Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04082008 - D.2 (2) i TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS t_ CONTRA .. FROM: John Cullen COSTA :.�� I'3 County Administrator " - .. �� COUNTY :. yy sA C011N'<� DATE: APRIL 8, 2008 SUBJECT: PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATIVE COST RECOVERY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATIONS)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. CONDUCT a public hearing, previously fixed for April 8, 2008 at 9:30 a.m., on implementation of the property tax cost recovery provisions of Revenue and Taxation Code section 95.3. 2. ADOPT the report of the Auditor-Controller filed on February 26, 2008, of the 2006-2007 fiscal year property tax-related costs of the Assessor, Tax Collector, Auditor, and Assessment Appeals Board, including the proposed charges against each local jurisdiction excepting school entities, for the local jurisdiction's proportionate share of such administrative costs. i 3. ADOPT Resolution No. 2008/217 regarding the implementation of the property tax administrative cost recovery provisions of Revenue and Taxation Code section 95.3 for fiscal year 2007-2008. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal year 2006-2007 net cost of property tax administration was $14,896,420. This amounts to approximately .74% of all 2006-2007 property taxes levied countywide. This cost is allocated to each taxing entity in the County based on net revenues of each entity as a percentage of total revenues. School districts, community college districts, and the County Office of Education are exempt from cost recovery. As a result, the County absorbs the schools' share, which this year amounts to $5,272,558. The net recovery to the County is $6,919,959. BACKGROUND: In 1997, the Board adopted Resolution 97/129 which provides procedures for property tax administrative cost recovery. The recommended actions are necessary for implementation of Resolution 97/129 for the current fiscal year. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: COMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE _OTHER SIGNATURES . ACTION OF BOA ON � APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUP VISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A _ %NIMOUS(ABSENT_ ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN NOES: I ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Lisa Driscoll 5-1023 .i f , CC: County Administrator ATTESTED Auditor-Controller JOHN CULL EN CLERK OF �- County Counsel—R.Hooley THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CqPUNTY ADMINISTRATOL, BY, - DEPUTY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND THE AUDITOR-CONTROLLER OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Resolution on April 8, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and the Auditor-Controller by his following signature. SUBJECT: Findings and Determination Concerning the Implementation of the Property ) Tax Administrative Cost Recovery Pro- ) RESOLUTION NO. 2008/217 visions of Revenue and Taxation Code ) section 95.3 ) A public hearing having been held during the Board of Supervisors' meeting of April 8, 2008, on implementation of the property tax cost recovery provisions of Revenue and Taxation Code section 95.3, as provided in Board of Supervisors' Resolution No. 97/129, the Board of Supervisors, and the Auditor-Controller, hereby make the following findings and determination. A. Property Tax Administrative Cost Recovery 1. On February 26, 2008; the Auditor-Controller filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors a report of the 20061 2007 fiscal year property tax-related costs of the Assessor, 'fax Collector, Auditor and Assessmdnt Appeals Board, including the applicable administrative overhead costs permitted by federal circular A-87 standards, proportionally attributable to each local jurisdiction and Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in Contra Costa County, in the ratio of property tax revenue received by each local jurisdiction and ERAF divided by the total property tax revenue received by all local jurisdictions and ERAFs in the county for the current fiscal year. The report included proposed charges against each local jurisdiction excepting school entities, for the.local jurisdiction's proportionate share of such administrative costs. 2. On April 8, 2008 at the Board of Supervisors' meeting, a public hearing was held on the Auditor-Controller's report, notice of which was given as required by law and by Board of Supervisors' Resolution 97/129. 3. The report of the Auditor-Controller filed on February 26, 2008, is hereby adopted, and the Board of Supervisors and the Auditor-Controller find that amounts expressed in said report do not exceed the actual amount of 2006-2007 fiscal year property tax administrative costs proportionally attributable to local jurisdictions. 4. The additional revenue received by Contra Costa County on account of its 2006-2007 fiscal year property tax administrative costs pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 95.3 shall be used only to fund the actual costs of assessing, collecting and,allocating property taxes. An equivalent amount of the revenues budgeted to finance assessing, collecting and allocating property taxes in fiscal year 2007-2008 may be reallocated to finance other county services. In the event that the actual 2007-2008 costs for assessing, collecting and allocating property taxes plus allowable overhead costs are less than the amounts determined in the February 26, 2008 RESOLUTION NO. 2008/217 1 I i report by the Auditor-Controller, the difference shall be proportionally allocated to the respective local jurisdictions which paid property tax administration charges. B. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION 1. The amounts expressed in the Auditor-Controller's report of February 26, 2008 are correct. 2. Notice as required by law was given of the public hearing on April 8, 2008. 3. Written objection from the City of Brentwood was received at the April 8, 2008 public hearing on the Auditor-Controller's report of February 26, 2008. The objection is overruled on the ground that the Auditor Controller's report of February 26, 2008 properly includes property tax revenues resulting from the application of Revenue & Taxation Code §§ 97.68 and 97.70 in the calculation of administrative icosts under Revenue and Taxation Code § 95.3. 4. The grounds stated he to support findings are not exclusive and any findings may be supported on any lawful ground, whether or not expressed herein. 5. If any finding herein is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect findings which can be given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end, the invalid finding is severable. So found and determined Stephen J. YbAa Contra Costa County Auditor-Controller 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: John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors And County Administrator By Deputy ORIG. DEPT: County Counsel cc: Auditor-Controller County Administrator RESOLUTION NO. 2008/217 2 ADDENDUM to D.2 April 8, 2008 On this day, the Board of Supervisors conducted a public hearing on implementation of the property-tax cost recovery provisions of Revenue and Taxation Code §95.3, and on the adoption of the report of the Auditor-Controller filed on February 26, 2008, of the 2006/07 Fiscal Year property tax related costs of the Assessor, Tax Collector, Auditor and Assessment Appeals Board, including the proposed charges against each local jurisdiction excepting school entities, for the local jurisdictions' proportionate share of such administrative costs. Auditor Controller Steve Ybarra and Finance Director Lisa Driscoll presented the Board with findings concerning the implementation of the Property Tax Administrative Cost Recovery Provisions of Revenue and Tax Code section 95.3 introduced to the Board on February 26, 2008. Ms. Driscoll noted the report included proposed charges against each local jurisdiction except school entities for the local jurisdiction's proportionate share of such administrative costs. She pointed out there was significant drop in property tax administration fees and cost for assessment appeals. She went on to say the amount shown on the report does not exceed actual amount of 2006-2007 fiscal year property tax administrative costs proportionally attributable to local jurisdictions. Ms. Driscoll pointed out notice as required by law was given of the public hearing, and a written objection from the City of Brentwood was received on April 8 public hearing. She said the objection was overruled on the ground