Kelley v. Yamhill County Assessor

CourtOregon Tax Court
DecidedNovember 4, 2015
DocketTC-MD 150054N
StatusUnpublished

This text of Kelley v. Yamhill County Assessor (Kelley v. Yamhill County Assessor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kelley v. Yamhill County Assessor, (Or. Super. Ct. 2015).

Opinion

IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Property Tax

NAOMI KELLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) TC-MD 150054N ) v. ) ) YAMHILL COUNTY ASSESSOR, ) ) Defendant. ) FINAL DECISION

This Final Decision incorporates without change the court’s Decision, entered

October 15, 2015. The court did not receive a statement of costs and disbursements within 14

days after its Decision was entered. See TCR-MD 16 C(1).

Plaintiff appealed Defendant’s denial of her request to place property identified as

Account 229666 into farm use special assessment for tax years 1999–2000 through 2014–15.1

The court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s appeal of tax years 1999–2000

through 2013–14 in its Order of August 13, 2015, which is attached and incorporated herein.

Defendant filed its Resolution of the Issue on October 13, 2015, stating:

“[Defendant] changes the denial of the Plaintiff’s request for Farm Use Deferral. In that a notice of denial was sent to the Plaintiff, dated January 27, 2015 for 47.48 acres. Given the additional evidence, [Defendant] has changed this denial to an acceptance of the request for Farm Use Deferral to include the 2014–2015 and 2015–2016 Tax year.”

The 2014–15 tax year is the only remaining tax year under appeal. Because Defendant has

agreed to provide Plaintiff with the relief she requested for the 2014–15 tax year, this case is

ready for decision. Now, therefore,

1 Plaintiff’s Complaint stated the tax years appealed were “1999–2014.” The court interprets those dates to include the 1999–2000 through 2014–15 tax years.

FINAL DECISION TC-MD 150054N 1 IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that, as requested by Plaintiff and agreed by

Defendant, Plaintiff’s request for farm use special assessment of the property identified as

Account 229666 is granted for the 2014–15 tax year.

IT IS FURTHER DECIDED that Plaintiff’s appeal of tax years 1999–2000 through

2014–15 is dismissed.

Dated this day of November 2015.

ALLISON R. BOOMER MAGISTRATE

If you want to appeal this Final 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 Final Decision or this Final Decision cannot be changed. TCR-MD 19 B.

This document was filed and entered on November 4, 2015.

FINAL DECISION TC-MD 150054N 2 IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION P Tax

NAOMI KELLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) TC-MD 150054N ) v. ) ) , ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER

This matter is before the court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s appeal of “the

1999-2013 years * * * due to lack of filing timely.” (Def’s Ans at 1.)

A. Procedural History

Plaintiff filed her Complaint on March 2, 2015, appealing the “1999-2014” tax years.

(Ptf’s Compl at 1.) She attached a January 27, 2015, letter from Defendant denying her

application for farm use special assessment. (Id. at 3.) She also provided 2008-09 and 2009-10

property tax statements for property identified as Account 229666 (subject property). (Ptf’s Ltr

at 3-4, Mar 27, 2015). During the case management conference held on June 4, 2015, Plaintiff

explained that the subject property had been disqualified from farm use special assessment in

2009 and she wished to challenge that disqualification. Defendant agreed to file a written

explanation of the legal authority supporting its motion to dismiss and Plaintiff agreed to file a

written response. Defendant filed its “Statement to Make More Definite and Certain”

(Statement) on June 11, 2015. Plaintiff filed her written response on August 3, 2015. This

matter is now ready for the court’s determination.

///

FINAL DECISION TC-MD 150054N 1 B. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Appeal of the “1999-2013” Tax Years

In its Statement, Defendant clarified that it sought dismissal of Plaintiff’s “1999-2013”

appeal pursuant to ORS 305.280(1),2 which states in pertinent part,

“Except as otherwise provided in this section, an appeal under ORS 305.275(1) or (2) shall be filed within 90 days after the act, omission, order or determination because actually known to the person, but in no event later than one year after the act or omission has occurred, or the order or determination has been made.”

Defendant asserted that “an official notice of special assessment disqualification for 47.478 acres

was sent to the owner of record on July 8, 2009.” (Def’s Statement at 2.) Defendant attached a

copy of that notice, which was addressed to “The Mishler Family LLC, 38561 SW Tindle Creek

Rd, Willamina OR 97396.” (Id. at Attachment A.) The notice stated that 47.478 acres of the

subject property had been disqualified from exclusive farm use special assessment under ORS

308A.718 and 308A.724 because it was “no longer in a qualifying use * * *.” (Id.) The notice

further stated that “[t]he potential additional taxes for farm use disqualifications will be deferred

under ORS 308A.706(1)(a) when farmland becomes idle and does not change to a different

special assessment.” (Id.) The notice explained that an appeal could be taken to the Magistrate

Division of the Oregon Tax Court “within 90 days of receipt of [the] notice in accordance with

ORS 305.275 and ORS 305.280 * * *.” (Id.)

Plaintiff responded that she “did not receive notification of the July 8, 2009, special

assessment disqualification letter * * *.” (Ptf’s Ltr at 1, Aug 3, 3015.) Plaintiff explained that

her father owned and farmed the subject property until he passed away in 2007, then her brother

owned and farmed the subject property until he passed away in 2008. (Id.) She wrote that her

“husband began clearing the upper terraced fields in 2010, but heart surgery interrupted his work.

2 The court’s references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2013.

FINAL DECISION TC-MD 150054N 2 After his stroke, in 2012, as he recuperated in 2013 and 2014, he again began preparing the

47.478 acres for cultivation.” (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff asserted that she and her husband “realized

[they] could harvest a marketable crop from the apple, cherry, maple and pear hardwoods that

were growing” on the subject property and they “began selling the hardwood to a local chip

distributor” in 2014. (Id.) Plaintiff argued that “it is logical that its growth rate on 47. 478 acres

should also be considered as a maturing crop in the 2009 time period.” (Id.) Accordingly, she

argued that the subject property “was erroneously removed from farm deferral in 2009” and

requested that “farm deferral status for the 47. 478 acres be reinstated.” (Id.)

C. Timeliness of Plaintiff’s Appeal under ORS 305.280

“Any land that is within an exclusive farm use zone and that is used exclusively for farm

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Clifford Parsons, Trustee v. Dept. of Rev.
21 Or. Tax 331 (Oregon Tax Court, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Kelley v. Yamhill County Assessor, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelley-v-yamhill-county-assessor-ortc-2015.