Donna O’ Grady – First American Title


May 6, 2013

Donna O’ Grady
First American Title

1159/1161 Tolman Creek Rd. (Tax lot 1700)
Ashland OR 97520
Owner: Debra M. Neisewander


1167 Tolman Creek Rd. (Tax lot 1800)
Ashland OR 97520
Owners: Michael E Jacobson and Mary A. Jacobson
Tax lot 1900
Black Oak Way
Ashland OR 97520
Owners: Michael E. Jacobson and Mary A. Jacobson

Perfect Scenario for Lot Line Adjustment:

1. Mini Title Report for tax lots 1700, 1800, and 1900 from First American Title
2. Terra Surveyor and Michael and Mary will get the report
3. Surveyor will send the new legal description for the legal deed to Julie Austad and Donna O’Grady at First American Title.
*Karen and Susan at Windermere would like a report if Michael and Mary authorize us to receive it.
4. Title will check for any steps for the partial release; liens, lenders and tax liens
5. Lender gives approval for survey and does the lender’s partial release letter.
6. City of Ashland then gives approval for the survey and the lender’s release and can authorize to record the deed, record the partial release of the loan and to pay taxes.
7. Re-mapping is then authorized.


Debra Neisewander
1159/1161 Tolman Creek Rd.
Lot 1700

Assessor’s Office: 541-774-6059

She will have to pay her back taxes $17,121.28 from 2010 (this amount is up to May 15, 2013) After May 15, tax due amount goes up. Also she will have to pay the errors and correction amount of approximately $2000 and taxes for 2013-2014.

If property closes escrow after June 30, 2013, taxes will include 2013-2014 year also. Buyer gives a credit to seller for the days they own property.

Debra is 4 years behind in taxes.
$17,121.28 up to May 15, 2013

Foreclosure will begin on May 15, 2014 and recorded judgement on August 15, 2014. Once foreclosure begins, she will have 30 days to pay cash or cashier’s check all 4 years plus 5% penalty before the judgement.

There is a 2 year redemption period.

If Debra’s taxes are paid in full by July 1, 2013, the lot line adjustment requirement will be completed on her side.

Letter to me from Susan (REA) regarding phone conference with Donna (First American Title).

List of Problems

Debra Neisewander

1159-1161 Tolman Creek Rd.

1) Lot Line Adjustment application is submitted to City of Ashland and agreed upon by both Neisewander and Jacobson’s.

a) Survey to be paid for by Jacobson’s

b) Once survey is recorded, the Lot Line is completed

c) What is the additional square footage that is gained? 876

2) ADU (additional dwelling unit)

Amy Gunther said that due to several events, the 640 square feet of accessory unit over the garage is legal.

a) It has separate utilities

b) It has a separate address (1161) This is the main mailing address for the parcel.

c) The county recognizes it as a separate living space and taxes the 640 square feet

d) On March 12, 1996, previous owner submitted an application for a Minor Land Partition to divide the parcel into two lots and a variance for a side-yard setback for flag drive. In this application, the Planning Department recognized the pre-existing accessory unit as a legal, rentable ADU.

This site plan was approved by Planning Commission. It needed zoning and subdivision plans for final approval and this was never done. Developer will have to start from beginning with application.

3) Taxes
Back taxes currently due from today to May 15, 2013 are $17,121.28.
These will be paid through escrow.

Tax Assessors office is unsure and unclear of why the tax rate went up to $6,391.51

Looks like Assessors office on 9/6/2006 went out and changed the “loft barn” to an additional dwelling unit” resident #2 of 2″ and began taxing the 640 square feet.

a) City of Ashland believes that Debra will need to straighten out the addresses. City of Ashland and Jackson County show 1161 as the main home and main mailing address. (Most likely Utility Dept. gave. address of 1161 when the[y] installed separate utility meter in ADU)

b) We will need to be clear of what the existing taxes actually are but also must consider the future Lot Line Adjustment.

4) TID
$125.00 per year. Are the dues paid for this year?
Are repairs needed to the TID pipe on/to the prop

I call this document ‘List of Problems’. It was written by Susan (REA) and the focus of a meeting discussing items preventing my property from being marketable.

