The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRESOLUTIONS - 01011969 - 69-449 IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STA'T'E OF CALIFORNIA In the Matter of Changes } of the Assessment Rall } RESOLUTION NO, 69/449 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 RESOLVED that the County Auditor is authorized to correct the following assessments: For the Fiscal Year 1969. - I9It,,70 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 corrected- Code 08001 - Assessment No. 3357, Guy F. Atkinson is errone- ously assessed for possessory interest in laad, improvements and fixed machinery with a total assessed valuation of $3030780. There has been a clerical error of the assessor in 'computation. There fare, the roll should be corrected to show they following possessory interestt. Lend 54,850, improvements $17 3,140, and Fixed Machinery $16,900, total assessed valuation $244,890. Code 110033 -» Assessment No. 21.80, Der Wienersohnitzel Int 162 is assessed for personal property and improvements with a valuation of 490 and $2,4717 plus 10% penalty for failure to file within the time required by law. There has been a clerical error of the asses- sor since the assessment was based on incomplete information, this assessment should be corrected to show personal property $900, im- rovements $2,690, plus 10penalty of $359, total taxable value 3#949. NOTE: Assesses has been notified of the increase and his rights of apps al.. R. es on, s al s tanf Issessor w: assessor (G. Giese) Auditor Page ; of Tax Collector j Cade 12012 - Assessment No. 2124, Alfred A, Lucco is er- roneously assessed for personal property with a valuation of $2200 plus 1 penalty for failure to file return within the time required by law. There has been a clerical error of the assessor since the assessment was based on incomplete informatiow this assessment should be corrected to show personal property with a valuation of $100$ plus 10 penalty of $10. Code 14010 - .assessment Wo. 2362, .Tames and Christina Stonestreet are assessed with personal property $250 and improve- ments $98€1. There has been a defect in description causing the assessor to enter assessed values other than these intended; there- fore, this assessment should be corrected to show personal property with a valuation of $250 and improvements of $654, total assessed valuation $904. 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 corrections should be made can the assessment roll: Code 08084 - Assessment No. 2007, Paul Bowman is erroneously assessed for personal property with a valuation of $1,9913. It has been determined that there has been a clerical error of the assessee in reporting; therefore, the roll should be corrected to show personal property with assessed valuation of $580, with 15% business inventory exemption of $9. Code 79331 - Assessment No. 2031, Paul Foreman is assessed for personal property with a valuation of $940. There has been a defect in description and clerical error of the assessee in his property statement; therefore, this assessment should be corrected to show personal property with a valuation of $140, with 15 business inventory exemption of $21. R. 0. Beaton, Assistant Assessor Page 2 of 69 / 449 it has been ascertained from the assessment roll and from records in the Assessor's officethat taxes have been levied or charged erroneously or illegally for the 'reasons as stated below;; and, therefore, pursuant to the Revenue and `faxat on Code, Section #x986 (1) (a), the fallowing uncollected tax, penalty: or costs heretofore or hereafter levied or chargead, should be cancelled in whole or in part on the fallowing assessments Code 79096 - Assessment Na. 2066s< Phillips Petroleum Company is erroneously assessed for improvements with a valuation of $620. This assessment was levied more 'than' onoe, being a duplicate with Assessment No. 09000-2919, Cade 66003 - Assessment No. 2008s, Phillips Petroleum. Company is erroneously assessed for improvements' 'with a valuation of $410. This assessment was levied more than ones., being a duplicate with Assessment No, '79006-2002. A.ND2 FUR 'HER, under Section, 4986' {l) (b)': Cade 12012 - Assessment No, 2127, Bruce D# Sanders and Fames W. Lewis are erroneously assessed for personal property with a valuation of $240,, plus penalty of 24# total $264. This offiee was not occupied until after the lien date; thereforet the assess- ment should be" caneeeli.ed. Code 48001 - assessment No, 2993s Nay Ainsworth is errone- ously assessed for personal property' with a valuation of 800 'since the equipment was moved out of the county' before the lien.; date. Code 09007 - Assessment No. 2009, R. H. Thomas is errone- ously assessed for personal property with a valuation: of $2000 plus, penalty of ''$24, total $220, since the livestock was sold before the lien date, Code 60009 - As see s sm.ent No. 2004, Darrell B. Hannan is er- roneously assessed for improvements with a valuation Of $lpO5O. The improvements were sold before the lion date and are being assessed to the correct owner. Code 62006 - .Assessment NO. 2061, Contra Costa Water District is assessed for improvements with a valuation of $5.,730, This should be cancelled as this assessment was .erroneously levied on improve- ments that are not subject to taxation, being exempt under Art.XTZI of the State Constitution. (naw awned by Crockett-Valcna Co. Water) . Code 66028 -- ,Assessment No. 2174, 'Mrs Mary Hancock is erroneously assessed for personal property with a valuation of 1*000. The equipment was sold before the lien date and is being added to the 1969-70 roll in the correct owner r s name. R. U. Seaton, AsilstZt I issBr 9 4 Page -I- of J4 Code 79096 Assessment No. 2097, Ida D. Smith is errone- ously assessed for personal property with an assessed valuation of 210, plus 2 penalty for failure to file return within the time required by law. A portion of the equipment is determined to have been included in another assessment, therefore, doubly assessed. This should be corrected to show personal property with: a valuation of $100, plus 10% penalty of $10. I hereby consent to the corrections and changes in the above resolutions. JOHN B. CLAUSEN Acting District Attorney • 0 Beaton Deputy Assistant Assessor Ad-opted by the Bt arcl, this 5'M tOay of s 671449 Page .,A_ of