 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| Grapevine—Here's How to Subscribe |
|
Christie Wilson, Lead Editor
The Grapevine newsletter is available to all subscribers in electronic format. We are very excited about keeping you up to date about happenings in the Property Tax Division of Oregon’s Department of Revenue and with the county assessors.
New subscribers who want to automatically receive Grapevine will need to subscribe. You can also find the current and recent Grapevine issues at the department’s website: http://egov.oregon.gov/DOR/PTD/grape.shtml.
If you know someone who would like to receive Grapevine, please forward this information on. Anyone may receive our newsletter.
To receive Grapevine electronically, subscribe through the Oregon State Library’s web hosting service:
- Go to http://webhost.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/dor-grapevine.
- In the area titled “Subscribing to DOR-Grapevine,” enter your e-mail address and a password of your choice.
- Note: The option for daily digest doesn’t apply to your Grapevine subscriptions because there are no multiple daily messages.
- Confirm the password and click, ”Subscribe.”
- When the Oregon State Library (“osl”) web host receives your subscription request, it sends an automated message back to you. In the e-mail subject line will be: DOR-Grapevine—confirmation of subscription—request (number).
- You will need to reply to that message to confirm that you want to be on the list.
- You’re signed up! Grapevine will now be sent automatically to your e-mail address.
Send comments about Grapevine to grapevine.newsletter@state.or.us or mail them to:
Oregon Department of Revenue
Attn: Christie Wilson, PTD-Timber
PO Box 14380
Salem, OR 97309-5078
If you are a DOR employee, you will receive an e-mail whenever a new Grapevine is posted on the Intranet (Rocket). Double click the link to bring up Grapevine.
|
|
|
|
| “Name that Building” Answer |
|
From the Summer 2007 Grapevine issue:
The building is the State Capitol in the county of Marion located in Salem, Oregon.
|
|
|
|
| Field in the Field: Communications is the Key |
|
Al Gaines, Eugene Field Team
Break-out session planners Steve Harris (2nd right) with field unit members (l to r) Al Gaines, Jim King, Rick Schack, Tom Clemens, Ross Turney, and Don Kirby.
It’s been awhile since I’ve offered a “Field in the Field” article to Grapevine, so I decided to review some of my old “Field” commentaries. I found this quote, my quote, in the Spring/Summer 2004 issue of Grapevine. I had offered it in closing a self-bio reported in that issue:
“…I hope to be a good listener and clear communicator. I'd like to become known as a solution facilitator. I certainly won't have all the answers!”
The experiences participating in the Chief Appraiser/Deputy Roundtable breakout session during this year’s Oregon State Association of County Assessors (OSACA) and Oregon Association of County Tax Collectors (OACTC) Summer Conference exemplifies that work ethic. “Communications is the key.”
It was early June when the summer conference announcement arrived. Our field work—reviewing county grant documents and related workload evaluations and federal funding issues—was fresh in our minds. Little snippets of conversation during grant reviews developed into casual inquiry; a suggestion evolved, and ultimately a request. “Communicating was the key.”
Steve Harris, Washington County’s chief appraiser (see the “County Corner” sidebar) would be organizing and facilitating the conference’s chief appraiser/deputy breakout session, we were told. And around a lunch table halfway between Hillsboro and Salem, insight was gained, common interest was discovered, and a mutually beneficial agenda for that breakout session was initially drafted. “Communicating was the key.”
“OSACA desires the department’s field staff develop and facilitate an ‘interactive’ one hour presentation focused on how the counties (statewide) are or can accomplish their property taxation mandates in the evolving business environment of ‘doing more with less’,” read the assignment summary statement. The senior field reps, headed by Tom Clemens, Bend field unit manager, went to work on that in a collaborative effort to build a presentation based on five consensus opinions derived from previous county discussions.
“We wanted to utilize these consensus opinions as a basis for renewing and inspiring discussion among the knowledgeable group attending the chief appraiser's OSACA session,” was Tom’s summation of the field staff’s goal.
Steve put it this way, “Their charge is to acknowledge our partnership during the financial challenges ahead, present alternatives ripe for discussion, and identify efficiencies already proven in counties. Ultimately, the goal of this breakout session is to build on the partnerships already established between counties and with the DOR.”
Again, “Communicating was the key.”
