CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM

Transcription

1 City and County of Broofield, Colorado CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMORANDUM To: Fro: Prepared by: Mayor and City Council Charles Ozaki, City and County Manager Tai Yellico, Deputy City and County Attorney Meeting Date Agenda Category Agenda Ite # July 24, 2012 Special Reports 15 ( b ) Agenda Title: Board of Equalization Report 2012 First and Second Quarters Suary This report suarizes the activities of the Board of Equalization (BOE) during the first and second quarters of There were no BOE eetings during the first quarter; BOE et on April 16 th and June 18 th during the second quarter and reviewed 14 requests for Abateent or Refund of Taxes for tax years 2009, 2010, and These properties are classified as: Residential (1); Coercial Real (9); Coercial Personal (2); or Vacant Land (2). Of the requests, seven were Approved (in whole or in part), and seven were Denied. The estiated Broofield portion of the tax adjustents fro abateents for the second quarter in 2012 is $75, A ore detailed listing of any adjustents to value and taxes refunded for each taxpayer is included in Attachent 1. One appeal to the Board of Assessent Appeals (BAA) for two properties for tax years 2009 and 2010 was received during the second quarter. There are currently five appeals to the BAA pending on vacant land or coercial real property. No requests for arbitration or appeals to District Court were received during the first or second quarters. Financial Considerations The estiated Broofield portion of the tax adjustents fro abateents for the second quarter is $75, Broofield s financial projections take into consideration property tax adjustents. None Inforation only. Proposed Actions/Recoendations 15 (b) - Page 1

2 Page 2 BACKGROUND During any given tax year, Colorado property taxpayers ay appeal property values for that year as said values are established by the Assessor. The initial appeal is to the Assessor. The decision of the Assessor can be appealed to the local county Board of Equalization (BOE). The BOE's decision can be appealed to the State Board of Assessent Appeals (BAA), District Court, or binding arbitration. After the tax year, if the taxpayer has not previously appealed value, an abateent petition can be filed to the BOE requesting a lowering or refund of taxes, and the BOE's decision can be appealed to the State BAA, the Colorado Court of Appeals, and the Colorado Supree Court, in that order. The taxpayer ust exhaust each level of appeal to be able to proceed to the next. In general, the property tax appeal process can be diagraed as follows: ASSESSOR COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION BINDING ARBITRATION or STATE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS or DISTRICT COURT COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS COLORADO SUPREME COURT 15 (b) - Page 2

3 Page 3 The constitutional aendent that established the City and County of Broofield allows the City Council to perfor or delegate the duties of the various boards and coissions that provide county functions. To address property tax appeals, City Council adopted Chapter 2-66 to the Broofield Municipal Code in 2001 establishing Broofield's Board of Equalization, which consists of one councileber, one alternate councileber, and four citizen ebers. City Council also authorized the appointent of independent hearing officers to hear appeals and ake recoendations to the BOE for final decisions. The role of the Board of Equalization, as set forth in the code, is to review the valuations recoended by the hearing officers and correct any errors. The property tax appeal process established in the Broofield code draws fro the experiences of larger counties like Denver, Jefferson, Arapahoe, and Boulder which have also taken advantage of the statutory option to use paid hearing officers to conduct the foral hearing process, question witnesses, review appraisal evidence, and recoend a decision to the County Board of Equalization. The use of experienced, professional hearing officers has proven effective in providing for an independent review of valuation issues, in conducting large nubers of hearings in the short tie frae for appeal allowed by statute, and in offering an in-depth review of valuation inforation on larger coercial properties. In 2002, Council approved Ordinance No to clarify that the BOE has final authority with regard to valuation appeals and tax abateent petitions, and to establish the liits of staff authority to settle tax disputes after the BOE has ade a final decision should the taxpayer wish to appeal to the next level of review at the state. City Council has requested that the Board of Equalization file quarterly reports of its activities. The BOE did not eet during the first quarter and held two eetings during the second quarter. SECOND QUARTER ABATEMENT PETITIONS If a property owner has failed to file an appeal of the value of property within the current tax year by the statutory deadline, taxpayers ay still appeal their values by filing Petitions for Abateent or Refund of Taxes. During the second quarter, the BOE ade decisions with regard to 14 requests for abateent or refunds for Tax Years 2009, 2010, and 2011 for property classified as Residential, Coercial Real, Coercial Personal, or Vacant Land. Additional details are provided below and in Attachent 1. Residential The Request for Abateent or Refund of Taxes for tax year 2011 subitted by Paul J. and Elizabeth M. Licht for residential property located in the Country Estates Subdivision, Filing 8, was considered at the April eeting. BOE approved the request in part based on additional inforation provided at hearing by Petitioner. Coercial Personal Requests for Abateent or Refund of Taxes subitted by McKesson Health Solutions for tax years 2009 and 2010 were considered at the April eeting. BOE approved the Written Mutual Agreeent of Assessor and Petitioner. Coercial Real Requests for Abateent or Refund of Taxes subitted by Chick-Fil-A, FSP 390 Interlocken Corp., WDCI, Inc., and McData Corporation for tax years 2009, 2010, or 2011 were reviewed at the April eeting and resolved as described below: 15 (b) - Page 3

