Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The daily Astorian. (Astoria, Or.) 1961-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 9, 2017)
COAST WEEKEND: ‘AU NATUREL: THE NUDE IN THE 21ST CENTURY’ INSIDE DailyAstorian.com // THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2017 144TH YEAR, NO. 160 ONE DOLLAR SEASIDE SWEEPS CLATSOP CLASH • SPORTS 10A LANDOWNERS FUME OVER FIRE FEE Astoria may turn to tax for housing Construction tax could spur options By ERICK BENGEL The Daily Astorian Astoria may set up a construction excise tax program that raises money to increase the city’s housing stock. Community Development Director Kevin Cronin advanced the idea, orig- inally fl oated last year , at Wednesday’s City Council work session. In 2015, the City Coun- cil embraced the goal of pro- moting hous- ing that Astori- ans can afford. The housing scarcity affects commu- nities throughout Clatsop County, bur- dening residents at all income levels. A construction excise tax is one of several tools the council has discussed to con- front the issue. “That’s the one tool that I think has the most potential impact to moving the needle here in Astoria,” Cronin told the council. See TAX, Page 7A Danny Miller/The Daily Astorian Tim Mancill says he was notified in January that he will have to pay an extra fee to the state on his Seaside property for fire pro- tection. Mancill has lived on his Seaside property for 13 years. Hundreds face new assessments By JACK HEFFERNAN The Daily Astorian Key data is lacking in housing debate By PARIS ACHEN Capital Bureau L and owners in Clatsop County are challenging a fee assessed by the state for fi re protection, citing improper classifi cation and a lack of advance notice. In early January, roughly 2,300 land owners in the Astoria Forest Pro- tection District were notifi ed that their properties, designated as forest lands in July, would be assessed an annual fee for fi re protection as part of their property taxes. But some argue either that their properties should not qualify as forestland or they had not received proper notice. The Oregon Department of For- estry provides fi re protection to for- est and grazing lands through money from both the state general fund and fees it collects from forestland prop- erty owners. Overall, roughly 4,750 lots were added as forestlands, while 1,200 lots — including 600 owners — were removed from the list. Danny Miller/The Daily Astorian See FEE, Page 7A Tim Mancill walks on his property on Wednesday in Seaside. Mancill is appealing the added fire protection fee on his property. SALEM — The state housing agency won’t fi nish a statewide affordable hous- ing inventory before the end of the leg- islative session during which lawmak- ers could consider millions of dollars in funding for affordable housing. The inventory is intended to give agencies, lawmakers and nonprofi t housing investors an accurate picture of what affordable housing exists and what federally backed projects are at risk of losing affordabil- ity because of expir- ing contracts with property owners. Oregon Hous- ing and Community Services was called out in an audit by the Secretary of Alissa State’s Offi ce in Keny-Guyer early December for failing to provide a statewide affordable housing inventory and statewide housing plan. Both are critical to adequately and strategically addressing the state’s affordable hous- ing shortage, the audit found. See DATA, Page 7A Cities push reforms to increase property tax cash By CLAIRE WITHYCOMBE Capital Bureau SALEM — As legislators set to work on balancing the state’s budget, some lawmak- ers and lobbyists are consider- ing property tax reform to ben- efi t local government budgets. In particular, supporters want to change how prop- erty taxes are calculated, and remove limits on tax rates. Two ballot measures approved by voters in the 1990s, Measure 5 and Mea- sure 50, limited the amount of property taxes Oregonians pay, and annual tax increases. Measure 5, passed in 1990, limited the total tax rates lev- ied by all local taxing bodies to no more than $15 per $1,000 of assessed property value — up to $5 for education, and $10 for other local taxing bodies. Measure 50, passed in 1997, decoupled a prop- erty’s assessed val- uation, the amount on which it is taxed, from real market value, according to the Ore- gon Department of Revenue, and put limits on how much a property’s assessed value could increase from year to year. The state’s cities advocate a “transition” back to real mar- ket value-based calculations and for permitting local voters to approve rates exceeding the limits established by Measure 5. Without a reduction in tax rates, the pro- posal would lead to higher property taxes. According to the League of Ore- gon Cities, there is a state average of a 25 percent difference between the real market value of property and its assessed value. Homestead exemption The Legislature is also looking at a homestead exemption, which could cush- ion homeowners from sud- den tax leaps on their primary residences. Cities contend Measures 5 and 50 have meant that owners of similarly priced properties can pay signifi cantly dispa- rate amounts in taxes, and that cities have to compete with other local jurisdictions, such as counties and fi re protection districts, for key funding. Even if residents of a city support measures to pay for local libraries or to build a new police station, for example, the total tax rate per $1,000 of assessed valuation can’t exceed the state limits. The proposal could also lead to greater increases in assessments. Assessed valu- ations — due to the require- ments of Measure 50 — typi- cally grow at a slower rate than real market value. On the other hand, when the real estate market dips, so do real market values. A senate resolution, Senate Joint Resolution 3, proposes repealing Measure 50 and replacing it with a real market value-based system. That reso- lution is scheduled for a pub- lic hearing before the Senate Finance and Revenue Com- mittee Tuesday. “We would support that in theory,” said Wendy Johnson, an intergovernmental relations associate for the League of Oregon Cities, noting that the details have not been ironed out. That resolution is the fi rst placeholder bill in what cities expect to be a broader prop- erty tax reform package, John- son said.