The five “opinions” were assigned to the reps most knowledgeable on that subject at that time.
- Don Kirby, Pendleton field: “Strong management has a vision that is open to change and provides the guidance and training required to produce the best RMVs at the least cost.”
- Ross Turney, Bend field: “The use of new technology is necessary to enhance the staff’s ability and manage growth.”
- Jim King, Salem field: “Maintaining a database of accurate and consistent property characteristics and clearly documented inventory, studies and appraisal practices are keys to setting-up for revaluation.”
- Al Gaines, Eugene field: “Ratio studies are diagnostic tools. Ratio study analysis evaluates the level of assessment and quality of new values. Ratio study reports should be used for constructive feedback, testing and documenting.”
Tom would initiate these discussions with the fifth opinion: “Communication is the key. The department should work with the counties year ’round (‘in the counties’) asking the counties for what is needed (‘within reason we’re willing to provide that’), then follow through as a true partner with objective, results based feedback.”
The idea behind each discussion point was to give just enough information about the subject for those “around the table” to become involved from their varied interests and perceptions. “Ancillary” subjects (known and unknown) would then be naturally addressed as they came to mind; in a “contextual” manner. We began to look at this as a meeting, rather than a presentation, thinking of it in a tech-group type of environment—an open forum where any and all are welcome (if not expected) to participate in the “conversation.” “Communicating was the key.”
Steve summarized the actual session as “fast-paced, interactive, and humorous*, tailored to the skills of the participants, filled with current information, enhanced with good visual displays, and supplied with handouts that provide a resource library. …a dynamic informational discussion promoting the partnerships between the Department of Revenue and the counties.”
From my perspective, well… “We tried to be good listeners and clear communicators. We want to be solution facilitators. And, no, we don't have all the answers, but we know…
"Communications is the Key.”
* One of the highlights of the session was a two-minute internet-accessed video clip, titled “Middle Ages Tech Support,” which was used to exemplify technical “challenges.” Here’s the website URL address: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRBIVRwvUeE
|
|
|
|
| County Corner |
|
Steve Harris, Washington Co. Chief Appraiser
I learned to spell “appraiser” at age 16 when I discovered that completing clean-up tasks at job sites was not my lifelong ambition. Bachelor’s degrees in Real Estate and Econometrics helped form a foundation from which I still draw assistance in understanding the appraisal sciences. In 1987, I brought fee appraisal experience to Oregon only to realize that these skills are quite limited when devising a mass appraisal system that maintains market values for more than seven years. Moreover, the knowledge I acquired in customer service falls significantly short when performing exemplary citizen service as a daily routine.
I truly enjoy the art of mass appraisal when serving the public. Building appraisal systems constantly challenge my skills, yet communicating the methods used to implement the property tax system in language understandable by the populous has left me wanting. My greatest hope is that together we will build a better statewide system and convince our taxpayers that our service is second to none. Now that technology facilitates communication, our partnership is crucial to our mission.
Steve Harris (l) with field unit members (l to r) Ross Turney (hidden), Tom Clemens, Don Kirby, and Jim King, planning their breakout session agenda.
|
|
|
|
| Karen's Korner |
|
Karen Gregory, Property Tax Division Administrator
At the department, our mission is to make tax systems work to fund the public services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens. In the property tax division, we focus on the property tax system that funds the public services provided by local government—cities, counties, schools, and more than 1,500 special districts.
This past year, we experienced something that we believe is a very real threat to the property tax system, something that could threaten the ability of local government entities to continue to provide the vital services that Oregonians depend on. I am referring to the loss of federal forest revenues (PL106-393), which total about $230 million annually.
While we understand the revenue loss affects many areas other than assessment and taxation, Revenue’s area of responsibility only includes property tax—hence our focus.
On October 9, 2007, a work group came together for the first time. Taxing District Property Tax Revenue Stabilization Review is the topic and we are considering any and all ideas. At the table are representatives from special districts, cities, counties, community colleges, the School Board Association, the Association of School Administrators, and the Assessors and Tax Collector associations. The department is facilitating the meeting and providing staff work. The work group brainstormed many items. They singled things out that they could not support; those came off the list immediately. The ideas going forward include modifying Measure 50 to change the number of tax payments in a year, which would require changing the Oregon Constitution. Revenue is taking this list of items and developing the ramifications more fully for the group. I am hopeful that we will come out of this process with a number of possible solutions that can work together to provide some stabilization of property tax revenue. I also suspect that, if we are able to come to a consensus, the recommendation will ask all constituencies to give a little to make any solution viable.
