Local Improvements and Works Generally

ORS 223.435
Personal notice to each owner

  • right to file objections

The recorder shall, within five days after the date of first publication of the notice, mail or personally deliver to the owner of each lot affected by the proposed reassessment, or to the agent of such owner, a notice of the proposed reassessment, stating the matters set out in the printed notice and also the amount proposed to be charged against the lot. If the address of the owner or of the owner’s agent is unknown to the recorder, the recorder shall mail the notice addressed to the owner or owner’s agent at the address where such property is located. Any mistake, error, omission or failure with respect to such mailing shall not be jurisdictional or invalidate the reassessment proceedings. The owners of any property included in the description of the printed notice, or any person having an interest in that property, may, within 10 days from the day of last insertion of the printed notice, file in writing with the recorder objections against the proposed reassessment. [Amended by 1991 c.902 §48]
§§ 223.405 to 223.485

Notes of Decisions

Where city initially formed local improvement district properly but later unilaterally acted to substantially change the character, cost and benefits of the improvement, effect was to create new local improvement district without following required procedures and city could not reassess for the improvements without forming the district properly. Heritage Square Dev. Co. v. City of Sandy, 58 Or App 485, 648 P2d 1317 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

Chapter 223

Notes of Decisions

Fact that ordinance, which charged fee to property owners taking advantage of privilege of making connection to city water system, specified that payment would be secured by liens which would be "enforced" in matter provided by this chapter did not, of itself, show that such charges were "assessments." Montgomery Brothers v. City of Corvallis, 34 Or App 785, 580 P2d 190 (1978)

Circuit court has jurisdiction to determine merits of assessment, but cannot address whether assessment is subject to constitutional limits on property taxes. Martin v. City of Tigard, 14 OTR 517 (1999), aff'd 335 Or 444, 72 P3d 619 (2003)

State statutory procedures for financing local improvements are not exclusive and do not displace consistent local procedures. Baker v. City of Woodburn, 190 Or App 445, 79 P3d 901 (2003), Sup Ct review denied


Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021