BILL ANALYSIS
AB 824
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 13, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 824 (Harkey) - As Amended: April 29, 2009
Policy Committee: Revenue and
Taxation Vote: 9-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill allows an assessment appeals board to hear and decide
property tax appeals filed in another county by a person who has
a conflict of interest with the board in his/her county. The
bill also expands the scope of individuals prohibited from
representing clients before the appeals board to include certain
employees of the county counsel.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Negligible impact on state revenues.
2)The bill states that if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that this bill contains costs mandated by the
state, reimbursement will be made pursuant to existing law.
However, reimbursable mandated costs, if any, are likely to be
minor.
COMMENTS
1)Background . Local assessment appeals boards are established
to resolve disputes between county assessors and property
owners. All counties in California provide for assessment
appeals proceedings. In 19 counties, the county boards of
supervisors hear the appeals. In the other 39 counties, board
members are appointed by the local boards of supervisors.
Existing law prohibits employees of the clerk of the county
board of equalization or assessment appeals board from
representing themselves or clients before the board in
equalization cases. It instead requires that an alternate
AB 824
Page 2
board be formed to hear these cases.
2)Purpose . According to the sponsor (the California Association
of Clerks and Election Officials), the creation of an
alternative board to hear certain appeals cases is a time
consuming process. This bill is intended to allow the use of
another county's already assembled board, thereby
"guaranteeing that the members of the special panel will be
individuals who are technically qualified and are experienced
in adjudicating property tax assessment appeals". The sponsor
notes that program would be voluntary for both counties
involved. The expansion in the number of individuals
prohibited from representing clients before the appeals board
reflects the inherent conflict that exists for employees of
the county counsel that advise the board or represent the
county assessor before the board.
Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081