties could obtain loans to enhance the property tax administration
system, not supplant current funding. Enhancements would include improving the
performance, efficiency, and automation of the systems and reducing backlogs related to
assessment appeals, Proposition 8 declines in value, new construction, ownership changes,
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 08/09/2011 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I
Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: L. DeLaney,
925-335-1097
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: August 9, 2011
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C.17
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Legislation Committee
Date:August 9, 2011
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:SUPPORT AB 946 (Butler): Property Tax Administration: Loan Program
and supplemental rolls. The program would make a maximum of $80 million available
statewide, and each county would be eligible for a loan up to a specified amount determined
by their proportion of statewide local assessments.
The previous PTAP program was very successful, and CSAC will be working with
Assessors and the author to ensure that the new program is designed to achieve the same
success while also protecting other county interests.
The Legislature enacted the State-County Property Tax Administration Loan Program in
1995 to ensure that counties have sufficient resources in the Assessor's Office to assess the
value of properties, and therefore collect future property taxes (AB 818, Vasconcellos,
Chapter 914, Statutes of 1995).
Because local property taxes are the first source of revenue for schools, more property tax
revenue reduces state general fund obligations to fund schools under Proposition 98.
Additionally, county assessors' offices had been subject to severe budget cuts resulting from
the Legislature shifting property tax revenues from counties to the Education Revenue
Augmentation Fund shifts in the 1992-93 and 1993-94 fiscal years, and did not have the
resources to assess all property that had been newly constructed or changed ownership. The
Program provided loans in specified amounts to counties for fiscal years 1995-96 until
2001-02, which repaid them at the end of the year out of the enhanced revenues produced
by the additional assessment resources provided by the loans.
This bill, AB 946, reauthorizes the State-County Property Tax Administration Program to
allow eligible counties to participate in the program to receive new “loans” in updated
amounts for fiscal years 2011-12 until 2015-16. This bill revises the contents of the
agreement between counties and the Department of Finance, which administers the
program, and requires the California Assessors' Association to summarize reports required
by individual counties. This bill also deletes obsolete provisions from the existing statute.
According to the author's office, without funding from the State, collectable property tax
revenue far in excess of the $60 million allocated 10 years ago by Property Tax
Administrative Program (PTAP) will remain uncollected. Over time, the impact of reduced
funding for Assessors' offices are compounding and California's property tax administration
is returning to the chaos of the early 1990's when County Assessors had billions of dollars
of "unworked assessments." As always, the time and cost to resolve these backlogs far
exceeds the cost of timely enrollment. Moreover they are not just leaving revenue
uncollected it is also creating problems for property owners who are faced with paying
property tax bills for multiple years.
According to the bill, the Department of Finance shall consider any or all of the following
items in determining the extent to which a county has satisfied the terms and repaid the
loan, pursuant to the contract:
(A) County performance as indicated by the State Board of Equalization’s sample survey
required pursuant to Section 15640 of the Government Code.
(B) Performance measures adopted by the California Assessors’Association.
(C) Reduction of backlog of assessment appeals and Proposition 8 declines in value.
(D) County compliance with mandatory audits required by Section 469.
(E) Reduction of backlogs in new construction, changes in ownership, and supplemental roll.
(F) Other measures, as determined by the Director of Finance.
Contra Costa County Assessor, Gus Kramer, supports this bill. The Legislation Committee
considered the bill at its July 28 meeting and also recommends a position of support to the
Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
STATUS: Senate Rules Committee
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Board does not take a position of support for the bill, no advocacy can be done on
behalf of the bill.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS
AB 946 Bill Text
AMENDED IN SENATE JULY 12, 2011
california legislature—2011–12 regular session
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 946
Introduced by Assembly Member Butler
February 18, 2011
An act to amend Section 279 95.31 of the Revenue and Taxation
Code, relating to taxation local government finance.
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 946, as amended, Butler. Property tax exemption: principal
residence: veterans and their unmarried surviving spouses.
administration: loan program.
Existing property tax law provides, pursuant to the authorization of
the California Constitution, for the exemption from property taxation
of the principal residence of a disabled veteran, a veteran’s spouse, and
the unmarried surviving spouse, in the case in which the veteran has,
as a result of a service-connected disease or injury, died while on active
duty in military service. Existing law provides when that property
becomes eligible for that exemption and also provides when that
eligibility terminates authorized an eligible county, as defined, upon
the recommendation of the assessor and by resolution of its board of
supervisors, to elect to participate in the State-County Property Tax
Administration Program, pursuant to which a participating county
received, in specified fiscal years, a loan from the state, as specified,
for the purposes of providing supplemental funding for that county’s
local administration of the ad valorem property tax.
