What’s your property worth? Some Plumas County residents opened their tax bills recently and found that their homes are valued at 50% more in 2024 than they were in 2023.
“That is just baloney,” said Mike Gardner, a Portola resident.
He was one of a handful of irate homeowners who complained about dramatically increased property assessments at the Nov. 5 meeting of the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. Some reported hikes as high as 70% in their property taxes based on dramatically higher property assessments.
Plumas County Assessor Cynthia L. Froggatt said her department reviews property assessments annually to determine their value. She uses a process established by California law that allows a maximum 2% annual increase in property valuation.
“We look every year and review the market to see if (a property value) is adjusted to it,” she told the supervisors.
Something must have gone haywire in 2024, said Greg Hagwood, chair of the board of supervisors. “The county needs a different process to avoid the shock so many people are experiencing,” he said.
The current assessment process
Property assessments in California are governed, in part, by two voter-approved ballot measures enacted in 1978. Proposition 13 rolled back most local assessments to 1975 market value levels. Adopted in June, this landmark property tax limitation set most future property tax increases to a maximum of 2% per year.
Proposition 8, adopted in November 1978, amended Proposition 13 to allow temporary reductions in assessed value. When a property’s value has been lowered, the assessor reviews it every year to decide if it should be increased.
According to Froggatt, that’s what has happened in this case: assessments were temporarily reduced over the past several years, and have now been raised to the correct levels. Froggatt warned county taxpayers in September that some tax bills might be “a bit of a shock.” Economic gains are forcing higher property assessment, which are reflected in higher taxes, she said.
“We’ve got to fix this.”
Jeff Engel, Plumas County supervisor
Homeowners and supervisors alike questioned the process used by Froggatt and her department. The valuations reported by his constituents are “unbelievable,” said Supervisor Jeff Engel. “We’ve got to fix this.”
In California, the taxable value of real property on the local roll must be lower than the base-year value of the property and the current market value of the property. Froggatt said she uses the State Board of Equalization to review and prove the values her department assigns to properties.
“I don’t care about the State Board of Equalization. I care about the citizens of Plumas County,” Engel said.
Whenever the assessor considers increasing a property valuation it is limited to a 2% per year increase, Froggatt responded. “We cannot go beyond the base-year values,” she said.
“It sure looks like you did,” said Gardner.
Rhonda Pappas, of Lake Almanor Country Club, said her 2024 property assessment was 66% higher than the previous year. “How is that fair?” she asked, commenting on Zoom. When she received her tax bill she called the assessor’s office and asked to see the documents that served as a basis for the assessment.
“I was told I was not privy to that information,” Pappas said.
Froggatt apologized and said, “I don’t know who you spoke with <but> that’s not how it works. You are privileged to that information.” At the time the appraiser was in training and not available to explain further, she said.
“I hope he got some good training,” said Engel.
Pappas said the person she spoke with was Froggatt. She did drop the assessment, Pappas added.
Froggatt said there are probably some pockets of the county where the appraisals should not have been increased: “It’s possible we need to adjust values down.”
Is the assessor playing “catchup?”
The sudden increases in assessments raised questions about whether they have been done annually, as state law requires. The hikes caught many property owners by surprise and are a “conversation starter” countywide, said Hagwood.
Perhaps the county is “playing catchup” for appraisals that should have been made annually, he said. “Would it be possible to implement the increases in tax assessments over two or three years?”
Hagwood suggested continuing the discussion Nov. 12, when other concerned citizens could be heard.
“Something that hasn’t happened for a number of years now is suddenly happening in one fell swoop.”
Greg Hagwood, Plumas County Supervisor
“The sense I get is that something that hasn’t happened for a number of years now is suddenly happening in one fell swoop. There has to be a better way,” said Hagwood.
Plumas County Treasurer-Tax Collector Julie White said the county needs a better way to communicate with the public over property assessments and beyond. While Froggatt posts information about assessments on the department website, “how would the general public know?” White said.
Plumas County department heads are restricted in how they can communicate with the public, said Plumas County Auditor-Controller Martee Graham. Many citizens do not have access to the internet and the assessor’s website, she added.
The supervisors are scheduled to delve further into the current process of countywide appraisals. Hagwood called for alternative solutions, which will be presented at the board’s Nov. 12 meeting.