4 Page 4 BOE denied the requests subitted by Chick-Fil-A for tax years 2009 and 2010 based on the Appraiser s recoendation that the Cost and Market approaches support the current value. The request subitted by FSP 390 Interlocken for tax year 2009 was denied based on the Assessor s recoendation, because the tax year 2009 value for this property was previously adjudicated through the Colorado Court of Appeals. BOE approved the Written Mutual Agreeent of Assessor and Petitioner for the McData Corporation for tax years 2009 and Consideration of the request subitted by WDCI Inc. for tax year 2011 was continued fro the April eeting to the June eeting to allow Petitioner tie to provide a tenant rent roll with inforation fro January 1, Following consideration at the June eeting, BOE supported the Assessor s recoendation that the valuation for 2011 be sustained because the vacancy rate for 2011 was siilar to previous years. Questar Acadey subitted requests for Abateent or Refund of Taxes for tax years 2009, 2010, and 2011, seeking a change in tax status/classification fro coercial real property to exept because the property was used as a charter school. BOE supported the Assessor s recoendation for denial because Petitioner did not provide necessary docuentation for the property to be classified as exept, like docuentation proving the property is owned or leased by a qualified charter school, as required by state statute. Vacant Land Requests for Abateent or Refund of Taxes subitted by Chick-Fil-A for tax years 2009 and 2010 for a.872 acre vacant coercial lot used for excess parking were also reviewed at the April eeting. Based on the Appraiser s recoendation considering Cost, Market, and Incoe approaches, BOE approved the request in part. The State Property Tax Adinistrator has also approved the above referenced abateent petitions and refunds. Nuber of Requests for Abateents (by Schedule #) Approved (in whole or in part) Denied Continued Total Tax Estiated Broofield Portion of Tax $245, $75, PROCEDURE FOR REFUNDS If a refund of taxes is required, Broofield reits a check for the total aount of the refund to the taxpayer. The portion of the refund owed by other taxing jurisdictions is reibursed to Broofield by reducing future tax distributions to those other entities. The property tax estiates in Broofield s budget for the following year are then adjusted down by the abated aount attributable to Broofield s portion of taxes. State statute also allows any taxing entity to ipleent a teporary ill levy increase to recover abated tax dollars. 15 (b) - Page 4

5 Attachent 1 to CC Meo/BOE Report First and Second Quarters Petitions for Abateent or Refund of Taxes Reviewed by BOE Shown by Property Classification O OE Mtg Date etitioner 1-12 [No eetings were held in 1st Quarter] st Quarter 70 w CL. ^. d n 3 c d 7 r D v a ax Year riginal/ Assessor Actual Value etitioner's Requested Actual Value OE Decision (0 3 3 OE Decision of Actual Value otal Tax (if any) Broofield Portion of Tax /16/2012 Licht, Paul J. and Elizabeth M. x , ,500 App in Part 600, Sub-Total Residential Property /16/2012 Chick-Fil-A Inc. x ,467,000 1,000,000 Denial 1,467, Chick-Fil-A Inc. x ,467,000 1,000,000 Denial 1,467, FSP Interlocken Corp. x 2009, 45,121,230 44,600,000 Denial 45,121, McData Corporation x ,668,240 20,040,000 Approval x 20,420,000 85, , McData Corporation x ,668,240 20,040,000 Approval x 20,420,000 85, , /18/2012 WDCI Inc. x ,696,520 5,750,000 Denial 6,696, Questar Acadey x ,820 class change Denial 709, Questar Acadey x ,820 class change Denial 709, Questar Acadey x ,580 class change Denial 631, Sub-Total Coercial Real Propert 170, , /16/2012 McKesson Health Solutions x ,132,530 1,066,459 Approval x 1,057,390 35, , McKesson Health Solutions x ,793, ,830 Approval x 854,810 32, , Sub-Total Coercial Personal Property 68, , /16/2012 Chick-Fil-A Inc. x ,390 App in Part 435,000, 2, Chick-Fil-A Inc. x ,390 App in Part 435,000 3, Sub-Total Vacant Land 6, , nd Quarter 245, , rd Quarter th Quarter 2012 Totals 245, , (b) - Page 5