Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 311.219 (2026)

Notice of intention to assess omitted property

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      311.219 Notice of intention to assess omitted property. Notice shall be given to the person claiming to own the property or occupying it or in possession thereof of the assessor’s intention to add the property to the assessment or tax roll under ORS 311.216 to 311.232 and to assess the property in such person’s name. Where the assessor has reason to believe the property is either no longer in existence or is outside the county, the assessor shall give the notice to the owner or the person in possession on the assessment date of the year or years as to which the property was omitted. The notice shall be in writing, mailed to the person’s last-known address. It shall describe the property in general terms, and require the person to appear at a specified time, not less than 20 days after mailing the notice, and to show cause, if any, why the property should not be added to the assessment and tax roll and assessed to such person. [Formerly 311.209]

 

      311.220 [Amended by 1971 c.384 §1; 1989 c.297 §1; 1991 c.459 §237; renumbered 311.235 in 1997]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Hoggard I v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 406 (Or. T.C. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hoggard I v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 406 (Or. T.C. 2019). · cites it 3× “The 2017 Notice stated in part: “In compliance with ORS 311.219, this notice is to inform you of the Assessor’s intention to add the property value listed below to the Assessment Roll for the years indi- cated.”
Hoyt Street Props. LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 18 Or. Tax 313 (Or. T.C. 2005). “4 On August 14, 2000, and pursuant to the omitted property authority and procedures under ORS 311.219, the county sent two so-called “twenty-day” letters (one for each tax lot affected by the PCM) to taxpayer.”
Clackamas Cnty. Assessor v. Vill. at Main Street Phase II, LLC, 245 P.3d 81 (Or. 2010). “Revenue, or any buildings, structures, improvements or timber on land previously assessed without the same, has from any cause been omitted, in whole or in part, from assessment and taxation on the current assessment and tax rolls or on any such rolls for any year or years not…”
Perkins v. Dep't of Revenue, 15 Or. Tax 381 (Or. T.C. 2001). · cites it 3× “ORS 311.219 requires the assessor to give the taxpayer notice and opportunity to show cause.”
Adair v. Dep't of Revenue, 17 Or. Tax 311 (Or. T.C. 2004). “The parties agree that the notice required by ORS 311.219 1 (the 20-day notice) was sent by the county and received by taxpayer.”
Nicolynn Props. LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 21 Or. Tax 320 (Or. T.C. 2013). “208 and informed taxpayer of a right to appear and show cause under ORS 311.219. Under date of April 10, 2012, taxpayer’s counsel filed a written appearance with the county setting forth reasons why additional value should not be added to the assessments for the years in…”
Clackamas Cnty. Assessor v. Vill. at Main Street Phase II, LLC, 282 P.3d 814 (Or. 2012). “Revenue, or any buildings, structures, improvements or timber on land previously assessed without the same, has from any cause been omitted, in whole or in part, from assessment and taxation on the current assessment and tax rolls or on any such rolls for any year or years not…”
Portland Dev. Com. v. Multnomah Cty. Ass., Tc-Md 091630d (or.tax 2-28-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 5× “) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to give proper notice of the revocation of the subject property's exemption, stating that Plaintiff's receipt of its 2009-10 property tax statement was its first notice that the property was no longer exempt from taxation.”
Hughes v. Tillamook Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). · cites it 2× “ORS 311.219 requires the notice to be in writing “mailed to the person’s last-known address * * * and require the person to appear at a specified time, not less than 20 days after mailing the notice, and to show case, if any, why the 2 The court’s references to the Oregon…”
Hoff v. Benton Cnty. Assessor, Tc-Md 100212b (or.tax 5-28-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). · cites it 3× “ty * * * or any buildings, structures, [or] improvements * * * on land previously assessed without the same, has from any cause been omitted, in whole or in part, from assessment and taxation on the current assessment and tax rolls or on any such rolls for any year or years not…”
Worldmark the Club v. Klamath Cnty. Asses., Tc-Md 050856b (or.tax 3-1-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 2× “It is Lavine's contention that notice was improper because Defendant issued a notice of intent as required by ORS 311.219, but never issued the notice required by ORS 311.”
Cocina Mexico Lindo v. Washington Cty. Ass., Tc-Md 091420c (or.tax 2-9-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 2× “es credible information, or if the assessor has reason to believe that any real or personal property * * *, has from any cause been omitted, in whole or in part , from assessment and taxation on the current assessment and tax rolls or on any such rolls for any year or years not…”
Show all 26 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 311.219(1) — 1 case
Conrad v. Clackamas Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2016).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.