1 BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 2 450 N STREET 3 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 4 5 6 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT 7 JULY 30, 2019 8 9 10 11 ITEM K1 12 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT; 13 ITEM K1(A) 14 STATEWIDE HEARINGS - REPORT ON LOGISTICS 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 REPORTED BY: Jillian M. Sumner 28 CSR NO. 13619 1 1 P R E S E N T 2 3 For the Board of Honorable Malia S. Cohen Equalization: Chair 4 Honorable Antonio Vazquez 5 Vice Chair 6 Honorable Ted Gaines First District 7 Honorable Mike Schaefer 8 Fourth District 9 Yvette Stowers Appearing for Betty T. 10 Yee, State Controller (per Government Code 11 Section 7.9) 12 For the Board of Brenda Fleming 13 Equalization Staff: Executive Director 14 Toya Davis Clerk 15 Board Proceedings 16 ---oOo--- 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 450 N STREET 2 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 3 JULY 30, 2019 4 ---oOo--- 5 MS. COHEN: Good afternoon, everyone. 6 We are going to resume. It's 3:15, 7 July 30th. 8 We're going to pick up the rest of our 9 agenda. 10 Madam Clerk, could you remind us where we 11 are in the agenda? 12 MS. DAVIS: Yes, Madam Chair. 13 We're going to go back. The next item is 14 Item K1(a) of the Executive Director's Report, 15 Statewide Hearings Update. 16 Ms. Fleming -- 17 With a possible vote. 18 Ms. Fleming is coming forward at this time. 19 MS. COHEN: All right. K1(a). 20 MS. FLEMING: K1(a). Thank you. 21 MS. COHEN: Thank you. 22 MS. FLEMING: Madam Chair, Honorable 23 Members; Brenda Fleming, Executive Director. 24 So as we talked about earlier, this is an 25 opportunity for us to focus on our proposal for 26 statewide hearings, or a forum that would allow us to 27 engage in conversations, information-collecting, 28 getting new data, getting different perspectives, 3 1 etc., on a couple different things, emerging issues. 2 And there's certainly a broad range of 3 emerging issues that are out there. And then even 4 current issues that perhaps we need to drill down on 5 a little bit further. 6 So some of the current things, for example, 7 I would put split roll in that category. So it's 8 definitely on the horizon, but it's a little closer 9 to us than not. 10 I'm excited to have this opportunity to work 11 with this Board, because this is going to be a new 12 journey. Because we're looking at some of these with 13 a little bit more proactive eye than maybe we have 14 done historically. So this will be a nice journey 15 for us all to work on. 16 The more that I participate in this roll, 17 and working with this tremendous staff, and the 18 county assessors, and with the Board, there is a lot 19 going on in the property tax phase, and a lot of 20 different lanes. And I think it would be prudent for 21 us as a collective to examine them a little bit 22 closer. 23 Our state is changing; our economy is 24 changing. We have great information from the 25 governor's office in the form of Vivek here today. 26 So there's a lot there. 27 So really what I would like to do is just 28 facilitate the discussion. And really a lot -- turn 4 1 it over to the Board to have discussion on what kind 2 of events or forums, or what process and what 3 approach do we want to use going forward that would 4 allow us to have these forums, or these events where 5 we can engage in the discussion. 6 The ideal on this would be that not just the 7 BOE staff would participate, but I think the 8 additional layer of this would include inviting a 9 range of guests. And in those guests we can include 10 just a broad range of people. 11 So we can include, clearly, the assessors. 12 We can include subject-matter experts in whatever the 13 specific topic area would be, interested parties, 14 stakeholders, practitioners, property owners, the 15 public, academicians. I mean, there's just a range 16 of people that can really come and weigh in with 17 their perspectives and subject-matter expertise in 18 this area. 19 So I think this really gives us an 20 opportunity to look at the pros and cons that we 21 talked about a little bit earlier. Things like split 22 roll and how we would look at all aspects of it, the 23 pros and the cons of it. 24 It would also allow us to examine those 25 things that might be a little bit more regional. So 26 not everything is always statewide, but there are 27 ways to look at some of those regional aspects of it 28 also. 5 1 And I think the other point that is -- that 2 I'm excited about is it really would give us an 3 opportunity to -- for the Board and for the agency to 4 exhibit and demonstrate our leadership role for the 5 state of California, so that they understand that we 6 are paying attention to property tax. And we really 7 do have some opportunities. We have a role and we 8 have value here. So I think it gives us an 9 opportunity to push that envelope a little bit more. 10 So that's it. I'll dig into a little bit of 11 some of what I refer to as framework, and that just 12 kind of highlights a few of the steps that -- or 13 activities that we would need to engage in to move it 14 along. And then I'll really start to maybe 15 provoke -- prompt some questions. 16 So one of the things that we'd have to 17 consider, depending on the nature and the style of 18 the event. And that would be one of the things in 19 and of itself to talk about, what the event or the 20 forum would look like. 21 But the things for us to consider, since we 22 do have -- and we're the only one in the nation that 23 has this nature of a commission of five elected 24 individuals, we do have to consider the Bagley-Keene 25 Open Meeting Act, of course. 26 So to the extent that we have all five Board 27 Members together, that becomes a public meeting, and 28 so we would have to agendize that event, similar to 6 1 what we do for these Board Meetings. 2 The second thing for us to consider is, 3 there are rules, of course, under Bagley-Keene Open 4 Meeting Act that deals with definitions of regularly 5 scheduled meetings versus special meetings versus 6 specially set meetings. 7 And I won't drill down on all the details 8 today, but there's slightly different rules there. A 9 regularly scheduled meeting, just in general, would 10 be our normal business where we take those up. Like 11 currently we have them pre-scheduled for monthly 12 meetings, and we take up the normal business and 13 issues related to our operations. 