Date: 02/02/2010

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB10-1129

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Moved to postpone House Bill 10-1129 indefinitely.
Moved to refer House Bill 10-1129, as amended, to 		FAIL
FAIL


04:55 PM -- House Bill 10-1129

Representative Bradford, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 10-1129, concerning consequences related to a higher actual valuation of property for the purpose of levying the property tax. Representative Bradford discussed the process by which assessors notify certain taxpayers of increases in property value and the tax due on properties. She explained that the bill would allow taxpayers to pay the property taxes based on the prior year’s assessed value if a taxpayer is going through an appeals process. The bill would allow a taxpayer who is appealing an increase in his or her property value that is more than 300 percent from the previous year to only pay the property taxes based on the prior year’s assessed value until a final order or decision on appeal is reached. This requirement would not include property value increases for a reclassification of the property; or improvements, modifications, or additions to the property. The bill also allows taxpayers to be reimbursed for attorney fees and other appeal expenses if the final adjusted value of the property is less than one-third of the initial value that was included in the original notice of valuation to the taxpayer. Once a final adjusted property value is set, a taxpayer has 30 days to pay any property taxes due.


05:02 PM

John Nisley, Grand Mesa Resort Company, testified in support of the bill and explained that taxpayers are required to pay taxes on the assessed value, even in cases where tax payers appeal an increase in their property value. Mr. Nisley discussed the ongoing appeal process by the Grand Mesa Resort Company.


05:05 PM

John LeFebvre, Colorado County Treasurers Association, testified against the bill and discussed the process for property evaluation by county assessors. Mr. LeFebvre talked about the process of collecting property taxes and explained that the bill would require counties to pay court costs and attorney fees. Mr. LeFebvre addressed questions from the committee concerning large increases in their property value and the collection of taxes and abatements.


05:11 PM

Paul Jacobs, County Assessor, City and County of Denver, testified against the bill, explained that cases where property value increase more than 300 percent are rare. He discussed situations where property owners can see significant increases between assessment years.


05:16 PM

James Mackley, Grand Mesa Resort Company, testified in support of the bill, discussed the ongoing appeal process by the Grand Mesa Resort Company, and talked about the need for changes under House Bill 10-1129 to improve the accountability of county assessors. Mr. Mackley addressed questions from the committee concerning the 300 percent increase in property value owned by the Grand Mesa Resort Company and the provisions in the bill for awarding attorney fees to the taxpayer.


05:20 PM

Ed DeCecco, Office of Legislative Legal Services, addressed the committee to discuss provisions in the bill concerning attorney fees. He explained that the bill provides that taxpayers could receive court costs, including witness fees, and reasonable attorney fees if the final adjusted valuation is less than one-third of the valuation included in the notice of valuation.


05:24 PM

Committee discussion ensued concerning the provisions in the bill that entitle the taxpayer to be awarded legal fees.
BILL:HB10-1129
TIME: 05:29:51 PM
MOVED:Bradford
MOTION:Moved to refer House Bill 10-1129, as amended, to the Committee on Finance. The motion failed on a 5-6 roll call vote.
SECONDED:Priola
VOTE
Acree
Yes
Apuan
No
Bradford
Yes
Liston
Yes
Massey
No
McKinley
Yes
Priola
Yes
Schafer S.
No
Vigil
No
Soper
No
Peniston
No
Not Final YES: 5 NO: 6 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:HB10-1129
TIME: 05:31:04 PM
MOVED:Schafer S.
MOTION:Moved to postpone House Bill 10-1129 indefinitely. The motion failed on a 5-6 roll call vote.
SECONDED:Apuan
VOTE
Acree
No
Apuan
Yes
Bradford
No
Liston
No
Massey
No
McKinley
No
Priola
No
Schafer S.
Yes
Vigil
Yes
Soper
Yes
Peniston
Yes
Not Final YES: 5 NO: 6 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


05:32 PM

The committee adjourned.