(1) Except as
provided in ORS 311.205(1)(b),
and section (3) of this rule, the officer may not correct an error or omission
on the roll of value of land; improvement; personal or other property; or of
any part, parcel or portion of land, improvement, personal or other property,
if the correction requires that the officer exercise judgment to determine the
value, formulate an opinion as to value, or inquire into the state of mind of
the appraiser. Mistakes of this nature may be:
(b) Making a
mathematical error when computing the square footage, the acreage, or some
other factor; or
(c) Errors made
in calculating a real market value. For example, in appraising bare land, the
appraiser may simply multiply the number of acres by the per acre value for
that class of land. The appraiser may also then make adjustments to that result
for size, shape, configuration, or other factors which affect the value of bare
land. If the appraiser makes a mistake in any of these computations or
assumptions of fact, these are mistakes that have entered into the appraiser's
determination of judgment and are not subject to correction.
Example 1: Taxpayer owned some 33.07 acres of
land. The assessor mistakenly carried the property on the roll as 37.63 acres.
The assessor arrived at a value per acre for each classification and then
multiplied the per acre value times the number of acres in the tract. Although
the assessor used unit values in arriving at a total assessment, the assessor
may also have made some adjustments in the final figure for special features or
qualities peculiar to the property. The figures may be wrong but the assessor's
judgment of the parcel's value may be right. Because it is the total assessment
that is subject to question, and because more elements than simply the matter
of acreage can be used to arrive at a total assessment, this is a case of value
judgment and is not correctable.
Example
2: A taxpayer sold two acres of his 8.33 acre parcel. Upon notice
of that sale, the assessor's office started the administrative process of
setting up a new account and revising the value of the old account. The new
account cards for the two-acre parcel were set up and the value put on the
roll. However, in the administrative process, no change in the acreage and
value was made on the old appraisal envelopes and cards for the remaining 6.33
acres. Consequently, the remaining 6.33 acres were placed upon the roll at the
same values used prior to the sale. There are two errors to consider here. One
is the fact that the assessor placed the original 8.33 acreage on the roll at
the same value used prior to the sale. This is an error in valuation judgment,
not a clerical error. Although this may appear to be a mathematical error due
to the failure of one of the clerks, it could just as well be the assessor
mistaken in fact and judgment. The situation is similar to that of an assessor
mistaken as to the number of acres or the number of square feet in a given
property. The figures may be wrong but the assessor's judgment of the parcel's
value may be right. Simply "subtracting" the prorated value of the two-acre
parcel from the value of the 8.33 acre parcel does not necessarily result in
the real market value for the 6.33 acre parcel. The appraiser must also look to
the highest and best use, lay of the land, and other considerations that would
affect value. In these circumstances, the statutory scheme requires that the
taxpayer be sufficiently cognizant of his property values to object and appeal
if necessary. Since both the appraisal cards and the assessment roll were not
changed, it must be presumed that the assessor intended those values to be
used, subject to appeal. The second error is the failure of the assessor to
reduce the acreage on the original parcel from 8.33 to 6.33 acres. This is a
clerical error because the correct facts are evident from the assessor records
and there is no speculation or conjecture as to value.
Example 3: A parcel of land has been carried
on the roll for several years as five acres. The parcel sells and the buyer
requires a survey. The surveyor arrives at a measurement of 4.72 acres. This is
an error in valuation judgment and is not correctable under ORS
311.205(1)(a)
as a clerical error or under 311.205(1)(c) as an error or omission on the roll
of any kind. Because it is the total assessment that is subject to question,
and because more elements than simply the matter of acreage can be used to
arrive at a total assessment, this is a case of value judgment and is not
correctable. The assessor may correct the acreage on the next assessment and
tax roll and reappraise the parcel for value, if necessary.
