2017 ORS 308.570¹
Determining value per mile of main and branch lines of companies using rail lines

(1) In the assessment of the property of any company conducting transportation or operating over rail lines, the Department of Revenue shall determine the value of each branch line of the company located within this state and the mileage of each branch line, including miles of main tracks, spurs, yard and sidetracks.

(2) The department shall determine the values per mile of a branch line by dividing the value of the line by the mileage of the line.

(3) The department shall deduct the total value of branch lines of the company from the total value of all centrally assessed property of the company. The department shall then determine the values per mile of the main line of the company by dividing the remainder by the number of miles of the main line, taking into consideration miles of main tracks, spurs, yard and sidetracks. Each mile of spurs, yard and sidetracks shall be valued at not to exceed 50 percent of the value per mile assigned to the main track of the branch or main line with which the spurs, yard and sidetracks are connected.

(4) This section does not apply to small private railcar companies. [Amended by 1969 c.102 §2; 1991 c.459 §151; 1997 c.154 §41; 1999 c.223 §3; 2009 c.128 §9]

Notes of Decisions

The wa­ter system in a planned unit develop­ment was properly assessed by the Depart­ment of Revenue as having value for which taxes should have been assessed. Brooks Resources v. Dept. of Rev., 276 Or 1177, 538 P2d 312 (1976)

In valuing a railroad, the weight to be given each approach customarily used (cost, stock and debt, and income) and the varia­tion among appraisers in the minutiae of their methods, if in dispute, are left to the court to consider. Burlington Northern v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 19 (1979), as modified by 291 Or 729, 635 P2d 347 (1981)

Land infested with tansy ragwort and therefore not used to obtain a profit was properly disqualified for special assess­ment at true cash value for farm use. Shepherd v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 122 (1979)

While it is allowable to use only one approach in valuing prop­erty, whether in any given assess­ment one approach should be used exclusive of the others or is preferable to an­oth­er or to combina­tion of approaches is ques­tion of fact to be determined by the court. Pacific Power and Light Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 286 Or 529, 596 P2d 912 (1979)

Central assess­ment statutes create excep­tion to public prop­erty tax exemp­tion out­lined in ORS 307.090 (Property of the state, counties and other municipal corporations). Pacificorp Power Marketing v. Dept. of Revenue, 340 Or 204, 131 P3d 725 (2006)

Law Review Cita­tions

26 WLR 714 (1990)

Chapter 308

Notes of Decisions

Programs administered by Depart­ment of Revenue that allow preferential assess­ment for farm and forestland are not “programs affecting land use” and are not subject to require­ment of statewide goal and local comprehensive plan compliance under ORS 197.180 (State agency planning responsibilities). Springer v. LCDC, 111 Or App 262, 826 P2d 54 (1992), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Applica­tion of Article XI, sec­tion 11b of Oregon Constitu­tion to this chapter, (1990) Vol 46, p 388

Law Review Cita­tions

5 EL 516 (1975)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 308—Assessment of Property for Taxation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors308.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 308, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano308.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
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.