| Contact Us: |
Kern County Taxpayers Association
331 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield Ca 93301
Phone:661-322-2973
Fax:661-321-9550 |
|
| Announcements |
Posted by: mturnipseed on 09/01/2009 01:42
Updated by: mturnipseed on 09/01/2009 01:42
Expires: 01/01/2014 12:00
Kern County Assessor's Office and Assessment Appeals
Comments to the Kern County Board of Supervisors
By Michael Turnipseed, Executive Director
Kern County Taxpayers’ Association
September 1, 2009
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board. I am Michael Turnipseed, representing the Kern County Taxpayers’ Association.
At last week’s meeting, your Board confirmed the July 21 decision to supplement the budgets of the Animal Control and the Library Departments with funds used from the Strategic Reserve Account.
Two additional requests to find the needed funding for the Assessor’s office and the Probation Department were referred to the CAO.
We received several phone calls from our members asking this question: “Is the Animal Control Department’s Public Education and Enforcement Team (PEET) a higher priority to our county than giving the Assessor’s office the tools he requests to certify the tax roles and defend the values he certifies against appeals?”
Comments to the Kern County Board of Supervisors
By Michael Turnipseed, Executive Director
Kern County Taxpayers’ Association
September 1, 2009
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board. I am Michael Turnipseed, representing the Kern County Taxpayers’ Association.
At last week’s meeting, your Board confirmed the July 21 decision to supplement the budgets of the Animal Control and the Library Departments with funds used from the Strategic Reserve Account.
Two additional requests to find the needed funding for the Assessor’s office and the Probation Department were referred to the CAO.
We received several phone calls from our members asking this question: “Is the Animal Control Department’s Public Education and Enforcement Team (PEET) a higher priority to our county than giving the Assessor’s office the tools he requests to certify the tax roles and defend the values he certifies against appeals?”
In addition, one of your members made the following comment:
“There is a real distinction between a homeowner with a valuation difference of opinion and a company with a significant tax liability – these companies, who, strategically, year after year, underestimate their values – we must aggressively and assertively defend the Assessor’s values and our responses.”
We are very concerned with the tenor of this comment. Taxpayers do not underestimate their property values. The Assessor’s office is responsible for determining the assessed valuation of property, not the taxpayers.
Let’s review the property assessment process for major commercial properties, including oil and gas:
• The taxpayer provides the assessor with reams of financial information, including income forecasts.
• The assessor reviews and audits the taxpayer’s financial records.
• The Assessor then establishes the assessed valuation and applies the appropriate tax rates.
• The taxpayer and the assessor’s office meet and review the proposed assessed valuation. Usually, any differences and issues are settled and the tax role is finalized.
• The vast majority of disagreements on the assessed value of commercial properties are settled during the meet and confer process.
• If, however, agreement is not reached, the taxpayer’s roll is still finalized and the taxpayer may elect to proceed with an assessment appeal.
We are not here today to discuss or represent out-of-county property owners, or non-KERNTAX members who hire commission-based consultants to appeal their assessed valuations.
Today, we are representing our members, companies with a local presence in Kern County.
The high number of appeals this year resulted because the Assessor’s office has changed some policies and procedures without seeking input or opinion from local taxpayers. So it should be no surprise that taxpayers are challenging the policy changes through the appeals process. This is directly opposite of the open, public input driven process used by the Resource Management Agency. This is unfortunate to say the least.
The key policy changes by the Assessor’s office include:
• Kern County is now assessing 100% of well costs on the supplemental roll. 30% of well cost are fixtures, which are exempt from supplemental assessments by California law. Prior to policy change Kern County only assessed the non-fixture portion of well costs on the supplemental roll.
• Kern County is now assessing replacement wells on the supplemental tax roll. Replacement wells were previously not assessed. Replacement wells represent a maintenance expense and should not be assessed.
• Kern County has changed its determination of what represents maintenance expense and what represents new construction investment. The County is now capturing maintenance expenses as new construction. This arbitrary change unnecessarily inflates PROP 13 base year values.
This year’s large number of appeals stem from changes of policy and procedures. The process will work its course. Local taxpayers are rightfully exercising their right to appeal property tax assessments. Let the Assessor do his job by giving him the tools he needs to do his legally required job.
The number one priority for the Assessor is properly valuing assessments which will then result in taxpayers paying the correct amount of property taxes.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
|
| Comments |
| The comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for its content.
|
|
| What's Related |
| These might interest you as well
Announcements
|
|
