https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-land-use-douglas-county-rezoning-farm-forest-conservation/
"Douglas County Commissioners will consider a plan Wednesday to open up 35,000 acres of rural land to 20-acre home plots. The land is currently zoned for farm and forest use."
"The county( Douglas) analyzed the acres in question and concluded that they’re not suitable for most types of farming."
"That’s a claim disputed by Greg Holmes, food systems programs director for 1,000 Friends Of Oregon."
“This is the type of land where our cattle and hay production happens, where our wine grapes happen, and other high-value crops to the state of Oregon happen,” Holmes said. He pointed out there’s land with similar soil types and characteristics across the state."
“It may be relatively less productive than some other lands, but if we were to suddenly take this type of land and call it non-resource land anymore and then multiply that across all the counties across the state … we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of acres of agricultural lands,” Holmes said."
What if the disputed claim is true? Then yes it should apply to all other agricultural land that is not suitable for most types of farming or refined to apply to all land that is absolutely not suitable for farming.
“Deschutes County is interested in pursuing a similar program,” reads the letter signed by the county’s three commissioners. “We recognize that a subset of resource lands are not accurately designated in our region as well.”
Maybe we have a lot of officially classified farmland in Deschutes that is not suitable for farming. What is the current assessment and taxation on this land. What would it be if it was in a higher use category?
More tax revenue?
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Oregon Farm/Forestland Dwelling in the City of Bend Oregon.
As I commonly do I will move the bottom line conclusion to the beginning of what this blog entry sets out to do. I got at the end where I intended to go in a bottom up analysis of the problem progressing to top level fundamental policy at the end. This is that end found at the end of this blog entry and moved to the top:
Forest Policy:
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/527.630
This entry stating from the bottom level with dwellings on forest land and working to the top Oregon Forest Policy above has reach one of its goals in navigating the conceptual structure laid out in ORS an OAR that relates that structure somehow to the aberration of Designated Forestland within the City of Bend.
That aberration is an unintended consequence that should be eliminated!
Is what comes out at the bottom with the application of everything in the system to implement the guiding policy in compliance and consistent with that purpose, The official State Goal of that policy that is to be implemented down through various levels an entities of statewide governance?
In the case of Designated Forestland in the City of Bend the conclusion is;
No.
Something is seriously wrong when residential zoned properties within the City are given a tax assessment intended for Forestland outside the urban development within the City.
This is an interesting decision making chart:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/Non_Farm_Dwellings.xls.E_W.pdf
The link was found at this website:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/pages/index.aspx
That website was found in the course of looking at this website:
https://www.bendoregon.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning-division/planning-regulatory-codes-procedures-and-policies
I went to that website because I looked at this website and wanted to go deeper into what the Planning Division is doing in Re-zoning. What started my interest that lead me down this trail of links is that Re-zoning is in the news recently and Planning Re-Zoning relates to land use in the city of Bend and all the zoning requirements, rules and regulations related to city zoning that are applied to shape the city we live in.
Designated Forestland properties within the City of Bend and its associated extremely low assessment value of around $70 per acre for computation of property tax is one of the things that interest me. It is fundamentally contrary to the states legislative purpose of protecting forestland from urban encroachment. City residential zoning has already encroached upon it! Regardless of that fact owners of residential zoned properties within the City of Bend have been given the approval of the Deschutes County Assessor to grow trees of commercial on their property for timber harvesting. Associated with that and there promised intent to grow trees for that purpose the city residential zoned land is assigned an assessment value of about $70 per acre intended to protect forestland from the encroachment of Urban Development by means of a low fixed tax assessment value. That low assessment value was intended to protect the owner of the Designated Forestland property near city limits from property tax increases that would that would make it economically difficult to grow trees on forestland for timber harvest profit.
Timber is an important economic issue to the state of Oregon. Urban encroachment on forestland to grow timber of economic importance to the common economic good of Oregon citizens is minimized by eliminating the the influence of increasing propery taxes to high levels that force forestland owners to sell forestland in the zone for urban development.
Designated Forestland in residential zoned areas within the City of Bend?
The horse has already left the barn for the city! It is not doing farm work anymore!
It is a zoning issue that I brought to the attention of the City Council, the Planning Division and the City Manager to no avail. It is a loss of property tax revenue to the City. The response was that it is not a zoning non-permitted problem situation that anything would be done about.
It is but the problem is to get any local government or state administrative or political authority to do anything about it.
One of the associated benefits of Designated Forestland property ownership is that a dwelling on the same property is directly associated with the commercial management of that property and therefore subject to a special property tax assessment computation that averages the assessed value of the dwelling site with the value of the non-dwelling site acreage having an assessed value of (for 2018-19, Eastern Oregon) of $79.38.
The preceding is a long way around explanation of why the top link that interested me:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/Non_Farm_Dwellings.xls.E_W.pdf
The tax break on a dwelling that is occupied by the owner/manager of the income producing forestland is relatively and minor benefit to encourage the economic retention incentive of keeping the land in production of timber instead of being "forced" to sell it due to increased property assessment value and increased tax that would otherwise apply to forestland in the general forestland/urban interface zone.
The general forestland/urban interface zone does not necessarily mean the zone between an official city limit that is subject to urban growth boundary expansion but any forestland far from a city that may be pocket areas converted to non-forest use as rural residential property and therefore also face the fact of growing pressure to convert forestland to residential development.
While pockets of forestland anywhere face the conversion to urbanized land the greatest pressure is in the city/forestland zone. That is where property value assessment difference is the greatest. These properties for example if they were immediately outside the city limits of Bend instead of immediately inside the city limits in a developed residential zoned area:
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/241568 Assessed value: $248
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117545 Assessed value: $2,163
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/241569 Assessed value: $222
3 contiguous Designated Forestland properties on Bachelor View road in a city residential zoned area.
Assessor Market Value Total: $2,400,380.00
Assessor Assessed Value Total: $2,633
Tax................................................... $97.11
Overhead views of these properties:
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/241568
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/117545
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/241569
There is obviously no dwelling associated with the Designated Forestland of these single owner three Designated Forestland Properties. If there were a dwelling on one acre of the contiguous properties then the land value of that acre for tax assessment purposes would be an average of all assessed land values for all three properties.
The beauty of the first link decision making chart is what is what it backs into. It backs into a back door approach to a decision of the property that the dwelling is located on is either Forestland or.....Not!
Maybe the link which is a proposed land use decision making chart is just a straw to grasp in the analysis of Designated Forestland within the City of Bend and termination of Forestland Designation of the property. At least the termination of the tax reduction benefit of the dwelling on the property?
The key to the solution might just be in one of the decision making steps:
Is the parcel capable of producing 50 cf/ay of wood fiber (Western OR) or 20 cf/ay (Eastern OR) ?
Where can I find official supporting documentation related to that determining question?
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/Non_Farm_Dwellings.xls.E_W.pdf
DLCD May 2016: Non-farm dwellings in Eastern OR and Western OR outside the Willamette Valley ORS 215.284, 215.263 OAR 660-033-0130(4)
*Unsuitability standard (OAR 660-033-0130(4)(c)(B)
https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/viewSingleRule.action?ruleVrsnRsn=176043
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/215.750
Forest Land Protection Program
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/pages/forlandprot.aspx
Look at "Forest Land" vs "Forestland" official definitions. It seems that these "apples and "oranges" definitions are intermixed in application to state OAR and ORS.
Definitions should probably be interpreted in accordance with State Goal 4 policy guidance:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/goals/goal4.pdf
Forest Policy:
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/527.630
This entry stating from the bottom level with dwellings on forest land and working to the top Oregon Forest Policy above has reach one of its goals in navigating the conceptual structure laid out in ORS an OAR that relates that structure somehow to the aberration of Designated Forestland within the City of Bend.
That aberration is an unintended consequence that should be eliminated!
Forest Policy:
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/527.630
This entry stating from the bottom level with dwellings on forest land and working to the top Oregon Forest Policy above has reach one of its goals in navigating the conceptual structure laid out in ORS an OAR that relates that structure somehow to the aberration of Designated Forestland within the City of Bend.
That aberration is an unintended consequence that should be eliminated!
Is what comes out at the bottom with the application of everything in the system to implement the guiding policy in compliance and consistent with that purpose, The official State Goal of that policy that is to be implemented down through various levels an entities of statewide governance?
In the case of Designated Forestland in the City of Bend the conclusion is;
No.
Something is seriously wrong when residential zoned properties within the City are given a tax assessment intended for Forestland outside the urban development within the City.
.......................................................................
The following is the beginning that leads to the end:This is an interesting decision making chart:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/Non_Farm_Dwellings.xls.E_W.pdf
The link was found at this website:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/pages/index.aspx
That website was found in the course of looking at this website:
https://www.bendoregon.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning-division/planning-regulatory-codes-procedures-and-policies
I went to that website because I looked at this website and wanted to go deeper into what the Planning Division is doing in Re-zoning. What started my interest that lead me down this trail of links is that Re-zoning is in the news recently and Planning Re-Zoning relates to land use in the city of Bend and all the zoning requirements, rules and regulations related to city zoning that are applied to shape the city we live in.
Designated Forestland properties within the City of Bend and its associated extremely low assessment value of around $70 per acre for computation of property tax is one of the things that interest me. It is fundamentally contrary to the states legislative purpose of protecting forestland from urban encroachment. City residential zoning has already encroached upon it! Regardless of that fact owners of residential zoned properties within the City of Bend have been given the approval of the Deschutes County Assessor to grow trees of commercial on their property for timber harvesting. Associated with that and there promised intent to grow trees for that purpose the city residential zoned land is assigned an assessment value of about $70 per acre intended to protect forestland from the encroachment of Urban Development by means of a low fixed tax assessment value. That low assessment value was intended to protect the owner of the Designated Forestland property near city limits from property tax increases that would that would make it economically difficult to grow trees on forestland for timber harvest profit.
Timber is an important economic issue to the state of Oregon. Urban encroachment on forestland to grow timber of economic importance to the common economic good of Oregon citizens is minimized by eliminating the the influence of increasing propery taxes to high levels that force forestland owners to sell forestland in the zone for urban development.
Designated Forestland in residential zoned areas within the City of Bend?
The horse has already left the barn for the city! It is not doing farm work anymore!
