Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03192002 - C44 -TO:„� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS � � �� CONTRA `COSTA FROM FINANCECOMMITTEE' °; , ,� � � COUNTY Gayle B. Uiikema, Chair Donna Gerber, Member DATE: March 19 2002 SUBJECT: Update on AB 934 — Property Tax Assessment Appeal Procedures SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION Recommendation: Request the County Lobbyist to continue tracking AB 934 (Hertzberg)and report to the Board of Supervisors on any actions that result in moving this bill forward in the legislative process. Background: Assembly Member Hertzberg introduced AB 934 on February 23, 2001. This bill would allow a taxpayer the right to a trial de novo if not satisfied with the decision of an Assessment Appeals Board. On June 5,2001,the Board of Supervisors referred AB'934 to the Finance Committee for their review and consideration. The County Administrator's Office submitted a report to the Finance Committee on June 18, 2001, recommending that the Board oppose AB 934. Counsel for the Assessor's Office and myself indicated that we believe this bill would be detrimental to Contra Costa's efforts to equitably assess and defend property valuations. Specifically, AB 934 would: encourage appeals that now settle to avoid subsequent court action; increase the County's cost for assessment appeal litigation dramatically, particularly against large refineries with resources far beyond those of the County; and put very technical issues before a body that does not have the Specialized knowledge to fairly settle complex cases. Additionally,the financial impact of AB 934 could be very substantial to the County., if two refineries per year were appealed,the cost to the County for the appeals would be approximately$15 million a year with a loss exposure of at least$10 million per year of tax receipts. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: x YES SIGNATURE.: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SI NATUREIS): ACTION OF BOARD ON March' 19, 2002 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED XX OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT NWe 1 AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: __ NOES: AND ENTERED ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact:Tony Erma 5-1094 Cc:Sara Hoffman,;Assistant CAO` ATTESTED March 19, 2UU2 Jahn Sweeten,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVI G3RS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY ) DEPUTY 'On,dune 19, 2001,the Board of Supervisors accepted the recommendation of the Finance Committee to oppose unless amended, AB 934. This legislation was also discussed during the FY 2001-2002 budget hearings on August 7, 2001. During the hearings, I requested supplemental funding to offset costs associated with defending; assessment appeals should AB 934 be approved by State Legislators, The Board denied the supplemental funding and requested that the Assessor's Office continue to track this legislation and report to the Finance Committee on the status'of this legislation. AB 934 was amended in Senate on August 21, 2001. On August 22 2001, the amended bill was passed and re-referred to the Senate Rules Committee. The Rules Committee has until June of 2002` to move the bill, however, there is no 'indication that the bill will be moved beyond the Rules Committee. On March 4, 2002 the Finance Committee reviewed the status of pending legislation regarding property tax assessment appeals with the County Assessor, the Committee agreed that the County lobbyist needs to continue to track AB 934 and advise the Board of Supervisors if additional actions are necessary.