that the Auditor Controller's report properly included property tax revenues that resulted from the application of Revenue and Taxation Code § 97.68 and 97.70 in administrative costs under Revenue and Taxation Code § 95.3. Supervisor Piepho voiced her concern about the disagreement between the cities and the county and the cities and the state and the County' position in between this disagreement, and asked Mr. Ybarra for suggestions to work on this issue together. Mr. Ybarra responded a Guideline Committee was formed in 2004 that consisted of participants from the cities, CSAC, State Controller's Office, Department of Finance as well as Auditor' Controllers' Office. He said this committee was an offshoot of not just property tax administration, but the implementation of the "triple flip" (As part of the 2003-04 Budget,and to finance a$10.7 billion dcfcit bond,the Legislature enacted a tenhporary%cent reduction in the local .sales tar and offset the losses to local governments with increased property taxes(AB 1766, Committee on Budget, 2003 and AB 7X,.Oropeza,2003), and the Vehicle License fee swap and said this is the resulting piece with Property Tax Administration and said this specific issue was discussed and agreed to by all parties. Mr. Ybarra noted the State Controller's office revisited the issue and presented their lawyers with flawed data that allowed an opinion. He indicated this was not a formal opinion, butt a letter from their lawyers stating the cost for doing the extra work should not be included. Mr. Ybarra said he disagrees with the allocation basis. He explained the cities objected to Vehicle License Fee funds, which were swapped for property taxes and other sales tax monies that were swapped for property 1 taxes brought into this formula and calculation. He said the Counties and CSAC have worked with the Statewide Association of County Councils who supports what the County does as following the law. Supervisor Piepho questioned the reason for this letter, and also asked if the agencies agreed to such letter. Mr. Ybarra responded the cities voiced their concern regarding the calculation even though they had agreed to the guidelines and requested the State Controller for a legal opinion. Supervisor Piepho asked if there was a legal opinion. Mr. Ybarra said the opinion is not enforceable. He indicated that the county' lawyers believe they are following the law. He went on to say special legislation could remedy this situation. Supervisor Piepho stated Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg and Pleasant Hill have expressed their concerns. Mr. Ybarra suggested accepting the recommendations as presented, and stated if not done properly adjustments would be made accordingly. Supervisor Gioia asked if the same methodology is used as all the 57 counties in California. He said the County is not legally required to hand over revenue and said this County would be the only County in the state of California doing this differently. He stressed that there needs to be a concerted effort to resolve these issues statewide and not on a county level. Mr. Ybarra responded property tax administration fees were authorized in 1990 via statute. He said the County went through 1992, 1993 and 1994 with the original Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF)where the state took local property tax entitlements and shifted them to (ERAF), which was.fifteen percent of the total pot. He explained for 1992, 1993 and 1994 property tax administration dalculations were taken into account and the County reduced shares of property taxes that went away from cities. He said money taken out of(ERAF) in 2004 is restored in the form of Property Tax to cities and the county and making appropriate adjustments to the Property Tax Administration fees. Supervisor Gioia suggested a letter to the cities from the County that explains the methodology is consistent statewide and the increase is due to cost of Assessment Appeals that includes Chevron Assessment Appeals, and less than vibrant supplemental assessments. He reiteratedIthe reasons should be spelled out. Supervisor Gioia asked when (OPEB) would be incorporated ointo the budget in terms of costs. I 2 Mr. Ybarra noted (OPEB) costs reflect pay as you go, and said next year's costs would reflect this year. Supervisor Bonilla did not agree to a letter being sent to the cities,but suggested County Administrator John Cullen work with the City Managers Association to try to resolve this issue. She stressed passing along the (OPEB) problem would not be fair to the cities, and said this was the County' problem. She asked Mr. Ybarra reasons for the dramatic increase. Mr. Ybarra explained the increased cost comes.from the basis of the property tax administrative allocation. He explained school districts, community college districts, and the County Office of Education are exempt from cost recovery, and the County absorbs the schools' share. Supervisor Bonilla said her�preference would be for Mr. Cullen to go back to the City Managers and have a detailed discussion prior to the board voting on it. Mr. Cullen informed the Board this issue has come up several times at the PMA meetings and information has been presented both for League of California Cities view as well as CSAC'S view. He went on to say this issue would only be resolved at the state level between CSAC and the League level. Supervisor Uilkema said she would like to make sure the letter goes to all cities and that Mr. Cullen continues his work with City Managers. She concurred this needs to be at the CSAC and League level. Chair Glover said it would be prudent for the Board to move forward with the letter to the cities. Chair Glover asked the public for their opinion and the following people spoke: • Margaret Lefebrael City of Concord requested the Board to waive the Property Y Tax Administrative Fee and direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip" and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law, and • Ralph Hoffinan, Walnut Creek resident, referred to history of the Government and quoted excerpts regarding taxation without representation. Supervisor Bonilla askedIto send the letter to the cities, and wait one or two weeks till there is adequate dialogue with the cities. Mr. Ybarra said he would follow the guidelines in the law, and he could not waiver on that. i I I • I . 3 Chair Glover requested more time be allowed for this matter to be brought on May 13, 2008 at 9:30 am. Mr. Cullen said he would host a meeting with Mr. Ybarra, and cities to discuss the history, and formula and brig back their views on May 13, 2008. By an unanimous vote, with Ione absent, the Board took the following action • Continued hearing on May 13, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. on implementation of the property tax recove I; I 4 ATTACHMENT I CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER'S REPORT on 2007-2008 Property Tax Administration Charges Table of Contents 3 Summary Calculations 4 Contra Costa County Assessor's Department 5 Contri Costa County Treasurer-Tax Collector's Depar 6 Contri Costa County Auditor-Controller's Department 7 Couniy Assessment Appeals Board 8 Federal A-87 Overhead Allocation 9 Department Revenue Offsets 10 Allocation of Cost to Taxing Agencies 2557SL07.xls page 2 ATTACHMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2007-2008 Pi�operty Tax Administration Charges ASSESSOR'S DEPARTMENT DIRECT AND ACTUAL INDIRECT DEPARTMENTAL COST 2006-2007 Salaries & Employee Benefits I $ 13,239,832 Services & Supplies I 2,920,036 Fixed Assets 0 Other Charges 5,000 Gross Cost $ 16,164,868 Less: * Intrafund Transfers I (293,824) ** Fixed Assets I 0 TOTAL ASSESSOR COST $ 15,871,044 LESS: ASSESSOR REVENUE OFFSETS (393,156) NET ASSESSOR DEPARTMENT COST 15,477,888 * Costs are related to preparing maps for LAFCO and County GIS related expenses. ** Lease/purchase and fixed asset costs included in the A-87 allocation are excluded from direct costs. Source: Cost: IJ Appendix A-1, Contra Costa Final Budget, Schedule 9F, Assessor Budget Unit, Actual Final Budget Statement,'Final Expenditure Ledger, JVs Revenue Offset: Attachment I Page 9, 2557SHxx.xls, Revenue Offsets, Assessor Page 4 2557SC07.xis i ATTACHMENT JICONTRA COSTA COUNTY I 2007-2008 Property Tax Administration Charges AUDITOR-CONTROLLER'S DEPARTMENT PROPERTY TAX FUNCTION - DIRECT AND ACTUAL DIRECT DEPARTMENTAL COSTS 2006-2007 Salaries & Employee Bel efits $ 575,626 (1) Information Technology Costs 382,176 (2) Other Services and Supplies 91,783 (3) Accounts Payable - Supplemental & Other Tax Refunds 9,689 (3) Department C-1—ad . 