It is a zoning issue that I brought to the attention of the City Council, the Planning Division and the City Manager to no avail. It is a loss of property tax revenue to the City. The response was that it is not a zoning non-permitted problem situation that anything would be done about.
It is but the problem is to get any local government or state administrative or political authority to do anything about it.
One of the associated benefits of Designated Forestland property ownership is that a dwelling on the same property is directly associated with the commercial management of that property and therefore subject to a special property tax assessment computation that averages the assessed value of the dwelling site with the value of the non-dwelling site acreage having an assessed value of (for 2018-19, Eastern Oregon) of $79.38.
The preceding is a long way around explanation of why the top link that interested me:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/Non_Farm_Dwellings.xls.E_W.pdf
The tax break on a dwelling that is occupied by the owner/manager of the income producing forestland is relatively and minor benefit to encourage the economic retention incentive of keeping the land in production of timber instead of being "forced" to sell it due to increased property assessment value and increased tax that would otherwise apply to forestland in the general forestland/urban interface zone.
The general forestland/urban interface zone does not necessarily mean the zone between an official city limit that is subject to urban growth boundary expansion but any forestland far from a city that may be pocket areas converted to non-forest use as rural residential property and therefore also face the fact of growing pressure to convert forestland to residential development.
While pockets of forestland anywhere face the conversion to urbanized land the greatest pressure is in the city/forestland zone. That is where property value assessment difference is the greatest. These properties for example if they were immediately outside the city limits of Bend instead of immediately inside the city limits in a developed residential zoned area:
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/241568 Assessed value: $248
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117545 Assessed value: $2,163
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/241569 Assessed value: $222
3 contiguous Designated Forestland properties on Bachelor View road in a city residential zoned area.
Assessor Market Value Total: $2,400,380.00
Assessor Assessed Value Total: $2,633
Tax................................................... $97.11
Overhead views of these properties:
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/241568
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/117545
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/241569
There is obviously no dwelling associated with the Designated Forestland of these single owner three Designated Forestland Properties. If there were a dwelling on one acre of the contiguous properties then the land value of that acre for tax assessment purposes would be an average of all assessed land values for all three properties.
The beauty of the first link decision making chart is what is what it backs into. It backs into a back door approach to a decision of the property that the dwelling is located on is either Forestland or.....Not!
Maybe the link which is a proposed land use decision making chart is just a straw to grasp in the analysis of Designated Forestland within the City of Bend and termination of Forestland Designation of the property. At least the termination of the tax reduction benefit of the dwelling on the property?
The key to the solution might just be in one of the decision making steps:
Is the parcel capable of producing 50 cf/ay of wood fiber (Western OR) or 20 cf/ay (Eastern OR) ?
Where can I find official supporting documentation related to that determining question?
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/Non_Farm_Dwellings.xls.E_W.pdf
DLCD May 2016: Non-farm dwellings in Eastern OR and Western OR outside the Willamette Valley ORS 215.284, 215.263 OAR 660-033-0130(4)
*Unsuitability standard (OAR 660-033-0130(4)(c)(B)
https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/viewSingleRule.action?ruleVrsnRsn=176043
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/215.750
Forest Land Protection Program
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/pages/forlandprot.aspx
Look at "Forest Land" vs "Forestland" official definitions. It seems that these "apples and "oranges" definitions are intermixed in application to state OAR and ORS.
Definitions should probably be interpreted in accordance with State Goal 4 policy guidance:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/goals/goal4.pdf
Forest Policy:
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/527.630
This entry stating from the bottom level with dwellings on forest land and working to the top Oregon Forest Policy above has reach one of its goals in navigating the conceptual structure laid out in ORS an OAR that relates that structure somehow to the aberration of Designated Forestland within the City of Bend.
That aberration is an unintended consequence that should be eliminated!
Monday, August 27, 2018
Pick and Shovel Data Mining - Data - Information - Knowledge
It is always strange to look back and see what started thoughts about anything and the relationship between what brought on the thoughts and the thoughts it produced.
An apple hit guy on the head. Who could guess at the thoughts that it would dislodge as. result. Where did they come from? Where did the apple come from?
This is the apple that hit me on the head this morning and I had no idea where it would take me. Having gone there now I know, for what it is worth.
How did I go from here to what follows? Beats me!
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/private-investigator-living-surveillance-culture.html
Data Mining with a pick and shovel. Data mining has become a popular meme. I call much of what I write as investigatory research my Data Mining with a pick and Shovel.
Actually it not data I am mining it is the next progression level of data where base data elements have been brought together in a collection that has the attributes of Information. Information that is a meaningful composite of relational data. That information is available on the internet and Google is the search method.
How to fix things is an example. Part numbers, makes and models are data element level things that when entered with some qualifying adjectives like "left door stuck will not open". leads to information on the internet relating to the problem.
The next level beyond information is knowledge. I am using this model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIKW_pyramid
Data is easy to gather. Little granular gold nuggets laying on the ground like bread crumbs laying out the trail to the loaf. The target I want information about. Finding the information loaf is relatively easy on the World Wide Web. Often it is already an assembly of all its parts and asked for me. Sometimes not and I have to put the parts together and bake my own loaf.
The next higher order step of Knowledge. That is often found on the WWW already put together for me to know about. Sometimes I have to put information together myself to conceptually create the bakery that produced the loaf. That is an order of magnitude more difficult, unless I have a shortcut intuition that sees the knowledge in the information written on the wall.
The peak of the pyramid is Knowledge.
The essence of an object thing is what it is as a real or conceptual thing and what it does at any object domain relationship collection level.
Darwin was good at seeing things and what they do to create higher levels of information and knowledge of the real world. Maybe his creative mind skipped ahead to see a flash of knowledge it would become in the future if he filled in the trail of data and information?
Artificial Intelligence is a creation of our human intelligence. The creative making of a hardware and software conceptual tool that enables us to expand our ability to apply our own intelligence like a lever or wheel is a tool.
Artificial Intelligence of the future applied to our Information Structures of today will be a tool to make them more efficient to serve us better. To engineer better systems based on logic and reason to accomplish our purposes of conceptual objectives.
Purpose and Objectives?
The purpose of self governance and what our objectives should be to accomplish that. Democracy is an ongoing grand experiment. I don't know about that. Some have ideas about that The data and information is here along with some creditable structures of knowledge. At the top is some wisdom about the domain of Self Governance Democracy. The wisdom of it all is not something that a Google search will return. Maybe someday Google will complete its creation of an Artificial Wisdom machine to wise us up to what the Wisdom means and put the writing on the wall for anyone to see?
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=democracy+is+a+grand+experiment&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Of all wisdom that has been presented to us to see the allegory of the Allegory of the Cave is absolutely elegant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave
Plato was a wise guy.
Something is wrong with the Oregon Designated Forestland taxation system. I know it because the system produces a tax it shroud not. I know that by examples that clearly present a bug in the system that requires correction. I know there is a problem. I think I know a solution. I really do not know how to implement that solution. Implementation requires a re-engineering of the tax system that produced the problem.
What is the nature of the elegant solution that I can put into play that induces the Oregon Property Tax system to skin itself and shed itself of self imposed disfunction?
The nature of the elegant solution is to be found at the granular level of the problem domain.
For example: Nobody should go hungry. Nobody should not have medical coverage.
It is the universal application to all the same things in the same equal singular object class model. Objects self defining as equal or defined as equal by self evident proclamation leads to application of attributes that are inalienable rights that will not be infringed upon by any other real or conceptual entity.
Knowledgeable and (some) Wiser Experts than me face the same problem domain solution Problem with the big "P". Does a magic bullet exist? Does it start with self evident truths?
Maybe self evident truths do not work anymore as the foundation of our conceptual systems?
Who benefits when the truth is no longer the truth? Where do we go from that premise?
https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/qhgdk/
The solution to our survival is a sluggish brain?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180822092709.htm
A dumbing down theory of evolutionary survival or maybe extinction?
Do leaders matter? They certainly do when leading on the wrong path! But on any other path that leads to a better way?
https://economics.mit.edu/files/2915
We have an individual leading the USA.
Perhaps the leader that will lead the world is not an individual like the USA or North Korea but a country with a better system?
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-19/china-s-economy-is-different-no-recessions-in-a-quarter-century
Who is to know?
A strategy for winning?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/08/china-is-cheating-at-a-rigged-game/
An apple hit guy on the head. Who could guess at the thoughts that it would dislodge as. result. Where did they come from? Where did the apple come from?
This is the apple that hit me on the head this morning and I had no idea where it would take me. Having gone there now I know, for what it is worth.
How did I go from here to what follows? Beats me!
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/private-investigator-living-surveillance-culture.html
Data Mining with a pick and shovel. Data mining has become a popular meme. I call much of what I write as investigatory research my Data Mining with a pick and Shovel.
Actually it not data I am mining it is the next progression level of data where base data elements have been brought together in a collection that has the attributes of Information. Information that is a meaningful composite of relational data. That information is available on the internet and Google is the search method.
How to fix things is an example. Part numbers, makes and models are data element level things that when entered with some qualifying adjectives like "left door stuck will not open". leads to information on the internet relating to the problem.
The next level beyond information is knowledge. I am using this model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIKW_pyramid
Data is easy to gather. Little granular gold nuggets laying on the ground like bread crumbs laying out the trail to the loaf. The target I want information about. Finding the information loaf is relatively easy on the World Wide Web. Often it is already an assembly of all its parts and asked for me. Sometimes not and I have to put the parts together and bake my own loaf.
The next higher order step of Knowledge. That is often found on the WWW already put together for me to know about. Sometimes I have to put information together myself to conceptually create the bakery that produced the loaf. That is an order of magnitude more difficult, unless I have a shortcut intuition that sees the knowledge in the information written on the wall.
The peak of the pyramid is Knowledge.
The essence of an object thing is what it is as a real or conceptual thing and what it does at any object domain relationship collection level.
Darwin was good at seeing things and what they do to create higher levels of information and knowledge of the real world. Maybe his creative mind skipped ahead to see a flash of knowledge it would become in the future if he filled in the trail of data and information?
Artificial Intelligence is a creation of our human intelligence. The creative making of a hardware and software conceptual tool that enables us to expand our ability to apply our own intelligence like a lever or wheel is a tool.