Petition For Addition Of Address 1161 Tolman Creek Rd



(Please Print)

Date Requested: 09/06/1996

Name: Debra Neisewander

Telephone number: n/a

Tax lot number: 39 1E 14CD Taxlot 1700

Existing Address: 1159 Tolman Creek Road

NEW ADDRESS: 1161 Tolman Creek Road

SIGNATURE: RDS             For Debra Neisewander

Approved by the City of Ashland, Engineering Division.

RDS Engineering Tech 09/06/96

Notification to:

  • Police Dept.
  • Fire Dept.
  • Building Dept.
  • Post Office.
  • Electric Dept.
  • Utility Billing
  • Water Dept.
  • JC Assessor

It was actually this letter that got Amy Gunter’s (City Planner) attention. According to her the engineering tech ‘RDS’ had been fired and therefor the house number is invalid. No further details were given. Recently Amy dropped a name but I am reluctant to say it. I am still waiting for Bill Molnar’s response.

Letter From Dave Kanner, City of Ashland Administrator, Outlining and Justifying Property Error


View PDF Version: Dave Kanner (City of Ashland) Letter


June 26, 2013City of Ashland

Ms. Debra Neisewander
1159 Tolman Creek Rd.
Ashland Oregon, 97520

Dear Ms Neisewander,

You raised a number of concerns when we met in my office last week. I will do my best in this letter to provide you with the information I believe you are seeking.

1. You requested an apology for and an explanation of the City’s error with regard to assigning a new address to your property.

I do offer my sincere apology for this and for the difficulties you experienced as a result. It’s my understanding that this has been corrected in the Jackson County Assessor’s records and in our utility billing system and that you have received refunds from both Jackson County and the City of Ashland for overcharges of property taxes and utilities resulting from this error.

However, this error occurred nearly 17 years ago. The individual who made this mistake is long gone and there are no records we know of that document his decision.

Again, I sincerely apologize for the error, but I can’t explain how or why it happened. The City provided you with a letter dated May 28, 2013, acknowledging this error. This letter clearly states that 1159 is the correct address for your property and that the garage/loft has not been approved as a second dwelling unit. I have furnished a copy of this letter to First American Title and they have indicated that they will revise the title report you currently have.

2. You asked about partitioning the property. The prior owner of the property applied for and received approval to partition into two lots in 1996. However, since no survey was subsequently filed, the approval expired. Your property is still eligable for partition. It would require a new application. A variance may be required, given the likely proximity of your house to any flag lot driveway that might be created.

3. Moving the property line to make it contiguous with the wall between your property and the Jacobson’s property will require an application from the Jacobsons. It’s my understanding that the Jacobsons submitted an application but have now withdrawn it. You might want to talk to them about re-submitting it. A property line adjustment is not necessary in order for you to partition the property or to use the loft above the garage as an accessory dwelling unit.

4. As stated above, the garage can be converted to an accessory dwelling unit. Again, a property line adjustment would not be necessary. It would, however, require a conditional use permit. Our Community Development staff can provide you with an application and explain the permit application process.

5. You expressed concern about the storm drain easement and the proximity to buried electric lines. Utility easements routinely allow for the placement of multiple utilities and the proposed easement is large enough to accommodate both storm and electric utilities. The storm water is piped and the electric is in a conduit. They are buried at different depths and there is no mixing of the two.

I hope this letter addresses your questions and concerns. Again, I apologize for the difficulties created by the 1996 addressing error.


Dave Kanner
City Administrator.


Dave Kanner (City of Ashland) Letter

Amy Gunter: City of Ashland Taxes Unqualified Structures Without Justification

May 28, 2013

Debra Neisewander
1159 Tolman Creek Rd
Ashland, OR 97520

Re. 1159 Tolman Creek Road
39 1E 14CD 1700

To whom it May Concern:

According to the records of the City of Ashland, the garage/barn with loft area is not approved as a second dwelling unit (Accessory Residential Unit) and never has had approval as a second dwelling unit.

Our records indicate that in 1996 it was noted in the file on the property that a Conditional Use Permit would need to be obtained in order for the loft area over the barn to be utilized as an Accessory Residential Unit.

It also appears that in 1996, somehow a second address of 1161 Tolman Creek Road was given to the property. The original and only valid address at this property is 1159 Tolman Creek Road. According to Jackson County Property Data on-line, only 1161 Tolman Creek Road is a recognized address. This conflicts with the City of Ashland records.

In the County Assessors information available on Jackson County Property Data on-line it appears that in 09/06/06 the loft barn was made 2 of 2. studio apartment on 2nd floor by #141.

