Facing widespread frustration and harsh criticism over recent tax increases, the Plumas County Board of Supervisors agreed Dec. 3 to consider ways to defer payments over several months or years.
Despite a legal opinion that no state or county regulations have been violated, the hour-long discussion included eruptions of anger over the way property owners learned that their increased property values would mean increased taxes — over 70% in some cases.
“The bottom line is that we’re all pissed off that our taxes got dramatically increased,” said Janet Crain of Meadow Valley. Her taxes went up 71%, she said, “And I don’t know how I’m going to pay it.”
Legal notification versus ‘common sense’
The Dec. 3 discussion was the third meeting devoted to public anger over property valuations made by the county assessor’s office. At their Nov. 12 meeting, the supervisors asked Interim County Counsel Josh Brechtel to clarify the process used to notify taxpayers that the assessed value of their property assessments had increased. They also wanted information about the board’s authority to make corrections to assessments and to defer taxes.
Before the supervisors could hear Brechtel’s opinions, they had to waive their attorney/client privilege, which they did quickly and unanimously.
Brechtel said he found no violations in the process the assessor’s office used to announce hikes in the 2024 assessed values of around 22% of the county’s 27,000 privately-owned parcels. Assessor Cynthia Froggatt posted the changes on the county’s website. She did not send individual notifications by mail.
Code 619 allows notice of reassessments to be placed on the county website, as opposed to announced individually by mail.
Josh Brechtel, Plumas County interim county counsel
That is in keeping with a process unanimously approved as a resolution by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors in 2012. Code 619 allows notice of reassessments to be placed on the county website, as opposed to announced individually by mail, Brechtel said.
“We definitely have substantial compliance with notice,” he told the supervisors.
Compliance with the law does not always equate to common sense, said Mike Gardner of Portola. “I don’t know of anybody that goes to the website of the assessor to find out if their taxes are going to be higher–about 50% for me,” he said.
The notification may be legal, he continued, “But the anger and the injustice and the non-common-sense approach that has occurred to this population is beyond my comprehension.”
Plumas County Chief Appraiser John Ridley may have exacerbated the issue with his explanation of Proposition 8 as a tool for adjusting property taxes to market values. Prop 8 is one of two state ballot measures enacted in 1978 that govern much of the current assessment process. Proposition 13 rolled back most local assessments to 1975 market value levels. Proposition 8 amended Proposition 13 to allow temporary reductions in assessed value.
Prop 8 is intended to be a temporary decline in assessed value when economic markets dip, Ridley said. The assessor can recapture that value when the markets return, increasing property taxes with an increased property valuation. The higher 2024 assessments are adjusting what he called “discounted” assessments in 2009, when the real estate market crashed.
“It’s incumbent upon all of us to live within our budget.”
John Ridley, Plumas County appraiser
“Everyone got very comfortable with their discounts… It’s incumbent upon all of us to live within our budget,” Ridley said.
Gardner responded: “I take deep offense at some assessor telling me that I should live within my means with a 50% increase that I didn’t know about… The crux <of the problem> is arrogance.”
Crain said she was also offended by Ridley’s comments, adding, “Maybe you want to reverse that unanimous decision that you took in 2012.”
Supervisor Dwight Ceresola agreed, directing county staff to create a resolution to rescind the 2012 resolution and bring it to the board for action.
Deferring property taxes
Crane and other citizens facing sharply higher property taxes asked Nov. 12 and again Dec. 3 if they can be deferred, allowing more time to make payments.
“Yes,” said Brechtel. “The county has that ability.”
But it’s a process that has to be developed in conjunction with County Tax Collector Julie White, he said. White, who said the sudden hike in taxes had put a burden on her office, will work with the county counsel’s office and other departments to find a way to ease the financial hardship.
“I don’t think any of us are at all interested in having this happen again,” White said.
Auditor/Controller Martee Graham said her office, the treasurer/tax collector and the assessor should all work together “and keep the lines of communications open.” Her office is affected when tax rolls change, she said.
Property owners can also appeal their assessments to the county assessor. Froggatt, the assessor, said her office has received 39 appeals. She has adjusted around 10 of them.
Citizens unhappy with their adjustments can further appeal to the Plumas County Board of Supervisors, which also serves as the county board of equalization.
“Nothing’s going to make this pretty.”
Greg Hagwood, Plumas County Board of Supervisors chairman
The entire county has been affected by the property tax hikes, said Supervisor Greg Hagwood, chair of the board of supervisors. Whatever action the supervisors take, “the bottom line is there’s going to be a lot of people that are not very happy.”
Deferment may not be the cure that people are looking for, but it can “soften the blow a bit outside of the appeal process,” Hagwood said. “Nothing’s going to make this pretty,” he added.
