Agenda - 06-18-2013 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

28 1 Chair Jacobs clarified that option A offers the most options subsequent to the Board's 2 approval and then permutations can be chosen later. 3 Commissioner Gordon asked what level these plans will be prepared over the summer. 4 Jeff Thompson said summer efforts will include programming, schematic designs, and 5 getting the project to a point that it can come back to the Board in a format that is 6 understandable. He said the question in September will be whether to approve the drawings to 7 begin the building process with a bid award in December and grand opening in June. 8 Commissioner Gordon said it seems that things are farther along than deciding what 9 might be chosen. 10 Jeff Thompson said there will be a point where the Board needs to instruct on specific 11 plan additions. 12 Commissioner Gordon said that the direction should be option A with an alternate of 13 option C. 14 15 b. Information and Resolution Regarding the Next Revaluation of Real Property 16 The Board discussed the optimal year for the next revaluation including information 17 about current market trends and statistics, current economic indicators, potential impacts, and 18 potential full list and measure; and to consider approval of a resolution establishing the year for 19 the next general reappraisal of real property in Orange County. 20 Dwane Brinson, Orange County Tax Administrator, referenced a memo and said that 21 there are two parts to this presentation. The first is the potential delay in reevaluation, and the 22 second addresses the possibility of finding inaccurate records during the re-evaluation process. 23 He said that the economy is improving and the sales ratio tells you what percent of the 24 market value is represented by the tax assessment. A ratio of 1.03 indicates a tax assessment 25 of 103% of market value. He said that the stats of the current market are steady and in line. 26 He said that the quantity of sales is improving. He said that his main reason for recommending 27 a delay is that, by the time a 2015 reevaluation is done, tax assessment and market value 28 would be the same. This would mean roughly no change in tax assessments. He used the 29 chart to illustrate this joining of values. 30 He said the second issue is to determine what happens when an inaccurate record is 31 found during the process. He reviewed the re-evaluation process and said there are instances 32 where tax records do not reflect the actual features of the house. He reviewed a general 33 statute listing the three instances for a tax refund: 1) Clerical error; 2) Illegal tax; and 3) Tax 34 levied for an illegal purpose. He reviewed examples where tax value did not match house 35 features and said there is no refund for those situations. He said that there is agreement for tax 36 refunds when taxes are levied on structures that do not exist. 37 He noted that the Real Estate Commission and the International Association of 38 Assessing Officers (IAAO) both recognize a 5% margin of error in assessing properties. 39 He said that the desire is to postpone the reevaluations until 2017 and then to make 40 every effort to get values and records straight. 41 Commissioner Dorosin clarified that the recommendation is to postpone re-evaluations 42 until 2017 because values are getting too close for any substantive changes now. 43 Dwane Brinson answered yes. 44 Commissioner Dorosin referred to information about the School of Government and 45 clarified that the Commissioners are not being asked to do anything related to that. 46 Dwane Brinson said that the practice in Orange County does not do refunds for 47 instances of square footage being off or an appraisal coming in different. 48 Commissioner Dorosin clarified information in the abstract about hiring new people to 49 do reevaluations in 2017.