108,602 (4) GROSS PROPERTY T I FUNCTION COSTS $ 1,167,876 LESS: TOTAL PROPERTY TAX FUNCTION REVENUE OFFSETS $ 932.733 (5) I NET AUDITOR-CONTROLLER COST $ 235,143 Source: Cost: (1) Appendix D-1 Total Salary & Benefits-Tax Functions(2557SBxx.xls) (2) Appendix E-1 (3) Appendix F-1 (4) Appendix F-2 Revenue Offset: (5) Attachment I Page 9, Revenue Offsets, Auditor Controller I Page 6 2557SF07.xls + I r , ATTACHMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2007-2008 Property Tax Administration Charges A-87 OVERHEAD ALLOCATION Percent A-87 Plan Property Tax Net to Department 2006-2007 Related Allocate Actual Assessor $ 1,724,925 100% $ 1,724,925 Tax Collector 413,214 74% 305,778 Auditor-Controller(Tax Division) 58,497 100% 58,497 TOTALS $ 2,196,636 $ 2,089,200 Source: Appendix G-2 Attachment I Page 5 Gross & Total Tax Collector Cost (2557S105.xis). i 2557SK07.xis Page 8 I i N cr N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N > > m Cn U( Cn m Cn (n A A A A A A A A A O O O N O IZ C C-) W W N N N0 (D CD OM W J J O J O - N N O O =3 D .> p J > O (n 0) A N (D OD O (n O O 0o O W W n r m m m m m m cn w w 0 0 0 w w w m 0 0 0 0 n c� < < m m m m m m m d o o O 0 m N o o° o° 00 00 0° 2 2. 2 �. �. 2 2 co) �» C z Q. n a n n n D D (� ci 0 0 0 n w z m 0 n n n n (� m m CD (D CD CD CD (D CD 0 � -i �o o 0 0 0 0 0 m 0) D D D D D D D �i n r -< O D C-) O Q CD °r' c <O CD n O OoN Om OOO nAS a .N > i co N O p) N CD Z1 Z n. N CDD N N C) (�j S O J Q) CD (D O N -•� W p J S W m.� C7 `G T m -G 3. DC7 m m m a a � m v C- , D o v CD c C m Fn n v a OD cn z C3 N > o N m o D co > cJl m cJ1 N .� O N N. N > A A O OWD N J O O O N o O O A W OD A OD N J CO O D) O a O 0) Ln O O A AM N ()) CO (D Ln > m N A O O W "'. O O D) W > > co W N (O N A OD (n J W J N A (n > O V J W N O) W w Cn > W O A O A A 7 W N W A > O O O W J K) J J A N m A A W J W W O co o J O J A O A (T O W (0 O O c D v cn o 03 o J W A J Z W > N C7 O (D (O > N m J (J77 W O 0 0 C) '� O > CD cn > (O A W (n 7 0 0) C31 (D 0) co J J co D) N MW O CO N A m W D Z W J w m N co A A N N W O J > ()1 > J O O) W m D n U) o cn O N v J N m N D W D-0o r- D N . go CO r- 0 0 0 c- ) O m D c U 3 o O Z U) of z -i N J N J (D N O W N N J W fJ1 C .m O O O O (D N w O D N (D _ o N O) v Z A N J O (D ry J O J > W > O) m W 7 '� N > (n (n A N J > O N (D N W (O A W tD C N J O _ N N OD O N Ut W (D W J O (O -Cl N O j > O W A (D J W COOA W A (WD Q) O O O O A JA W O > O V > (n O) (D (n (n OD J O A Cn N (n (O W W -� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -� n N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m > m o o O > AO N > > O O O O O O O0JO O NC O O W OO OO OW > D O NN >0) 0) E> O(D W V O O O O N 0) m J O W W W (D N N N W J 0) m V) O cn O J > A N J O > (D �, O O A O Ut O J O U) A J O J 0) W N A cn (n m p OD J O -+ Cn (),, W A — Co O J O Cl J N a) O > > A Z) J N J CD A D) A !_a 0) N (n O J N OD > W cn O c)) N (D O O (n U) W 0) (n 01 A O 0) N O O W A O A N W co (J) (D > Q1 (n J O O A N J N 07 O O A > m > W N O o. O [D P: Z cin W J d W > J A m (D (n W .A:::. --1 a N > A Cl) -I U) Ol U) N o N o 0) O W W (D .�N'. _ -+ 0) V J (D j 0) .J (D > W s J A p (n 0) A O :C. A J W > 0 W W CD J (n O W O) N W (D W " w w w w w w w w• w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w -n �' U7 cn (T A ' A A N A -t' A A A A A W N N N -� O O O IZ C N N -� m m m w A� N 1 O O O m 01 A O V O p 7 U O OT N O O O N m m A (D m O Cn O N A j J C2 n o o o o m n 0 CD (7 0 0 o m N m O (�' 0I o (o E Q < n Q m coi C-) m CD C N d N O 7c 7 N (D p (D O O m O C) Q m O O � cn cn o to m * o C7 CD O1 = (o C) oCL G 2. 0' cD m ncn 0 3 n m O m = CD o 0 0 0 o wi - - _ o C/) o 3 0 O a -n m d m _ CD °-' 2 In w n�i N 2 m Z -' °1 ° 3 3 °1 N m n - : m 2 D - 3 c _n C) d D m cn 2 o' Z � o n T N �I C CD o C (D S N (7 m n o . 3 D W N O O a w A Cn N N D N N V N A W (n N N (D N N W m -"` W N A m m J C. O J Co m m m m w CD co (n m O m N O m O J O N C) 0K3 :-j N W J m N s m Cn W m N m W A J W m N Cn m d 0 0" O W m A Ln O m V N -� O (D m O m O m Cn A (n CP A M O m Cn Co N mw V s m i m A A m U( N (n W N s W O V M A m (n p O O m � N A m -+ La W O m A O O 7 m (D Cr m CP J m m A J J (n M Ln A O CD W O Cn A m W N co N O V A co A O A O W O L" N -+ W W O N m O O co C D 7 O O 0 Z m Ncn n A O O W O W W W N W A (T N CD m W w m N O C -1 O N m .n m Cn CD O --j Ln W 1 m O J Lo cn W (n m A co W O O < Q7 Z A (J -h. m m Ln cn W m (T W m J m U7 N CD A J D) O G A A w --i m J W m O W CD m CT O O O (D s O O W V N ,� mD n =- o o cn O D.0 CD r D : Q� m r O c n O m > c v ' No O Z cn v � o Z A W w a m � D' O ON (D W Z1 m0 m N (D N O W O D m -+ Cn N N ((DD Z A 7 CD CT N N O_ N N w co w -+ N cn m O C A J J N m m W Co M V O m (D O (D V 07 A (D Cn (D i t Cn (D A ) N m Cn . W O O m -> m m O O m m w J w co 01 m W m � O m (77 W m O W J A m (D m N IV d m O O m O V m co (D m w Cl) (D m J (n m A m m m N V m CI( O — U( w W m W �! O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O V N O O O O CD O s � I-n D0 ' m m N CT V N W W J O co m m V co N m w m J (D C77 W (D A O W V m cn D) a O m A (D (D O V O O N J m O O W (D A O m O N m O J O n N W CD O O N W 1 V A m (D (D co m A (n N (D (Jt (D m (T7 p� O J O N m m U) m O J CD CD N j CD J CP N cn 01 01 .• O O( N A CD m A V J N J W V CD m m -+ (D Cl A (D O p m W m A N Cl) V N (J W (D J J J Cl m 1 m (D O A A co A O m W O O cn V J V co CD A W Cn 07 co (D Cn A A V (D OD -' m m N N -+ m A N J m (D (D m m N O m m � m (D m m m O J m J m J w Ln Co N N W O O w J N J O (D D D _ co:; o tD M w w A N N v 0 Z civ O N J i w W Cn (T m A W m cn CD m (D m m W V A W CJ7 m N m --• (D m m mCD N w O m O V m CD w CD m (D A m s A w N m N m to 0.... CT U7 w W W A IJ A (D (D m CT J CD m A m m m J w Nj. a A A A A A A a A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A m v N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z C > > O O O O O O O O O O ' O N G V (D co V O CT A W N O O (D V W Cr -Cl W N C1 n n n n n n Z Z ,c Z Z Z c c Z m 3 0 0 0 > > 0 3 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O j j O O o o r _ -0 D m w w () 3 0 m m m 0 m m o n 0 m 0 C- = o a Q a 77 � a d 3 0 m o v o 3 N o m m 0 0 O N > c Q n > O co 0 CD cn � x m n� m x (n (n s N n o (r 0 a q 3 m _� o a cD Q° o = CD -a (n 7rn — (D O Ell> 0 W > UV D c N > N ' O O d CT co N D 0 W co CD N A > N A (O cn > fb > O J CA w o N N (D N C co > N N m (D a o O o O > > W (D O A N Co A A O O N O W O C) A O W N N o O W CD W CD J O W Cn OD A CD N OO Q pi O (D N) COW CD > co N O O W ^� O O > A A w cD J J O O J cD A -+ O y N (D A (Q W V7 N N I W O co O 0) O O V W O (n O co (.T7 7 A w co Q m > O > W A m in A J N A W O -- A N (D W N > N N Co -> 6) O (n A W W Co A J CD 0 W J (Ji O > 0 O O co C: D 7 J w4. -, > O > N W co co A (T N W v N (n n N CT W W N W a O W J A A W J W A N (T W O). 0 0 --1 O J A N U7 O W N (D O co N O U7 O O A N > (A A a A > > C OD Z N (T N O (T L W cn U) V A co A CD w > O A CT > W ul < D m W (T p J Q) > N W N CD J W J CA -i A O O (T O (D N N --i ..� m .-i D n .=! N O 0 N (pl A N N N (A O w A CD N N A (A co- O (n O o cT (T N a cn W W N cn W co (P (A (A cD O N (D `� O J -I W j (T CD A CD W� CT (P CD W O1 N �1 N D A co W W (P O A A (D N A J O (T N (T D U CD r- D J (O N (D Oo N 0) -� m .� w 1 m > w 0 m J L O CO r w (D JI N cn W m J J cn (D W J NJ co Cn N O V > O V (D V J A O (D Ul J W m O 0 C7 O m is w 3' o OZ _ (n of Z A C N G (D 3 C1 O �7 O w J C: p CO D N < [D CT A 07 N (T O) A W CD > O W co W W (D CD CD W CD CD N M > Co N W CO V N > A O (D (D O co N " A U1 A (n m O W O O w N W .(P (n V M O A C' W W O W W J A A O W fr (A (A A -! N CT O O U7 > CD CD (T N V (P A N W > > m o -+ A CT a (D m O A N Cn W (D J V A W A0 J > (P V A > > O > W > T co > O co O co CA co W Ui Ln co A A W V O ((O O W ( D N CD A 0 0 0 0 0 0 o I o 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D O O o 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O o o O_ N O O O CD O O O s O O O N O O O > O O --+ O O CD > O > > (J (T W W J > W N N N (T W O) A W Cn -+ M 00 D O N > > �+ W N O A > Cb (n V M > J m CT W N > (D V N d A W A A w 'w N CT N O CD A N W O co U7 V J w CD N co [) O o O U7 0 O A O Nm O > O O N A V O O V N W J (O 0 n N m A J V N A (D > —� W N OD (T CO O W J O J (A (11 s w , D) O Ul w CT 0 co W O cD W > m 0) (D J > CT co N N J N O Cl) (n -� O O U1 N O W O N O O V U1 O) N co O O CO o W W co — O. p N Oo N > W N A Cn " O N A CT O N W O W W CT co m A A O O (A (0 N — co (T O m J -+ 0 N J O — W J O (D CT J W (n (T N co W CD A O) W (O M M NM W (n (O CD J CD A O A W (D W co (D O W W N O (D > CT CD co J if1 C7 2 V A a �) O N Ut W w W co O Co O) (D V N W J m W (P J N (D CA CT O (T J W (D (D > A a J CT ! CA (O o NA: (T CD O O co > O U7 > V_ w V > CD W O Ui .O J a CT O -11, ICD N. a CD (T m (A A (A O CD (T . Ln N (A a) a (D (o CD CT A O m CT (D co V O > N iJ A N co J w CD > W co co J w O s A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A •71 J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J :'V _J J J Iz C O ALJ W W W W W W W W W N N N N N O O 7 n O (D CD J m U1 A W N O m m m O J m A 'N"!i 1 O (D C1 C') o v v o O o o m m c) c) z �' x r. m > > m m m O m o o 3 =T S J N NN C C O CT (7 6 O a a CS (S 6 U D - C C C C C C C = = O 1 co co m (O (O X < G o o N N pCL n a D O D o D 0 o �Z Z Zai CD D o70 < no v =3 a m � D O oN co N u D D D aCD CL �. N N D- Da O a O N O m a Nn 0• O O O O 7 7 p N D m N Op M (on En a a D O a :3n a CL D [D N oo O D 1 1 A J 1 W C11 - _Cn J Ln W D o E' m m co A Ln -i W U7 CD j C L71 J O m M CD U, -4 m W A Ut CD m A (D m N N A O N v ) W (D W m O O J CD -N m (D 1 m J CD (A (D N J 0 Op a O J A N O A N O m O A O O A Ut — W (D J (o W W co -w W O (D Ln J N co co O A A m A A N J O N N N s A -+ J J O m (D A� m CT O O m Cn M co U1 N N Q) N U1 (11 j V CO co N W co N M W CP O W O Cn O W J (D (D J A N W O m Ln O CD Ln (D (D Ln N W m N En CD J O O m C: D 2. 