Artificial Intelligence of the future applied to our Information Structures of today will be a tool to make them more efficient to serve us better. To engineer better systems based on logic and reason to accomplish our purposes of conceptual objectives.
Purpose and Objectives?
The purpose of self governance and what our objectives should be to accomplish that. Democracy is an ongoing grand experiment. I don't know about that. Some have ideas about that The data and information is here along with some creditable structures of knowledge. At the top is some wisdom about the domain of Self Governance Democracy. The wisdom of it all is not something that a Google search will return. Maybe someday Google will complete its creation of an Artificial Wisdom machine to wise us up to what the Wisdom means and put the writing on the wall for anyone to see?
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=democracy+is+a+grand+experiment&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave
Plato was a wise guy.
Something is wrong with the Oregon Designated Forestland taxation system. I know it because the system produces a tax it shroud not. I know that by examples that clearly present a bug in the system that requires correction. I know there is a problem. I think I know a solution. I really do not know how to implement that solution. Implementation requires a re-engineering of the tax system that produced the problem.
What is the nature of the elegant solution that I can put into play that induces the Oregon Property Tax system to skin itself and shed itself of self imposed disfunction?
The nature of the elegant solution is to be found at the granular level of the problem domain.
For example: Nobody should go hungry. Nobody should not have medical coverage.
It is the universal application to all the same things in the same equal singular object class model. Objects self defining as equal or defined as equal by self evident proclamation leads to application of attributes that are inalienable rights that will not be infringed upon by any other real or conceptual entity.
Knowledgeable and (some) Wiser Experts than me face the same problem domain solution Problem with the big "P". Does a magic bullet exist? Does it start with self evident truths?
Maybe self evident truths do not work anymore as the foundation of our conceptual systems?
Who benefits when the truth is no longer the truth? Where do we go from that premise?
https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/qhgdk/
The solution to our survival is a sluggish brain?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180822092709.htm
A dumbing down theory of evolutionary survival or maybe extinction?
Do leaders matter? They certainly do when leading on the wrong path! But on any other path that leads to a better way?
https://economics.mit.edu/files/2915
We have an individual leading the USA.
Perhaps the leader that will lead the world is not an individual like the USA or North Korea but a country with a better system?
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-19/china-s-economy-is-different-no-recessions-in-a-quarter-century
Who is to know?
A strategy for winning?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/08/china-is-cheating-at-a-rigged-game/
Sunday, August 26, 2018
DOR Certified Eastern Oregon Designated Forestland Assessed Value 2018 -19
This following view of the forest preface was added after generating all the information that are trees in the forest that follows this broader view post analysis comment on what was originally written this morning:
The problem is multi acre Designated Forestland properties within the residential zoned city of Bend Oregon that have a property tax computed on a special Forestland Designation on their property that assigns it a property tax assessment value of $79.38 per acre that has a reasonable market value of at least $250,000. It is an unintended consequence of the Oregon Forestland Value laws and rules.
The big problem is....how are thousands of acres of privately owned forestland in Oregon going to be given a property assessment value. One that is reasonable and fair and promotes the multitude of private forestland values to the state and its citizens.
The size of private forestland assessed for value and taxed under state law and DOR implementation ranges from a minimum of 2 acres to thousands of acres. Thousands of acres of private forestland in remote areas...only have their own vast number of acres as well as acres owned by others around them. A minimum of 2 acres in the city assessed at $79.38 per acre where the next neighbor with 2 or more acres is assessed at at a value of maybe $250,000 per acre.
The best examples in Bend of this situation are located along Bachelor View Rd.
There is a difference in value between an acre of forestland in the middle of nowhere held as a parcel of thousands of acres and an acre of of officially Designated Forestland in the city of Bend. Big difference. They are both assessed at the same value for tax computation!
DOR annually certifies the property assessment value for county assessors to use in Eastern Oregon for assessing and taxing privately owned Forestland and Designated Forestland. $79.38 assessment per acre for the forthcoming year....
Examining the certification that the DOR makes it looks to me like the law requiring this certification applies to parcels over 5,000 acres. Makes sense, I guess. However when it comes to applying this assessment rate the county assessor applies to Designated Forestland properties that have the minimum of 2 acres qualifying the property (even in the city!) for the $79.38 per acre assessment value.
Maybe that is a point of entry to attack this anomaly. The tax assessment value is applicable by law only to forestland properties of more than 5,000 acres.
Based on Oregon ORS law a decision making chart would lay it all the relationships of the Forestland value assessment and tax. That is the objective of the following dive into the working parts of how it was intended to work at the legislative level and how it works in application.
There are unintended consequences where the rubber meets the road. Probably intended consequences by special interests. Perhaps the consequences of captured state offices and individuals as well as state offices and individuals that do not want to get involved in calling attention to the problem or doing anything about it......whoever they my be and state office they may be in ore running for.
I am not armed with any special expertise or knowledge in this area. It is a slow and painful effort to sift through it all just to get an understanding of the scope of the problem and all its relationships much less to come up with a solution. It is essentially all about money on the assessment and taxation side but then there are all the other issues that come into play that are either valid in themselves or useful idiots to those whose agenda is money....money in their pocket as an intended big player or unintended small player beneficiary along for the ride of self interest benefit. Big beneficiaries? Big forestland owners on the doorstep of Bend. They get the forestland assessment rate for the assessor approved purpose of growing and harvesting trees for timber and big bucks on what is really speculation property that will grow far more bucks as leaves on a conceptual money tree that sheds real dollars in a windfall.
Maybe the followings a solution from looking at the huge magnitude of difference between the forest and the trees is to draw a line between them at some point.....What point and why? Maybe when the county assessed value goes beyond 1 or 2 thousand times a Designated Forestland value of $79.38 per acre then it is time to terminate the exorbitant tax benefit to property owners that have avoided and morally evaded pay taxes on based on the sham of growing trees for sale on a future commercial market.
What is the state and citizens of Oregon, tax paying residents of Bend getting in return for the low tax assessment given to these property owners of a few acres....? Getting to pay property taxes that they don't pay?
For example:
Real Market Value for this non-Designated Forestland vacant bare land property on Bachelor View Rd. in Bend with 1.97 acres is $450,750.
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/204894
Assessed Value: $141,070. Property tax: $2,188.94
Real Market Value for this Designated Forestland vacant bare land property
nearby on Bachelor View Rd in Bend with 4.72 acres is $739,380.
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117569
1st Property:https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/204894
2nd Property:https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/117569
Looking at other bare land on Bachelor View Rd a general guess at the assessor Market Value of an acre in this area is about $300,00. When that value per acre its protected from tax by an assessment of that is protected from taxation at the Designated Forestland assessment value rate of $79.38 then the non-Designated Forestland Market Value is .....3,779 times greater than the Designated Forestland assessment value.
Keep in mind that this is property in a residential zoned area within the City of Bend!
There may be other ways to terminate this unbelievably unfair situation where a property owner in the city with 2 or more acres of land exclusive of an acre for their home can apply to the county assessor for Designation as Forestland with a promise to plant and grow trees to maturity for sale on the commercial market and receive a property assessment that is thousands of times less than their neighbor that does not have (but certainly could have if they qualified).
One final example.....go figure. Not even enough trees on it to sell them
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/241568
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117545
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117545
3 contiguous Designated Forestland properties on Bachelor View road in a city residential zoned area.
Assessor Market Value Total: $2,400,380.00
Tax................................................... $97.11
Been getting this gift since 2005!
End of my post-analysis and thoughts on what I wrote this morning.
Pick and shovel data mining in a pile of crap to find the pony follows:
..........................................................................................
DOR certified Oregon Designated Forestland Assessed Value 2018 -19: $79.38 per acre.
https://www.oregon.gov/DOR/programs/property/Documents/specially-assessed-forestland-values.pdf
To Whom It May Concern:
ORS ORS 321.216 requires that the Department of Revenue certify the specially assessed values of forestland to the counties on or before June 1 of each year. I, therefore, certify that the enclosed schedule contains the 2018-2019 per acre values of forestland in your county.
These certified specially assessed values constitute the department’s determination of the real market value, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of highest and best use forestland.
These certified specially assessed values constitute the specially assessed values, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of designated forestland that is assessed under either ORS 321.354 in the land class for which the certification is being made for western Oregon or ORS 321.833 (formerly 321.812) for eastern Oregon.
The 2018-2019 Maximum Specially Assessed Value (MSAV) was calculated using a three percent increase over last year’s Assessed Value (AV) and is included in the table for your benefit.
The 20% Specially Assessed Value (SAV) is for use on forestland that is assessed under 321.700 to 321.754 (Small Tract Forestland Option).
The 20% MSAV value for the tax year beginning July 1, 2018 was calculated using a three percent increase over last year’s 20% AV and is included in the table for your benefit.
The values in this certification are calculated based on the procedures set out by ORS 321.207 to 213 and OAR 150-321-0200.
Page 2:
Eastern Oregon MSAV – Maximum Specially Assessed Value (Measure 50):
$79.38 per acre.
The Oregon DOR is guided by these referenced ORS extracted from the DOR Certification document:
ORS 321.216
ORS 321.354 (Western Oregon, not applicable to this analysis)
ORS 321.833 (Eastern Oregon)
ORS 321.207 to ORS 321.213
OAR 150-321-0200
The following is an examination of the specific Oregon Revised Statutes law related to to the DOR required Certification of the value for Eastern Oregon Forestland at $79.38 per acre.
ORS 321.216
Certified specially assessed values
(1) On or before June 1 of each assessment year, the Department of Revenue shall adopt specially assessed values of forestland, as of the assessment date for that year. The department shall certify the specially assessed values of forestland in eastern Oregon to the county assessors of eastern Oregon and the specially assessed values of forestland in western Oregon to the county assessors of western Oregon.
(2). The certified specially assessed values constitute:
(a) The department’s determination of the real market value, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of highest and best use forestland in the land class for which the certification is being made; and
(b): The specially assessed values, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of designated forestland that is assessed under ORS 321.354 (Western Oregon)(Common ownership minimum acreage requirements) and ORS 321.833 (Eastern Oregon) (Common ownership minimum acreage requirements) in the land class for which the certification is being made.