This group will get back together in early November to go over the staff work the department is providing on the solutions list. At that meeting, we hope to narrow down the possibilities. Revenue will provide more in-depth staff work on the remaining potential solutions; we hope to have the group’s final meeting in early December. Our goal—by year’s end we hope to have ideas on how to stabilize the property tax system and we will present these to the governor and legislature.
We are very pleased with the commitment and openness of the work group members. They are original thinkers and not afraid to place some controversial ideas on the table…this is wonderful. Everyone clearly realizes that they have a stake in the outcome and have shown in the first meeting that they are interested in working together to produce some viable solutions. We are fortunate to have these folks working with us! We’ll share more as the work group, progresses but I am very hopeful that this group will be successful.
|
|
|
|
| Management Changes |
|
Shanne Johnson, appraiser analyst 3
Over the last several months, the valuation and cadastral information systems units have seen several management changes. Some were temporary; others were permanent. Each of them offered growth opportunities for everyone involved.
Section manager Larry Hinton has taken a permanent promotion. He is now the Administrative Services Division (ASD) administrator, working on the third floor of the Revenue building. ASD includes Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology Services, and the Processing Center. Congratulations, Larry! Everyone in valuation enjoyed the time they got to spend working with you.
Taking Larry’s place on a six-month developmental status is Vera Carriger. Vera came to us from the Corp and Estate Section on the fourth floor where she oversaw the Corporation Policy Unit and the Nexus Unit. She was also the first line supervisor and program manager for the Inheritance and Estate tax programs. Welcome aboard.
Finally, there was a temporary first line management position assignment swap between valuation’s Merri Seaton and cadastral information systems’ Brett Juul. These managers are technical experts in their areas, having spent years working up through the ranks as either an appraiser or cartographer. They will trade responsibilities for about one year, with a review after the first six months to see how things are working. The swap began October 1. We wish them both good luck.
|
|
|
|
| OSACA and OACTC 2007 Joint Summer Conference |
|
OSACA: Oregon State Association of County Assessors
OACTC: Oregon Association of County Tax Collectors
This summer, the conferences for county tax collectors and assessors were held jointly in Bend during the middle of August. Scott Langton, OSACA president, said that this was the first joint summer conference since the late 1990s, when he and OACTC president Sharon Roosa opened the conference.
Featured during the week were meetings, presentations, and activities offering insight to current events and opportunities to exchange ideas. Approximately 200 attendees participated and benefited from the networking and continuing education opportunities, as well as the hospitality and social events designed to entertain and build new relationships. (See the sidebar Shar’in Drinks.)
Highlighted guest speakers included DOR Director Elizabeth Harchenko, Legislative Revenue Officer Paul Warner, and Ray Naff, director of the governor’s office on economic revitalization. Other insightful speakers represented the Washington Department of Revenue, a panel of industrial valuation experts, and an open conversation about property tax assessment policies and procedures titled “Assessor Talk.”
Specialty “break-out” sessions were also available for assessors, chief appraisers and deputies, and tax collectors. Topics ranged from office security to data exchange to doing more with less. (See the article Field in the Field.)
Sidebar: Shar’in Drinks:
 One of the fun aspects for conference attendees was figuring out who was on the hospitality room’s drink ticket. “That’s me,” laughed Sharon Roosa. “I don’t know where they got it, but that photo is from my high school annual.”
Following is a photo essay recapping the conference:
Incoming OSACA president Tom Green (l), Crook County assessor, and outgoing president Scot Langton, Deschutes County assessor.
Outgoing OACTC president Sharon Roosa (l), Linn County taxation manager, and incoming president Isabella Brock (r), Curry County treasure/tax collector.
Elizabeth Harchenko opens the conference with a DOR and state government update focused on challenges, relationships, and looking ahead.
Legislative Revenue Officer Paul Warner was one of several guest speakers addressing interests and offering insight for all conference attendees.
John Phillips explains the details of new laws passed during the recent legislative session.