0 o 'D o i Z U1 J N U1 A W d �O N (n C7 Cb m O m ? m A -� A A (D s N N J O Q' 00 O A -+ m U1 M W N O CD W W N CD J W A O A 7 < A W W O W (D m (b m -� (T N O J N A W W Cr C W n Z W W A -i U, -� W A' (D m V 1 W (D (D A (A O A O -� ,_•' �] m D n =;; n o O C/) O m J uJ N m O D D-0 O r D 90 00 O n n DO m -I C ami 3 O O Z w in m o Z -i m m N G (D 3 O O A O c ZJ m (b D T7 _ m N N Cn A A A N p7 CT A W M J O A m W m J W O Ut J O_ co m A N J J A _ A m m A W A N W O C N O W (T N ) A W W A N W — OD O A m m W J m N A A m (D O A (D J A W m W m Q) O N N (D W N m A (D O W co m (A O W Wm O A O O N J O N A (D — O -+ 3)CD (n J N .(D m N V 1 (D (D cn (A O O V m m CT m O 6 . 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q N O O O O O O — O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O J N V O O O O O N W O W W A w O O (D O �1 O W O N (D m A A (D N0 O w m O J N N W N N D C, A A U1 W (D m Q) N N O w 1 O A A m N O W N 8 m O m (D m N A W A m O O (T (D O CID (T m J (D O o (`t Cn CA [D -� N W N Cn (D M m J O O O N Cp U7 -+ m (D A y O (D co O N (n O J V (A W A N (D O m O W U7 (T J Cb -+ CD m W (D J m m W N O N O A J J m O co W W V U1 U1 p m D7 O A Ln -i (D O A W W A A O N A N CA Ln W CD m V m U1 A m �! W A J CA (D — (D N m O n O A m m (n A (D Cn (n J J CT Cn N A V N J (n (D W A m O co A A 0) CT) co A O (D N W 1 J A A N m W W (D co V N m m O co D 777 D C) D A�. _ �. U � N ...a v O :m:' fil O W m -+ W (31 A Ul j A m Ul W W V CD O m W W A W m C) m W m V N A' J J CD -� m s W J N _ W A V _ W (D W O O O_ A (D m N: — m A U1 -4 (D m cn V Il N( (D U1 W W (D CA m J W W W -+ 03 0 C)1 O co N N J N CJ1 O (n J A0) A -N -i iY v A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 71 J V J J J J J V V J J J J J J J J J IZ C a) m m w w m m J J V J J V W D) W W O O > > m Ut A W N � O V U7 W N -+ 0 to O J O) cn U) d r m C7 ZI O n 0 0 n Cl) r- -0 -V -0 'o fn (n (n (n (n 0 O O N O O O O D) ty y y (p (p 2 0 a C) 0 C-) n O 0 CD° 0 n n 0 7 w m 2 2 m w v v n�i obi O o o O o 0 3 v r' Ez -0 Z * -0 O ;7 C7 (n 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 ° ° m m 0 0 ° = = O m ; d s D 3 0 0 0 d < '�` o <. 0. z < D N 3 3 0 m' w m 0 : m o a 3 3 F w � a' -i 2 O 17 x 3 c D N 3 a D 3 x w m D 0 m o rn a o D X a rn TD ;aca N O m o Q 9 N W N A CT m W -i N N � N D �I 0 W Ut N m J (D A — J O (D O W N O O) m O) A W W A A A O W (D O m A A J m O N N (,q V V O A N O A — Vn O O) N U) O (D W U) N 00 a N --� J A Ln O) m A O m J CO A A 1 J A N J Ut = m O D O ) W m (D W O) m m (D A U7 m N N O O A U O) " A (A O N W OO tD W (O (D J (D CC) O y I-' --� V j W O W w N J N V m N CO A m U) N w cn Ln -� U7 U) w W (O A A O W (n s J O O o 0 w 4 D Z o o N 0 Z W W W W J O m N (.n � J W W A 7 C D) N) J N (T J W (D m W O m W m W U1 N N W A O G m D Z N W w O m J (T m O) W O) O U) O A N m O '--'I C Ai m D n 0 �O U) 0 O g m � -i (n °) �! oN D -I CL go m r- D O 0 n O mDi c U) j' o O Z N. m Q1 N N OV Z --IQ7 (71N (T U) A N .� W (D O) O U7 m d N J m (D J -• (D S O J 1, (D A j O C .77 w Ln 0) O) � v v 0 D CD m J W N N N v N O) d co m Ul Cl) Co V O (D O m N 3 (P N O W A m Cl) O A O W (D — CoA A 0 O O (D J J A A N W U) W J M M O 0 A J w J J w O) A �l m U( (D J W A J 0 M m O m O W (A m (P J W (n O N (D A O m m (v:;;: O.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a N 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W O O C w D O U7 W D) Ln V N w (D A m O w W O O O A 0) w::.:" -+ N m N (D U7 A (D J A A O) N O N _W m A O) ,n.,. O V N W w O (D (D M W N 0 n N 1 J w (D � A " (D O m (D j A Ln N O O O N; Cl) m w J O W A m w .N A w (D A m N O -+ U7 0) i (D m A Ul W A A — W (A 0 — m N p m Ln j I (T W m J co m A O w N m m W O O N N (D O Ol V (3) O O CO N w N O (D .-4 V (D m M m O) m Ln N m D) W A -> J A A m m J N O Co w N W J Co O O N D D n D A 2 — Co. O tD i Z CD �(D!.;�; V Q) N m J W O m N (O W (D JCD . :(O.:. (D �N (3) U( m m (D N (D W C) (A (D N U) co m A .M W A D) (D W (D m U1 (O O O) O U) O m m W m ' .Co., (D A O (D A w O) O O O U7 w O) J -+ A (D — LLLJ I CL to UD m -j (z -n c 0 C) C) 10 ::5 — — — > m 0 cn C> > CL 0 :3 7E' 0 0 -4 0 3 o > 0 0 o CL r— 3 3 :03 ocn 3 3 < C) 0 0 C). 'o FM C: --.3 :3 0 CD a G) to CD CD G) :3 to m CD CO O 0 a) m > 0 -4 CD co 0 > o to co -4 NJ P :'4 O p a CD to C:) co Ln la W A CD O :3 --j Nw C> N Cl co > 2 6 C.) z in La --j co CA m G co ct) 4 w m > <4 J'j 0 0 0 0 cl) o 0 -n Ili = 0 > >v0 > Ln go CO r— o 0 0 C) O mq C: Ln = o0 z in 3 Z to V N Cn -4 CL a O o 0 OD co r ;o m a) 0 OD cn 0) 0 co 0) C- (D Ul ri co 0 0) to CD Nco C> CD 0 0 CD W (0 M > -4 -4 0) t' 0 -1 0 C) ZQ�;'IE K) 0 CD 0 0 C) CO to M 0 o Lro W 00 co 0 CO 0 CD C� W CD 'CO. CA) O Co w 0) .......... a) c' ()I :V N Z! :-4 Lrl (No D ov: '- O co Ci (31 �; Ctrl'OF CONCORD ,. r 19:;0 Parkside Drive Hrle>i/M rjlien,i Vice n ierke Concord,Caliri)rnia 94519-`3518 / Gue S.I31�eke FAX: (9`17) 75)4diG?�f Ult Va M.H(Al'mcistcr Mark A/Peterson ..e Mar}'Rae Lehman,Cit}'G►erk AGER €3c / Thom/a.'J.\4'entling,C.itr Ti'eastn'er OFFICE OF T7iE CITY MANAG Tcle}ahone: (9`15) 671-3150 ��Mn ;IjEdward R._james,interim City Manager March 31,2008 Al / t Chair Federal Glover Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street Martinez, Cad 94553-1229 / r 1 ' Re: - Pro�rty Tax Administration Fee 1 . r Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: Upon review of the documentation provided in support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8,/2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration,Fe8 ,1he City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods useddn the calculation of this fee. As you are aware,/there has been a change in the transmission of a portio/n/hof Sales Tax (the"triple- flip") and Motor Vehicle in-Lieu(VLF)Tax to/local ageeficies�Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to bothth/r/e.counties and the cities. Currently these funds are transferred from the,State to the. es via the counties. The change in procedure and additional work is minor,.yet�biupon your staff report we estimate that our Property Tax Administration Fee has increased 1369/o. In other words, ! we calculate that the increase to the City of Concord�is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to$272,450' :' The-City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However, underlying the use of cost recovery is wb ib assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the full costs incurred,-n' o more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would mo/reAffiihe/! pay for a year's services of a full l� � sl of accountant—clearly an overstatement of cost, Restating the full property tax administration program to charge the agencies;receiving the"triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the face of logic,reasonableness-and the law governing this procedure for '" nn viii these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code,`Seetion 97.75),which states that/". ..For the 2006-07 fiscal year,and each fiscal,year thereafter;a county may impose a fee, charge,or r %r!rii / other Levy on a city for these services [calculation/of the"triple-flip"and the/VLF in-Lieu], but the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost of provtdmg these services. (Emphasis added.) rail/ e•ma k cityinfo@cixoneord.ca.us • website.:www.cityofconcord.org r r r i�llll . Chair Federal Glover March 31,2008 Page 2 k .t The State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain separate documentation for Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges,4as fees must be based on actual costs and actual costs relating to each type of charge migl't�tdiffer from one another." 