(3) Upon receipt of the certified values, the county assessors shall develop tables for each assessment year that reflect, for each class and area, the values determined under this section and that express the values as values per acre. [2001 c.860 §18]
ORS 321.833 states the specific applicability of the requirement of DOR to certify specially specially assessed values of Eastern Oregon forestland. Specifically for 5,000 minimum acres or more.
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/321.833
Common ownership minimum acreage requirements
• specially assessed value and maximum assessed value of forestland of large landowners
1. (a) The Department of Revenue shall identify the forestland that is held in common ownership of 5,000 acres or more as of the assessment date for each tax year.
ORS 321.207 to 321.213
The values in this certification are calculated based on the procedures set out by ORS 321.207 :
The Department of Revenue by rule shall develop valuation models to be used to value forestland in western Oregon and eastern Oregon.
It is best to start at ORS Chapter 321 to get the big picture on Forestland..
(2) The valuation models may consider forestland sales, stumpage values, immediate harvest values, log prices or other commercially reasonable factors or data that promote real market value analysis of forestland. [2001 c.860 §15]
It is important to note that the following is an Oregon Administrative Rule and the relationship of an OAR to Oregon Revised Statutes. The difference being what agency makes them and their authority.
OAR 150-321-0200
Forestland Valuation Rule
(1) Purpose: The purpose of this rule is to describe the process used to develop the annual preliminary forestland values and to clarify the establishment of the final certified forestland values (ORS 321.216).
(2) General Principles and Definitions:
(a) For the purpose of this rule, “forestland” has the meaning provided in ORS 321.257(2) for Western Oregon, and ORS 321.805(4) for Eastern Oregon.
Yes. By my examination I conclude that it certified the specially assessed values of Forestland
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/321.805
The problem is multi acre Designated Forestland properties within the residential zoned city of Bend Oregon that have a property tax computed on a special Forestland Designation on their property that assigns it a property tax assessment value of $79.38 per acre that has a reasonable market value of at least $250,000. It is an unintended consequence of the Oregon Forestland Value laws and rules.
The big problem is....how are thousands of acres of privately owned forestland in Oregon going to be given a property assessment value. One that is reasonable and fair and promotes the multitude of private forestland values to the state and its citizens.
The size of private forestland assessed for value and taxed under state law and DOR implementation ranges from a minimum of 2 acres to thousands of acres. Thousands of acres of private forestland in remote areas...only have their own vast number of acres as well as acres owned by others around them. A minimum of 2 acres in the city assessed at $79.38 per acre where the next neighbor with 2 or more acres is assessed at at a value of maybe $250,000 per acre.
The best examples in Bend of this situation are located along Bachelor View Rd.
There is a difference in value between an acre of forestland in the middle of nowhere held as a parcel of thousands of acres and an acre of of officially Designated Forestland in the city of Bend. Big difference. They are both assessed at the same value for tax computation!
DOR annually certifies the property assessment value for county assessors to use in Eastern Oregon for assessing and taxing privately owned Forestland and Designated Forestland. $79.38 assessment per acre for the forthcoming year....
Examining the certification that the DOR makes it looks to me like the law requiring this certification applies to parcels over 5,000 acres. Makes sense, I guess. However when it comes to applying this assessment rate the county assessor applies to Designated Forestland properties that have the minimum of 2 acres qualifying the property (even in the city!) for the $79.38 per acre assessment value.
Maybe that is a point of entry to attack this anomaly. The tax assessment value is applicable by law only to forestland properties of more than 5,000 acres.
Based on Oregon ORS law a decision making chart would lay it all the relationships of the Forestland value assessment and tax. That is the objective of the following dive into the working parts of how it was intended to work at the legislative level and how it works in application.
There are unintended consequences where the rubber meets the road. Probably intended consequences by special interests. Perhaps the consequences of captured state offices and individuals as well as state offices and individuals that do not want to get involved in calling attention to the problem or doing anything about it......whoever they my be and state office they may be in ore running for.
I am not armed with any special expertise or knowledge in this area. It is a slow and painful effort to sift through it all just to get an understanding of the scope of the problem and all its relationships much less to come up with a solution. It is essentially all about money on the assessment and taxation side but then there are all the other issues that come into play that are either valid in themselves or useful idiots to those whose agenda is money....money in their pocket as an intended big player or unintended small player beneficiary along for the ride of self interest benefit. Big beneficiaries? Big forestland owners on the doorstep of Bend. They get the forestland assessment rate for the assessor approved purpose of growing and harvesting trees for timber and big bucks on what is really speculation property that will grow far more bucks as leaves on a conceptual money tree that sheds real dollars in a windfall.
Maybe the followings a solution from looking at the huge magnitude of difference between the forest and the trees is to draw a line between them at some point.....What point and why? Maybe when the county assessed value goes beyond 1 or 2 thousand times a Designated Forestland value of $79.38 per acre then it is time to terminate the exorbitant tax benefit to property owners that have avoided and morally evaded pay taxes on based on the sham of growing trees for sale on a future commercial market.
What is the state and citizens of Oregon, tax paying residents of Bend getting in return for the low tax assessment given to these property owners of a few acres....? Getting to pay property taxes that they don't pay?
For example:
Real Market Value for this non-Designated Forestland vacant bare land property on Bachelor View Rd. in Bend with 1.97 acres is $450,750.
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/204894
Assessed Value: $141,070. Property tax: $2,188.94
Real Market Value for this Designated Forestland vacant bare land property
nearby on Bachelor View Rd in Bend with 4.72 acres is $739,380.
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117569
Assessed Value: $136,396 Property tax: $2,135.16. That is extraordinarily high tax when the assessed value of Designated Forestland last tax year was about $72 pr acre! There is a reason. It is to be found in the Land and Structures for the account:
One acre is assessed as "Tract'. The remaining 3.72 acreage is assessed as Designated Forestland at about $72 per acre and about $230 is taxed at about .015%. The Tract is a higher level assessment. Subtracting the measly Designated Forestland tax from the total tax paid and rounding everything for ease of mental computation .015% of the remaining Tract assessed value tax is around $2,000. Close enough.
The one acre "Tract" of vacant land is set up to be the 1 acre the house is to be built on. The remainder is Designated Forestland. That is the model used for about a dozen other properties with 1 acre devoted to the house that is subject to normal land assessment and tax computation and the remainder average is Designated Forestland.
Look at the two example of bare land properties. The interactive map provides the view for looking:
2nd Property:https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/InteractiveMap/117569
Looking at other bare land on Bachelor View Rd a general guess at the assessor Market Value of an acre in this area is about $300,00. When that value per acre its protected from tax by an assessment of that is protected from taxation at the Designated Forestland assessment value rate of $79.38 then the non-Designated Forestland Market Value is .....3,779 times greater than the Designated Forestland assessment value.
Keep in mind that this is property in a residential zoned area within the City of Bend!
There may be other ways to terminate this unbelievably unfair situation where a property owner in the city with 2 or more acres of land exclusive of an acre for their home can apply to the county assessor for Designation as Forestland with a promise to plant and grow trees to maturity for sale on the commercial market and receive a property assessment that is thousands of times less than their neighbor that does not have (but certainly could have if they qualified).
One final example.....go figure. Not even enough trees on it to sell them
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/241568
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117545
https://dial.deschutes.org/Real/Index/117545
3 contiguous Designated Forestland properties on Bachelor View road in a city residential zoned area.
Assessor Market Value Total: $2,400,380.00
Tax................................................... $97.11
Been getting this gift since 2005!
End of my post-analysis and thoughts on what I wrote this morning.
Pick and shovel data mining in a pile of crap to find the pony follows:
..........................................................................................
DOR certified Oregon Designated Forestland Assessed Value 2018 -19: $79.38 per acre.
https://www.oregon.gov/DOR/programs/property/Documents/specially-assessed-forestland-values.pdf
To Whom It May Concern:
ORS ORS 321.216 requires that the Department of Revenue certify the specially assessed values of forestland to the counties on or before June 1 of each year. I, therefore, certify that the enclosed schedule contains the 2018-2019 per acre values of forestland in your county.
These certified specially assessed values constitute the department’s determination of the real market value, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of highest and best use forestland.
These certified specially assessed values constitute the specially assessed values, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of designated forestland that is assessed under either ORS 321.354 in the land class for which the certification is being made for western Oregon or ORS 321.833 (formerly 321.812) for eastern Oregon.
The 2018-2019 Maximum Specially Assessed Value (MSAV) was calculated using a three percent increase over last year’s Assessed Value (AV) and is included in the table for your benefit.
The 20% Specially Assessed Value (SAV) is for use on forestland that is assessed under 321.700 to 321.754 (Small Tract Forestland Option).
The 20% MSAV value for the tax year beginning July 1, 2018 was calculated using a three percent increase over last year’s 20% AV and is included in the table for your benefit.
The values in this certification are calculated based on the procedures set out by ORS 321.207 to 213 and OAR 150-321-0200.
Page 2:
Eastern Oregon MSAV – Maximum Specially Assessed Value (Measure 50):
$79.38 per acre.
The Oregon DOR is guided by these referenced ORS extracted from the DOR Certification document:
ORS 321.216
ORS 321.354 (Western Oregon, not applicable to this analysis)
ORS 321.833 (Eastern Oregon)
ORS 321.207 to ORS 321.213
OAR 150-321-0200
The following is an examination of the specific Oregon Revised Statutes law related to to the DOR required Certification of the value for Eastern Oregon Forestland at $79.38 per acre.
ORS 321.216
Certified specially assessed values
(1) On or before June 1 of each assessment year, the Department of Revenue shall adopt specially assessed values of forestland, as of the assessment date for that year. The department shall certify the specially assessed values of forestland in eastern Oregon to the county assessors of eastern Oregon and the specially assessed values of forestland in western Oregon to the county assessors of western Oregon.
(2). The certified specially assessed values constitute:
(a) The department’s determination of the real market value, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of highest and best use forestland in the land class for which the certification is being made; and
(b): The specially assessed values, as of the assessment date for the tax year, of designated forestland that is assessed under ORS 321.354 (Western Oregon)(Common ownership minimum acreage requirements) and ORS 321.833 (Eastern Oregon) (Common ownership minimum acreage requirements) in the land class for which the certification is being made.
(3) Upon receipt of the certified values, the county assessors shall develop tables for each assessment year that reflect, for each class and area, the values determined under this section and that express the values as values per acre. [2001 c.860 §18]
ORS 321.833 states the specific applicability of the requirement of DOR to certify specially specially assessed values of Eastern Oregon forestland. Specifically for 5,000 minimum acres or more.