14 But when you have special meetings, it has 15 some very specific rules around it. And it typically 16 needs to be somewhat related to like -- similar to 17 emergency meetings. So there's a specific topic that 18 you're meeting for to come up with some emergency or 19 some special response. 20 And then the third category is the specially 21 set. And I think Chief Counsel -- we were talking 22 about this yesterday. I think we have more 23 flexibility with the specially set. I'll come back 24 to you with more of that detail, because we're still 25 doing a little bit more research about which 26 structure and opportunity works best, or all of the 27 above. 28 Location and venue would be another key 7 1 element of how we would proceed with this. Location, 2 like where in the state would it occur. And then 3 within that specific area, which venue. Would it be 4 a college or university, City Hall, Board of 5 Supervisor facilities, you know, colleges, 6 universities, etc. We'd have to have those 7 discussions. 8 Then there is the event logistics and 9 planning itself. You know, we've done some of these 10 events historically in the past. And then in the 11 BOE 1.0, we actually had an education outreach aspect 12 of our organization. And they did a lot of event 13 planning and scheduling town hall meetings and 14 workshops, and professional development days, etc., 15 etc. So there's pretty much a recipe that we follow. 16 And so you'd have to go through that process. 17 And then the planning, of course, would 18 involve working with you at the Board, both in the 19 public meetings, and then in maybe some of the detail 20 on, you know, what does that look like, who do you 21 want to invite as your guest, and how do we go about 22 doing the outreach and communications with them. 23 Just the logistics of getting -- if it's a venue that 24 we'd have to borrow for someone else, are there 25 contracts involved or interagency agreements, etc., 26 etc. So we'd look at all that detail. 27 The next category is, you know, what would 28 be the meeting topics. You know, we've talked about 8 1 some of them here today, meeting topics. And one of 2 the things that I think would be helpful is once we 3 kind of establish what those topics or subjects or 4 agenda items would be, as we are in these venues or 5 these events, we could collect the information from 6 different perspectives, then sort of the next step, 7 we'd look at the process there. 8 And that next step could include, do we take 9 some of that information and some of those 10 perspectives that we gain from these panelists, if 11 you will, bring that back, we could then move that 12 towards the M item on our current agenda structure. 13 And our M item today allows us to have -- that's the 14 public policy hearings. 15 So depending on the nature and the evolution 16 of these topics, then that would be where we could 17 consider taking up some of those items to the extent 18 that it's appropriate to move forward with them. 19 The next category of things is to look at 20 roles and responsibilities. Unlike in the prior -- 21 our prior error where we had a lot more flexibility 22 and budget to do a lot of these events. You know, AB 23 102 is here with us. And so we've got some 24 restrictions. 25 So we'd really have to determine how to move 26 forward with working with those activities where 27 we're -- where it's appropriate or where we're 28 restricted or limited on how we use the tax program 9 1 staff, and then what would be the roles and 2 responsibilities. 3 For the overall process, we definitely would 4 have a role. The property tax staff would have a 5 role. Because ultimately it would be work to the 6 extent that it's -- it's -- something's adopted or 7 we're going to implement it, certainly then we would 8 fold it into the normal operational work. But we 9 just have to look at how, and make sure we're all 10 just in compliance with the law and not triggering 11 any problems. 12 And of course budget and cost. I've got 13 some basic historic information on some of the 14 historic costs. The meetings in Sacramento are going 15 to be the -- if you want a public meeting with all 16 Board Members, is the least expensive route. 17 To the extent that we have historically 18 taken some of these events on the road, and where we 19 were able to use a BOE facility. For example, the 20 Culver City office was a BOE field office. So we had 21 it established, the dais was established there. All 22 of the infrastructure was there. So the only cost 23 that we incurred for that kind of venue was the 24 travel cost. 25 Now, on those days when we traveled to 26 Culver City, about four times a year, we travel with 27 clearly a lot more tax programs, a lot more staff. 28 But you still had basically the travel cost, the 10 1 hotel, and air fare cost. 2 So if we -- we've had a couple of occasions 3 when we had a non-BOE facility, so it wasn't at 4 450 N Street, nor was it at Culver City. We had one 5 or two, if I recall correctly; in Irvine, and I 6 believe one in San Francisco. And so we're trying to 7 dig up the cost on those. So we'll find out exactly 8 what those costs were. 9 That took a little bit more for those 10 historic events, because we didn't have our 11 infrastructure in place. And so the staff needed 12 more time to test the equipment, and we had, I think, 13 some fees for leasing the facilities, some, like, 14 insurance, you know, those kinds of things. 15 So just in general we thought, with your 16 pleasure, would like to maybe consider or offer for 17 your consideration maybe some types of forums that 18 you might want to think about. And so this is not an 19 exhaustive list. So one would be regular Board 20 Meetings. 21 As we've talked about before, we have an 22 opportunity to invite guests here. We've got a good 23 size auditorium. So we have an opportunity to invite 24 guest panelists, etc., here, and the staff and 25 infrastructure is established. So the cost of that 26 would not be any more than we incur each day. 27 One option is to consider it on day two, 28 where you could schedule a full day of activities. 11 1 And those cases, even if you want to consider for a 2 second day, I mean, you could actually do like one 3 day of Board Meetings, if that's the Board's 4 pleasure, and then you can do two days of it. So we 5 have some flexibility of using this facility. That 6 would be one option. 