According to the property owner this revised assessment was made based on a view of the exterior of the structure and that no one went into the barn / garage and loft area.

These modifications to the assessments appear to be in error and no fault of the property owner.

It is possible for the property owner to obtain a Conditional Use Permit to allow for an Accessory Residential Unit but that approval has not been requested at this point.


Amy Gunter
Assistant Planner

TRC Report From Data Analyst – Jackson County Assessors Office

TRC Report From Jackson County Data Analyst

Click to enlarge.

TRC Report From Jackson County Data Analyst

This document comes from Data Analyst – Sara C (#133) outlining Tax Roll Correction (TRC) and reasons.

TRC Reason: The taxable value of this parcel was calculated incorrectly.

Many errors found within “correction”. RMV changes added as exception. Original TRC by CA#23 was in no way a “clerical error” therefore making the “correction” invalid. MM added in 07 & CPR’D in 08 in error. TRC to remove all invalid exception and adjust appraisal to reflect what H&BU is (legally permissible. Can’t split therefore no 2nd HS warranted at this time). No paperwork/appraiser notes to prove that 2nd HS was ever valid OR the appraisers intent to add to tax roll. Appears that RT was converted to 2nd HS in 2002/03 ORCATS conversion. Created all changes based on all collected field sheets, appraisal notes, etc.  #133
also blocked are the years  top 12-13   11-12   10-11   09-10   08-09

Read PDF version: TRC Report From Jackson County Data Analyst

1996-97 Property Tax Statement

1996-97 Property Tax Statement

1996-97 Property Tax Statement

This is my first property tax statement. See any red flags? I didn’t….

As an out-of-state purchaser I was unaware that Measure 50 was going into affect January 1, 1997 or that Oregon relied so heavily on property taxes. My real estate agent neglected to mention any of these things. I was ignorant and unaware. What a nightmare!!!


 Look at the same statement 10 years later…

96-97 Modified Tax Statement


View PDF version: 1996-97 Property Tax Statement

View PDF version: 96-97 Modified Tax Statement

Josh Gibson Explanation Of Assessment Error

Disclaimer: This is an interpretation of the assessment records for account # 10082966. These records are for property tax assessment purposes only and have no legal bearing over any other jurisdiction.

Exhibit A – Appraisal Jacket 1965-1981

This represents the appraisal information of both land and improvements valuation from 1965 to 1981.


The record shows that from at least 1971 the home was appraised as a stat class 141

1 – Single family residence
4 – Quality class 4; average
1 – One story

The year built of this home was estimated at 1948.


The property was appraised in 1978 and the improvements (home) was updated to a stat class 151; meaning the judgement of the appraiser was that it was of quality above a class 4.

The estimated year built of the home was changed to 1945. There is no documentation stating why the year was changed.

Exhibit B – Drawing of improvements on property
Exhibit C – Deed card from 1952 to 1996
Exhibit D – 1977 appraisal

Exhibit B shows a home of 1567 ft², an attached garage with the dimensions of 18′ x 24′ and a detached carport with the dimensions of 12 x 23′. There is no date on this drawing. However, I interpret it to be prior to 1977 for two reasons:

1. The map and tax lot number at the upper right hand corner states 391E14C-4500. Exhibit C shows the map and tax lot were updated in the assessment records in 1981 to it’s current layout of 391E14CD-1700

2. Exhibit D shows an appraisal performed on 2/23/1977 which was signed by the owner of the property at the time as being a true representation of improvements at that time.

Exhibit D shows the home having converted the attached garage into livable ft² growing from 1597 ft² to 2010 ft². The appraisal also shows the appraiser judgement changing the carport to a 276 ft² class 4 attached garage. The appraiser also added a 640 ft² two story loft barn with low cost finish to the appraisal.

Exhibit E – 1980 appraisal

Home appraised as a stat class 5 at 2010 ft². Loft barn is on appraisal. However, 276 ft² detached garage has been removed from appraisal. Remarks on home are “outside looks like cl. 4 but inside is cl 5. home is well maintained.”

Exhibit F – 1983 Appraisal

Home continued to be appraised as 2010 ft² stat class 151. Loft barn @ 640 ft², comments on loft barn are “2 bedrooms upstairs N.V. (no value) yet.” In addition, land comments state “House placement; prohibits split in lot”

Exhibit G – 1989 + 5/30/1996 appraisal

There is no record of the 1989 appraisal showing appraiser actual changes. The only record that we have of the 1989 appraisal is the 5/30/1996 appraisal with the information placed on the account in 1989 being scratched out. The only difference between the 1989 and 1983 appraisal is that the appraiser at the time reduced the stat class of the home to a class 141.