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/321.833
Common ownership minimum acreage requirements
• specially assessed value and maximum assessed value of forestland of large landowners
1. (a) The Department of Revenue shall identify the forestland that is held in common ownership of 5,000 acres or more as of the assessment date for each tax year.
ORS 321.207 to 321.213
The values in this certification are calculated based on the procedures set out by ORS 321.207 :
The Department of Revenue by rule shall develop valuation models to be used to value forestland in western Oregon and eastern Oregon.
It is best to start at ORS Chapter 321 to get the big picture on Forestland..
(2) The valuation models may consider forestland sales, stumpage values, immediate harvest values, log prices or other commercially reasonable factors or data that promote real market value analysis of forestland. [2001 c.860 §15]
It is important to note that the following is an Oregon Administrative Rule and the relationship of an OAR to Oregon Revised Statutes. The difference being what agency makes them and their authority.
OAR 150-321-0200
Forestland Valuation Rule
(1) Purpose: The purpose of this rule is to describe the process used to develop the annual preliminary forestland values and to clarify the establishment of the final certified forestland values (ORS 321.216).
(2) General Principles and Definitions:
(a) For the purpose of this rule, “forestland” has the meaning provided in ORS 321.257(2) for Western Oregon, and ORS 321.805(4) for Eastern Oregon.
Important note #1: The stated purpose of this OAR rule applies solely to describing the process and clarify the final DOR certified forestland values required by Oregon Revised Statute ORS 321.216. This preceding analysis of links contained in ORS 321.216 reveal that ORS is exclusively related and only applicable to the end intent of DOR promulgating to county assessors the valuations of forestland of 5,000 minimum forestland acres or more.
Is that exactly what the DOR certification of Eastern Oregon "specially assessed values" for Highest and Best Use Eastern Oregon Forestland did in explicit compliance with ORS 321.316 requirements 2(a) and 2(b) for the Designated Forestland in the land class of a minimum of 5,000 acres? That is what the certification relates to by the inclusion of "designated forestland that is assessed under either ORS 321.354 (Western Oregon) in the land class for which the certification is being made and 321.833 (Common ownership minimum acreage requirements) in the land class for which the certification is being made." in accordance with ORS 321,316Yes. By my examination I conclude that it certified the specially assessed values of Forestland
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/321.805
Saturday, August 25, 2018
City of Bend Oregon Findings Report Statewide Goal 4
City of Bend Oregon Findings Report
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/planamendments/Bend%202016/Ord.%20Ex%20A%20-%20Adopted%20Findings%20no%20watermark.pdf
Section 9-10:
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/planamendments/Bend%202016/Ord.%20Ex%20A%20-%20Adopted%20Findings%20no%20watermark.pdf
Section 9-10:
9.2.3 Goals 3 and 4, Agriculture and Forestry
The Council finds that the neither Goal 3 nor Goal 4 are applicable to this proposal. The Boundary and Growth Scenarios TAC recommended and the USC approved two decisions that were intended to avoid including any resource land in a UGB expansion. First, the USC approved the decision to follow the statutory priorities in ORS 197.298 and focus first on exception lands (Priority 2 under ORS 197.298(1)(b)). Second, the USC approved the use of a two (2) mile study area within which properties would be evaluated for UGB expansion. These decisions led to research that showed there were over 0000 acres of exception lands that the City could evaluate for UGB expansion, and that there was the no need to consider resource lands (Priority 4 under ORS 197.298(1)(d)) (Rem Rec 3588). The proposed UGB amendment does not include any lands that were designated under the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan as either agriculture or forest lands. 2
Oregon Statewide Planning Goals
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/goals.aspx
Oregon´s statewide goals are achieved through local comprehensive planning. State law requires each city and county to adopt a comprehensive plan and the zoning and land-division ordinances needed to put the plan into effect.
The local comprehensive plans must be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals. Plans are reviewed for such consistency by the state´s Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC). When LCDC officially approves a local government´s plan, the plan is said to be acknowledged. It then becomes the controlling document for land use in the area covered by that plan.
Oregon´s planning laws apply not only to local governments but also to special districts and state agencies. The laws strongly emphasize coordination -- keeping plans and programs consistent with each other, with the goals, and with acknowledged local plans.
Oregon statewide Planning Goal 4
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/goals/goal4.pdf
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/527.722
The Council finds that the neither Goal 3 nor Goal 4 are applicable to this proposal. The Boundary and Growth Scenarios TAC recommended and the USC approved two decisions that were intended to avoid including any resource land in a UGB expansion. First, the USC approved the decision to follow the statutory priorities in ORS 197.298 and focus first on exception lands (Priority 2 under ORS 197.298(1)(b)). Second, the USC approved the use of a two (2) mile study area within which properties would be evaluated for UGB expansion. These decisions led to research that showed there were over 0000 acres of exception lands that the City could evaluate for UGB expansion, and that there was the no need to consider resource lands (Priority 4 under ORS 197.298(1)(d)) (Rem Rec 3588). The proposed UGB amendment does not include any lands that were designated under the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan as either agriculture or forest lands. 2
Oregon Statewide Planning Goals
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/goals.aspx
Oregon´s statewide goals are achieved through local comprehensive planning. State law requires each city and county to adopt a comprehensive plan and the zoning and land-division ordinances needed to put the plan into effect.
The local comprehensive plans must be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals. Plans are reviewed for such consistency by the state´s Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC). When LCDC officially approves a local government´s plan, the plan is said to be acknowledged. It then becomes the controlling document for land use in the area covered by that plan.
Oregon´s planning laws apply not only to local governments but also to special districts and state agencies. The laws strongly emphasize coordination -- keeping plans and programs consistent with each other, with the goals, and with acknowledged local plans.
Oregon statewide Planning Goal 4
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/goals/goal4.pdf
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/527.722
Aadhaar -- A Lab Rat Test Bed for the USA
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/india-aadhuar-tech-companies_us_5b7ebc53e4b0729515109fd0
Big Tech in the USA needs to test out new stuff that could not be tested in the USA. It is analogous to testing new drugs in poor foreign nations...or even poor and unprotected human lab rats in the USA.
One of the most fundamental rules of Information Engineering is that data element classes like "Human Beings must be identified by discrete properties that absolutely identify a discrete instance of the collective class to the exclusion of any other instance. A person's name does not do that. A collection of data elements relating to a person's name may do that with increasing accuracy as home address, cell phone number, property ownership, profession, school graduation, credit card, bank account, etc reduce the probability of error to near zero. The shortcut to identification is a biometric ID that is not duplicated by any other human being.
Everyone take a number! An IPv6 number for example that combined with your individual biometric ID is the key to.....living! Like oxygen, water, food. Don't have a biometric ID? Then you are dead and that jersey number has been retired for infinity. Don't have a biometric ID? The law says each human must have one. Violation resolution method? Execution or involuntary branding with a biometric ID.
Sounds like a movie plot....oh, its been done infancy and reality all the way back to a scarlet letter or cutting off a hand before better technical methods reduced the level of human ID ambiguity.
In prior blog entries I have looked at various aspects of discrete instance of an object class ID at the most granular level. Each single dollar with a value of one each identified by its own serial number as well as attributes, methods and messages properties as well as blockchain history over time since creation associated with that unique serial number.
In the absence of a universal USA ID for all citizens I have mused that the NSA or some agent of government has assigned us all a number to the maximum extent that all and any citizen(s) can be identified to that number with an associated accuracy probability. We just don't know what that unique ID number is. It is not a Public Number and Private Key social engineering structure.....yet. If it has in fact already been secretly done for out own good to weed out the bad guys by separating the sheep from the wolves then we should at least have a right to know what our secret number is!
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=2272083378205830331;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=41;src=link
The USA is so far ahead of Aadhaar. The only thing is that the public cannot know that. Public knowledge of that in the USA is a variable factor that is critical to implementation. That variable factor must be tested and evaluated in a foreign country before it is brought home to roost.
Maybe the USA Big Tech stuff being tested in India is also being test domestically. The most likely is a captive audience.
Prisons?
Military? Name, Rank and Serial Number. The military is predisposed to state regimentation.
Illegal Immigrants?
Other likely softer targets for testing?
Students
Medical Patients?
Age sector of the population?
Maybe everyone in a single USA city selected as a representative test bed sample for experimentation based on criteria selection.
Maybe the ID and tracking of bad guys in the Middle East. The deck of playing cards model with a biometric ID and tracking tag ability? Plenty of military/security money going to Big Tech for that.
Is this blog getting into the conspiracy realm?
I would say so except it all seems so reasonable. A reasonable extrapolation of things got come based on current reality.
Our real world that mixes the reality of physical things and conceptual things. A single unique elemental conceptual thing that is an instance of the collective plural is called Human Being. What conceptual collective thing is that unique instance of Human Being most closely related to? Actually several primary collective real and conceptual collective things and singular instances of those collective thingsin order of priority as ordered by individual freedom of choice.
High on the list of priorities is an individual unique Human Being relationship to the collective conceptual thing called Money in its physical form and their acquisition, ownership and disposition of a quantifiable amount of discrete units of Money.
If access to Money (or goods and services provided in lieu of an exchange of what money could buy) and use money or receipt of what would otherwise be bought with money by and individual is gained only through a unique personal identifier.
Create that strong one to one relationship structure as a foundation of a walled garden social system and the result is that people cannot live without it.
Everybody get and line for a number!
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=7985352476041271671;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=1;src=link
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=3149571083242201857;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=2;src=link
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=8703189862373922883;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=3;src=link
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=5587877689155297960;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=4;src=link
It all discretely elemental at the granular level!
There is a difference in the technical design intent of the system.
An individual should not live the way they do and are subject to the design of a system in which to live. No opt out for the greater good.
An individual should not have to live like they do and may freely chose the manner in which they live if they wish to opt out.
A compromise to this binary situation?
Big Tech in the USA needs to test out new stuff that could not be tested in the USA. It is analogous to testing new drugs in poor foreign nations...or even poor and unprotected human lab rats in the USA.