7 The other option would be something like 8 town hall meetings. Prior Board Members, 9 historically -- not just the prior Board, but just 10 historically, town hall meetings were used quite a 11 bit. The town hall meetings are more regional, where 12 each Member would work with their staff to 13 coordinate, and working with local officials to 14 really use their venues, or local community colleges, 15 or some of the local government venues, and partner 16 with them. 17 And the opportunity there is there's more 18 local outreach directly with you and the local 19 governance, so that you're partnering to look at the 20 issues that are regional and to be collaborative in 21 how you're solving those problems with them. 22 So that is not as expensive as a little bit 23 more than what we would do here in Sacramento. But 24 it does give each Member an opportunity to travel in 25 their districts. And so there's some cost 26 containment there, because you're not having as many 27 people with air fare, hotel costs, etc. So that's 28 another option. And that would be to the Board's 12 1 pleasure. 2 And the third will be something like a 3 special meeting where we can travel up and through 4 the state. One option is to go -- to have these 5 events in regional levels. So we can have one or 6 some number of them in each of the equalization 7 districts. And then we would work with you to 8 determine what venue would be used, and then really 9 just coordinate the timing of it. 10 One of the things that we've, you know, had 11 discussions about possibly is the -- and I haven't 12 had a chance to talk to Ms. Leslie about this -- but 13 we've had discussions about the assessor's meeting in 14 San Diego, for example. There's some interest in, 15 "Hey, wait. So we've got assessors there. And a 16 good number of our staff would be there." So that 17 would be an opportunity. 18 Now just a footnote there, for that 19 assessor's conference in San Francisco, we would have 20 to -- it doesn't -- what we've currently got -- I'm 21 looking at Teri. 22 Because we currently don't have our Board 23 Proceedings team scheduled to travel for that event, 24 because it's not our event. So we would have to look 25 at that consideration. Or really even talk to the 26 locals to see if there are any of their resources 27 that we might be able to leverage. 28 So we haven't done a deep dive to 13 1 investigate all of the different details of these 2 options. This, again, was just a high-level 3 framework to present it to the Board. And with some 4 direction from the Chair, because she's got a 5 fantastic vision of how she sees this rolling out. 6 So just wanted to be responsive to offer some of 7 these to you. 8 And I think that kind of covers, for the 9 most part, at this point. 10 So I think, Madam Chair, how would you like 11 for me to proceed? 12 MS. COHEN: I think you did great opening 13 remarks. I think now we'll just take it -- take the 14 conversation. I've got some comments that I'd like 15 to add. 16 First, thank you, Ms. Fleming, for your 17 presentation on the statewide hearings. I think you 18 covered it, both the opportunity as well as some of 19 the challenges that may be laying ahead of us in 20 order to honor this. 21 Again, I say all of that with the backdrop 22 of today was the budget day. So there's food for 23 thought that was given by the governor's 24 representative on what's really available. 25 So today, you know, we're discussing the 26 statewide hearings on issues impacting property tax 27 administration. And this is what I envision to be 28 statewide hearings that will help us, not only 14 1 address some of the challenges that we've heard from 2 assessors, but formalize those concerns. 3 Also extending an opportunity to hear from 4 stakeholders that cannot or do not travel to the 5 great city of Sacramento. 6 You guys may recall that I raised the 7 possibility of a series of meetings back in our April 8 Board Meeting. I brought this to the attention of 9 the Board because I believe that it's very critical 10 for us to be able to ascertain the outstanding 11 property tax administration needs, which are becoming 12 more and more, I think, visible as people that are 13 working in the space are vocalizing what they need. 14 We heard from BOE Property Tax staff today. 15 We heard from assessors in the past several months. 16 And I hear from taxpayers informally when they come 17 and they interact with our office, and they call me. 18 I'm sure many of you are dealing with 19 taxpayers directly as well. 20 So we have to, I think, join forces 21 together, and begin to figure out all the tools that 22 are working, and figure out what's not working, to 23 ensure that we are in the 21st century when it comes 24 to property tax administration. 25 So at this time what I would like to do is 26 to propose that the Board authorize Vice Chair 27 Vazquez and myself to work in coordination with our 28 respective Chief Deputy to develop a pretty strategic 15 1 plan on how to proceed with the hearings, as well -- 2 the hearings/fact-finding meeting. 3 Of course we will continue to work hand in 4 hand with the Executive Director, and we'll keep her 5 and her staff abreast on all the ongoing strategy 6 moving forward. 7 I hope that the Executive Director will 8 continue to be a partner in this -- 9 MS. FLEMING: Mm-hm. 10 MS. COHEN: -- as we begin to work out the 11 logistics. 12 We don't have very many months left in this 13 year to execute. We are in the month of August. I 14 would like to almost be up and operational by 15 mid-to-late September. 16 So I'm going to be working on an aggressive 17 time line. And it's my hope that these meetings will 18 occur in each of our four Board Member districts. 19 To my colleague down in the south, south, 20 down there in San Diego, Mr. Schaefer, I'm looking 21 forward to coming down to your territory and 22 supporting you and working with you. Hearing what 23 your assessor has to say, as well as your 24 stakeholders, when it comes to just the assessment of 25 the property tax administration. 26 MR. SCHAEFER: And you've been down to my 27 office, and you had visited with Mr. Dronenburg. And 28 I appreciate that very much. 16 1 MS. COHEN: Yes. So I've been down to the 2 San Diego office. And we've done it informally. 3 What I'd like to do is formalize it and create a 4 record, so that we can definitely solicit some 5 feedback and some direction. 6 This will also serve as an opportunity for 7 property owners, stakeholders, and other elected 8 officials to -- and tax practitioners to express 9 their views and recommendations on how we can begin 10 to better address administrative issues that are 11 impacting their office, as well as the Board of 12 Equalization. 13 I'm thinking that what we can do is view and 14 compile data, and then we will make a presentation 15 presenting this information in a formal matter at the 16 Board Meeting, probably at the end of the year. This 17 will be in the form of a meta-analysis of the issues 18 and challenges that we have found that we are facing. 