1 i In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office,and generally accepted � 4 t + Nn h+k accounting principles with regard to cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respieetfully request that, at the Property Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April $;2008,the Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed t'o ihe�k "triple-flip" and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, 1 Edward R.Jame `� 1 Interim Ci Manager 4 1 4 ti REQUEST TO SPEAK FOIM (3 Minute Limit) I wilsh to speakIIIIIIII Agenda Item M I Complete this,form acid place itinthe upright box near the Date:l,. speaker's podium and wait to be called by the Chair: My comments will be: .0 General Personal information is optional. This speaker's card will be 1i incorporated into(lie public 11ecord of this meeting. I I I For � Name(PRINT): QiY° 1 11 II El Against I'Y1 a -F V' _ To ensure your pante is arurourtced �ectly,you Wray want[ irrclerde irs plrone[ic spelling I. III 1'{!I1 n ❑ I wish to speaklon the subject of. Address: CL 60 PA.V*6 i 4�fi 1�,a A-11 1A P III�I City: , Phone: I am speaking for:. ❑ Myself 1 li '��I IIIIIIIPElI do not want''.,to.speak but would like to Organization: I leave`comments for'a Board to consider 1 (Use the back of thislyorin) I ` 1111 I i. III'll REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (3 Minute Limit) I wish to sueaki ,on���Aaenda Item#: �� 1 Complete this forni and place it in the upright box near the Date: ,I speakers podium, and wait to be called by the Chair. i I1I My continents will be: L + General Personal information is optional. This speaker's card will be incorporated into the public record of this itteeting. I `(I'I ❑ For Name(PRINT): �1 �' � /��t ` I rI it El Against To ensure your name is arinou eed cory ectly,you may want to include its phonetic spelling I wish to speak on the subject of Address: IIIA. Cit i , rl Phone: I ' C 1 I ain speakiiag for: Myself �, ❑ 'I do riot want to sip e�ak but would like to 11. Organization: t �P uu, leave commentsf for the Board to consider 1111. (Use the back of this form REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (3 Minute Limit) I wish to sneak d;;!�I�Aaeada Ite,n . .��'I Complete this,form and place it iii the upright box near the Date: ,'i top, I speaker's podium,and wait to be�called by the Chair. '7General My comments will be: personal information ration is optional. This speaker's card will be incorporated into the public record of this riteeting. �;' ,'I �,I ❑ For Name(PRINT): �t I �vt(cz,n r., El Against To ensure your name is a nvun d comeedy,you may want to include its phonetic spelling I ;'i ;� I', II/wish to speak on the subject of: Address: r �.✓- 11 C I'. rc City: E u� -Q61 I Phone: I am speaking for:. Myself l /// ❑ Ido not wantlto,;speak but would like to El Organization: leave co en' '� or the Board to consider { (Use the back,0 f thl is for»t) ti-1-i 8/0 8 TI-E (18: 23 F_•1?: 9:.51252.1851 CITS. ta'l-.;: t.i4 A)-S '0 6 TL-h (j 21 4 FAA. 91512523651 (AI). M.Ar,AGE-X Contra Ccnta County Board Of SLIpevisors April 7, 2008 Page,2 .Staff recently received Contra Costa County's -p.roposi}d FY 2007/108- Przoperqr Tax Administrative Cost Recovery fees and lwerc extremely disapppinted tt.iat the recommendations, of I the SCO have not been follovred. The revenues collected for Sales and Use, Tax and Vel-ucle License Fee adjustinents have once again becii included the calculation of net revenue per -itirisdictiort. In a direct contrast to .what the SCOopined, -its, is then used to calculate the this net reverme, inc;i lusive of the additional adjustrnei property tax administration charges. In addition, no S!21�arate documenLati,:ni foi- Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle TAcense Yee charges was ,:)ffered as recommended by the SCO. -a tive We are.therefore lormally prOtesting the of Property 'Tax Administi Cost Recovery for FY 2)(007/08 as scheduled to be heLard at a public hearing lav the'Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors at your meetdrig scheduled. for Tuc�day, A.pril 8, 2008. Sincerely, Will Casey cc: City Council N11-1 rnbers John Cullen, Chief Administrative Officer a '5 243-1 04.,t)8,`08 TUE 0 23 FA92.5.:5?485.1 CITS. MANAGER X001 M, ---Oj a:o-865 Civic Avc;nue Pitnbur, Cafi orn.ia 9 i��i VlsoRs. OF}.FCC (')I THE MAYOR:: FOR IMMEDIATE TRANSMITTAL April 7, "2008 ' I I Contra Costa Cour7.ty Board of Supervisors 65-1 Pine Street Martinet. CA 94553-1229 Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: . in FY 2006-07, COUI:ties thrrlughout the Staf:e ( nC_1L-(J.irL;� Cc.nt1.-�1 i�p5i� Cc:�11n i-) began .. including Sales and Use Tax (Re,.,enue and Taxation. Gude sec on 97.68) alid Vehicle ' License Fee (Revenue Iand 7 axation Codi section Y770' adjustment uAou;its i11 their computation of property I:ax administration cost Marc:;. Thi, iricti-4sioli has led to Significant increases inlproperty tax adi-rdnlstr.ation cc) is for citi.c:s throuL;l (,)ut 1.he State. The City of Pittsburg; has been lut exceptionally bard by this change, having e=ndured a. massive :_,ice 7o increase in FY 7006-07/ - While 006-07Whi1e C:.ty staff did not agree with the Cow-ity"<; :.:tf rl�retari.ort that the Sales and Use Tax and Velucle License Fee adg-tstrnent arnounts .,l-touid be included in t<Le citiculation for administration charges, �S tait..vas EYW,a.re that tl-1e State Controller's Office h:-ic% been asked to weigh In on the issue and elected to wail: fc)r their opLirdon. normally protesting the County's llnterpretatlon. I TI-le SICU legal office offered. their opinion.irl a letter ;stated Jenuary 7, 2008- .lrf this letter, lef.fr•ey V. Brovrnfietd, Chien: of the Division. r A.-u('its e. r the Cont-r(.iller'-, Officcf stated ?17�}iTt:1!lf')li:!7 S' lZPi?t'!lG((: Ciii t7 �ii.11f�ii?7? =OAL' >i';-'t'7�ir.* :� .bi :e ii;i `��.%I)• �:l^:• Lf.''?'a L47/il::c'i to R'e-,;e73:1!'C711(i IT:7-ya or C' 4' :`'Cti:J)i �'b.i r''?:i sL li i? -11.)f)r:^!'1'I^il ft'-Ci j'7 j'r7!i_7't 7-' �,=C7'; tilIC7.l'!:';7 7?7 (?)'ut'!' :i+ (.�CiF1-?737.iif:iff:l7r1?77?�f)'i•Zi1Z'i CO_i Cfi:'71'cj. ti3::I3t (.1t'Ci?1:1! ;!:.1("f'. 'h.7t ?1•:' (T"ir,'1.17i� �i1C'77i11 be('i:arged iL'r!' I!'^, C:l,:' I - til 01c Ua'0[11MJl ,,V i!ich :•f7"'7�'C. T.ta'!71 C'(1:177:.3r't l7il;c r' :17?7'i 7hn cozintie, nu !!:7!!:::7:J .;.�7i7:'':iii :7i)( 17T7 C.'Yat'':'.?.(.'77 ,r'Jr ::.1'.... 17J7L1 USS T[il 17)7(I Vcincle Llcen t'. F,,e. (:!TldY{:'.:, r! tt":; YwgI 1st j ii,sed (7f7 :1L:7.(Q! CCs!,: C77iG lull' 1tctl.lr? r.• :r:a relitlll ;.p '4::! r:.fl: n{Char7;,,: I 04:[1,5.08 TUE (M: 24 kA 925252'-1851 (:11Y A.lA`,AG1:K 4/uv Contra Costa County Board of SuPevisol's April 7, 2008 Page 2 Staff recently received Contra Costa County's fp:oposed FY 2007'i)S '-`rop(?rty Tax Administrative Cost Recovery fees and IMOrf, extremely disappointed that the recommendations of ithe SCC) have not been followed. The revenues collected for Sales and Use Tax and Velucle License Fee adjustments ?lave once again been. included the calculation of net rev u-lue per jurisdiction. In a direct contrast to what the SCO opined, this net revenue, inclusive of the additional adjustments, is then used to calculate the property tax administration charges. In addition, no separate documentation foi— Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle ticense;Fee charges ivas offered as recommended by the SCO. I We are therefore formally protesting the Dctc>>zriin3tion of Property 'Tax ��clrllir:ist�ative Cost Recovery for ICY" /08 as scheduled to be heard at a public hearing by ti nc Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors at your meeting scheduled. for Tuesday, .". pri1 8, 2008. Sincerely, Wily Cas 6`1 %Mayor CC: Ci.ty Council Members john Chi-Ief Adrl-timstrat-ive Officer I. I I i i - I CITY OF CONCORD I I CITY COUNCIL 1950 Parkside Dive William D.Shinn,Mayor C:oncurd,Califbrnia 94519-2578 Helen M.Allen,Vice Mayor FAX: (925) 798-0636 Guy S.Bjerke Laura M.Hoffineister Mark A.Peterson OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Uonegid Mary Rae Lehman,City Clerk Telephone: (925)671-3150 Thomas J.Wending,City'I'reasllrrr Edward R.James,Interim City Manager March 31,2008 Chair Federal Glover Board of Supervisors County of Contra CI sta 651 Pine Street i Martinez, Ca 94553-1229 Re: . Property Tax Administration Fee I Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: Upon review of the documentation provided in support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8,2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration Fee,the City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods used in the calculation of this fee. As you are aware,there has been a change in the transmission of a portion of Sales Tax (the"triple- flip") and Motor Vehicle in-Lieu(VLF) Tax to local agencies. Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to both the counties and the cities. Currently these funds are transferred from the State to the cities via the counties. The change in procedure and additional work is minor,yet based upon your staff report we estimate that our Property Tax Administration Fee has increased 136%. In other words, we calculate that the increase to the City of Concord is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to $272,450. The City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However,underlying the use of cost recovery is a basic assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the full costs incurred—no more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would more than pay for a year's services of a full time accountant—clearly an overstatement of cost. Restating the full property tax administration program to charge the agencies receiving the"triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the face of logic,reasonableness and the law governing this procedure for these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code Section 97.75),which states that". . . For the 2006-07 fiscal year,and each fiscal year thereafter,a county may impose a fee,charge,or other levy on a city for Ithese services [calculation of the"triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu], but the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost ofproviding these services. (Emphasis added.) e-mail: cityinfo®ci.concord.ea.us • website: www.cityofctmeord.org I i Chair Federal Glover March 31,2008 Page 2 I The State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain separate documentation for Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges,as fees must be based on actual costs and actual costs relating to each type of charge might differ from one another," In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office,and generally accepted accounting principles with regard to cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respectfully request that, at the Property Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April 8,2008,the Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, I Edward R. Jame Interim City Manager) i i I I I I I I i 01-:18'`03 TLE (18: :5 FAX 92525"4851 CITS. MANAGER X0 11 APR U 0 2000 ?,� f . 65 .CiV3C r1N'c:nue • Pirrsburg, Calift)rriia )'4;65 i CLERK BOARD �_ CONTRA CC;;A CCV(50RS C I 'RWITH C'(FPCE (1F -['HE MAYOR FOR IMMED'[A'rE 'IRA145MITT L April 7, ?Ooh, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 6_?1 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553-1229 Dear Chair Glover incl einbers of the Board: In FY 21706-07, cour.ties thrcnrg,hout the .Stale r,nc:sidling C(:.rib.-'a 4a�ia (-cunt-) began includirl;� Sales clad 1-1 Se Tax 1.<evenue and 1«xrltlG:n Cc,:ie �'"'.1��� atl:-i Vehicle `_sec-.OI.Z ) License Fee (Revenue land Taxation Codi section. x'7.70) adjustment .:rr.Iortn.t5 in their computation of pro IIty I:a:� admtrustration cost I ire-,. This inr:i_:.Sial(. has led to significant incri:'ases In ;property tax adn-Linlstration. (_o is for c'itics through()ut tale State. The City of Pittsburg has been flit exceptionally hard by this chiurlge, having endured a. massive 375% increasc in FY 7006-07. - •r I - - �11.lile C.:t] staff did not agret_ ��1Lll fife _orintv'.:, :. t�r;�retati.on that flue a11a 1 Use Ta;: and Vehicle License Feel adjustment arnounts 4-louid be inc',tided in tate ca.lcuiation f-or . - administration charges, staff was aware that tire! State Controller's Office (S)'':_.C)) ]-.:gid beell i asked to weigh in on the issue and elected t<) Nva-l: for, their (T)MI011 1—_)—f ire formally protesting t1-ie County's tllterpretat1on. The SCO legal office offered. their-opinion in a letter ciateci ianuary 7, 2G0.S'. .in this letter, Jeffrey V. Brc�Nv'nfield, Chief of the Divislon. i; r�>,ll its fr7r the �7tate i=oi�(fr;,Llcr' , Office state(a I A. Y.�r,: C:i?:i ?i 11 llti�['_,:11� .lili:i � :�:lii_. .... ...:1'.:'..:�`;.S .:il.`..'t- 1; :ii:lli�;il?'l:i•'. (.0_i:- Ili' .1)77plf'010111'7v Rel 72077.( (i'i:1 i 74 i ;nlI7E:� 7f alt.;I li'iil �1=f.' iii li}?l7 �'C'?:_tC 1.1:'ll:. 5 !1 'l, f E :�]1/ i I'r 'l)l:ti ('rZ,''7.1/vT. r.' i`f?.R.c i.%1'1111: ai:d TII.Yfl r1U?'1 r, -00 OI l:'Sf:'('tiJ7i �Zb.J "vmi'Lc:l::l: i "(?3'7'?''! i f7"'(;;�)F.!'t7.' 77i i ,-'7der :0 f.Tc.'er?17'11+ 114:1?7l77115 t1-afii:6 i0_i Share-s. de; rill , fl!', '1.17;; 7 T,t�`lll C'C17d 77:tc'1 �'i.]ii1 V '07 il;ed tical ccz n1i1C; Y!'1i 1;! !l:7CI:f:I ) ^5 . 11? `:.'�'il:''iZ:;: and Lls� Tax lid v"C" lcle T Gi: 71 :'. t'r:f' ('12i;YLY:S.. :.7 +C:': ring f;E ba z7 ed on acival cLSf- a71d 011, actual co5,.3 reiat M,,,, ip ca'--h tlj,'.7°of char 04.•0,`1-(18 'lTUE 08: L4 FAX 9Y5 .5'4651 LF.j vv� Contra Costa County Board of Supevisors April 7, 2008 Page 2 Staff recently received Contra Costa C unt•s's FY 2007,108 Propert}= Tax Administrative Cost Recovery fees and extremely disappointed tfiat the recommendations of the SCO have not been folle-v ed. Ilse revenues collected for Sales and Use Tax and V i hicle License Fee adjustments have once again been included the calculation of net revenue per jurisdiction. In a direct contrast to what the SCO opined, this,net revenue, inclusive of the additional. adjustmc�n.t:s, is than used to calculate the property tax administration. charges. In addition, no supai-ate documentation for Sales and i Use Tax and Vehicle Lacense;Fee charges was ).ffered .�s recolzune-tided by the We are therefore forry ally Protesting the Deterzllin��.tron of Property Tax Aclmir:istzative Cost Recovery for FY 2007;08 as scheduled to be. heard. at a public hearing by thy- Contra Costa County Board cif Supervisor; at -%rour meeting, s:c_l-ieduled. for 'Tuesday, April 8, 2008. Sincerely,. Will Casey Nilayor cc: City Council hTembers Jahn Cullen, Chief Administrative Officer i I i . I STATE BOAR® OF EQUALIZATION STAFF LEGISLATIVE ENROLLED BILL ANALYSIS I Date Amended: Enrolled Bill No: AB 2115 Tax: BradleylBurns Local Author: Committee on Budget I Related Bills: SB 1096 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review,) SB 1115 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) SCA 4 (Torlakson) ILL SUMMARY I This bill makes technical corrections-and clarifying changes to SB 1096 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 211, Statutes of 2004), the loca�vernment Budget trailer bill. Among its provisions, this bill would provide that, during the revenue exchange period (also known as the "Triple Flip") the applicable local sales and use tax rate in the case of a county is 1 percent, and in the case of a city is 0.75 percent or less (this change replaces thel language that required a county or a city to impose a sales and use tax at a rate as specified in the local ordinance as of January 1, 2004, reduced by 0.25 percent). The provisions of this bill would take effect immediately. Although this bill affects property tax, sales and use tax, and vehicle license fee revenues, this analysis will discuss the sales and use tax provisions only. The property tax and vehicle license fee provisions will not be discussed because they are not within the scope of administration by the Board. I ANALYSIS Current Law The Sales and Use Taxes Law (commencing with Section 6001 of the Revenue and Taxation .Code), provides that a sales tax is imposed on retailers for the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail. The use tax is imposed upon the storage, use, or other consumption of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer. Either the sales tax ori the use tax applies with respect to all sales or purchases of tangible personal property, unless specifically exempted or excluded from the tax. The statewide sales and use tax rate is 7.25 percent. Of the 7.25 percent base rate, 6 percent is the state portion and 1.25 percent is the local portion. However, beginning July 1, 2004, the state tax rate increased by 0.25 percent, from 6 to 6.25 percent, and the local tax rate decreased by 0.25 percent, from 1.25 to 1 percent. The revenues from the 0.25 percent state tax rate increase are to be deposited. into the Fiscal Recovery Fund and dedicated to the repayment of the deficit bonds. The components of the state sales and use tax rate of 6 percent are as follows: • 4.75 percent is allocated to the state's General Fund which is dedicated for state general purposes (Sections 6051 and 6201 of the Revenue and Taxation Code); • 0.25 percent is allocated to the state's General Fund which is dedicated for state general purposes I(Sections 6051.3 and 6201.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code); • 0.50 percent is allocated to the Local Revenue Fund which is dedicated to local ........................................._................