Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PLANNER 1/18/2010 . , . . , L1MBIRD Andrew From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: RICHARDSON Liane I [Liane.RICHARDSON@co.lane.or.us] Monday, January 18, 201012:48 PM 'Bill Van Vactor'; SPICKARD Anette B LEAHY Joe (HL) RE: Effective date of Water District withdrawals. If we only had ORS 222.465 to look at, I'd agree with Bill (July 1 effective date). However 308.225 indicates it has to be final prior to July 1. Marc is in the office also, and he did research on this a year or so ago. He looked at Springfield's annexations and water district withdrawals last year and the statutes and interpreted that the withdrawals became effective end of the day on June 30th, as the intent was to not go in to the next tax year. My analysis is that if they are still in effect on July 1, the statutes look like we need to tax for another year. I would agree that the written effecteive date should be June 30th to avoid the possibility of taxes being assessed. Liane Richardson County Counsel Office of Lane County Legal Counsel CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - This email message is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited and may void any privileges otherwise protecting this communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Bill Van Vactor [mailto:BW@emeraldlaw.com] Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 11:36 AM To: SPICKARD Anette B; RICHARDSON Liane I Cc: Joe Leahy Subject: RE: Effective date of Water District withdrawals. Anette, Thanks for the quick reply. Liane, Do you agree that notwithstanding the statutory language that seems to say a July 1 effective date would be fine (especially if enacted on or before March 31) the resolution should nevertheless be written effective June 30? If you agree with Anette we will need to amend some earlier resolutions, a not easy, but not impossible task. Bil This email is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contains information belonging to Leahy, Van Vactor & Cox, LLP which is confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this email information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.! >>> SPICKARD Anette B <Anette.SPICKARD@co.lane.or.us> 1/16/2010 10:07 AM >>> I agree with Alice, the effective date should be June 30. Tax liens automatically occur on July 1 and as far as I know there isn't anything speCific in statute that tells us what order actions occur if they all happen on July 1 (withdrawal first, then lien or vice-versa) and if the accounts are still members of the water district on July 1 they will receive a tax lien. Anette From: Bill Van Vactor [BW@emeraldlaw.com] Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 8:42 AM 1 Date! H8ceived:~?i~.) Planner: AL " To: SPICKARD Anette B; RICHARDSfLiane I Cc: Joe Leahy Subject: Effective date of Water District withdrawals. . . Liane and Anette, Springfield needs your help. Last year about this time' we processed a couple of annexations and water district withdrawals. And we need to process another one, see attached. I read ORS 303.225 and ORS 222.465 (if the resolution is enacted before April 1) as authorizing a July 1 effective date with the result being that the withdrawing districts taxes cease the next tax year (on July 1 of the same calendar year). And our City code SDC 5.7-160 D. on withdrawals says it shall be effective as specified n ORS 222.465. There appears to be a slight ambiguity in ORS 308.225 section 2 which talks about enactments before March 31 which are final before that date, and section 5 which talks about enactments after March 31 but which are certain to become "effective" before July. I think this is the source of the ambiguity. We have written the resolution to be effective July 1. However Alice Marks of A&T believes we need to specify it has an effective of June 30 in order to avoid another year of taxes. We just want to do what is correct to avoid taxation double taxation for the same service. And we are not so entrenched in our opinion that we are willing to risk double taxation for the taxpayer. We just want to work this out with Lane County and get on the same page now that we live in a post Boundary Commission County. So, can you take a look at the statutes and let me know how you read' the requirement? Thank you, thank you! Bill This email is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contains information belonging to Leahy, Van Vactor & Cox, LLP which is confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this email information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Date, i':(cCeived:~f~/" Planner: AL 2