19 Of course we will present suggested 20 solutions and solutions to address these issues 21 either through additional funding, improved 22 technology, training development, building strategic 23 partnerships. I'm not quite sure exactly what it 24 would be. But we are going to be thinking out of the 25 box as well as critically to identify some of the 26 best practices that we can bring to our business. 27 At this point I want to go ahead and open up 28 for comments and suggestions. 17 1 Or, colleagues, if you have any ideas or 2 questions or thoughts, I'd welcome opportunity to 3 hear from people. 4 Mr. Vazquez. 5 MR. VAZQUEZ: Thank you, Madam Chair, for 6 bringing this to our attention and kind of pushing 7 the ball a little bit further on this issue. 8 And then just listening to our Executive 9 Director's comments. 10 Ms. Fleming, I think you did a good job of 11 kind of capsulizing what I think many of us were 12 thinking about. 13 MS. FLEMING: Mm-hm. 14 MR. VAZQUEZ: And just trying to be, I 15 guess, not only strategic about it, but also 16 financially cognizant of some of the cost. And I 17 think it makes a lot of sense to try to see, moving 18 forward, if we can piggyback with some of the events 19 that are already happening, that some of your staff 20 is already attending. So you minimize some of that 21 cost. 22 I think you mentioned the one that's coming 23 up in San Diego. I don't know if there's anything 24 scheduled in the north already this year or in LA. 25 But I know in conversations I've had with my 26 assessor Jeff Prang, I'm sure he would welcome the 27 opportunity to work with us. And we could probably 28 take advantage of some of his staff, you know, given 18 1 AB 102, I think we have to be careful how we utilize 2 staff outside of the BOE now. And I think we can 3 take advantage of those resources, specifically in 4 LA. 5 And I'm hoping that also carries out in 6 other counties. I'm thinking some of the larger 7 counties probably have more staff that can chime in 8 on that. 9 And I think what you hit on, you know, I 10 know in Santa Monica we've had hearings inside our 11 council chambers. Because we're basically set up 12 like this with, you know, already the visuals and the 13 audio and the capability to actually do a live, you 14 know, feed through, whether it's cable or some kind 15 of live stream. Which should minimize your cost. 16 I think the only cost might be, like you 17 said, is maybe where they're staying, you know, the 18 actual accommodations. 19 And it sounds like you guys have been in 20 Culver City. Culver City is probably a little bit 21 cheaper to stay in than Santa Monica. And it's not 22 that far from Santa Monica. 23 But I'm sure I know several of the hotels in 24 Santa Monica would, I'm sure, cut us a corporate 25 break. And at least make it more affordable so 26 you're not spending some exorbitant amount of money 27 for the rooms, as an example. 28 And I know we've had hearings in the past 19 1 like -- I know in the past like Senator Dianne 2 Feinstein said, you know, hearings in council's 3 chambers, and it's gone on real well. And I know the 4 cost factor here was very minimal, you know, outside 5 of the travel and accommodations. 6 MS. FLEMING: So one of the things -- thank 7 you for that feedback, Mr. Vazquez. 8 So one of the things that, just for 9 consideration, and we'd have to drill down on this 10 detail. We arranged, for Culver City, as a 11 cost-saving approach, we organized it because we knew 12 specifically how many times we would be staying at 13 that specific hotel. So we tried to get everybody in 14 the same hotel. 15 So there's some advantages if you know in 16 advance that we're going to have X number of them, or 17 X number of people. And so we kind of get the group 18 rate, state rate, obviously. So we still have to 19 follow the appropriate rules. But there might be 20 some other opportunities to leverage other 21 cost-saving opportunities. 22 MR. VAZQUEZ: And along those lines, because 23 I've had this conversation with ,I know, at least two 24 of the large hotels in Santa Monica to accommodate 25 other mini conferences where people have requested 26 it. And they -- I know they've been pretty generous 27 in terms of just charging pretty much the minimum 28 what they would charge, I guess, their corporate 20 1 folks. You know, which is a lot less than what it is 2 on the commercial end. 3 So I think it would be real close to what 4 the government rate is up here, for example. 5 MS. COHEN: Ms. Stowers, you look like -- 6 you -- you -- Ms. Stowers, you look like you have 7 some thoughts that are bubbling in there. 8 MS. STOWERS: Yeah, there are some 9 thoughts. 10 MS. COHEN: Let them out. 11 MS. STOWERS: So I think we're -- I'm kind 12 of paraphrasing. You're looking into having meetings 13 in each district with one starting as early as 14 September. 15 MS. COHEN: Mm-hm. 16 MS. STOWERS: I'm not really sure if this 17 would be a special meeting, or a -- 18 MS. COHEN: Oh, I see what you're saying. 19 MS. STOWERS: My question is really -- 20 MS. COHEN: Let me -- 21 MS. STOWERS: Must they be webcast if it's a 22 special meeting or a regular meeting? What's the 23 rules on that? 24 MS. FLEMING: So to the extent that you have 25 all of the Board Members, or a quorum of the Board 26 Members, that would qualify as a Board Meeting, which 27 means it's a public meeting. And so everything that 28 comes along with an open meeting. 21 1 MS. STOWERS: Not only being available to 2 the public, but it must be webcast. 3 MS. FLEMING: Yes, ma'am. 4 MS. STOWERS: And I understand what 5 Mr. Vazquez is saying, at least Santa Monica City 6 Hall, you've done it before. So it's webcast. 7 I know not San Diego, but Irvine, we have 8 been in Irvine. And it was webcast. And we were in 9 San Francisco at the PUC, and it was webcast. 10 Do you have any numbers or figures of what 11 it would cost to do Board Meetings, and do we have 12 the funding and the budget for it? 13 MS. FLEMING: So we have not drilled down on 14 the specific costs. We just, honestly, if we're 15 going to -- I'd like to know more about it if this is 16 something the Board wants to pursue, and then get a 17 little bit better sense of what the venue would look 18 like. 19 Because to the extent that you could take 20 advantage of, you know, a county supervisor location, 21 than the cost is going to be different than if we're 22 looking at a college or university. Or, you know, we 23 don't know that yet. 24 We do have some historic numbers that we 25 have from Culver City, and then, you know, basic cost 26 information for the Sacramento office. 