Opinion ID: 1201005
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: method of valuation

Text: Yuma argues that valuation as used in A.R.S. § 11-148 means full cash value. Yuma contends that since valuation is not defined in Title 11, the definition of valuation as full cash value [3] in A.R.S. § 42-201(13) should be used. La Paz contends that the statute refers to assessed valuation. [4] Yuma's proportionate entitlement to property and money on hand at the time of La Paz County's organization would be 83.3% under a full cash value determination, but only 81.6% under an assessed valuation determination. La Paz, on the other hand, would be entitled to 18.4% if assessed valuation is used, but only 16.7% if full cash value is used. The special master concluded that assessed valuation is the correct interpretation. We agree with this conclusion. The special master noted that the three sections of A.R.S. § 11-131 prohibit the creation of counties which fall below certain percentages of assessed valuation. These threshold amounts of assessed valuation have been established in order to enable the new and old counties to survive as viable entities. Reasoning from this, the special master concluded that assessed valuation should be the controlling standard for § 11-148 as well. While this reasoning may provide some basis for understanding the meaning of valuation in A.R.S. § 11-148, we believe there is a more direct approach derived from the language of § 11-148 itself. The context of the word valuation in A.R.S. § 11-148 is crucial. The statute sets the date for the valuation at the time of the last assessment of county taxes previous to the receipt of the new county election petition. The petition was received on March 29, 1982. A.R.S. § 42-304 establishes the annual date for levy and assessment of the tax levy as the third Monday of August. The last assessment of county taxes prior to March 29, 1982 took place on August 17, 1981. This is a final assessment of taxes, which is based on the assessed valuation of all taxable properties. We believe, therefore, that § 11-148 contemplates the use of assessed valuation. We uphold the special master's finding that based on the use of assessed valuation, Yuma County is entitled to distribution of 81.6% of the county assets, revenues and debts, and La Paz County is entitled to 18.4%. Using the foregoing percentages, we accept the special master's recommendation and order Yuma County to pay to La Paz County the sum of $2,023,685.