|
|
WORK SESSION: SB 549 |
|
|
PUBLIC HEARING: SB 556 |
|
|
PUBLIC HEARING AND WORK SESSION: SB 229 |
|
|
TAPES 62-63,
A-B |
March 13,
2003 1:00 PM STATE CAPITOL BUILDING
Members Present: Senator Ryan Deckert, Chair
Senator Ted
Ferrioli, Vice Chair
Senator
Tony Corcoran
Senator
Lenn Hannon
Senator
Charlie Ringo
Senator
Bruce Starr
Witnesses Present: Fred Hansen, General Manager, Tri-Met
Senator
Vicki Walker, District 7
John
Brown, Eugene Real Estate Appraiser
Diane
Belt, Oregon Association of County Tax Collectors
Gary
Bartholomew, Oregon Association of County Tax Collectors
Staff Present: Lizbeth
Martin-Mahar, Legislative Revenue Office
Mazen
Malik, Legislative Revenue Office
Paul
Warner, Legislative Revenue Office
Tara
Lantz, Committee Assistant
TAPE
62, SIDE A
|
003 |
Chair Deckert |
Calls meeting to order at 1:10pm |
OPENS WORK SESSION ON SB 549
|
017 |
Sen. Deckert |
Asks if TriMet would have to enact
the increase by January 1, 2004 in order to meet the requirements of the
phase in process thereby voiding the promise that they would wait until there
was an economic recovery before phasing in an increase. |
|
|
|
|
|
023 |
Fred Hansen |
Responds negatively citing that the
language allows them to phase in the increase for 10 years after it is
initiated and not 10 years after the passage of the bill. |
|
|
|
|
|
038 |
Sen. Starr |
MOTION: MOVES LC-5 AMENDMENTS DATED
3/12/03 TO SB 549 BE ADOPTED. Exhibit 3. |
|
|
|
|
|
044 |
Martin-Mahar |
Explains the LC-5 amendments, which
specifies that the district board must adopt an ordinance increasing the tax
authority if the economy in the district has recovered from any downturn,
reflected in employment and income growth. Exhibit 1. |
|
|
|
|
|
051 |
Sen. Starr |
Asks if it would make more sense to
adopt amendments to section 2, where it relates to timing of the increase,
rather than section 1. |
|
|
|
|
|
064 |
Hansen |
Responds that the advantage of being
in section 1 is that when section 2 is repealed by the sunset it would stay
in place and would apply across all times. |
|
|
|
|
|
083 |
Sen. Starr |
Asks if in the situation that the
ordinance was passed in 2005 it would be phased in until 2015. |
|
|
|
|
|
095 |
Hansen |
Responds affirmatively. |
|
|
|
|
|
112 |
Sen. Starr |
Asks if the board takes one action
to set the increase in motion or if there is an ordinance at every point that
the increments are phased in. |
|
|
|
|
|
117 |
Hansen |
Responds that section 2 allows for
it to be done either way. |
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
Sen. Deckert |
ORDER: WITHOUT OBJECTION THE LC-5
AMENDMENTS ARE MOVED INTO SB 549. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT EXCEPT SEN. FERRIOLI. |
|
|
|
|
|
137 |
Sen. Ferrioli |
Asks about the cost per ride. |
|
|
|
|
|
145 |
Hansen |
Responds that in FY02 the cost per
boarding ride of light rail is about $1.51 and the bus ride $2.04. Discussion follows. |
|
|
|
|
|
206 |
Sen. Hannon |
MOTION: MOVES SB 549 TO THE SENATE
FLOOR WITH A DO PASS AS AMENDED RECOMMENDATION. |
|
|
|
|
|
213 |
Sen. Deckert |
ORDER: ROLL CALL VOTE: MOTION PASSES 6-0-0. Sen. Starr will carry the bill on
the Senate Floor. |
OPENS PUBLIC HEARING ON SB
556
|
223 |
Mazen Malik |
Explains SB 556, which reduces the
rate of interest paid on certain property tax refunds. Exhibit 4. |
|
|
|
|
|