_....._......_...........__.........;... _.........._..... ...._ . .. _._.... ...... . . _ ..._._.....__. ... .......... ....._. .._........_ ......._......__...._.....__..._ . This staff analysis is provided to address various administrative, cost, revenue and policy issues; it is not to be construed to reflect or suggest the Board's formal position. I j CIT'OF C10NCORD I CITY COUNCIL 50 Parkside Drive \1'illiam I).Shinn.Afacrn Concord,California 94519-2.578 Helen M.Allen,Vice hiayur (9`-'5)=795-063(i Guy S.Bjerke Laura A1.Horfnteister Mark A.Peterson 2" Mary Rae Lehman,City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CIT'MANAGER Te-lephone: (925) 671-3150 7, oe r� Thomas J.l4'entling,GityTreasurer IEdward R fames,Interim City Manager March 31, 2008 Chair Federal Glover I Board of Supervisors I C) County of Contra Costa I 651 Pine Street Martinez, Ca 94553-1229 I Re: . Property Tax Administration Fee Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: I Upon review of the documentation provided in support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8, 2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration Fee,the City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods used in the calculation of this fee. As you are aware,there has been a change in the transmission of a portion of Sales Tax (the "triple- flip") and Motor Vehiclelin-Lieu (VLF)Tax to local agencies. Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to both the counties and the cities. Currently these funds are transferred from the State to the cities via the counties. The change in procedure and additional work is minor, yet based upon your staff report we estimate that our Properly Tax Administration Fee has increased 136%. In other words, we calculate that the increase to the City of Concord is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to $272,450. The City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However, underlying the use of cost recovery is a basic assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the full costs incurred—no more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would more than pay for a year's services of a full time accountant—clearly an overstatement of cost. Restating the full property tax administration program to charge the agencies receiving the "triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the face of logic,reasonableness and the law governing this procedure for these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code Section 97.75),which states that". . .For the 2006-07 fiscal year, and each fiscal year thereafter;a county may impose a.fee;charge,or other levy on a city for these services [calculation.of the"triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu], but the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost of providing.these services. ". (Emphasis added.) :i l Ie-mail• cityinfoOd.eoneord.ea.us • website: www.cityofeoneord.org I Chair Federal Glover March 31,2008 Page 2 f _ I The State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain separate documentation for Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges,as fees must be based on actual costs and aIdual costs relating to each type of charge might differ from one another. i In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office;and generally accepted accounting principles with regard to cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respectfully request that, at the Property Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April 8,2448,the Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip" and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration.1 Respectfully, I " Edward R. Jame Interim City Manager I f i i CrrY OF CONCORD' I CITY COUNCIL 101x)Parkside Drive y'rn William D.Shinn.Ma - 1., I ' Concord,California 94519-2578 Helen M..411cn;\'iceMati•ur (925) 79S 0636I Guy S.Bjerke Laura A4.HulTmeister Mark A.Peterson Ice Q^ Mary Rae Lchman,City Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER -�� t Telephone: (925) 671-3150 ThomasJ.`A'entling,City Trcasurer Edward R james,Inlcrim City Manager I March 31, 2008 I Chair Federal Glover Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street Martinez, Ca 94553-1229 j Re: . Property Tax Administration Fee Dear Chau Glover and Members of the Board: Upon review of the documentation provided in-support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8, 2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration Fee, the City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods used in the calculation of this fee. As you are aware, there has been a change in the transmission'of a portion of Sales Tax (the"triple- flip") and Motor Vehicle in-Lieu (VLF)Tax to local agencies. Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to both the counties and the cities. Currently these funds are transferred from the State to the cities via the counties. The change in procedure and additional work is minor, yet based upon your staff report we estimate that our Property Tax Administration Fee has increased 136%. In other words, we calculate that the increase to the City of Concord is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to $272,450. The City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However, underlying the use of cost recovery is a basic assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the.full costs incurred—no more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would more than pay for a year's services of a full time accountant—clearly an overstatement of cost. Restating the full property tax administration program to charge the agencies receiving the"triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the face�of logic,reasonableness and the law governing this procedure for these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code Section 97.75),which states that". . .For the 2006-07 fiscal year,and each fiscal year thereafter,a county may impose a fee;charge,or other levy on a city for these services [calculation of the"triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu), but.the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost of providing.these services. (Emphasis added:) - I e-mail• eityinfo@ci.eoneord.ea.us • website.: www.eityofconeord.org . I lChair Federal Glover March 31,2008 Page 2 The-State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain separate documentation for Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges, as fees must be based on actual costs and actual costs relating to each type of charge might differ from one another. In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office,and generally accepted accounting principles with regard to cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respectfully request that, at the Property Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April 8,2008,the Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip" and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Edward R. Jame Interim City Manager II . . ' I I Cl„'OF CONCORD I CIT]'COUNCIL dA 50 Parkside Drive William D.Shinn.Max Concord.Calitilrnia 99519-257S I Helen M.Allen,Vice Mavor F:\\: (925) 79,5-(I636 Gu) S.Bicrke Laura M.Hoffnteisier Mark A.Peterson �... Mary Rae Lehman,(,it),Clerk OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER ^ � Telephone: (925) 671-3150 ioncor ThurnasJ.\Arntling,CityTrcasluer IEdward R..)an]es,Interim City Manager I I March 31, 2008 . I Chair Federal Glover Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street Martinez, Ca 94553-1229 i Re: . Property Tax Administration Fee I Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: Upon review of the documenItation provided in support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8, 2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration Fee, the City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods used in the calculation of this fee. As you are . aware,there has been a change in the transmission of a portion of Sales Tax (the"triple- flip") and Motor Vehicle in-Lieu (VLF)Tax to local agencies. Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to both the counties and the cities. Currently these funds are transferred from the State to the cities via the counties. The change in procedure and additional work is minor, yet based upon your staff report we estimate that,our Property Tax Administration Fee has increased 136%. In other words, we calculate that the increase to the City of Concord is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to$272,450. The City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However, underlying the use of cost recovery is a basic assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the full costs incurred.