This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes that would
consolidate the provisions relating to the date when property becomes
eligible for the disabled veterans’ exemption, and would make other
98
conforming changes. This bill would also make other clarifying changes,
including clarifying that the exemption terminates for a unmarried
surviving spouse of a disabled veteran when that surviving spouse
remarries reauthorize the State-County Property Tax Administration
Program to allow eligible counties, as defined, to elect to participate
in the program to receive a loan in each fiscal year from the 2011–12
fiscal year to the 2015–16 fiscal year, inclusive. This bill would also
require the California Assessors’Association to report to the Senate
Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review and the Assembly Committee
on Budget regarding participating counties, as specified.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SECTION 1. Section 95.31 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
is amended to read:
95.31. (a) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
any eligible county may, upon the recommendation of the county
assessor, and by resolution of the board of supervisors of that
county adopted not later than December February 1 of the fiscal
year for which it is to first apply, elect to participate in the
State-County Property Tax Administration Loan Program.
(2) Except as specified in paragraph (3), for For the purposes
of this section, an eligible county shall mean a county in which
additional property tax revenue allocated to school entities would
reduce the amount of General Fund moneys apportioned to school
entities. However, eligibility shall be terminated when, in
combination with resources in the Educational Revenue
Augmentation Fund, additional property tax revenues allocated to
school entities will not result in a reduction in the General Fund
apportionments.
(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), both the County of Solano
and the County of San Benito shall be deemed eligible counties
that may, upon the recommendation of the county assessor, and
by resolution of the board of supervisors of the county adopted on
or before March 31, 1996, elect to participate in the State-County
Property Tax Administration Loan Program.
(4) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), any county in which a new
assessor is elected in 1998 may, upon the recommendation of the
98
— 2 —AB 946
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
county assessor, and by resolution of the board of supervisors of
the county adopted on or before January 31, 1999, elect to
participate in the State-County Property Tax Administration Loan
Program commencing with the 1998–99 fiscal year.
(b) (1) In each fiscal year from the 1995–96 2011–12 fiscal
year to the 2001–02 2015–16 fiscal year, inclusive, an eligible
county participating in the State-County Property Tax
Administration Loan Program may receive a loan for up to the
amount listed in paragraph (3). The loan shall be repaid by June
30 of the fiscal year following the year in which the loan is made.
However, at the discretion of the Director of Finance, the loan may
be renewed once for an additional 12-month period at the request
of the participating county board of supervisors. For the Counties
of Fresno, Orange, San Benito, and Solano any loan agreement
signed on or before July 31, 1996, shall be deemed a loan
agreement for the 1995–96 fiscal year for the purposes of this
section. For any county in which a new assessor is elected in 1998,
any loan agreement signed on or before January 31, 1999, shall
be deemed a loan agreement for the 1998–99 fiscal year for the
purposes of this section.
(2) If an eligible county elects to participate in the State-County
Property Tax Administration Loan Program, it shall enter into a
contractual agreement with the Department of Finance. At a
minimum, the contractual agreement shall include the following:
(A) The loan amount, as determined by the Director of Finance.
(B) Repayment provisions, including the interception of Motor
Vehicle License Fee Account moneys apportioned pursuant to
Section 11005 to repay the General Fund.
(C) A listing of the proposed use of the additional resources
including, but not limited to:
(i) Proposed new positions.
(ii) Increased automation costs.
(D) An Commencing in the 2012 fiscal year, an agreement to
provide to the Department of Finance, by March 31 of the fiscal
year in which the loan is made, a report projecting the impact of
the increased funding in the current and subsequent fiscal year.
(E) An agreement to provide the Department of Finance an
audit report detailing the county’s basis for satisfying the terms
of the loan agreement. The report shall be provided by October 1
of the fiscal year following the year in which the loan is made.
98
AB 946— 3 —
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
(F) An agreement to use the funds for the purposes stated, and,
should any portion of the funds be diverted to a different,
unapproved use, to return an amount equal to the diverted funds
to the state regardless of whether or not other terms of the
agreement are satisfied.
(3) Upon request of the Department of Finance, the Controller
shall provide a loan to the following counties for up to the amount
specified by the Director of Finance, not to exceed the following
amounts:
Amount Jurisdiction
$ 2,152,429
3,597,414.49
Alameda .................................................................
3,124
50,000.00
Alpine .....................................................................
80,865
84,884.74
Amador ..................................................................
381,956
339,221.56
Butte .......................................................................
109,897
125,711.59
Calaveras ................................................................
53,957
50,000.00
Colusa ....................................................................
