Washam Provides Further Challenges for the County
Here’s yet another chapter in the Dale Washam saga: The News Tribune is reporting that Washam has directed his staff to cease assessing new property a month before a state deadline. Officials are calling the move “unprecedented.”
In a nutshell the decision to quit assessing new property values would mean that some new property owners would not pay property taxes for at least a year, while their neighbors with properties already on the tax rolls are left to take up the slack. It would also put some special revenue districts in a tough position.
In a June 14, 2012 memo with the subject line of “RE: 2013 Budget Considerations” Washam informed Pierce County officials that his office would not be fulfilling its obligation to assess all new properties by the August deadline this year.
As we have promised in the past, we will operate to the best of our ability within the confines of the funds that are given us, and we will refrain from submitting supplemental funding requests. However, the present funding levels are already taking a toll, as this office is being prevented from meeting all the identified Performance Measures. Specifically, we will be unable to meet Performance Measure No.3 this year.
An enclosure lists the “Assessor-Treasurer 2013 Performance Measures” as follows:
- Guarantee the equitable and uniform treatment of all taxpayers by maintaining strict accordance to all applicable statutes and regulations, and successfully completing all the scheduled annual physical inspections as required by RCW 84.41.030. (Goal D)
- Continue to seek efficiencies and quality improvement at every stage of our processes; all the while ensuring total operating costs do not exceed 1% of property tax billings. (Goal A)
- Place all discoverable real property “new construction” value on the rolls by August 31, 2013, for the 2014 Tax Levy. (Goal A)
- We will achieve a minimum 25% increase over 2012 in the number of a) Personal Property and b) Trended Investment accounts that utilize our new electronic paperless process to file their annual statements with this office. (Goal C)
The response from the Council expressed concerns over the consequences of such a move:
The Pierce County Council is appreciative of the efforts of you and your staff to meet the county’s legal assessment obligations. We understand that, like many departments, you are doing this under difficult budget constraints. Due to the importance of new construction and improvements (NC&I) on the budgets of many entities, including fire districts and cities, we urge your department to prioritize the completion of work in this area in the time period prescribed by law. The consequences of not completing the work on NC&I could be devastating and long-lasting for many taxing districts, especially in light of the continuing drop in the value of existing property.
A letter from the Washington State Department of Revenue expressed similar concern, reminding Washam of his office’s obligation to assess all new property each year.
Failure to place all new construction on the assessment roll would create inequities among taxpayers and affect local taxing districts’ revenue. Those property owners with new construction would not pay taxes on their new building value while other property owners pay tax on the full value of their property. Taxing districts, including local fire districts, library districts, and others, would not receive funding they are entitled to. These taxing districts are allowed to levy additional funds based on the value of new construction in order to provide services to those property owners. Therefore, failure to properly assess new construction would adversely impact these local jurisdictions.
I recognize that the current economic climate has affected resources in many assessors’ offices across the state. However, ensuring all taxable property is properly assessed is crucial in maintaining a fair, equitable, and functional property tax system. I encourage you prioritize your work in such a manner that will allow you to ensure all taxable property is included on your assessment roll.
According to the TNT, the County has offered Washam an additional $20,000 to help cover the man power Washam says he would need to ensure that new properties are assessed. Washam has added a week to his planned stop date, but has not said he will direct staff to continue the assessments up to the state deadline date. If he chooses not to do so, Pierce County officials are considering legal action.
With an impending hotly contested Pierce County Assessor Treasurer’s race, and events leading to the Pierce County Council’s vote of no confidence in Washam and decision not to pay any more of Washam’s legal fees, we’re not sure what to say about all this. Words like “rogue” and “maverick” come to mind…
Read more from The News Tribune.
Filed under: pierce-county, elections
19 comments
F fredo June 28, 2012
But wait a minute.
I thought cutting property taxes on new development was a way of encouraging new development? Our city council even codified such an arrangement so that hundreds or thousands of condominium units would be built in Tacoma. Our Mayor even lives in a property tax abated unit.
Apparently when a conservative elected official helps developers it’s bad, but if the Tacoma city council does it it’s good.
T tacoma_1 June 28, 2012
The assessor’s job is to assess properties, not to stop assessing properties two months prior to the deadline. Nor is it his job to bestow tax breaks on the few, and to inflict unfair tax burdens on the majority of Pierce County citizens.
One thing that I can say about Mr. Washam is that he is extremely adept and masterful with his problem creation skills.
For our next assessor, I would like to try someone who is extremely adept and masterful with problem soving skills.
F fredo June 28, 2012
“The assessor’s job is to assess properties, not to stop assessing properties two months prior to the deadline.” tacoma1
Maybe you should improve your reading skills.
It says in the Exit133 story that Washam intended to stop the inspections 1 month early, not 2 months.
