Agenda

Return

C.144

To:	Board of Supervisors
From:	Russell Watts, Treasurer-Tax Collector
Date:	August 18, 2015

Contra

Costa

County

Subject:

DENY Petition to Rescind the Sale of a Tax-Defaulted Property

APPROVE	OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR	RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE

Action of Board On: 08/18/2015

APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED

OTHER

Clerks Notes:

VOTE OF SUPERVISORS

AYE:

John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor

ABSENT:

Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor

Contact:

Brice Bins, (925) 957-2888

I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: August 18, 2015
David Twa,

BY:	, Deputy

RECOMMENDATION(S):

DENY petition to rescind the sale of a tax-defaulted property filed on behalf of Jacqueline Y. Mau and Tien Lung Chen.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No negative financial impact on the County.

BACKGROUND:

The Tax Collector sold a tax-defaulted property, which is located in the Point Richmond neighborhood of the City of Richmond and identified by Assessor's Parcel Number 558-192-007 (the "Property"), at a public auction in February 2014. The deed for the Property was recorded on March 18, 2014. The Office of the County Counsel received a petition dated March 13, 2015 from an attorney who represents the purchasers of the Property seeking to rescind the sale because the purchasers were not aware that the Property was zoned as permanent open space. The petition also sought to rescind the sale of five other properties, but the purchasers are no longer seeking rescission according to the attorney who submitted the petition on their behalf.

BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)

Revenue and Taxation Code section 3731 authorizes the Board of Supervisors with the consent of County Counsel and the purchaser of a property sold at a public tax auction to rescind the sale if it is determined that the property should not have been sold. The purchasers' mistake concerning whether the Property could be developed does not meet the standard for rescission. Due to the absence of facts indicating that the Property should not have been sold, County Counsel has determined the remedy of rescission is unavailable in this matter.

CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:

Failure to take the recommended action will hinder the Tax Collector in determining whether to distribute the excess proceeds from the tax sale of the Property.