Valentine v. Johnston
| Decision Date | 31 January 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 42635,42635 |
| Citation | 518 P.2d 700,83 Wn.2d 390 |
| Parties | Randolph C. VALENTINE et al., Respondents, v. Kenneth D. JOHNSTON, Jr., Pierce County Assessor, et al., Appellants. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Slade Gorton, Atty. Gen William D. Dexter, Asst. Atty. Gen., Olympia, Ronald L. Hendry, Pros. Atty., Michael B. Hansen, Deputy Pros. Atty., Tacoma, for appellants.
E. Albert Morrison, Kenneth S. Kessler, Tacoma, for respondents.
An Eighteenth Century Freench maxim defines taxation as the art of so plucking the goose as to procure the most feathers with the least amount of hissing. Since the commencement of a program of revaluation of real property by the county assessors, the goose has been hissing--louder and with more frequency.
Initially some background of the assessment procedure is necessary to place in focus the nature of this litigation. The county assessor, each year, prepares an assessment roll of all real estate in the county. This listing of property and placing valuations thereon is to be completed by May 31st of each year and may reach back to June 1st of the prior year. RCW 84.40.040. Thereafter the taxes are levied against the assessment roll, RCW 84.52, and the treasurer is authorized to collect them. RCW 84.56.010. Thus what might be called the 1970 assessment roll is the basis for taxes payable in 1971. When we refer to taxes of a particular year we mean taxes payable in that year, unless otherwise indicated.
The Pierce County Assessor undertook a 4-year cyclical revaluation program financed in part by grants from the Department of Revenue. The department approved the initial grant for the 4-year revaluation program on August 7, 1969. By staff work and contract appraisals some 57,242 parcels were revalued in phase 1, that is the assessment year of June 1, 1969, to May 31, 1970. This represented about 35 percent of all the parcels of real estate in Pierce County. It is taxes arising from the revaluations in phase 1, payable in 1971, which are involved here. Remembering that it is the real property taxes payable in 1971 that are in issue, we must examine, interpret and apply Laws of 1971 1st Ex.Sess., ch. 288, § 8, the so-called rollback statute. It provides:
The board of equalization shall reconvene on the first Monday of August for the purpose of equalizing valuations of real property within the county. Such equalization shall be accomplished in the following manner:
(1) The department of revenue shall certify to the board the ratio of the assessed valuation of locally assessed property in the county to the true and fair value of such property, based upon assessed values established without regard to equalization accomplished pursuant to this section (hereinafter referred to as the 'tentative county indicated ratio'). The department shall also certify the ratio of the assessed valuation of locally assessed property in those geographical areas in the county which have been revalued pursuant to a cyclical revaluation program approved by the department of revenue to the true and fair value of such property (hereinafter referred to as the 'revaluation ratio'). If, pursuant to the cyclical revaluation program, land alone or improvements alone have been revalued for any assessment year, the revaluation ratio shall be for land alone, or improvements alone, as appropriate, or such combination thereof as is appropriate. The board shall review the revaluation ratio so certified, and may accept, reject, or modify the ratio.
(2) If the revaluation ratio, as determined by the board, exceeds one hundred and ten percent of the tentative county indicated ratio, the board shall order the assessor, in accordance with the provisions of section 7 of this 1971 amendatory act, to reduce by a uniform percentage the true and fair values of land, improvements, or both as appropriate, within the geographical areas covered by the revaluation ratio by a uniform percentage such that the revaluation ratio shall equal the tentative county indicated ratio. The board shall also order the assessor to make appropriate similar adjustments to properties valued in the same year. For the purpose of administrative convenience, such reductions may be accomplished, in lieu of actual changes in the assessment rolls, by the assessor certifying to the treasurer the percentage adjustment for the geographical areas involved on the basis of which the treasurer shall adjust the amount of taxes otherwise payable.
The effective date of this statute was May 21, 1971.
In essence the statute requires a comparison of the ratio of all of the property in the county to its true and fair value with the ratio of the revalued property to its true and fair value.
If the revaluation ratio exceeds 110 percent of the county ratio, the revalued values are to be 'rolled back' to equal the county ratio. It is apparent that the procedure is designed to lessen the tax impact upon taxpayers whose property is revalued early in a cyclical program. For taxes payable in 1972, the values of property revalued in phases 1 and 2 (assessment years 1970 and 1971) were rolled back by 13.2...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Belas v. Kiga
...898. This is similar to the argument made by the Assessors regarding the effect of value averaging. See also Valentine v. Johnston, 83 Wash.2d 390, 394, 518 P.2d 700 (1974) (explaining that the common thread of the cyclical revaluation cases was that the entire revaluation program must be s......
-
Sator v. State Dept. of Revenue
...of Revenue, 80 Wash.2d 262, 493 P.2d 1012 (1972); Morrison v. Rutherford, 83 Wash.2d 153, 516 P.2d 1036 (1973); and Valentine v. Johnston, 83 Wash.2d 390, 518 P.2d 700 (1974). The instant case, however, represents a decisive break with the past. It is the first to involve an interpretation ......
-
Fifteen-O-One Fourth Ave. Ltd., Partnership v. State Dept. of Revenue, FIFTEEN-O-ONE
...undertook 4-year, cyclical, revaluation programs and equalization procedures as authorized by RCW 84.48.080. See Valentine v. Johnston, 83 Wash.2d 390, 518 P.2d 700 (1974). Under the reassessment program, the tax burden on properties reassessed during the first years was lessened somewhat b......