|
|
|
|
|
COUNTY OF SAN MATEOInter-Departmental Correspondence |
Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder |
| |
DATE: |
April 30, 2003 |
BOARD MEETING DATE: |
May 13, 2003 |
| |
TO: |
Honorable Board of Supervisors |
FROM: |
Warren Slocum, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder |
SUBJECT: |
Agreement to Participate in State-County Property Tax Administration Grant Program for FY 2002-03 |
| |
Recommendation |
Adopt a resolution authorizing the President of the Board of Supervisors to execute an agreement with the California State Department of Finance to continue participating in the State-County Property Tax Administration Grant Program (AB 589) for FY 2002-03 to receive a grant in the amount of $2,220,001, subject to the County's achievement of performance criteria between February 1, 2003 and January 15, 2004. |
| |
Background |
The State-County Property Tax Administration Loan Program (the "Loan Program") was launched in 1995 and later extended as a means to fund the otherwise unreimbursed costs of county property tax administration. The Loan Program authorized a state loan that was forgivable upon the recipient county's achievement of specified assessment performance goals. |
| |
San Mateo County began participating in FY 1995-96 and has continued to do so through FY 2001-02. Each fiscal year, our performance earned forgiveness of a $2,220,001 loan to improve tax administration. Cumulative loan resources have funded our implementation of new secured, unsecured, and supplemental assessment systems, our new GIS (geographic information system), as well as various property tax administration activities of the Assessment Appeals Board, County Counsel, Tax Collector, and Controller. In that period, we have enrolled properties valued at more than $10 billion and collected an additional $100 million in tax revenues. |
| |
In 2001, the legislature enacted the State-County Property Tax Administration Grant Program (the "Grant Program"). Motivated by the increased tax revenues yielded by the Loan Program and modeled after it, AB589 provides annual grants for fiscal years 2002-03 through 2006-07. |
| |
Discussion |
Grant money is paid at the end of the fiscal year, but only if prior year goals were met. Our performance year for the FY 2001-02 loan ended March 31, 2003, and we met our goals by January. For continuity, our agreed performance year for the FY 2002-03 grant will begin February 1, 2003; we must report our performance by January 15, 2004. The bottom line measure of performance is the total change in assessed value-potential tax dollars-derived from specified audit or appraisal categories. Success equals increased revenues in an amount equal to or higher than the grant amount. Grant funds may not supplant the County's base level funding for the Assessor, and the Assessor must maintain base staffing and use grant proceeds for specified tax administration purposes. Upon successful performance, we need not return unused proceeds and may roll over excess funds to the following fiscal year. |
| |
By the written request of the Assessor and the County Manager, the County may opt to participate for each successive program year, for the original or lower grant amount and the original performance requirements, unless we have exercised our right to renegotiate terms of performance in the event of major misfortune or calamity affecting at least one percent of the County's assessable parcels. In turn, the State is not obligated to make a grant in succeeding years if performance goals have not been met, or the State may make a grant in a lesser amount. |
| |
Loan Program funds have enabled significant reductions in processing backlogs. Further, we successfully resolved major litigation involving airlines and Genentech, thus helping to establish statewide valuation standards and practices in the airline and biotechnology industries. Improvement activities continue as we further integrate systems and personnel, and we foresee further benefits to stakeholders in the County and cities, and to owners and other customers. |
| |
As the legislation requires, the Assessor has consulted with the Tax Collector and Controller prior to submitting the expenditure plan to the Board of Supervisors. Each of them will share equally in the $300,000 allocated to the Supplemental Property Improvement Project. County Counsel's Office will receive $144,000 to offset attorney costs associated with this program. County Counsel has reviewed and approved this agreement, and the State Department of Finance has verbally approved it. |
| |
Vision Alignment |
This agreement will serve County's commitment to partnerships that facilitate responsive, effective, and collaborative government and its goal of making government decisions based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain." Our experience in this fiscal management partnership is proof that this program can reliably yield meaningful administrative improvements and substantial revenue growth. |
| |
Fiscal Impact |
There is no Net County Cost. Annually to date, the predecessor loan program has generated an additional $100 million in tax collections. This agreement will secure access to grant funds that we believe promise similar or better yields. |
| |
cc: |
Lee Buffington, County Tax Collector-Treasurer |
| |
Tom Huening, County Controller |
| |
John Maltbie, County Manager |
| |
Paul Scannell, Assistant County Manager |
| |
Thomas F. Casey III, County Counsel |