Ceniceros
State Bd. of Equalization v. Ceniceros
Opinion
Opinion
McKINSTER, J.
Contending that the County of Riverside had adopted a rule governing discovery in assessment appeals proceedings which was contrary to and thus preempted by state law, the State Board of Equalization (SBE) petitioned the trial court for a writ of mandate to force the county to comply with state law. The trial court concluded that the local rule was not preempted by state law, and denied the petition. The SBE appeals. We affirm.
Introduction
In the abstract, the imposition and collection of property taxes consists of four major steps: assessment, equalization, computation of the tax rate, and collection of the tax. (Bandini Estate Co. v. Los Angeles (1938) 28 Cal.App.2d 224, 227 [ 82 P.2d 185 ].) “Assessment”- is the process of listing the property to be taxed and estimating its value. (See W. F. & Co. v. Bd. of Equalization (1880) 56 Cal. 194, 205 (cone. opn. of Thornton, J.).) It is the duty of local assessors. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 404. )
“Equalization” is the adjustment of the assessed value up or down to more closely conform to the actual value of the property. (§ 1610.8; County of Sacramento v. Assessment Appeals Bd. No. 2 (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 654, 663 [ 108…