Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Date:03/23/2010
ATTENDANCE
Time:01:36 PM to 02:18 PM
Acree
X
Apuan
X
Place:HCR 0111
Bradford
X
Liston
X
This Meeting was called to order by
Massey
X
Representative Peniston
McKinley
X
Priola
X
This Report was prepared by
Schafer S.
X
Raegan Robb
Vigil
X
Soper
X
Peniston
X
X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call
Bills Addressed: Action Taken:
SB10-138
HB10-1362		Referred to the Committee of the Whole
Amended, Referred to the Committee of the Whole


01:37 PM

The committee chair, Representative Soper, called the meeting to order.


01:38 PM -- Senate Bill 10-138

Representative Peniston, prime sponsor, presented Senate Bill 10-138, concerning the award of expenses in a proceeding to appeal the valuation of property for property tax purposes. Representative Peniston explained that the bill addresses an adjustment obtained by a taxpayer following an appeal from a county board of equalization. She explained the process of appealing the valuation of property, the tax valuation appeal process, and discussed a ruling in the court of appeals in the case of Gerganoff v. Board of Assessment Appeals,which ruled that either a county or the taxpayer was responsible for court fees as fixed by the court or board of assessment appeals. As a result of this ruling, current law is interpreted to mean that if a decision on property a tax valuation appeal is in favor of the taxpayer or the county, the losing party is authorized to cover procedural and witness costs as determined by the court or board of assessment appeals.


01:43 PM

Patrick Boyle, Colorado Assessors' Association, spoke in support of the bill and described the property tax valuation appeal process. Mr. Boyle discussed the result of the Gerganoff case and explained that Senate Bill 10-138 would make each side in a property tax valuation appeal responsible for its own costs.








01:46 PM

Paul Jacobs, City and County of Denver, spoke in support of the bill and described numerous problems with the current property tax valuation appeal process.


01:53 PM

Jim Everson, representing the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners, and Eric Butler, representing the Jefferson County Assessors Office, spoke in support of the bill and discussed problems with the current property tax valuation appeal process.


01:56 PM

Bob Hullinghorst, representing the Colorado County Treasurers Association, spoke in support of the bill and talked about problems with court costs burdening homeowners that failed to have a favorable ruling in the appeal property tax valuation appeal process.


01:58 PM

Terry Campbell, Colorado Counties Inc., testified in support of the bill.


01:59 PM

Representative Peniston entered closing comments on the bill.
BILL:SB10-138
TIME: 02:00:47 PM
MOVED:Peniston
MOTION:Moved to refer Senate Bill 10-138 to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on a 10-1 roll call vote.
SECONDED:Acree
VOTE
Acree
Yes
Apuan
Yes
Bradford
No
Liston
Yes
Massey
Yes
McKinley
Yes
Priola
Yes
Schafer S.
Yes
Vigil
Yes
Soper
Yes
Peniston
Yes
Final YES: 10 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS



02:02 PM -- House Bill 10-1362

Representative Vigil, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 10-1362, concerning the inactive status of a special district. Representative Vigil explained that the bill permits a special district to designate itself as inactive and exempt from compliance with certain provisions required of active districts. He discussed the reasons for special districts to become inactive and explained the circumstances that would allow a special district to designate itself as inactive.


02:05 PM

Evan Goulding, representing the Special District Association, testified in support of the bill and explained the need for metropolitan districts and the need for them to become temporarily inactive. Mr. Goulding explained that the bill establishes procedures for designating a district as inactive and for returning to active status. He explained that the bill requires that a district notify all appropriate local and state level entities when it has become inactive. During the period that a district is inactive, it may not issue any debt, impose a mill levy, or conduct any official business other than to conduct elections and to undertake procedures necessary to designate itself as an active district. Mr. Goulding discussed the criteria listed in the bill to allow a special district to become inactive and suspend state filing and audit requirements. He explained the limitations placed on special districts that become inactive and discussed prepared amendment L.001 (Attachment A).

10HseLoc0323AttachA.pdf
BILL:HB10-1362
TIME: 02:13:35 PM
MOVED:Vigil
MOTION:Moved amendment L.001 (Attachment A). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:Schafer S.
VOTE
Acree
Apuan
Bradford
Liston
Massey
McKinley
Priola
Schafer S.
Vigil
Soper
Peniston
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection








02:15 PM

Committee discussion ensued concerning prepared amendment L.001 and the procedure for a special district to return to active status.
BILL:HB10-1362
TIME: 02:17:31 PM
MOVED:Vigil
MOTION:Moved to refer House Bill 10-1362, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on a 11-0 roll call vote.
SECONDED:Apuan
VOTE
Acree
Yes
Apuan
Yes
Bradford
Yes
Liston
Yes
Massey
Yes
McKinley
Yes
Priola
Yes
Schafer S.
Yes
Vigil
Yes
Soper
Yes
Peniston
Yes
Final YES: 11 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


02:18 PM

The committee adjourned.