Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Sharing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Siskiyou LAFCO staff briefs commission on tax‑sharing agreements; commission asks staff to research master study cost and timing
Summary
LAFCO staff explained the difference between project‑specific and master tax‑sharing agreements, cited Imperial and Mono County examples, and agreed to research timing and likely costs for a master tax‑sharing study to streamline future annexations.
Haley Lang, LAFCO executive officer, briefed commissioners on tax‑sharing agreements that typically accompany annexation and other LAFCO projects, saying there are "two main" types: individual project tax‑sharing agreements and an overarching master tax‑sharing agreement that can streamline calculations for multiple projects. "So the individual tax sharing agreements are project specific... There's also a master tax sharing agreement, which is kind of an overarching agreement that has high level calculations," Lang explained.
Lang said some counties (Imperial) have procured master studies to avoid repeating calculations on every project, while others (Mono County) use ad hoc approaches tailored to specific projects. She noted the property tax negotiation process is separate and can trigger a negotiation period (about 90 days) that can delay LAFCO processing. Commissioners asked who would pay for a master study, update frequency and staff capacity; Lang said costs could be shared (e.g., LAFCO and county) and committed to researching recent consultant costs and completion timeframes.
Commissioners generally supported staff looking into a master study to see whether it would reduce repetitive work on future annexations and asked staff to report back with cost estimates and timing to inform a decision.