239 |
Sen. Walker |
Testifies in support of SB 556
because counties are losing a lot of money because the interest on property
tax appeals is paid out at 12 percent when the current interest rate is
extremely low. |
|
|
|
|
|
256 |
John Brown |
Testifies in support of SB 556
because it provides increased revenues to local taxing districts without a
cost to the taxpayers and corrects an inequity. Gives examples from Lane County
of large refunds. |
|
|
|
|
|
319 |
Sen. Hannon |
Asks if this appears to be a
persistent problem of refunds. |
|
|
|
|
|
341 |
Brown |
Responds that there is a problem in
that the county tax board is so understaffed that they are not able to
adequately contest the appeals in court. |
|
|
|
|
|
360 |
Sen. Hannon |
Asks about the interest rate for
those who underpay. |
|
|
|
|
|
369 |
Brown |
Responds that he believes a person
is able to go back and pay the taxes owed without a penalty within a certain
amount of time. |
|
|
|
|
|
378 |
Sen. Hannon |
Asks if this is a problem because of
the size of cases taken to contested hearings. |
|
|
|
|
|
387 |
Brown |
Responds that he doesn’t believe so
and that the problem is because of the number of people who are able to
obtain a refund. |
|
|
|
|
|
400 |
Sen. Hannon |
Asks if he is saying that there is a
problem with the county tax assessors. |
|
|
|
|
|
404 |
Brown |
Responds affirmatively. |
|
|
|
|
|
413 |
Sen. Deckert |
Asks if the tax assessors need to
have some sort of disincentive to not underestimate the tax liability and if
the 12 percent rate addresses that. |
TAPE 63, SIDE A
|
001 |
Brown |
Responds that he doesn’t believe a
12 percent rate is a penalty to the county and that it was put in place
historically to reflect the market and lost opportunity and that those
markets have changed now. |
|
|
|
|
|
006 |
Sen. Deckert |
Asks about the history of the 12
percent rate. |
|
|
|
|
|
007 |
Brown |
Responds that he doesn’t know. |
|
|
|
|
|
012 |
Sen. Walker |
Responds that she doesn’t believe
the assessors are not appropriately assessing property and that the problem
lies in that the tax assessors are understaffed and cannot compete against
lawyers who are after large refunds. States that she has been told that the
bill should be changed to use a simple rate rather than a compounded and that
she has no position on that. |
|
|
|
|
|
034 |
Malik |
States that the Legislative Fiscal
Office had difficulties in issuing a fiscal impact statement because of the
compounded rate. |
|
|
|
|
|
038 |
Sen. Deckert |
States that he will hold off on the
compounded rate issue until he gets a sense of where the committee is on the
concept. |
|
|
|
|
|
046 |
Diane Belt |
Discusses the history of the 12
percent rate and the problems with compounding rates. Recommends using simple
rate. Gives examples of large refunds. |
|
|
|
|
|
084 |
Gary Bartholomew |
Suggests language that would set the
rate at the nearest quarter percent so that counties might not even have to
change the rate every year. |
|
|
|
|
|
095 |
Sen. Deckert |
Asks how Oregon compares to other
states. |
|
|
|
|
|
102 |
Bartholomew |
Discusses Washington’s and
California’s rates. |
|
|
|
|
|
120 |
Sen. Ferrioli |
Asks about the differential between
the interest charged and interest paid. |
|
|
|
|
|
123 |
Bartholomew |
Responds that the interest rate
charged is currently 16 percent annually. |
|
|
|
|
|
135 |
Sen. Ferrioli |
Points out that some people will
think about a sense of proportionality when looking at this bill. |
|
|
|
|
|
146 |
Belt |
Responds that the full 16 percent
doesn’t kick in until 12 months have passed. |
|
|
|
|
|
159 |
Sen. Ferrioli |
Asks how the counties compound
interest. |
|
|
|
|
|
160 |
Belt |
Responds that they use simple
interest. |
|
|
|
|
|
161 |
Sen. Ferrioli |
States that he still doesn’t have an
answer to give his constituents about the fairness of the differential. |
|
164 |
Belt |
Responds that she asks those people
where else they can go and not pay but still receive services with the only
downfall being that they have to pay interest. |
|
|
|
|
|
174 |
Sen. Deckert |
States that to him it seems like
there should be some consistency between what is paid and what is charged. |
|
|
|
|
|
180 |
Sen. Ferrioli |
Responds that he agrees but argues
that there is proportionality to the symmetry and that there should be a
differential, just not 10 points. Discussion follows. |
|
|
|
|
|
199 |
Sen. Deckert |
Asks what the 12 percent rate would
be if there was complete balance. |
|
|
|
|
|
204 |
Bartholomew |
Responds that it would be about 5.5
percent. Discussion follows. |
|
|
|
|
|
236 |
Malik |
Explains that 4 percent of the 16
percent charged is dedicated to funding assessment functions within the
county. Discussion follows. |
CLOSES PUBLIC HEARING ON SB
556
OPENS PUBLIC HEARING ON SB
229
|
252 |
Malik |
Explains SB 229. Discusses the
previous concerns and explains the LC-1 and LC-2 amendments. Exhibits 6-8. |
|
341 |
Sen. Hannon |
Asks if this is the same interest
rate that was discussed in SB 556. |
|
|
|
|
|
345 |
Malik |
Responds that it is the same
interest rate but on the other side. Discussion follows. |
CLOSES PUBLIC HEARING ON SB
229
OPENS WORK SESSION ON SB 229
|
370 |
Sen. Corcoran |
MOTION: MOVES LC-1 AMENDMENTS DATED
3/7/03 TO SB 229 BE ADOPTED. |
|
|
|
|
|
373 |
Sen. Deckert |
ORDER: HEARING NO OBJECTION, MOTION
PASSES: 4-0-2. SENATORS EXCUSED: RINGO, FERRIOLI. |
|
|
|
|
|
374 |
Sen. Corcoran |
MOTION: MOVES LC-2 AMENDMENTS DATED
3/12/03 TO SB 229 BE ADOPTED. |
|
|
|
|
|
377 |
Sen. Deckert |
ORDER: HEARING NO OBJECTION, MOTION
PASSES: 4-0-2. SENATORS EXCUSED: RINGO, FERRIOLI. |
|
|
|
|
|
378 |
Sen. Corcoran |
MOTION: MOVES SB 229 TO SENATE FLOOR
WITH A DO PASS AS AMMENDED RECOMMENDATION. |
|
|
|
|
|
385 |
Sen. Deckert |
ORDER: HEARING NO OBJECTION, MOTION
PASSES: 4-0-2. SENATORS EXCUSED: RINGO, FERRIOLI. Sen. Corcoran will carry the bill on
the Senate Floor. |
|
|
|
|
|
392 |
Sen. Deckert |
Adjourns meeting at 2:02pm |
Tape Log Submitted by,
Tara Lantz, Committee Assistant Reviewed
by Kim Taylor James
Exhibit Summary:
1.
SB 549, Lizbeth Martin-Mahar, Staff Measure Summary, 1p.
2.
SB 549, Lizbeth Martin-Mahar, Fiscal Impact Statement, 1p.
3.
SB 549, Lizbeth Martin-Mahar, -5 Amendments to SB 549, 1p.
4.
SB 556, Mazen Malik, Staff Measure Summary, 1p.
5.
SB 556, John Brown, Written Testimony, 1p.
6.
SB 229, Mazen Malik, -1 Amendments to SB 229, 2pp.
7.
SB 229, Mazen Malik, -2 Amendments to SB 229, 1p.
8.
SB 229, Mazen Malik, Staff Measure Summary, 1p.
9.
SB 229, Mazen Malik, Revenue Impact Statement, 1p.
10.
SB 229, Mazen Malik, Correcting Errors or Omissions in Rolls
ORS Reference, 5pp.