27 But for these other venues throughout the 28 state, which I think is the objectives, we have not 22 1 gotten those estimates yet. A little bit more 2 information -- the purpose of this discussion is to 3 try to flush that out. 4 The second portion of your question 5 regarding the budget, we would have to really, again, 6 see where we could leverage to see what the budget 7 would look like. 8 Each of the Members -- we're now into the 9 new fiscal year. And so each Member has a percentage 10 of their money that's allocated for travel, hotel and 11 lodging. And so we'd have to look at the cost of 12 this compared to what's budgeted. 13 Equally, we would have to look at the cost 14 of the Board Proceedings and the program staff. 15 Because not everyone has, you know, a huge amount of 16 budget for travel. 17 Because historically we had funding budget 18 for it because it was multiple times a year. There 19 is some money in our budget, because the rule is that 20 we could have a certain number of meetings in 21 Sacramento, but Government Code also allows for us to 22 have meetings in other locations. 23 So there's some budget. It's not huge. So 24 we would really, you know, look at that as a part of, 25 you know, what's the scope of these events, and then 26 determine what we could accomplish within the budget 27 boundaries. 28 MS. STOWERS: What about the town hall 23 1 meetings? I think you said it would be regionally? 2 MS. FLEMING: They could be regionally. 3 MS. STOWERS: And work with their staff, and 4 coordinate with local electives. 5 MS. FLEMING: Yeah, that's a historic 6 reference. 7 So when we've had town hall meetings with 8 Members before, there's been a variety of them. 9 They've been, you know, attended at certain venues. 10 So they might be at some of the local electives in 11 their area. There's been town halls at community 12 centers. But wherever they choose to partner with 13 nonprofits, etc. And so most of that work -- then a 14 lot of the work would be accomplished working with 15 the Board staff. 16 But in those days, also, we also had an 17 education outreach arm. And so they did support some 18 of that activity. Our budget was significantly 19 greater then. So, yeah, we were able to do a lot 20 more. 21 A lot of the education outreach activities, 22 though, were partnered with -- because a lot of that 23 work was -- for example, one area was in the sales 24 and use tax area. And so a lot of times they were 25 trying to really take advantage of promoting the 26 message of sales and use tax. So if there was a new 27 tax program, or, you know, some aspect that was 28 somewhat similar to this, the intent of those town 24 1 hall meetings were to drive those discussions. 2 For example, one of the ones that 3 occurred -- just popped into my mind -- is we did one 4 for the town hall meetings with Mr. Runner, former 5 Mr. Runner's District 1 on fire fee. 6 So there was quite a bit of active education 7 and outreach activities in the forum of a town hall 8 to get the message out, and to collect information 9 about what it means. 10 Especially when the legislation took effect, 11 we needed to also understand, you know, both sides of 12 the fire fee program. 13 So those are options. And those were -- 14 some, I think, were done in actual venues. Some of 15 them were done with technology, webcasting. 16 MS. STOWERS: Yeah. I was going to ask what 17 happened to our -- they did a lot of tele-town 18 halls. 19 MS. FLEMING: They did a number of them. So 20 there's a broad range. 21 This is not meant to be exhaustive at this 22 point. I really just wanted to address that, you 23 know, there's some benefit definitely to having these 24 kind of open forums where we're inviting panelists 25 and getting us interacting with a range of people. 26 You know, property tax staff are tremendous, 27 but we're going to have our perspective. And so I 28 think it would enrich all of us to have, on some of 25 1 these emerging issues, and some of these are big 2 issues, as I mentioned, we need to have a broader 3 more diverse set of perspectives on it. That would 4 be my recommendation. 5 MS. STOWERS: I think the idea of having 6 these meetings is excellent. 7 Don't know about the location, because you 8 haven't really provided any costing on what it would 9 cost. 10 But definitely engaging in the public is 11 what we should be doing. I understand you make it a 12 different mix of people if you're traveling. 13 MS. COHEN: Mm-hm. 14 MS. STOWERS: But we do have this facility 15 here. And I do believe in your presentation you said 16 this would be the least expensive one. 17 MS. FLEMING: Yes. 18 One of the options -- and, you know, it's 19 like you've got a menu. So you can select from a 20 menu. And like any menu, you can select one item, 21 or, you know, pleasure of the Board to look at a 22 range of them. 23 MS. STOWERS: My concern is the cost. 24 That's -- that's -- 25 MS. COHEN: I can appreciate that. 26 Again, I just want to highlight that we 27 had -- how much did Vivek say we have in the budget 28 in surplus? 26 1 MS. STOWERS: But how much was allocated to 2 the Board of Equalization? I believe it was 29 3 million. And most of that is to Division 1 4 employees. 5 MS. COHEN: Right. Until we interject our 6 conversations in the fall, and get it built back into 7 the budget. So don't worry; I'm working on that. 8 So I understand the concerns about cost. 9 And, actually, I, too, share those same concerns. 10 We've had conversations with the Executive 11 Director about that we're looking for the most 12 cost-effective and efficient way to carry out our 13 constitutional function and duties. 14 Mr. Vazquez. 15 MR. VAZQUEZ: Yes. And along those lines, 16 maybe what you might want to do -- and I have no 17 problem rolling up my sleeves and working with the 18 Chair and staff moving forward to maybe at our August 19 meeting, coming back with some actual hard figures 20 that would show, maybe we do -- the northern one 21 maybe is here. Because obviously this is the 22 cheapest one. 23 And then if we can piggyback on the one 24 that's happening in San Diego in September. 25 And then in terms of LA, I would offer the 26 City Hall in Santa Monica, which I know it's pretty 27 much designed for this. So the cost, like I said, 28 would be minimal. 27 1 But at least come back with a budget. And 2 if the Members are comfortable with it, move forward 3 with it. 4 MS. COHEN: Thank you. 5 How about on this side? 6 MR. GAINES: Yes. 7 MS. COHEN: Mr. Gaines. 8 MR. GAINES: Thank you, Chair Cohen. 