Mark Kinslow (l) and Brett Juul address an attendee's question during their GIS/Cartographic update period.
Sharon Roosa (l) talks with Karen Gregory and Jim Bucholz before the tax collectors' business meeting.
The "Assessor Talk" panel prepares for its discussion. Left to right are Scot Langton, Paul Chalmers, Randy Walruff, and Dennis Day; Dan Ross is in the background.
|
|
|
|
| The Oregon Legislative Sessions: 2007, Interim, and 2008 |
|
John Phillips, Legislative Liaison
The 2007 session
A summary of taxation legislation can be found at: http://www.leg.state.or.us/comm/lro/2007_measures_passed.pdf
This document was prepared by the Legislative Revenue Office.
The department provided a high level overview of 2007 session bills at the joint assessor/tax collector conference in August. Follow up training occurred in several regional sites throughout the fall. Of the 4,000 bills entertained in this past session, approximately 3,000 passed. Of those 3,000, the department seriously tracked just shy of 60.
A disc containing copies of each bill is available to counties in lieu of the biennially published hard copy version.
The interim
The House Revenue Committee and the Senate Finance and Revenue Committee met August 31 for the first interim revenue meeting and to receive the Office of Economic Analysis quarterly revenue forecast. The latest forecast revealed little change from the Close of Session forecast. The estimated kicker refund percentage is now 18.62 percent.
http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/OEA/economic.shtml#Most_Recent_Forecast
The committees also reviewed draft work plans for the next few months. The Senate is tentatively considering:
- Review of the refundable tax credit for mobile home park closures;
- Federal tax policy and its impact on the state;
- Small school/ESD issues;
- Work of the Tax Reform Task Force;
- How decisions are being implemented, including the Department of Revenue's: Voluntary Compliance Initiative (SB 39) and real estate withholding on nonresidents (HB 2592);
- Estate tax compliance; and
- Film and video tax credit.
The House work plan may include:
- Reconnection to the federal tax code;
- Corporate tax reform;
- Excise taxes;
- Tax credit policy review;
- Document recording fees and county funding; and
- Enterprise Zone review. The Legislative Revenue Office is conducting a cost benefit analysis of enterprise zones pursuant to SB 151 from the 2007 session.
- The report will be due prior to the 2009 session.
The 2008 special session
Discussions are still underway about how the February 2008 session will be structured. It was reported that each member will have the opportunity to introduce one bill and that the session will run for six weeks beginning February 8. The final arrangements for this supplemental session have yet to be decided.
The primary focus of this special session is to triage budget and critical policy developments where it is not prudent to wait a full two years to implement course correction. This is particularly in regard to budget issues, which in the past the legislature would typically delegate to a select few legislators on the emergency board to resolve on behalf of the entire body during the interim.
|
|
|
|
| A “Mini-Reorg” in ATS |
|
Linda Blacklock, Assessment & Taxation Standards
Periodically, a section needs to step back and take a look at how it is using its resources to carry out the business assigned to it by the taxpayers of Oregon through the legislature. For the Assessment & Taxation Standards (ATS) section, that time came when we were faced with a vacancy, a new manager, and hiring a new team leader. Rather than slotting in the new faces where we had holes, we decided that it was time to review how we are structured to make sure that we are best situated to carry out our mission, vision, and values.
In ATS, our primary purpose is to provide education and assistance to our county property tax partners. Some of the duties we carry out include providing formal appraisal training classes; administering the County Assessment Functions Funding Assistance (CAFFA) and Board of Property Tax Appeals (BOPTA) programs; overseeing the assessment programs from the Salem, Bend, Eugene, and Pendleton field offices; and providing education and assistance with exemptions, personal property, tax collecting, and budgeting programs. Biannually, we poll the county assessors to see how they feel we are doing at addressing their needs by the services we provide. The most recent survey indicated that, overall, we were doing a pretty good job, but it highlighted some areas we believe could benefit from some minor restructuring and refocusing of duties to better maximize our effectiveness.
In reviewing our current structure and making the decision to restructure, we considered several factors:
- Are we currently providing the right mixture of services to our stakeholders?
- Is there other work that needs to be done that we aren’t getting done with the current structure?
- Are we providing for successor planning?
- Are we fully developing staff so they can most effectively do their current work and be in a position to promote if the opportunity arises?
