header-left
File #: 25-259    Version: 1 Name: Williamson Act Review
Type: Report Status: Consent Calendar
In control: Auditor-Controller
On agenda: 4/22/2025 Final action:
Title: Accept the Auditor-Controller's Audit Division's Internal Control Review of the Williamson Act Program
District: All
Attachments: 1. A - Williamson Act Program Internal Control Review
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
No records to display.

title

Accept the Auditor-Controller’s Audit Division’s Internal Control Review of the Williamson Act Program

 

body

Published Notice Required?     Yes ____ No _X _

Public Hearing Required?         Yes ____ No _X _

 

DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATION:

 

The Auditor-Controller’s Office (ACO) recommends the Board of Supervisors accept the Internal Control Review of the Williamson Act Program.

 

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION:

 

Pursuant to the ACO Internal Audit Division’s FY2024/25 Audit Plan, the ACO completed the internal control review of the Williamson Act Program. The review was conducted in conformance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing as developed by the Institute of Internal Auditors.

 

The review had three objectives: (1) determine if the policies and procedures for monitoring the Williamson Act program are in compliance with state law, (2) determine if the policies and procedures are being followed, and (3) to provide a comparison with the monitoring practices of other counties.

 

The Williamson Act encourages agricultural and open space land use by reducing property tax assessments of enrolled landowners. Private property owners within an agricultural preserve may sign voluntary contracts with the county to restrict their land usage in exchange for the reduced property tax assessment. These contracts are for ten years and automatically renew each year. The contract may be exited using one of three processes: (1) nonrenewal, which allows the contract to lapse; (2) cancellation, which includes a fee for early termination; or (3) rescission, which requires agreement from both parties to restrict use of other land of equal or greater value.

 

The ACO collected information about the program through interviews with County staff and a review of existing policies and procedures. The ACO also conducted a survey of other California counties and interviewed staff of other counties to understand the monitoring practices of others.

 

The ACO determined that Solano County is compliant with State law. The ACO also determined Solano County policies and procedures are being followed.

 

The ACO sent a survey regarding the monitoring practices to 53 counties and 2 cities that participate in the Williamson Act. The ACO received 19 responses and conducted interviews of staff from 5 of the respondents.

 

Challenges noted by the respondents included: low response rates from landowners to requests for information, tracking lot-line adjustments, a lack of awareness amongst new landowners, and resource limitations. The best practices shared included direct communication with landowners, observation of fields either in person or through available images, and annual request for income and expense information.

 

The ACO observed Solano County also experiences challenges obtaining timely and complete information from landowners. The low response rate to information requests increases difficulty in determining an accurate assessed property tax value. To improve response rates from landowners, survey respondents from other counties used the nonrenewal process, implemented an online portal to simplify the process, and educated landowners and members of the public about the Williamson Act.

 

The ACO recommends a required self-attestation from landowners that the land is only being used for allowable purposes and implementation of one or more practices used by other counties to increase self-reporting from landowners. The practices include education, simplifying the reporting process, and consequences for failure to respond to the County’s information requests.

 

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

 

The acceptance of the report has no financial impact.

 

ALTERNATIVES:

 

The Board of Supervisors could elect not to accept the report. This alternative is not consistent with sound public policy and is therefore not recommended.

 

OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:

 

The Department of Resource Management and Assessor/Recorder’s Office have reviewed and accepted the report.

 

CAO RECOMMENDATION:

 

APPROVE DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATION