Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeals Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BOER discusses evidence, representation and 'good cause' guidance for untimely appeals
Summary
Orange County BOER discussed tightening procedural guidance for accepting untimely appeals, deadlines for submitting evidence (particularly from tax consultants), and representative criteria for entity-owned properties; staff were directed to draft clarifying documents and explore separate deadlines for residential vs. commercial appellants.
At its April 30 meeting, the Orange County Board of Equalization and Review spent significant time on procedural matters affecting how appeals are handled.
Board members noted that under existing practice the county has accepted nearly all untimely appeals. To promote equitable decisions, the BOER directed Staff Attorney Martha Bordogna to draft a document identifying where 'good cause' applies to late filings and to return with recommendations at the next meeting.
The board also discussed whether to require firm deadlines for 'evidence to follow' submissions—an issue raised with regard to tax consultant companies—and asked Bordogna to investigate whether separate deadlines for residential and commercial appellants would be permissible under applicable rules. Appraisal staff will be responsible for scheduling and communicating that appeals will be heard as scheduled unless an appellant requests a reschedule.
On representation, the BOER adopted criteria aligned with Property Tax Commission (PTC) practice for who may present appeals on behalf of entities: a 25% shareholder, a W-2 employee of the owning entity, an authorized officer of the entity, or an attorney. The board discussed the option of requiring a signed authorization statement from representatives but did not adopt that step; staff were asked to explore the option further. The BOER also agreed to accept a brief verbal truth affirmation for witnesses rather than a signed oath.
Finally, county staff and the BOER decided that Notices of Decision should be sent to both the property owner and the representative appellant (tax consultant). Staff were given May target dates to return with draft guidance and recommended procedures.