It further states that Washam doesn’t have the funds to continue physical inspections until July 31.
It doesn’t say he is stopping the collections early in order to “bestow tax breaks on the few” or to exercise his “problem creation skills.”
T tacoma_1 June 28, 2012
blah blah blah
E Erik B. June 28, 2012
Get Tim in there to clean up this mess!
P Paul White June 28, 2012
I am assessing my lunch options. All involve ground beef.
C Chalky White June 29, 2012
I“m assessing why a county council decision is being tied to the city council by Fredo.
J Jackie June 29, 2012
Dale Washam is incompetent and must be defeated.
That said, former Assessor Ken Madsen “sold” the idea of buying the $2.7 million purchase of the Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal system by claiming that a much smaller appraisal staff would be needed. He suspended legally mandated phyisical inspections before Washam came, but the problem was that physical inspections were the only way to gather information needed to program the CAMA system and make sure that prices and property size, condition, etc. at sales were accurate for use as“comparable”. Many property sales are not confirmed as to condition etc. and outdated characteristics are used even when the property had undergone a complete remodel to “as new condition”. When will the various candidates tell us how he/she will solve that problem. So far, none has.
F fredo June 29, 2012
“I“m assessing why a county council decision is being tied to the city council by Fredo.” chalky
There’s no direct relationship, but that doesn’t mean the issues presented are unrelated.
City council is elected.
Dale Washam is elected.
City council gave tax breaks to developers.
Dale Washam gave tax breaks to developers (according to his critics)
Ironically, folks aren’t accusing city council of incompetance, only Washam. If Washam is doing the same thing that the city council does, then why don’t we celebrate that?
C Chalky White June 29, 2012
You do realize Fredo, that the majority of the county council is made up of conservatives, right? The tax breaks created by the city council were first offered in 1996 by conservative members of the city council, had the full support of the business community and were opposed by labor.
Other than looking for an excuse to criticize a city council that you seem a bit obsessed with, I’m still not seeing the connection. But party-on Fredo.
T That Girl June 29, 2012
I think there’s a distinct difference between strategic tax breaks intended to incentivize development, and just not getting around to fulfilling a state mandate.
Randomly not assessing properties after they’re developed can’t be said to encourage anything other than crossed fingers.
T tacoma_1 June 29, 2012
If Dale Washam spent most of his time with the business of Pierce County property assessment instead of tilting at windmills with Sancho Panza, he could have completed all of the assessments on time w/out costing the taxpayers $3/4 M in lawsuits, and the latest $20K. IMHO.
F fredo June 29, 2012
“You do realize Fredo, that the majority of the county council is made up of conservatives, right? “ chalky
You do realize chalky, that I never mentioned the county council in my postings, right?
T tacoma_1 June 29, 2012
Washam holds a non partisan office. I have no idea if he is a conservative or liberal politically. And frankly, for the assessor job, I could care less what his politics are. His incompetence is what I care about. And it is his incompetence that makes me want to vote him out of office ASAP.
D David Boe June 29, 2012
Fred, the program to allow developers tax incentives does not mean they don’t pay property tax for the particular parcel. The tax break is on the improvement that is being made by the project itself. So a site that has a property tax value of $200k prior to the project still pays the current property value. It is the building valuation that is zero’d-in for the terms of the contract (8-12 years depending on the particulars). After the term expires, then the total value of the project – both site and building – is accessed. It is a State of Wa program that is to provide incentive to increase density in the urban centers (to counter-act what some see as the State funding transporation enhancements out in the rural areas to make it cheaper for residential sprawl).
D David Boe June 30, 2012
Oh yeah, and the property tax benefit is really to the initial owner of the condo more than the developer – as once the project is complete, the timeline starts – which means for every day units are not sold, the incentive is reduced (and since a condo developer really only makes any profit when they sell the last three units – it is more a marketing tool) – and considering that developers also have to usually improve the city infrastructure to make a project happen – and the city only gets about 20% of the property tax – the program is really more of a hit for the school district since they get about 40% of the property tax collected on a property (though typically condos don’t have a huge school age population). Lots more working parts than might be considered for a provocative sound bite.
J Jesse June 30, 2012
Boe knows… downtown density. Thank goodness.
F fredo June 30, 2012
Thanks david.
Well Washams only transgression was that he was changing the July 31 arbitrary deadline to a new June 30 arbitrary deadline and the reason is that the county council didn’t budget sufficient funds to pay for the inspections. The developers are still paying the property tax on the land, they’re only getting a pass on one year of the improvements.
As shakespeare once said, it is all “much ado about nothing.”
T tacoma_1 June 30, 2012
The only logical explanation here for fredo’s reasoning is that he must have a new building somewhere in Pierce County that he doesn’t want to pay taxes on.