Property taxation: county assessment appeals boards: assessment appeals commissioners.

Section 1622.3(a) text was cleaned from 'all any property tax assessment appeals' to 'any property tax assessment appeals,' resolving Senate amendment markup that had shown both the original word ('all') and the replacement ('any') side by side.

Legislative passage dates were added: Passed the Assembly August 25, 2026, and Passed the Senate August 24, 2026, along with a Governor receipt and approval block.

Prior amendment history headers (Amended in Senate June 11, 2026; Amended in Assembly April 23 and April 9, 2026), the original introduction date, line numbers, and page numbering were removed from the enrolled version.

All single-member commissioner provisions were consolidated into a single new Section 1622.3 instead of being spread across amendments to Sections 1622 and 1622.1 plus a separate new section. The existing Sections 1622 and 1622.1 are no longer amended at all.

Language changed from 'all property tax assessment appeals in the county be heard and decided by a single-member appeals board' (mandatory) to 'all any property tax assessment appeals in the county may be heard and decided by a single-member appeals board' (permissive), giving counties more flexibility in routing appeals.

The appellant's procedural right changed from an opt-in model (the appellant must authorize the commissioner to hear their appeal) to an opt-out model (the appellant may object to having their appeal heard by the commissioner). Under the old version, if the appellant did nothing, the case went to a multi-member board. Under the new version, if the appellant does nothing, the commissioner hears the case; only upon objection does it go to a 3- or 5-member board.

Section 1620.5 (definitions section) was simplified to reference only Section 1622.3 rather than multiple subsections of Sections 1622 and 1622.1, reflecting the consolidation into a single new section.

The appellant's procedural right changed from an opt-in authorization model to an opt-out objection model. Previously, the county had to provide a process for the appellant to 'authorize' the commissioner, and if no authorization was given, the case went to a multi-member board. Now, the county must provide a process for the appellant to 'object' to the commissioner, and only upon objection does the case go to a multi-member board. The default is now that the commissioner hears the appeal.

The single-commissioner option was restructured from being embedded as subdivisions within existing Sections 1622 and 1622.1 into a new standalone Section 1622.3. This consolidates all commissioner-related provisions (appointment authority, qualifications, alternates, objection process, State Board of Equalization rules, and sunset) in one section rather than spreading them across multiple code sections.

The commissioner option language (subdivisions (b) through (h)) was removed from Section 1622, which now contains only the traditional three-member board selection procedure in subdivision (a) plus a sunset provision for a new operative date of January 1, 2034.

The commissioner option language (subdivision (c)) was removed from Section 1622.1, which now contains only the direct appointment alternative for three- or five-member boards plus a sunset provision for January 1, 2034.

Section 1620.5 was updated to add a reference to Section 1622.3 in its scope provision, ensuring the definitional cross-references (treating 'assessment appeals board' to include single-member boards and 'member' to mean 'commissioner') apply to the new standalone section as well.

The legislative digest was updated to reflect the objection model language, changing references from 'authorize the commissioner' to 'object to their appeal being heard and decided by an assessment appeals commissioner.'

Only counties with a population of 500,000 or more may now use the single-member assessment appeals commissioner option. This was added to both Section 1622(b) and Section 1622.1(c).

The consent mechanism was reversed. Previously, the appellant could request that their appeal be heard by a three- or five-member board (opt-out from the commissioner). Now, the appellant must affirmatively authorize the commissioner to hear and decide their appeal (opt-in). If the appellant does not authorize, the county must ensure the case is heard by a three- or five-member board.

Sections 1622(b) and 1622.1(c) now explicitly state that a commissioner shall not hear and decide a property tax assessment appeal without obtaining the authorization of the appellant pursuant to Section 1622.3.