After evaluating the criteria above, we decided that a “mini-restructure” might be beneficial. We are calling it a mini-restructure because, with the exception of moving two employees into different units, the three units in ATS remained intact. Although the changes in ATS probably appear fairly minimal to others, we anticipate that the benefits gained will be significant. In short, we are moving ATS from a section of individual program experts to a team environment where program knowledge and expertise is spread throughout the team.
For instance, Gary Wright, an appraiser/analyst 3, has been the farm-forest expert for several years. When counties need assistance in the areas of farm-forest, they know they can rely on Gary for answers. With the mini-restructure, Gary—although still physically stationed in Salem—has become part of the field services teams, because much of the farm-forest property is located in areas where the field teams operate. He is now facilitating a farm-forest team made up of one appraiser from each of the field offices. Our goal in this part of the restructure change is three-fold. We want to:
- Provide assistance to Gary so that he no longer shoulders the entire program burden,
- Provide for successor planning, and
- Allow for even better service to our customers by having more knowledge of the program spread throughout the state.
We have also moved individual program experts onto teams led by appraiser/analyst 4s. The team leaders provide assistance with the day-to-day technical needs of their team members. Once again, we hope to accomplish cross-training and thus provide better customer service and employee development.
As with most changes, this mini-restructure has not come about without valid concerns from those who both provide and receive our services. However, we are going into this with an open mind and a willingness to give it a fair try. We will monitor our progress to see if we are achieving the three primary goals for the restructure. If it appears that we were better achieving program success with the old organization, then we can always go back. Stay tuned!
|
|
|
|
| Court Case Corner: October 2007 |
|
Doug Adair, Assistant Attorney General
Pacific States Marine Fisheries Comm. v. Multnomah Co. and Dept. of Revenue, TC 4771
At issue was entitlement to exemption for property leased by an advisory commission created by a compact of five western states. An exemption under ORS 307.112 is available for an institution, organization, or public body granted exemption under ORS 307.090 such as a city, county, school district, or other public or municipal corporation. The court held that the advisory commission was a non-corporate entity that did not meet the definitions of ORS 307.090 and, thus, the property it leased was not eligible for exempt status.
Gardner v. Multnomah Co., TC-MD 070044C
The taxpayer had two pole buildings, including an equestrian arena, on land subject to farm special assessment. The taxpayer claimed that the buildings are exempt from taxation as farm buildings under ORS 307.397. The court found that ORS 307.397 exempted certain machinery and equipment and personal property, but that this exemption did not apply to the real property buildings at issue.
Hartsell v. Marion Co., TC-MD 070611E
The taxpayer sought restoration of farm special assessment. During the relevant five-year period, the property was not used for farm purpose for the latter two years, and income from farm activities in years two and three was all received in year three. The court held that the more recent two years of non-farm use was, itself, sufficient to disqualify the property under ORS 308A.068(1). The court also found that, for purposes of satisfying the three-out-of-five-year income rule, ORS 308A.071 requires that qualifying income must be considered when reported for tax purposes on a calendar year basis.
|
|
|
|
| Comings and Goings |
|
New Employees: Teri Cannoy, Valuation
Resignation/Separations: Nick Odom, Admin
Retirements: Dennis Leckington, ATS; Julie Cutsforth, Valuation
Promotions/New Assignments: Linda Blacklock, ATS; Cherri Lyon, Valuation; Tammy Keen, CIS; Joe Bucher, CIS
Temporary Work Assignments: Tom Woods, PTAC Portland field; Vera Carriger, Valuation; Merri Seaton, CIS; Brett Juul, Valuation
|
|
|
|
| Grapevine |
|
Grapevine is published by the Oregon Department of Revenue, Property Tax Division.
Editorial Board: Al Gaines; Judi James; Shanne Johnson; Mary Kintner; John Phillips; Christie Wilson, Lead; Gary Wright.
To be added to the Grapevine mailing list or to submit articles, e-mail Grapevine, or contact us by mail at:
Oregon Department of Revenue
Property Tax Division
955 Center Street NE
Salem OR 97301-2555
Phone: 503-945-8292
Fax: 503-945-8737
TTY: 503-945-8617
In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), this information is available in alternative formats upon request by calling 503-378-4988.
|
|
|
|
|
|
