COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

County Counsel

DATE:

September 6, 2004

BOARD MEETING DATE:

September 28, 2004

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Thomas F. Casey III, County Counsel

SUBJECT:

Correction of Property Tax Roll, APNs 009-542-010 through 009-542-110 and 009-541-310, 299 Imperial Drive, Pacifica

Recommendation

Approve a change to the 2003 tax roll, and a corresponding tax refund to Harry B. Lewis, et al. (“Lewis”), to reflect that a change in ownership of the property located a 299 Imperial Drive, Pacifica (the “Property”) was partially exempt from reassessment under section 63.1 of the California Revenue & Taxation Code (the “Code”).

Background

In 2003, the San Mateo County Assessor’s staff made a 100% reassessment of the Property, a multi-parcel apartment building located in Pacifica. Thereafter, the Property’s new owners presented the Assessor with documentation establishing that the 2003 change in ownership was, in part, a parent-child transfer, which is partially exempt from reassessment under section 63.1 of the Code.

Discussion

Section 63.1 of the Code provides, in pertinent part, that the full value of a transfer from a parent to a child of property consisting of a principal place of residence, or the first million dollars of any other real property, shall be exempt from reassessment. Here, the Assessor fully reassessed the Property upon its 2003 transfer, notwithstanding that the transfer was, in part, from a parent to a child.

Pursuant to section 4831.5 of the Code, which allows for corrections to the tax roll due to errors caused by the assessee, the Assessor proposes to correct the roll to reflect the application of section 63.1 of the Code.

Vision Alignment

The implementation of this proposal will further commitments and assist in achieving goals set forth in the County’s Shared Vision 2010 report. Specifically, this proposal implements the commitment of providing “responsive, effective, and collaborative government.”

Fiscal Impact

The fiscal impact of this action is estimated to be a $72,164.28 decrease in the 2003 roll, and a corresponding tax refund of the same amount. The County’s General Fund share of the refund is 14% of the decrease (i.e., approximately $10,103).