One of the most fundamental rules of Information Engineering is that data element classes like "Human Beings must be identified by discrete properties that absolutely identify a discrete instance of the collective class to the exclusion of any other instance. A person's name does not do that. A collection of data elements relating to a person's name may do that with increasing accuracy as home address, cell phone number, property ownership, profession, school graduation, credit card, bank account, etc reduce the probability of error to near zero. The shortcut to identification is a biometric ID that is not duplicated by any other human being.
Everyone take a number! An IPv6 number for example that combined with your individual biometric ID is the key to.....living! Like oxygen, water, food. Don't have a biometric ID? Then you are dead and that jersey number has been retired for infinity. Don't have a biometric ID? The law says each human must have one. Violation resolution method? Execution or involuntary branding with a biometric ID.
Sounds like a movie plot....oh, its been done infancy and reality all the way back to a scarlet letter or cutting off a hand before better technical methods reduced the level of human ID ambiguity.
In prior blog entries I have looked at various aspects of discrete instance of an object class ID at the most granular level. Each single dollar with a value of one each identified by its own serial number as well as attributes, methods and messages properties as well as blockchain history over time since creation associated with that unique serial number.
In the absence of a universal USA ID for all citizens I have mused that the NSA or some agent of government has assigned us all a number to the maximum extent that all and any citizen(s) can be identified to that number with an associated accuracy probability. We just don't know what that unique ID number is. It is not a Public Number and Private Key social engineering structure.....yet. If it has in fact already been secretly done for out own good to weed out the bad guys by separating the sheep from the wolves then we should at least have a right to know what our secret number is!
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=2272083378205830331;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=41;src=link
The USA is so far ahead of Aadhaar. The only thing is that the public cannot know that. Public knowledge of that in the USA is a variable factor that is critical to implementation. That variable factor must be tested and evaluated in a foreign country before it is brought home to roost.
Maybe the USA Big Tech stuff being tested in India is also being test domestically. The most likely is a captive audience.
Prisons?
Military? Name, Rank and Serial Number. The military is predisposed to state regimentation.
Illegal Immigrants?
Other likely softer targets for testing?
Students
Medical Patients?
Age sector of the population?
Maybe everyone in a single USA city selected as a representative test bed sample for experimentation based on criteria selection.
Maybe the ID and tracking of bad guys in the Middle East. The deck of playing cards model with a biometric ID and tracking tag ability? Plenty of military/security money going to Big Tech for that.
Is this blog getting into the conspiracy realm?
I would say so except it all seems so reasonable. A reasonable extrapolation of things got come based on current reality.
Our real world that mixes the reality of physical things and conceptual things. A single unique elemental conceptual thing that is an instance of the collective plural is called Human Being. What conceptual collective thing is that unique instance of Human Being most closely related to? Actually several primary collective real and conceptual collective things and singular instances of those collective thingsin order of priority as ordered by individual freedom of choice.
High on the list of priorities is an individual unique Human Being relationship to the collective conceptual thing called Money in its physical form and their acquisition, ownership and disposition of a quantifiable amount of discrete units of Money.
If access to Money (or goods and services provided in lieu of an exchange of what money could buy) and use money or receipt of what would otherwise be bought with money by and individual is gained only through a unique personal identifier.
Create that strong one to one relationship structure as a foundation of a walled garden social system and the result is that people cannot live without it.
Everybody get and line for a number!
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=7985352476041271671;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=1;src=link
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=3149571083242201857;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=2;src=link
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=8703189862373922883;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=3;src=link
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=5587877689155297960;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=4;src=link
It all discretely elemental at the granular level!
There is a difference in the technical design intent of the system.
An individual should not live the way they do and are subject to the design of a system in which to live. No opt out for the greater good.
An individual should not have to live like they do and may freely chose the manner in which they live if they wish to opt out.
A compromise to this binary situation?
Friday, August 24, 2018
Designated Forestland Oregon - Governor Candidate Buehler
This blog entry deals with an different definition of forestland than the prior blog entry that dealt with fire protection fees. In either case the they may relate to same property or not but are defined differently. This blog entry deals with Designated Forestland assessment for property tax
This Dept of Revenue gives a simple explanation Forestland and its tax assessment intent:
https://www.oregon.gov/DOR/programs/property/Pages/timber-forestland-tax.aspx
Introduction:
Property in Oregon is valued and taxed based upon the real market value—the price the land would sell for on the open market. The Legislature recognized that urban areas are encroaching on lands capable of growing timber. Legislators also recognized that this drives up the value and tax on these properties and makes holding these lands while the timber is growing more expensive. This is why Oregon offers special assessment programs to forestland owners. These programs reduce the property tax the landowner pays if they agree to manage the property primarily for growing and harvesting timber.
The question is: Why does the city of Bend, Oregon have a total of approximately 100 acres of Designated Forestland assessed at a value of $79.38 per acre within the city limits. The urban area has already encroached on the forest! Without the Forestland Designation these same properties totaling approx. 100 acres would be assessed at about $250,000 per acre.
I sent an email to Deschutes County Representative Buehler regarding this situation
and providing factual information regarding specific properties within the city that are assessed at the Designated Forestland rate.
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=6110653029596981719;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=0;src=link
He never replied. Never acknowledged receipt.
This is Washington's explanation of the assessment valuation of Forestland in that state:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=84.33.130
Washington Designated Forestland
This Dept of Revenue gives a simple explanation Forestland and its tax assessment intent:
https://www.oregon.gov/DOR/programs/property/Pages/timber-forestland-tax.aspx
Introduction:
Property in Oregon is valued and taxed based upon the real market value—the price the land would sell for on the open market. The Legislature recognized that urban areas are encroaching on lands capable of growing timber. Legislators also recognized that this drives up the value and tax on these properties and makes holding these lands while the timber is growing more expensive. This is why Oregon offers special assessment programs to forestland owners. These programs reduce the property tax the landowner pays if they agree to manage the property primarily for growing and harvesting timber.
The question is: Why does the city of Bend, Oregon have a total of approximately 100 acres of Designated Forestland assessed at a value of $79.38 per acre within the city limits. The urban area has already encroached on the forest! Without the Forestland Designation these same properties totaling approx. 100 acres would be assessed at about $250,000 per acre.
I sent an email to Deschutes County Representative Buehler regarding this situation
and providing factual information regarding specific properties within the city that are assessed at the Designated Forestland rate.
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1176829519333181968#editor/target=post;postID=6110653029596981719;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=0;src=link
He never replied. Never acknowledged receipt.
This is Washington's explanation of the assessment valuation of Forestland in that state:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=84.33.130
Purpose—1981 c 148: "(1) One of the purposes of this act is to establish the values for ad valorem tax purposes of bare forestland which is primarily devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber without consideration of other potential uses of the land and to provide a procedure for adjusting the values in future years to reflect economic changes which may affect the value established in this act.
(2) Chapter 294, Laws of 1971 ex. sess., as originally enacted, required the department of revenue annually to analyze forestland transactions to ascertain the market value of bare forestland purchased and used exclusively for growing and harvesting timber. Most transactions involving forestland include mature and immature timber with no segregation by the parties between the amounts paid for timber and bare land. The examination of these transactions by the department to ascertain the prices being paid for only the bare land has proven to be very difficult, time consuming, and subject to recurring legal challenge. Samples are small in relation to the total acreage of forestland involved and the administrative time and costs required for the annual analyses are excessive in relation to the changes from year to year which have been observed in the value of bare forestland. This act eliminates most of these administrative costs by establishing the current bare forestland values and by providing a procedure for periodic adjustment of the values which does not require continuing and costly analysis of the numerous forestland transactions throughout the state."
Washington Designated Forestland
"
- "As a way to encourage commercial forestry in Washington State, landowners may choose to have their land designated as forest land. This designation often results in a lower assessed value and lower taxes. Specific requirements must be met to qualify for this designation."
"The assessed value of designated forest land was set in state statute, and in 2014 ranged from $1/acre to $189/acre, based on soil productivity and the ease/cost of timber extraction. Current values can be found on the State Department of Revenue website at: http://dor.wa.gov/content/findtaxesandrates/othertaxes/timber/forst_lvs.aspx.
In contrast, assessed fair market value could be thousands of dollars per acre. So, designating your land as forest can reduce your tax burden by up to 99 percent on the forested portion of your property. The tax assessment for the residential portion of your property and any structures would not see a reduction.".......
"Is This Special Designation Fair?
Some people have raised objections to this lower tax status program, claiming that it’s not equitable to decrease the tax burden on forest land, because that increases the tax burden on other land. Others, however, note that forestland owners are expected to provide public benefits with no compensation, and also have many regulatory constraints imposed upon them by the public. ......
Eighty studies nationwide by the American Farmland Trust and others on the cost of community services have found that forest lands contribute far more in taxes than they require in public services (37 cents in services needed for every $1.00 of tax revenue produced). Residential lands, on the other hand, require more in public services than they contribute in taxes ($1.19 in services needed for every $1.00 of tax revenue produced)."
The preceding is an interesting way of looking at the low tax on Designated Forestland. It gets an "A" for creative thinking. It deserves some logic and reason analysis.
Is this a valid basis for the formation of tax policy supporting community services?
"forest lands contribute far more in taxes than they require in public services"
https://timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/oregon/
https://timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/washington/
Oregon Forest land Protection Program
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/pages/forlandprot.aspx
In contrast, assessed fair market value could be thousands of dollars per acre. So, designating your land as forest can reduce your tax burden by up to 99 percent on the forested portion of your property. The tax assessment for the residential portion of your property and any structures would not see a reduction.".......
"Is This Special Designation Fair?
Some people have raised objections to this lower tax status program, claiming that it’s not equitable to decrease the tax burden on forest land, because that increases the tax burden on other land. Others, however, note that forestland owners are expected to provide public benefits with no compensation, and also have many regulatory constraints imposed upon them by the public. ......
Eighty studies nationwide by the American Farmland Trust and others on the cost of community services have found that forest lands contribute far more in taxes than they require in public services (37 cents in services needed for every $1.00 of tax revenue produced). Residential lands, on the other hand, require more in public services than they contribute in taxes ($1.19 in services needed for every $1.00 of tax revenue produced)."
The preceding is an interesting way of looking at the low tax on Designated Forestland. It gets an "A" for creative thinking. It deserves some logic and reason analysis.
Is this a valid basis for the formation of tax policy supporting community services?