9 Just -- you know, I'm concerned about cost 10 also. 11 And I -- if you could do some additional 12 research for us, Executive Director Fleming, that 13 would be helpful. Just in terms of knowing what 14 those costs are. 15 And so I know we've talked about a special 16 subject matter-related meeting here, or meetings that 17 we'd do right here in this chamber. 18 I like the idea of Member Vazquez, that 19 maybe I can have mine here for Northern Cal. 20 MR. VAZQUEZ: Right. 21 MR. GAINES: That would be simple. 22 But I'd also like to know what the cost is 23 for a town hall meeting. We can break these out. 24 That would be nice to know. And then the cost for 25 special meetings. 26 Then we've also talked about two-Member 27 meetings also. So you'd have less than a quorum, 28 which I think would drive that cost down 28 1 substantially. 2 I think all of these options give us an 3 opportunity to do outreach. Especially the town hall 4 meetings. Because it's an opportunity for us to meet 5 with our constituents and get out and about in our 6 district and talk about relevant issues. 7 But I think, yeah, if I can just get a 8 little more information on the budgetary cost of 9 this, and then that would provide a lot more 10 information. It would be easier for me to, then -- 11 MS. FLEMING: To weigh in. 12 MR. GAINES: -- make a decision on which 13 pathway to go down. 14 MS. FLEMING: I appreciate that. 15 MS. COHEN: I don't think we're making 16 decisions today. We're just having conversations. 17 We're sharing -- because we can't talk -- 18 MR. GAINES: I know. 19 MS. COHEN: Because of Bagley-Keene, we 20 can't talk. So this is a forum that allows -- 21 MR. GAINES: Yes. 22 MS. COHEN: -- us to have the conversations. 23 MR. GAINES: Yes. 24 MS. COHEN: So I'm here to tell you that 25 it's so preliminary, and so -- that we have not -- we 26 don't have hard numbers. 27 MR. GAINES: I understand. 28 MS. COHEN: Okay. 29 1 MR. GAINES: So I'm just asking -- 2 MS. COHEN: So when we come back to you, 3 you're saying -- 4 MR. GAINES: -- if we could have more 5 information for the next meeting -- 6 MS. COHEN: I understand. 7 MR. GAINES: -- that we can discuss 8 publicly, that would be great. Thank you. 9 MS. FLEMING: And if I may, just a footnote. 10 MS. COHEN: Yeah. 11 MS. FLEMING: To the degree that it's the 12 Board's pleasure, first of all, to say, "Is this 13 something the Board is interested in?" one. And it 14 sounds like there's definite interest. Then when we, 15 as a part of getting the cost estimates, and 16 getting -- drilling down on the possible locations. 17 So that way I'm not giving you just a wild-hair 18 estimate. 19 So if I know, for example, that we would be 20 in some venue in San Diego or Santa Monica or 21 San Francisco, we can narrow some of that down. And 22 I can give you a little bit better cost estimate. 23 So that would be part of the pleasure of 24 Chair Cohen in terms of the next steps, where do we 25 want to go, you know, with planning some of that. 26 So to the degree that we could, you know, 27 have not had an opportunity yet to talk to 28 Mr. Dronenburg down in the San Diego area to say, 30 1 "Hey, is this an opportunity we could take advantage 2 of? And if so, what's involved?" 3 And to the extent that we can get that 4 information, then I can give a little bit better 5 estimate. At that point we would just look at if we 6 can use his locations and his equipment, etc. And if 7 there's any fees involved in that, we can get that. 8 Then you'd probably just be limited to the travel and 9 lodging. 10 But definitely we would look for 11 cost-effective ways of doing it. I just need more 12 information in terms of what the go-forward plan 13 would look like in order to give a cost estimate -- a 14 more accurate cost estimate. 15 In Sacramento, we could probably give you 16 that number. 17 MS. COHEN: Mr. Vazquez. 18 MR. VAZQUEZ: Well, maybe to move it 19 forward, then, maybe I'll make the motion that we -- 20 I guess if there's consensus from the Board here to 21 basically empower myself and the Chair to work with 22 the staff to come back in August with a proposal with 23 specific cost. 24 If we were to do, let's say, three, maybe, 25 right now. Maybe export three. You know, San Diego 26 would cover the furthest southern part of the state. 27 And then one in LA, whether it's in Santa Monica or 28 somewhere in the venue that would be the cheapest. 31 1 And then up here in Sacramento as the third. 2 And then -- yeah, I'll leave it at that. 3 MS. STOWERS: Could you add on -- I'd be 4 willing to support that if you could add on not just 5 the cost to get there, but the impact on staff 6 resources. 7 MR. VAZQUEZ: Yes. 8 MS. STOWERS: On how that would work. 9 Their -- yeah. 10 MR. VAZQUEZ: Their whole travel, what it's 11 going to cost for the whole team. 12 MS. STOWERS: Mm-hm. And the workload. 13 MR. VAZQUEZ: And their workload. 14 MS. STOWERS: If we're moving staff from one 15 project to another, you know, if we're trying to do 16 something immediately. I think San Diego is in 17 October. 18 MR. VAZQUEZ: September. 19 MS. STOWERS: September. That's even 20 sooner. 21 So do we have the shift existing BOE staff 22 resources in order to get this meeting planned and 23 implemented? 24 MS. FLEMING: So the assessor's meeting, 25 that's all apart of -- if we're going to go forward 26 with this, all of that has to be factored into the 27 dialogue and into the plans and proposals. 28 It's my understanding, I believe -- and you 32 1 guys help me, and make sure my dates are -- I think 2 the San Diego conference is September 16th through 3 the 19th. And our Board Meeting is on 4 September 20 -- 5 MS. STOWERS: 23rd. 6 MS. FLEMING: 23rd, 24th, 25th. I don't 7 have the number off the top of my head. So two 8 separate timeframes. 9 So if we were to do the San Diego meeting 10 joined to the assessor's conference, that would be a 11 specially set meeting. 12 MS. STOWERS: In addition to our regular 13 scheduled meeting? 14 MS. FLEMING: Correct. Because you would 15 not be replacing that. So you would end up having 16 two meetings. It would be two days in September. So 17 two separate meetings. So your regular Board Meeting 18 would be the September 23rd, 450 N Street in 19 Sacramento. And then the second meeting would be -- 20 MR. GAINES: Why is that? Why couldn't you 21 reduce it to one? 22 MS. FLEMING: Well, we can take a look at 23 the legal framework around -- because it's a 24 scheduled meeting already. And so we certainly can 25 have some flexibility under Government Code to change 26 those. It's just that's what's currently on the 27 schedule. So it would be to the Board's pleasure if 28 we wanted to reconsider doing it all in -- doing one 33 1 meeting in September. 