2015 ORS 294.461¹
Tax certification contrary to law voidable by Oregon Tax Court
  • appeal procedure

(formerly 294.485)

Notes of Decisions

Doctrine of substantial compliance must be limited to relieving parties from mi­nor irregularities or errors which would not affect substance of statute's objectives. Dept. of Rev. v. Umatilla County, 10 OTR 309 (1986)

This sec­tion does not make Tax Court exclusive forum for all issues that can arise in connec­tion with Local Budget Law but applies only to noncompliance with budget law in connec­tion with prepara­tion and making of budgets and levies; sec­tion does not address expenditures made after budget is adopted but which are not authorized in budget or are nominally authorized through pro­ce­dures which violate budget law. Gugler v. Baker County Educa­tion Ser. Dist., 86 Or App 549, 740 P2d 798 (1987), aff'd 305 Or 563, 754 P2d 900 (1988)

As a mechanical proposi­tion and as relevant to unlawful building expenditures alleged in this case, this sec­tion could not be a source of redress for improper transfers of appropria­tions within funds or from one fund to an­oth­er. Gugler v. Baker County Educa­tion Serv. Dist., 86 Or App 549, 740 P2d 798 (1987), aff'd305 Or 563, 754 P2d 900 (1988)

Tax Court's jurisdic­tion over Local Budget Law matters is conferred by this sec­tion, not ORS 305.410 (Authority of court in tax cases within its jurisdiction). Gugler v. Baker County Educa­tion Serv. Dist., 86 Or App 549, 740 P2d 798 (1987), aff'd305 Or 563, 754 P2d 900 (1988)

Term "interested taxpayer" does not include renter of commercial or residential prop­erty or per­son by virtue of pay­ment of city business occupa­tion taxes. Hermo v. City of Lincoln City, 12 OTR 52 (1991)

Levy challenge pro­ce­dure does not exempt plaintiff challenging tax base ballot title from general procedural require­ments for ballot title challenges. Coultas v. City of Sutherlin, 318 Or 584, 871 P2d 465 (1994)

Attach­ment to complaint of appendix containing signatures of 10 interested taxpayers is sufficient notwithstanding that not all of taxpayers are listed or signed as plaintiffs on complaint. Luedtke v. Estacada School District #108, 16 OTR 114 (2002)

Notes of Decisions

Tax court properly invalidated sanitary authority's proposed tax where authority had sufficient federal grant and other funds available to meet pay­ments due on its bonds without tax. Bashaw, Dept. of Rev. v. Bear Creek Valley San. Auth., 287 Or 113, 597 P2d 822 (1979)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Budgeting deferred compensa­tion assets and liabilities, (1976) Vol 37, p 1284; exclusion of municipal financial activities with respect to urban renewal agency projects, (1977) Vol 38, p 1062

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 294—County and Municipal Financial Administration, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors294.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 294, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano294.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.