AgdaPkt 2003-09-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

is a common practice among California assessors when the prior year value of the property is less than the base year value of the property (the value assigned upon change of ownership or new construction) and the current year, market value of property is equal to or higher than the computed base year value for the current ,year. Such instances occur when the prior year value of the property was determined by a Propusition 8 appeal and the condition causing reduction (e.g., recession in the real estate market) has ceased to influence the value of property. The court ruled that the California Constitution and the California Revenue and Taxation Code limit the year to year change in value of property to 296 except in situations described in law but not limited to the instances mentioned above. The court also found that the California Constitution does not authorize a temporary decline in the base value of property that can be restored at a rate higher than 2 %. In December 2002, the Orange County Superior Court defined as a litigation class all of the people in Orange County subject to recapture. The Court entered a Final Judgment on April 18, 2003. In 2002 two other Superior Courts (Los Angeles and San Diego) ruled differently on the "recapture" issue. Therefore, the issues of uniformity and equal protection for each taxpayer statewide must be addressed. When lower courts differ, the subject matter is often subject to a uniformity review. On June 12, 2003, the Orange County Assessor and the Tax Collector, in conjunction with the County of Orange, filed a notice of appeal of the action in the Court of Appeal of the State of California. This appeal process can take 1 -2 years to complete. The Agency is unable to predict the effect on Tax Revenues if the ruling described above is ultimately determined to have applicability to property within the Project Area. M ... , FrIn As described in greater detail below (see "LIMITATIONS ON TAX REVENUES "), Article XIIIA of the California Constitution provides that the full cash value base of real property used in determining taxable value may be adjusted from year to year to reflect the inflationary rate, not to exceed a 2% increase for any given year, or may be reduced to reflect a reduction in the consumer price index or comparable local data. Such measure is computed on a calendar year basis. For fiscal year 2003 -04, the County Assessor applied the maximum inflationary factor as determined under Article XIIIA of 2 %. Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, which significantly affected the rate of property taxation, was adopted under California's constitutional initiative process. From time to time, other initiative measures could be adopted by California voters. The adoption of any such initiative might alter the calculation of tax increment revenues, reduce the property tax rate, or broaden property tax exemptions. See "LEVIITATIONS ON TAX REVENUES - Property Tax Rate Limitations - Article XIIIA." Levy and Collection The Agency has no independent power to levy and collect property taxes. Any reduction in the tax rate or the implementation of any constitutional or legislative property tax decrease could reduce the Tax Revenues and, accordingly, could have an adverse impact on the ability of the Agency to make debt service payments on the Bonds. Likewise, delinquencies in the payment of property taxes could have an adverse effect on the Agency's ability to make timely debt service payments on the Bonds. The County currently allocates 100% of the Tax Revenues levied on the secured and unsecured property tax roll to the Agency, regardless of the actual amount of payments made by taxpayers under an arrangement similar to the "Teeter Plan" (described below). 6Ls