2 MR. GAINES: Yeah. I want to just echo what 3 Member Stowers -- 4 MS. STOWERS: The Board has the flexibility 5 to -- I mean, if we don't have anything on 6 September 23rd that's deadline-driven, they have the 7 flexibility to either consolidate it or cancel. 8 MS. FLEMING: We do have some flexibility. 9 I'm just saying right now there is a scheduled 10 meeting on our calendar, our workload calendar for 11 2019 as September 23rd Board Meeting. 12 MS. COHEN: Let me interject here. Because 13 I think we're getting a little ahead of ourselves. 14 All I'm saying -- I just want to tighten up 15 your motion, Mr. Vazquez, if I may. 16 MR. VAZQUEZ: Sure. 17 MS. COHEN: That we all support hosting an 18 opportunity to engage in this fact-finding process. 19 And so it may not be September, you know. I mean, we 20 need to look at the numbers. We need to look -- we 21 need to rule down. 22 I'm looking for permission, if you will. 23 Your blessing to move in this direction. This is an 24 idea that's been percolating, and I'd like to take it 25 to the next step to put some numbers to it and to 26 really build it out. 27 We will take a separate action to address 28 the cost and the burdens and other issues raised by 34 1 the Board that we're discussing today. This is just 2 a preliminary -- I just want you to know this is 3 something I'd like to be able to do. Mr. Vazquez has 4 expressed an interest as well. 5 So this is something, an idea that we'd like 6 to continue to flush out, and then come back and make 7 a presentation. 8 We will be working with Ms. Fleming's 9 office, and this is just a request to start the 10 planning process. 11 And all the discussion, we will take under 12 consideration. Folding in assessor meeting into a 13 BOE meeting in Southern California is certainly an 14 option. 15 Exploring ways to keep our cost down low, 16 staying within an agreed-upon budget. And these are 17 all things that we will do our due diligence with. 18 So I don't know if that's -- 19 MR. VAZQUEZ: So is that a huge amendment to 20 my motion? 21 MS. COHEN: I know, that's a pretty large 22 caption of that. 23 MS. FLEMING: Status of the motion. 24 MR. GAINES: If I could just add to that. 25 MS. COHEN: Absolutely. 26 MR. GAINES: Because I think Member Stowers 27 brought up a great point about allocation of labor. 28 And so I just want to make sure that we -- 35 1 we're already short on labor. So I want to make sure 2 that having these additional meetings that are away 3 from where we typically have them here is not 4 creating a bigger backload for a staffing that's 5 under a bit of duress right now. 6 So if we can -- if that could be included in 7 this presentation, I would like an assessment in 8 terms of the labor allocation. 9 MS. FLEMING: So one of the things that I 10 can offer that might help -- and, again, I would like 11 time to work with staff to drill down on the detail. 12 But just what my brain does sometimes at 3:00 in the 13 morning thinking about these things is depending -- 14 if you decide that you want to consolidate the 15 September meeting, and it becomes the September Board 16 Meeting, and it's in San Diego, we'd have to first 17 take a look at what the currently scheduled mandated 18 work is. If there's anything on the September 19 calendar. 20 And off the top of my head, I don't remember 21 if there's anything specific. But if there isn't 22 anything -- any mandated-specific item, then we can 23 drive the meeting to just coming up with the agenda 24 items. 25 And so if we can come up with agenda items 26 that are not state-mandated or mandated items, I 27 don't have to bring all of the staff there. 28 So Board Proceedings, absolutely would need 36 1 to travel and would probably be the management team. 2 So there would be some impact to having broader 3 number of staff travel to any other location. 4 We had similar kinds of issues with the 5 historic meetings that we took on the road. We knew 6 when we all were there. But it was a part of the 7 work. So we made sure we were taking up items that 8 were related to the tax programs. 9 But we knew, when we were in Culver City and 10 you're sitting in the board room, you are focusing on 11 that Board Meeting. And so you are away from your 12 desk. 13 But to the degree that we can minimize the 14 number of staff, especially, you know, any of the 15 provision one staff, or those people who are actively 16 engaged in those responsibilities, if we can exclude 17 them or have minimal impact, then that's another 18 option. So there may just be a smaller team of us 19 that would travel for those kinds of days. 20 And so we just wouldn't -- like a lot of the 21 presentations, we would -- because what happens 22 here -- when we're doing presentations here, the 23 staff come in, they do their presentations, and I'm 24 pretty sure they've all sprinted back -- with the 25 exception of Richard Moon. But they've gone back, 26 Jack McCool, etc., they go back to their desk and 27 they resume working. So we would just need to 28 consider that impact. 37 1 But good point. It would be a concern of 2 mine to make sure we're not impacting them. 3 MR. SCHAEFER: Chair Cohen. 4 MS. COHEN: Yes, sir. 5 MR. SCHAEFER: We don't have the number 6 of -- 7 MS. COHEN: You have to speak into the mic, 8 Mr. Schaefer. 9 MR. SCHAEFER: We don't have the number of 10 consumer issues to talk to the public about that we 11 had a couple years ago. 12 MS. COHEN: We don't have the number of 13 what? 14 MR. SCHAEFER: Number of consumer issues to 15 talk to the public about that we had a few years ago. 16 We can talk to the public about railroad 17 cars and aircraft. But, you know, that's another 18 esoteric thing. 19 Talk to them about the value of their home, 20 which is our main thing, and the value of their 21 business, and whether that's going to be under 22 Prop. 13 or not. 23 But I think we're quite a different 24 organization than we were a couple of years ago. And 25 I'm afraid we may not have as many consumer things to 26 go around the state and talk about than we had a 27 couple years. 28 We have the desire to do it, but I'm just 38 1 wondering whether we'd be as popular as we were a 2 couple years ago. I mean, we have to figure that 3 in. 4 MS. COHEN: That's an interesting 5 perspective. 6 I mean, certainly this is not necessarily a 7 popularity contest. But certainly for the last 8 couple of months we've been having a series of 9 focused conversations. Just think about the 10 conversations we had today just on surveys and survey 11 assessment. 