2,022,088
2,661,514.92
Contra Costa ...........................................................
36,203
50,000.00
Del Norte ................................................................
302,795
500,178.71
El Dorado ...............................................................
1,165,249
1,070,650.34
Fresno .....................................................................
59,197
50,000.00
Glenn ......................................................................
210,806
200,082.72
Humboldt ...............................................................
231,673
194,085.89
Imperial ..................................................................
100,080
76,218.55
Inyo ........................................................................
98
— 4 —AB 946
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1,211,318
1,380,856.07
Kern ........................................................................
138,653
156,128.75
Kings ......................................................................
117,376
126,266.06
Lake ........................................................................
54,699
50,000.00
Lassen ....................................................................
13,451,670
19,541,022.69
Los Angeles ............................................................
212,991
202,353.21
Madera ...................................................................
790,490
1,033,995.76
Marin ......................................................................
46,476
50,000.00
Mariposa ................................................................
160,435
185,211.95
Mendocino .............................................................
298,004
309,114.75
Merced ...................................................................
24,022
50,000.00
Modoc ....................................................................
47,778
108,273.73
Mono ......................................................................
795,819
911,532.24
Monterey ................................................................
366,020
495,016.41
Napa .......................................................................
234,292
307,121.22
Nevada ....................................................................
6,826,325
7,643,925.87
Orange ....................................................................
628,047
1,042,694.84
Placer ......................................................................
80,606
70,809.37
Plumas ....................................................................
2,358,068
3,896,893.30
Riverside ................................................................
1,554,245
2,308,128.57
Sacramento .............................................................
98
AB 946— 5 —
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
90,408
111,129.49
San Benito ..............................................................
2,139,938
3,114,103.20
San Bernardino .......................................................
5,413,943
7,108,480.10
San Diego ...............................................................
1,013,332
2,735,297.69
San Francisco .........................................................
818,686
1,023,588.01
San Joaquin ............................................................
736,288
729,247.75
San Luis Obispo .....................................................
2,220,001
2,631,042.86
San Mateo ..............................................................
926,817
1,114,551.00
Santa Barbara .........................................................
4,213,639
5,546,096.80
Santa Clara .............................................................
565,328
609,524.84
Santa Cruz ..............................................................
342,399
285,322.39
Shasta .....................................................................
7,383
50,000.00
Sierra ......................................................................
91,164
76,546.32
Siskiyou ..................................................................
469,207
754,150.47
Solano ....................................................................
1,035,049
1,246,693.76
Sonoma ..................................................................
866,155
673,145.07
Stanislaus ...............................................................
147,436
149,209.53
Sutter ......................................................................
97,222
86,231.96
Tehama ...................................................................
24,913
50,000.00
Trinity .....................................................................
501,907
499,088.04
Tulare .....................................................................
98
— 6 —AB 946
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
126,067
120,823.06
Tuolumne ...............................................................
1,477,789
1,904,605.02
Ventura ...................................................................
278,309
373,673.88
Yolo ........................................................................
88,968
88,041.89
Yuba .......................................................................
(4) The Department of Finance shall consider any or all of the
following items in determining the extent to which a county has
satisfied the terms and repaid the loan, pursuant to the contract, as
offered under this part:
(A) County performance as indicated by the State Board of
Equalization’s sample survey required pursuant to Section 15640
of the Government Code.
(B) Performance measures adopted by the California Assessors’
Association.
(C) Reduction of backlog of assessment appeals and Proposition
8 declines in value.
(D) County compliance with mandatory audits required by
Section 469.
(E) Reduction of backlogs in new construction, changes in
ownership, and supplemental roll.
(F) Other measures, as determined by the Director of Finance.
(5) The Director of Finance shall notify the Controller of any
participating county that fails to comply with the terms of the
agreement, including the repayment of the loan. When the
Controller receives notice from the Director of Finance, the
Controller shall make an apportionment to the General Fund on
behalf of the participating county in the amount of that required
payment for the purpose of making that payment. The Controller
shall make that payment only from moneys credited to the Motor
Vehicle License Fee Account in the Transportation Tax Fund to
which the participating county is entitled at that time under Chapter
5 (commencing with Section 11001) of Part 5 of Division 2, and
shall thereupon reduce, by the amount of the payment, the
subsequent allocation or allocations to which the county would
otherwise be entitled under that chapter.
