California assessors outline legislative priorities to Board of Equalization, urge Prop 19 fixes and caution on appeal deadlines
Loading...
Summary
San Francisco Assessor Joaquin Torres told the Board of Equalization the California Association of Assessors is tracking roughly 60 bills and supports fixes to Prop 19 heirs’ timing, disaster-rebuild protections, and targeted veterans' exemptions while opposing bills that impose unrealistic appeals deadlines or create complex new valuation regimes for solar and manufactured homes.
San Francisco Assessor Joaquin Torres, chair of the California Association of Assessors' legislative committee, presented the association's 2026 legislative priorities and a framework the assessors use to review bills at a Board of Equalization meeting on March 25.
"We start with clarity to ensure the bill language is precise and can be implemented without ambiguity," Torres said, listing a set of criteria — clarity, legality, administrative feasibility, consistency with existing law, and stakeholder impact — the association applies when reviewing proposals.
Torres said the association supports bills intended to avoid unfair results under Proposition 19, including Assembly Bill 288 (heirs' protections) that would extend or otherwise align transfer timelines when probate delays prevent heirs from meeting a one-year move-in requirement. He highlighted bills to help disaster-affected homeowners rebuild without adverse tax consequences (SB 1053 and SB 1052–style measures that extend base-year value transfer timelines) and said the assessors support AB 2022, a temporary homeowner tax exemption for 100% disabled veterans, as well as a bill (SB 1298) clarifying tax treatment for church parking facilities.
On bills the association opposes, Torres called out a solar-valuation bill (SB 1329) that would introduce a special evaluation method and complicate appraisal consistency, and SB 1402, which would impose a six-month appeals deadline. "A six-month appeals deadline is simply not realistic," Torres said, noting assessors and local appeals bodies already struggle to meet a two-year timeline in some counties.
Board members pressed Torres on specific bills. Vice Chair Gaines and Controller Cohen asked whether a single‑hearing‑officer model (AB 2172) could preserve fairness and what appeal options exist for taxpayers. Torres said counties would retain discretion and that superior-court review remains an option after the assessment-appeals board process. He also warned that classifying manufactured homes as secured real property (SB 996) could produce uneven outcomes for low‑income homeowners and urged an economic analysis.
Member Schaeffer said manufactured-home values in his district varied widely and asked whether switching classification would meaningfully change tax obligations; Torres said the impact depends on the owner’s circumstances and urged caution and more analysis.
What this means
The CAA told the board it will continue discussions with authors and staff to refine language, identify administrative impacts, and, where possible, reach neutral or supportive positions. Board members signaled interest in inviting bill authors back for follow-up sessions as bills move through policy committees.