12 Now, whether it's popular or not is 13 inconsequential. This is a significant driver. 14 Brings in almost north of $70 billion. $70 billion 15 of taxpayers' money comes in through property taxes. 16 And people generally don't pay attention 17 until they're in trouble or they're in disagreement 18 with their assessed value of their property. 19 Now, in particular, in your area where there 20 is fires, there will be a lot of interest I would 21 imagine about the loss of property and what that 22 actually means to families as they began to piece 23 their life back together. 24 And so I believe that how life was is 25 different than the Board of Equalization. It was 26 different. But we have a new reality. And I think 27 that we still have a very significant contribution 28 that we need to educate people on, that taxpayers 39 1 need to be made aware of. 2 You think about, you know, these tax 3 dollars; where do they go? They go into public 4 education; they go into public healthing facilities; 5 they go into fire service and suppression. I mean, 6 there is a direct nexus to what we are doing to what 7 California taxpayers are paying. So it's incumbent 8 upon us to educate them. 9 Yes, we're collecting property tax dollars, 10 and this is where it's going. Here is some 11 potentials. 12 We also have a responsibility like we were 13 talking about earlier about educating them about 14 potential legislative changes; what are the impacts 15 of split roll when that passes? How is that going to 16 feel on the ground? 17 You heard staff today present talking about 18 property taxes and how it affects taxpayers. Those 19 two pieces of legislation, how that's going to impact 20 people's access to information. 21 So I beg to differ. I think that we have an 22 awesome task ahead of us, and have a heavy 23 responsibility. And there is a lot of work to do. 24 And you're welcome to come partner with me. 25 I will give you half of the workload that I have. 26 And so that you and Gary and your entire team can 27 stop thinking that there's nothing going on when 28 there is a profound amount of work that needs to go 40 1 on. 2 And, plus, we need to be thinking about 3 re-modernizing the property tax collection. We heard 4 from staff that they need staffing. Let's talk about 5 building relationships with CSUs, and UCs, and city 6 colleges. 7 There's a program that we can start to fill 8 the pipeline and put future appraisers in the 9 pipeline, and give them internships with the BOE, and 10 the assessor's office so there is more of a robust 11 work pool there. We just -- I think we've got to 12 change our thinking about how we do our job. 13 And it also requires us to leave this 14 wonderful place. You learn so much when you travel, 15 and you're listening to everyday people's lives. And 16 I believe that there are many stories that are untold 17 that don't come all the way up here to Sacramento, 18 that we need to get out into the pile, we need to get 19 out in public housing, we need to get out into the 20 immigrant community and hear where their challenges 21 are. 22 And it is our responsibility to make the 23 connection on how our responsibility of tax 24 administration relates to a positive impact to their 25 daily lives. 26 I don't expect average taxpayers to know how 27 we perform our job and how -- and what that 28 intersection is. That's for us to understand and 41 1 then to communicate to them on how we can help them. 2 We've learned about earned income tax 3 credit, and how that has been increased. I mean, 4 that is, again, a direct relationship still in the 5 sphere of taxes that will impact our greater 6 constituency. 7 We have a responsibility to give face and 8 show people that we are not just about sitting in the 9 palace in Sacramento. That we are on the ground, and 10 we are going to travel, and we are going to listen, 11 and we are going to learn. And most importantly, we 12 are going to respond to what we see and what we hear 13 taxpayers' needs are. 14 MS. STOWERS: Madam Chair, may I kind of -- 15 MS. COHEN: Hold on. I was responding to 16 Mr. Schaefer, and I think Mr. Schaefer wants to 17 respond to that. 18 MR. SCHAEFER: Well, we have Fiona Ma and 19 the governor coming down to San Diego and bringing 20 their message. And I think you should do the same 21 thing. 22 MS. COHEN: I think I will. 23 MR. SCHAEFER: And I know you're going to 24 Canada I think in October to bring your message. I 25 think you at least ought to get it to the major 26 counties of California, you know, at the same time. 27 MS. COHEN: I totally agree. 28 And before I hit up Canada, I'll be hitting 42 1 up every county in the state of California. 2 So I represent 23 counties, and we have 3 touched a majority of them, much like my colleague 4 Mr. Schaefer. And for those that I cannot get to, 5 I've called and I've extended, you know -- let them 6 know that I'm here, and gave them my contact 7 information. 8 MR. SCHAEFER: I only have five. 9 MS. COHEN: Well, you're fortunate, I think. 10 But it's a very large -- in terms of population, it's 11 a very large -- 12 MR. SCHAEFER: I've got Disneyland. 13 MS. COHEN: Disneyland is quite a huge swath 14 of land. 15 Okay. So we need to keep moving this 16 conversation. 17 MS. STOWERS: I'd like to make a motion to 18 have Chair and Vice Chair work together to develop a 19 plan on proceeding with a fact-finding meeting that 20 could include the costs of the meetings, the 21 locations of the meetings, the timeframes of the 22 meetings. I mean, you do cost. And also consider 23 staff allocation. 24 MS. COHEN: Excellent. 25 MS. STOWERS: And report back to us. 26 MS. COHEN: All right. So let the record 27 reflect that Yvette Stowers has made a motion. 28 It's been seconded by Senator Gaines. 43 1 And we can take that without objection. 2 Thank you. 3 All right. Let's carry on. 4 ---o0o--- 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 44 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 3 State of California ) 4 ) ss 5 County of Sacramento ) 6 7 I, Jillian Sumner, Hearing Reporter for 8 the California State Board of Equalization, certify 9 that on July 30, 2019 I recorded verbatim, in 10 shorthand, to the best of my ability, the 11 proceedings in the above-entitled hearing; that I 12 transcribed the shorthand writing into typewriting; 13 and that the preceding pages 1 through 44 14 constitute a complete and accurate transcription of 15 the shorthand writing. 16 17 Dated: August 13, 2019 18 19 20 ____________________________ 21 JILLIAN SUMNER, CSR #13619 22 Hearing Reporter 23 24 25 26 27 28 45