—no more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would more than pay for a year's services of a full time accountant—clearly an overstatement of cost. Restating the full property tax .,�. administration program to charge the agencies receiving the"triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the facelof logic,reasonableness and the law governing this procedure for these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code Section 97.75),which states that". . .For the 2006-07 fiscal year, and each fiscal year thereafter,a county may impose a.fee, charge,or other levy on a city for these services [calculation of the"triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu], but.the fee, charge,or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost of providing these services. m hasis added. � P ) I I i l . i. a-mail• eityinfo®ei.eoneord.ea.us website: www.cityofconcord.org I. Chair Federal Glover March 31,2008 Page 2 The State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain se Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges,as fees separate documentation for Sales and U must be based on actual costs and actual costs relating to each type of charge might differ from one another." In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office,and generally accepted accounting principles with regard to cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respectfully request that, at the Property. Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April 8,2008,the Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip" and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Edward R. Jame Interim City Manager . I cr . � i CITY OF CONCORD ' i CITY COUNCIL .1050 Parkside Drive i William D.Shinn.Malor Concord,California 94519-2578 I Helen M.Allen,Vice Mavor r•.&x: (9 5) 7984636 Guy S.B•e ke I Laura A1.HoCAneister :. Mat k A.Peterson 2 _ Mary Rae Lehman,City Clerk OFFICE OF"IE CITY MANAGER -G �- ` @ "�1 Thomas).Wending,Cite Treasurer Telephone: (9_0) 67]-3150 G�f � Edward R jautes,Interim City Manager t..t . March 31, 2008 - Chair Federal Glover I Board of Supervisors I County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street Martinez, Ca 94553-1229. Re: . Property Tax Administration Fee Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: Upon review of the documentatiol provided in support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8, 2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration Fee, the City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods used in the calculation of this fee. As you are aware,there has been a change in the transmission of a portion of Sales Tax (the"triple- flip") and Motor Vehicle in-Lieul(VLF)Tax to local agencies. Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to both the counties and the cities. Currently these funds are transferred from the State to the cities via the counties. The change in procedure and additional work is minor,yet based upon your staff report we estimate that our Property Tax Administration Fee has increased 136%. In other words, we calculate that the increase to'the City of Concord is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to $272,450. The City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However, underlying the use of cost recovery is a basic assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the full costs incurred—no more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would more than pay for a year's services of a full time accountant—clearly an overstatement of cost. Restating the full property tax administration program to charge the agencies receiving the"triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the face of logic,reasonableness and the law governing this procedure for these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code Section 97.75), which states that". . .For the 2006-07 fiscal year, and each fiscal year thereafter,a county may impose a fee;charge,or other levy on a city for these services [calculation ofthe"triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu], but the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost of providing.these services. ". (Emphasis added.)I I e-mniL cit)rlinfo®ci.concord.ca.us we6silr.:www.cityofconeord.org . f Chair Federal Glover i March 3l,2048 . Page 2 The State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain separate documentation for Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges,as fees must be based on actual costs and actual costs relating to each type of charge might differ from one another." In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office,and generally accepted accounting principles with regard to cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respectfully request that, at the Property Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April 8,2008,the 1 Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip".and the VLF in-Lieu so that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, i I Edward R. Jame Interim City Manager CITY OF CONCORD CITY COUNCIL 1950 Parkside Drive I William D.Shinn.Mayor Concord,CaliRa'nia 94519-25-78 Helen M.Allen,Vice Mayor r•,m (925) 79541636 Gut S.Bjei Laura M.Huf neister . .... .... . Mark A.Peterson OFFICE OF'mE CITY MANAGER0= Mar} Rae Lehman,Cii1•Clerk Thomas]. fin g,City Treasurer Telephone: (925) 671-3150 One it Edward Rjames,Interim City Manager March 31, 2008 . Chair Federal Glover Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street Martinez, Ca 94553-1229 I Re: . Property Tax Administration Fee Dear Chair Glover and Members of the Board: Upon review of the documentation provided in support of the Public Hearing to be held on April 8, 2008,addressing the Property Tax Administration Fee, the City of Concord has determined that it must protest the methods used in the calculation of this fee. As you are aware, there has been a change in the transmission of a portion of Sales Tax (the"triple- flip") and Motor Vehicle in-Lieu (VLF)Tax to local agencies. Under prior programs these amounts were transmitted directly from the State to both the counties and the cities. Currently these funds are'transferred from the State to the cities via the counties. The change in procedure andladditional work is minor, yet based upon your staff report we estimate that our Property Tax Administration Fee has increased 136%. In other words, we calculate that the increase to the City of Concord is approximately$157,000 raising the proposed charge to the City of Concord to $272,450. I. . The City of Concord understands, supports and makes use of the concept of cost recovery. However, underlying the use of cost recovery is a basic assumption and understanding that the cost recovered represents the full costs incurred—no more,no less. The increase you propose for the City of Concord alone would more than pay for a year's services of a full time accountant—clealrly an overstatement of cost. Restating the full property tax administration program to charge the agencies receiving the"triple-flip"and the VLF in- Lieu, flies in the face f logic,reasonableness and the law governing this procedure for these programs(Revenue and Taxation Code Section 97.75), which states that". . . For the 2006-07 fiscal year, and each fiscal year thereafter,a county may impose a fee,charge,or other levy on a city for these services [calculation of the"triple-flip"and the VLF in-Lieu], but the fee, charge, or other levy shall not exceed the actual cost.of providing these services. (Emphasis added.) i e-mail: cityinfo@d.concord.cams • webtile. www.cit),ofconcord.org I Chair Federal Glover i +^ March 31,2008 Page 2 The State Controller has agreed with this opinion in stating"that counties must maintain separate documentation for Sales and Use Tax and Vehicle License Fee charges,as fees must be based on actual costs and actual costs relating to each type of charge might differ from one another. I. In light of the law,the opinion of the State Controller's Office, and generally accepted accounting principles with regard too cost recovery,we in the City of Concord respectfully. request that, at the Property Tax Administrative Fee Public Hearing on April 8,2008,the Board of Supervisors direct staff to recalculate the portion of the fee attributed to the "triple-flip" and the VLF in-Lieu sIo that its imposition is in compliance with State law. Thank you for your consideration.) Respectfully, Edward R. Jame Interim City Manager I I.