Opinion

Rismoen Revocable Tr. v. Washington Cnty, Tc-Md 090477d (or.tax 8-21-2009)

Court
Oregon Tax Court
Filed
Aug 21, 2009
Status
Published
On the bench
JILL A. TANNER, Presiding Magistrate.
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 0.5%

The opinion

DECISION OF DISMISSAL

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's appeal of the real market value of her property identified as Account R2123321 for tax year 2008-09. A case management conference was held on January 2, 2009, and a second telephone case management conference was held on July 2, 2009.

Plaintiff appealed the real market value of the subject property to the Board of Property Tax Appeals (BOPTA). In its Order dated February 27, 2009, BOPTA reduced the real market value to $310,000. The maximum assessed value and assessed value remained unchanged at $226,830. Plaintiff requests that the real market value be reduced to $288,000 to recognize the costs to cure structural defects.

A taxpayer must have standing to bring a property tax appeal to the court. ORS 305.275 . 1 To have standing, a taxpayer must be "aggrieved." ORS 305.275 (1)(a). "In requiring that taxpayers be `aggrieved' under ORS 305.275 , the legislature intended that the taxpayer have an immediate claim of wrong. It did not intend that taxpayers could require the expenditure of public resources to litigate issues that might never arise." Kaady v. Dept. of Rev. , 15 OTR 124 , 125 (2000). *Page 2

In the case before the court, Plaintiff stated that she is appealing the real market value of the subject property because the real market value of her property does not accurately reflect the costs to cure the identified structural defects. For a taxpayer to be aggrieved, the alleged real market value must be lower than the maximum assessed value. Parks Westsac L.L.C. v. Dept. of Rev ., 15 OTR 50 , 52 (1999). Plaintiff has not alleged a real market value less than her maximum assessed value. Defendant concluded, in its letter dated July 2, 2009, that "if the proposed change in real market value" was allowed "there would be no change in the taxes. It was verified with the Washington County tax collector that this account would not be subject to any compression, and the recommended RMV of $288,000 is not below the MAV of $226,830." Because the real market value Plaintiff alleges will not result in a change in her property taxes, Plaintiff is not aggrieved. Now, therefore,

IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that this matter be dismissed.

Dated this ___ day of August 2009.

If you want to appeal this Decision, file a Complaint in the Regular Division of the Oregon Tax Court, by mailing to: 1163 State Street, Salem, OR 97301-2563; or by hand delivery to: Fourth Floor, 1241 State Street, Salem, OR.

Your Complaint must be submitted within 60 days after the date of the Decision or this Decision becomes final and cannot be changed.

This document was signed by Presiding Magistrate Jill A. Tanner on August 21, 2009. The Court filed and entered this document on August 21, 2009

1 All references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2007.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.