Relates to the determination of adjusted base proportions in special assessing units which are cities for fiscal year 2027.
Summary
This bill amends the Real Property Tax Law to change how adjusted base proportions are determined in a special assessing unit that is a city for fiscal year 2027. Under the bill, the local legislative body of the city would determine the percent increase in the current base proportion of any class over the prior year’s adjusted base proportion, rather than having that increase determined under the existing statutory formula. The bill caps that increase at 5 percent and requires the local legislative body to make the determination by December 1, 2026.
The bill also addresses the possibility that 2027 property tax bills may already have been sent before the act takes effect. In that case, the city must take whatever steps are necessary under state and local law to implement the new proportions, including revising proportions, resetting tax rates, and issuing amended tax bills. It preserves taxpayers’ obligations for installments already due and payable before amended bills are sent, and allows the city to decide which installments will be reflected in the amended bills.
Impact
The bill would temporarily alter the property tax administration rules for a city that is a special assessing unit, giving the local legislative body direct authority over a key component of the tax apportionment process for fiscal year 2027. It would affect the Real Property Tax Law provisions governing adjusted base proportions and could require recalculation of class shares, tax rates, and billing if enacted after initial bills are issued. The practical impact would fall on the city government, property taxpayers, and any classes of property subject to the special assessing unit system.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history available, so the bill’s sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call data. Based on the text alone, the measure appears administrative and targeted, suggesting it is intended to provide flexibility to the city in setting property tax proportions for one fiscal year rather than to make a broad policy change. The absence of opposition or support records means no clear public sentiment can be inferred from the available materials.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the shift of authority from the existing statutory method to the local legislative body, which could affect how much each property class pays in taxes. Another possible issue is the bill’s retroactive or corrective effect if tax bills have already been sent, since it authorizes amended bills and recalculated rates after the fact. Taxpayers and property owners may be concerned about uncertainty, while city officials may view the bill as necessary to manage fiscal-year 2027 assessments and billing.
Relates to increasing the number of units subject to an assessment cap; provides that the assessment roll of a special assessing unit wholly contained within a city shall identify those parcels classified in class two which have fewer than thirty-five residential units.
Mandates that any surplus state tax revenue received in any fiscal year would be refunded to the taxpayers of this state on a proportional basis in relation to the personal income tax liability incurred by the taxpayers in that fiscal year.
Mandates that any surplus state tax revenue received in any fiscal year would be refunded to the taxpayers of this state on a proportional basis in relation to the personal income tax liability incurred by the taxpayers in that fiscal year.