"forest lands contribute far more in taxes than they require in public services"
https://timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/oregon/
https://timbertax.org/statetaxes/states/summary/washington/
Oregon Forest land Protection Program
https://www.oregon.gov/LCD/pages/forlandprot.aspx
Deschutes County Forestland Classification
Forestland Classification Committee: Hearing Final Classification
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/526.328
The committee shall prepare one or more maps showing the final classifications, but the maps may not be included as part of the formal written order. The original of the order shall be filed with the county clerk of its county or with the county clerk of each of its counties
https://www.oregon.gov/ODF/Fire/Pages/ForestlandClassification.aspx
Deschutes County Forestland Classification Committee
http://odfcentraloregonflcc.blogspot.com
My email to Ed Keith, Deschutes County Forester darted 24 August 2018
Ed Kieth
Scot Langton
Deschutes County Assessor
Mr. Langton,
The Deschutes County Forestland Classification Committee has concluded its study to reset boundaries for the collection of the Fire Patrol fee collected with property taxes. A result for the city of Bend is that the fee will be terminated for about 8,000 city properties.
Will that Dept. of Forestry Fire Patrol fee termination be reflected in the forthcoming property tax bill?
Will that reduction be explained with the property tax bill for those properties no longer paying the fee?
End of email.
This is an Oregon county example of the state wide review:
Clatsop County Forestland Classification and Assessment presentation by ODF.
The Clatsop County Forestland Classification Committee was established and had its first meeting in October of 2013.
http://betsyjohnson.com/News/FLC_TownHall_FINAL.pdf
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/526.328
The committee shall prepare one or more maps showing the final classifications, but the maps may not be included as part of the formal written order. The original of the order shall be filed with the county clerk of its county or with the county clerk of each of its counties
https://www.oregon.gov/ODF/Fire/Pages/ForestlandClassification.aspx
Deschutes County Forestland Classification Committee
http://odfcentraloregonflcc.blogspot.com
My email to Ed Keith, Deschutes County Forester darted 24 August 2018
Ed Kieth
Deschutes County Forester
My email to Scot Langton Deschutes County Assessor dated 23 August 2018
When did (or will) the official 30 day clock start as the date of the order making a classification appeal of the findings of the Classification Committee?
- How can a landowner appeal the findings of the Classification Committee? Any owner of land classified under ORS 526.328 or 526.340 and who is aggrieved by the classification may, within 30 days after the date of the order making the classification, appeal to the circuit court for the county. The appeal shall be taken by serving the notice of appeal on the secretary of the committee and by filing such a notice with the county clerk.
End of email.
Email redirected to Gordon Foster ODF.
Email redirected to Gordon Foster ODF.
Scot Langton
Deschutes County Assessor
Mr. Langton,
The Deschutes County Forestland Classification Committee has concluded its study to reset boundaries for the collection of the Fire Patrol fee collected with property taxes. A result for the city of Bend is that the fee will be terminated for about 8,000 city properties.
Will that Dept. of Forestry Fire Patrol fee termination be reflected in the forthcoming property tax bill?
Will that reduction be explained with the property tax bill for those properties no longer paying the fee?
End of email.
This is an Oregon county example of the state wide review:
Clatsop County Forestland Classification and Assessment presentation by ODF.
The Clatsop County Forestland Classification Committee was established and had its first meeting in October of 2013.
Flowchart for Forestland Classification Process
Forestland Classification Process
Review Oregon Laws and Forestland
Classification/ Assessment Manual
↓
Conduct District-wide evaluation on Classification
information and assess the need for Comprehensive Update
↓
Obtain Map Products and other Assessment dataTaxlot, Photography, Vegetation Data
↓
Form Classification Committee↓Editing Process/ Preliminary Maps
↓
Public Input/ Community Meetings↓Public Hearing/ Finalize Data↓Finalize Maps/ Create Summaries
↓
Deliver Data to County Clerk and State Forester
↓
Annual Assessment Update
....................................................
Forestland Classification Process
Review Oregon Laws and Forestland
Classification/ Assessment Manual
↓
Conduct District-wide evaluation on Classification
information and assess the need for Comprehensive Update
↓
Obtain Map Products and other Assessment dataTaxlot, Photography, Vegetation Data
↓
Form Classification Committee↓Editing Process/ Preliminary Maps
↓
Public Input/ Community Meetings↓Public Hearing/ Finalize Data↓Finalize Maps/ Create Summaries
↓
Deliver Data to County Clerk and State Forester
↓
Annual Assessment Update
....................................................
What is the purpose of the Public Hearing?
The Public Hearing is a mandatory and formal process that must occur prior to implementation of the findings of the classification effort. This hearing is a time when interested persons can make comments to the proposed classification. This hearing was conducted at the Clatsop Community College on May 23, 2016.
Following the hearing the committee considered all the comments and thereafter made its final classification. The Official Forestland Classification of properties in Clatsop County was recorded July 8, 2016 by Clatsop County.
This is a Yamhill county example of their Forestland Classification:
http://www.co.yamhill.or.us/sites/default/files/Yamhill%20County%20forest%20classification%20report%20on%20process%20and%20summary%20of%20re..__2.pdf
"The Yamhill County Forest Classification Committee was authorized by Yamhill Board of Commissioners by Board Order 11-687 on October 27, 2011
This is a Benton County Example:
https://www.co.benton.or.us/boc/page/forestland-classification-project
"FORESTLAND CLASSIFICATION
The Public Hearing is a mandatory and formal process that must occur prior to implementation of the findings of the classification effort. This hearing is a time when interested persons can make comments to the proposed classification. This hearing was conducted at the Clatsop Community College on May 23, 2016.
Following the hearing the committee considered all the comments and thereafter made its final classification. The Official Forestland Classification of properties in Clatsop County was recorded July 8, 2016 by Clatsop County.
This is a Yamhill county example of their Forestland Classification:
http://www.co.yamhill.or.us/sites/default/files/Yamhill%20County%20forest%20classification%20report%20on%20process%20and%20summary%20of%20re..__2.pdf
"The Yamhill County Forest Classification Committee was authorized by Yamhill Board of Commissioners by Board Order 11-687 on October 27, 2011
This is a Benton County Example:
https://www.co.benton.or.us/boc/page/forestland-classification-project
"The Oregon Department of Forestry's forestland classification system originated with the passage of the Forest Land Classification Act by Oregon Legislature in 1937. By the 1950s, the system had been adopted statewide with significant regional variation in interpretation and application.
Many things have changed in the past 70 years. Land use patterns and the wildfire protection environment are much different today. Benton County's population has increased, and development patterns have changed."
"FORESTLAND CLASSIFICATION
The ODF forestland classification system originated with passage of the Forest Land Classification Act by the 1937 Oregon Legislature. Classification of lands as “forestland” essentially determined where ODF’s protection responsibilities were. By the 1950’s, the system had been adopted statewide with significant regional variation in interpretation and application.
Today, the wildfire protection environment, social and ecological systems, land uses, values and overall attitudes are much different. The population has increased and greater numbers of people are living within traditional forestlands with their fire prone fuels. This Wildland-Urban Interface covers significantly larger portions of the forest protection district than in the past, and includes thousands of private dwellings. Consequently, many of the conditions pertaining to the original forestland classification system no longer apply, and the ODF fire protection program has escalated in complexity and costs.
In 2007, a statewide review committee made up of landowners, cooperators, legislators and ODF reviewed the statutes, rules and policies that make up its forestland classification system. Review goals were to update the classification system to reflect current conditions, and identify ways to improve the efficiency and consistency of its application and administration. One of the outcomes of this policy review was to emphasize the establishment of county committees which will re-examine forestland classifications of all lands in the state, including Benton County lands within ODF’s West Oregon Protection District.
This is a Lincoln County example of their Forestland Classification
http://www.co.lincoln.or.us/sfpc
"The Lincoln County Forestland Classification Committee (Lincoln FCC) had its first meeting in January 2009."
ODF Southwest Example: Note that this is a review encompassing two counties in the ODF Southwest District.
Lane County example:
www.lanecounty.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server…
Polk County example:
https://www.co.polk.or.us/fcc/forest-classification-committee
Classification Map:
http://geoservices.co.polk.or.us/PCMAPS/index.html
Josephine County example:
http://co.josephine.or.us/Files/joccc_%20report_jocifp_%20121106.pdf
"The Oregon Department of Forestry began implementing the Oregon Forestland- Urban Interface Fire Protection Act in Josephine County early in 2006. The first major step in that process was to convene a county forestland-urban interface classification committee, which held its first meeting on April 17."
"The committee’s final findings are expected to be filed with the Josephine County Clerk and the Oregon Board of Forestry by fall 2007. At that time, forestland- urban interface property owners will receive official notification from the Oregon Department of Forestry about their lands’ classification and their fuel-reduction obligations under the Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act."
News report:
http://www.kdrv.com/content/news/Forestland-Classification-Continues-In-Jackson--Josephine-Counties-479408623.html More than half of the lands in Jackson and Josephine Counties have been reviewed to determine protection for fire season. It's a process that happens every five years and it determines where in both counties ODF resources will be needed most.
Today, the wildfire protection environment, social and ecological systems, land uses, values and overall attitudes are much different. The population has increased and greater numbers of people are living within traditional forestlands with their fire prone fuels. This Wildland-Urban Interface covers significantly larger portions of the forest protection district than in the past, and includes thousands of private dwellings. Consequently, many of the conditions pertaining to the original forestland classification system no longer apply, and the ODF fire protection program has escalated in complexity and costs.
In 2007, a statewide review committee made up of landowners, cooperators, legislators and ODF reviewed the statutes, rules and policies that make up its forestland classification system. Review goals were to update the classification system to reflect current conditions, and identify ways to improve the efficiency and consistency of its application and administration. One of the outcomes of this policy review was to emphasize the establishment of county committees which will re-examine forestland classifications of all lands in the state, including Benton County lands within ODF’s West Oregon Protection District.
This is a Lincoln County example of their Forestland Classification
http://www.co.lincoln.or.us/sfpc
"The Lincoln County Forestland Classification Committee (Lincoln FCC) had its first meeting in January 2009."
Meeting #31 June, 25th 2018:
"At the end of the review, there will be a public hearing. Following the hearing, a written order will be submitted to the County Clerk, and the results of the classification review will be passed on to the Assessors Office, where they will implement the changes to the tax rolls.