98
AB 946— 7 —
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
(c) (1) Funds appropriated for purposes of this section shall be
used to enhance the property tax administration system by
providing supplemental resources. Amounts provided to any county
as a loan pursuant to this section shall not be used to supplant the
current level of funding. In order to participate in the State-County
Property Tax Administration Loan Program, a participating county
shall maintain a base staffing, including contract staff, and total
funding level in the county assessor’s office, independent of the
loan proceeds provided pursuant to this act, equal to the levels in
the 1994–95 2011–12 fiscal year exclusive of amounts provided
to the assessor’s office pursuant to Item 9100-102-001 of the
Budget Act of 1994. However, in a county in which the 1994–95
funding level for the assessor’s office was higher than the 1993–94
level, the 1993–94 fiscal year staffing and funding levels shall be
considered the base year for purposes of this section. Commencing
with the 1996–97 fiscal year, if a county was otherwise eligible
but was unable to participate in this program in the 1995–96 fiscal
year because it did not meet the funding level and staffing
requirements of this paragraph, that county shall maintain a base
staffing, including contract staff, and total funding level in the
county assessor’s office equal to the levels in the 1995–96 fiscal
year.
(2) Prior to the assessor’s recommendation for participation in
the State-County Property Tax Administration Loan Program, the
assessor shall consult with the county tax collector, and any other
county agency directly involved in property tax administration, to
discuss the needs of the program for the duration of the contractual
agreement.
(d) A participating county may establish a tracking system
whereby a work or function number is assigned to each appraisal
or administrative activity. That system should provide statistical
data on the number of production units performed by each
employee and the positive and negative change in assessed value
attributable to the activities performed by each employee.
(e) Notwithstanding Section 95.3, no amount of funds provided
to an eligible county pursuant to this section shall result in any
deduction from those property tax administrative costs that are
eligible for reimbursement pursuant to Section 95.3.
98
— 8 —AB 946
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
(f) At the request of the Department of Finance, the board shall
assist the Department of Finance in evaluating contracts entered
into pursuant to this section.
(g) On or before December 1, 2013, the California Assessors’
Association shall provide to the Senate Committee on Budget and
Fiscal Review and the Assembly Committee on Budget a report
summarizing the reports provided by participating counties.
SECTION 1.Section 279 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
is amended to read:
279.(a) Subject to the provisions regarding cancellations and
the limitation periods on refunds, property becomes eligible for
the disabled veterans’ property tax exemption, as described in
Section 205.5, as of:
(1) The effective date of a disability rating, as determined by
the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, that qualifies
the claimant for the exemption.
(2) The date a qualified claimant purchases a property that
constitutes the principal place of residence, provided residency is
established within 90 days of purchase.
(3) The date a qualified claimant establishes residency at a
property owned by the claimant or the spouse, as specified in
subdivision (a) of Section 205.5.
(4) The date the veteran died, as a result of a service-connected
injury or disease, in the case where the unmarried surviving spouse
is the claimant.
(b) A claim for the disabled veterans’ property tax exemption
filed by a qualified claimant, once granted, shall remain in
continuous effect unless any of the following occurs:
(1) Title to the property changes.
(2) The owner does not occupy the dwelling as his or her
principal place of residence.
(A) If the claimant is confined to a hospital or other care facility
but principally resided at a dwelling immediately prior to that
confinement, the claimant will be deemed to occupy that same
dwelling as his or her principal place of residence on the lien date,
provided that the dwelling has not been rented or leased as
described in Section 205.5.
(B) If a person receiving the disabled veterans’ exemption is
not occupying the dwelling because the dwelling was damaged in
a misfortune or calamity, the person will be deemed to occupy that
98
AB 946— 9 —
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
same dwelling as his or her principal place of residence, provided
the person’s absence from the dwelling is temporary and the person
intends to return to the dwelling when possible to do so. Except
as provided in subparagraph (C), when a dwelling has been totally
destroyed, and thus no dwelling exists, the exemption provided
by Section 205.5 is not applicable until the structure has been
replaced and is occupied as a dwelling.
(C) A dwelling that was totally destroyed in a disaster for which
the Governor proclaimed a state of emergency, that qualified for
the exemption provided by Section 205.5 and has not changed
ownership since the disaster, will be deemed occupied by the
person receiving a disabled veterans’ exemption provided the
person intends to reconstruct a dwelling on the property and occupy
the dwelling as his or her principal place of residence when it is
possible to do so.
(3) The property is altered so that it is no longer a dwelling.
(4) The veteran is no longer disabled as defined in Section 205.5.
(5) The unmarried surviving spouse claimant remarries.
(c) The assessor of each county shall verify the continued
eligibility of each person receiving a disabled veterans’ exemption,
and shall provide for a periodic audit of, and establish a control
system to monitor, disabled veterans’ exemption claims.
O
98
— 10 —AB 946