Local Improvements and Works Generally

ORS 223.710
Rebonding application

  • form
  • prerequisites


(1)

The applications for rebonding shall be in the same form and preserved as original bonding applications. The officer charged with keeping the records of the local government shall keep the bonding applications in convenient form for examination. The officer shall enter in a docket kept for that purpose a description of each lot or parcel of land against which the rebonding assessment is made, or which bears or is chargeable for the cost of the local improvement, with the name of the then owner and the total amount of unpaid final assessments rebonded.

(2)

The total amount to be rebonded against any lot or parcel of land must be $25 or more. The owner shall tender and pay with the application all accrued interest due on the bonded assessment to the first of the month preceding the date of application.

(3)

No application for rebonding shall be received unless the taxes for any quarter of the current year then due and payable, together with the entire amount of taxes of the year immediately preceding the year in which the application is filed, have been fully paid and evidence of such payment satisfactory to the officer receiving the application is produced at the time of making the application. [Amended by 1991 c.902 §78; 2003 c.802 §52]
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


Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021