The appeal period has now expired and Classification of Lands has been finalized. Anyone with questions about Forest Land Classification is encouraged to contact the Oregon Department of Forestry office in Toledo at 541-336-2273.
Thank you.... Committee and Board"
Thank you.... Committee and Board"
ODF Southwest Example: Note that this is a review encompassing two counties in the ODF Southwest District.
"The committee completed its draft maps of the Southwest Oregon District at its May 18 meeting. The committee is planning to meet again in October to review digitized maps, and outline dates and locations for a series of public meetings."
www.lanecounty.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server…
Polk County example:
https://www.co.polk.or.us/fcc/forest-classification-committee
Classification Map:
http://geoservices.co.polk.or.us/PCMAPS/index.html
Josephine County example:
http://co.josephine.or.us/Files/joccc_%20report_jocifp_%20121106.pdf
"The Oregon Department of Forestry began implementing the Oregon Forestland- Urban Interface Fire Protection Act in Josephine County early in 2006. The first major step in that process was to convene a county forestland-urban interface classification committee, which held its first meeting on April 17."
"The committee’s final findings are expected to be filed with the Josephine County Clerk and the Oregon Board of Forestry by fall 2007. At that time, forestland- urban interface property owners will receive official notification from the Oregon Department of Forestry about their lands’ classification and their fuel-reduction obligations under the Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act."
News report:
http://www.kdrv.com/content/news/Forestland-Classification-Continues-In-Jackson--Josephine-Counties-479408623.html More than half of the lands in Jackson and Josephine Counties have been reviewed to determine protection for fire season. It's a process that happens every five years and it determines where in both counties ODF resources will be needed most.
Thursday, August 23, 2018
USA War Policy - In Support - Anywhere, Anytime
https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2018/08/dod-grey-zone/
War is no longer a pastime of Nation States. Official traditional Nation State Warfare now applies to non-Nation/State entities. Or, in other words, any non-Nation/State carter of choice. Except, I hope, any self internal non-Nation/State actor of one's own Nation?
Interesting observation based on the real events in the real de facto world.
The whole world becomes the wet dream free fire zone of the Vietnam War for any geographic area of choice regardless of Nation/State domain.....only if it is done is support of some chosen entity of any Nation/State.
"In the FY2018 defense authorization act (PL 115-91, sect. 1202) Congress specifically authorized the Secretary of Defense “to provide support to foreign forces, irregular forces, groups, or individuals engaged in supporting or facilitating ongoing irregular warfare operations by U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF).”
War is no longer a pastime of Nation States. Official traditional Nation State Warfare now applies to non-Nation/State entities. Or, in other words, any non-Nation/State carter of choice. Except, I hope, any self internal non-Nation/State actor of one's own Nation?
Interesting observation based on the real events in the real de facto world.
The whole world becomes the wet dream free fire zone of the Vietnam War for any geographic area of choice regardless of Nation/State domain.....only if it is done is support of some chosen entity of any Nation/State.
"In the FY2018 defense authorization act (PL 115-91, sect. 1202) Congress specifically authorized the Secretary of Defense “to provide support to foreign forces, irregular forces, groups, or individuals engaged in supporting or facilitating ongoing irregular warfare operations by U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF).”
The new authority was needed, Congress said, in order to fill a perceived gap in the US military’s ability to fight in conflicts that are below the threshold of war."
Big things creep in under the door in the middle of the night or when nobody is looking.
This is a big thing that was probably seen to be necessary to retroactively cover the legality of what is de facto U.S. War Policy to make War at any time and place, including space, where we want to make war against any entity of choice.
CYA.
https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/dtm-18-005.pdf
Rules of War: Old School it was Official Nation vs Official Nation
New Rule: Any entity of choice, anywhere but only "in support" of any chosen opposing entity anywhere.
The Vietnam Model was in the grey area.
The new model is way into the black area ops.
JTMcphee tight on target again:
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/links-8-23-18.html#comment-3016799
https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/dtm-18-005.pdf
Rules of War: Old School it was Official Nation vs Official Nation
New Rule: Any entity of choice, anywhere but only "in support" of any chosen opposing entity anywhere.
The Vietnam Model was in the grey area.
The new model is way into the black area ops.
JTMcphee tight on target again:
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/links-8-23-18.html#comment-3016799
In Database Machine Learning - Narrow Focus Human Specific Purpose Coding is So Old School Pick and Shovel Work
A different way of looking at the utility of Data Mining. I have personally framed my perception of extracting information from a database in terms of Data Mining. (DataMining). to discover and extract the golden nugget or nuggets. Lacking the tools or ability to do mass processing of all the data bearing universe I call my data mining efforts "Pick and Shovel" old school data mining. The only advantage I have over digging through everything is that I have some real and intuitive knowledge of where to look for the gold without sifting through the entire mountain that narrows the probability of finding it.
That is the type of data mining I use to extract nuggets of information then knowledge from the Deschutes County Assessor Records on Dial.
https://dial.deschutes.org
My Safari browser gives a garbled view of the site. Use a different browser to see the link.
The Interactive Map link at the site is my shortcut to where what I define as the "gold" is to be found. The gold? Those property owners not paying their fair share in taxes.
In Data Base Machine Learning is a better way to get to the gold. Build a machine that self learns how and where to find the gold and apply it to the Database and let it go to work for me.
Fantastic Business Model. Just teach the machine to be intelligent enough to teach itself to recognize the gold when it sees it. It can see it so much better than me and vastly more efficient than an army of programmers investing their specific sector human brain intelligence engineering knowledge to construct millions of lines of program code in software development that controls the Data Mining process.
My new view of Data Mining is to be done is to drop the pick and shovel development of code by humans to create a tool to do it and Paradigm Shift to In Database Machine Learning approach to enable the Machine to learn to find it.
Eureka!
There is gold in them there hills of tax records! Hidden gold by those that have it by avoidance and evasion. Gold that belongs to all of us.
This is the new gold rush:
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=in+database+machine+learning+property+tax&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The objective:
Create an AI to "See Something, Say Something" with the intelligence of a self taught genius.
The flow of real time data for machine learning is no different, except for the time data element (zero time or eternal now time) than ZeroTime NowTime data captured and stored in a database with a BlockChain time stamp.
Real Time is a NowTime DataBase. It would be reasonable to conclude that In Data Base Machine Learning would learn equally well from NowTime or TimeStampTime.
Time is simply a data element to a machine that reduces the human work/time production relationship to relatively nothing. It only needs to know the relationship of the data element time to any other object data element.
There is no "Lump Of Labor" to a self teaching/learning AI machine to either go to college or go do work in the classic sense of relatively resource constricted human labor manual labor or conceptual labor like software codeing. Even human labor is not economically restricted to a Lump of Labor.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/lump-of-labor-fallacy-the-nastiest-motives-of-nasty-people.html
Maybe this (extracted from the preceding link) is exactly what a self taught/learning AI machine would knowledgeably tell us about ourselves and our capital system:.......................
“The great merit of the capitalist system, it has been said, is that it succeeds in using the nastiest motives of nasty people for the ultimate benefit of society.”
That wise observation came from a very smart human intelligence.
Interesting spontaneous thought: Not everything that was said was really said by those to whom it is attributed:
"Misattributions are commonplace. Often it is simply the assignment of a saying to a historical celebrity because, “who ever heard of Austin Robinson?” Mark Twain, Abe Lincoln, Gandhi, Stalin and Winston Churchill are said to have said many a saying they never said."
A self learning AI would know that and apply it knowledgeably on a case basis.
That is the type of data mining I use to extract nuggets of information then knowledge from the Deschutes County Assessor Records on Dial.
https://dial.deschutes.org
My Safari browser gives a garbled view of the site. Use a different browser to see the link.
The Interactive Map link at the site is my shortcut to where what I define as the "gold" is to be found. The gold? Those property owners not paying their fair share in taxes.
In Data Base Machine Learning is a better way to get to the gold. Build a machine that self learns how and where to find the gold and apply it to the Database and let it go to work for me.
Fantastic Business Model. Just teach the machine to be intelligent enough to teach itself to recognize the gold when it sees it. It can see it so much better than me and vastly more efficient than an army of programmers investing their specific sector human brain intelligence engineering knowledge to construct millions of lines of program code in software development that controls the Data Mining process.
My new view of Data Mining is to be done is to drop the pick and shovel development of code by humans to create a tool to do it and Paradigm Shift to In Database Machine Learning approach to enable the Machine to learn to find it.
Eureka!
There is gold in them there hills of tax records! Hidden gold by those that have it by avoidance and evasion. Gold that belongs to all of us.
This is the new gold rush:
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=in+database+machine+learning+property+tax&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The objective:
Create an AI to "See Something, Say Something" with the intelligence of a self taught genius.
The flow of real time data for machine learning is no different, except for the time data element (zero time or eternal now time) than ZeroTime NowTime data captured and stored in a database with a BlockChain time stamp.
Real Time is a NowTime DataBase. It would be reasonable to conclude that In Data Base Machine Learning would learn equally well from NowTime or TimeStampTime.
Time is simply a data element to a machine that reduces the human work/time production relationship to relatively nothing. It only needs to know the relationship of the data element time to any other object data element.
There is no "Lump Of Labor" to a self teaching/learning AI machine to either go to college or go do work in the classic sense of relatively resource constricted human labor manual labor or conceptual labor like software codeing. Even human labor is not economically restricted to a Lump of Labor.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/lump-of-labor-fallacy-the-nastiest-motives-of-nasty-people.html
Maybe this (extracted from the preceding link) is exactly what a self taught/learning AI machine would knowledgeably tell us about ourselves and our capital system:.......................
“The great merit of the capitalist system, it has been said, is that it succeeds in using the nastiest motives of nasty people for the ultimate benefit of society.”
That wise observation came from a very smart human intelligence.
Interesting spontaneous thought: Not everything that was said was really said by those to whom it is attributed:
"Misattributions are commonplace. Often it is simply the assignment of a saying to a historical celebrity because, “who ever heard of Austin Robinson?” Mark Twain, Abe Lincoln, Gandhi, Stalin and Winston Churchill are said to have said many a saying they never said."
A self learning AI would know that and apply it knowledgeably on a case basis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)