The 5/30/96 appraisal further reduces the stat class of the home to a class 131 and updates the effective age of the home to 1955. The land is also appraised with the home site increasing in acreage from .30 of an acre to .35 of an acre. This was most likely due to a recalculation of the areas land values in which it was determined that .30 acres would sell for the same amount as a .35 acre lot would. There were also changes to eliminate a neighborhood adjustment (U52). The appraiser added a landscape (L15) 4 and added a location 2.

The property class of the property is a 101 meaning it is residential improved which can further be interpreted as not being able to be further developed. The situs address of this property is listed as 1159 Tolman Creek Rd.

These changes made during the site visit 5/30/96 were not entered into the appraisal valuation software system until 8/7/96.

Exhibit H – 5/30/96 updated on 8/14/96 and 9/24/96.

All components of the appraisal are the same as in Exhibit G. Excluding three main components:

  1. Property class changed to 191; meaning improved residential with the potential to be developed.
  2. The situs address changed to 1161 Tolman Creek Rd.
  3. A .26 acre building site replaces the previous rural tract land fragment on the appraisal.

Measure 50

Measure 50 was voted into the Oregon Constitution. Prior to Measure 50, all properties were assessed on the Real Market Value (RMV). Although potentially limited by Measure 5 if that calculation exceeded a certain amount for schools or governments. Measure 50 established an additional value to a property called the Maximum Assessed Value (MAV). This figure was derived from the 1995 certified RMV minus 10%.

For account # 10082966, the RMV in 1995 was $177,410 which resulted in 1997 MAV being set at $159,670. Regardless of what appraisal judgement occurred in 1996, due to the timing of measure 50, the tax consequences were established correctly and not negatively affected by the 1996 appraisal judgments. The MAV grew by the constitutional 3% as prescribed by law until 2006.

Exhibit I – 2o06 Appraisal

Major changes occurred to the appraisal in 2006:

  1. The situs was changed from 1161 Tolman Cr. Rd to 1159 + 1169 Tolman Cr. Rd.
  2. The building site was changed to a homesite.
  3. The loft barn was changed to a 2nd dwelling. Year built was estimated at 1977 with an effective age of 1995 and a remodel year of 2005. Comments are “Changed loft barn to 2 of 2. Studio Apt on 2nd floor.”

Exhibit J – 2008 Appraisal

The 2008 appraisal has a comment from 6/13/07 with the comments “OSD conversion – table land.” There is no paper documentation of this change. The difference that I can interpret from the 2006 appraisal to the 6/13/07 change is that an onsite “market” development was added to the 2nd homesite. No changes were made during the 2008 appraisal.

Exhibit K (attachment missing) – Tax roll corrections (TRC)

A TRC was performed in 2009 based on the appraisal in 2006 for the 2nd homesite. Owner contacted office on 11/19/09 stating serious concern. TRC was not overturned. The TRC went back to the 2006 tax year and increased the MAV from $202,210 in 2005 to $284,090 in 2006 an increase in over 140%

2013 TRC

Around April/May of 2013, owner visited office stating her concern with what had occurred in the past. We looked into the situiation. The results are stated as follows.

“06/13/13 the taxable value of this parcel was calculated incorrectly. #133 TRC #711

Notes – many errors found within “correction”. RMV changes added as exception. Original TRC by CA=#23 was in no way a “clerical error” therefore making the “correction” invalid. Appears loft barn to 137 was IR-RMV only but was CPR’d in error. TRC to remove all invalid exception and adjust appraisal to reflect was H+BU is (legally permissible – can’t split therefore no 2nd HS warranted at this time). No paperwork / appraiser notes to prove that 2nd house was ever valid or the appraisers intent to add to tax roll. Appears that RT was converted to 2nd HS in 2002 / 03 ORCATS conversion – re-created all changes based on all collected field sheets, appraiser notes, ect – removed off error and corrections from all years as a result of the 2009 TRC by CA.

TRC results of fixing invalid TRC

This office can only correct the current tax year plus five years back, in this situation, 2013 was the current year and five years back included: 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008. Unfortunately, this office nor any other does not have the authority [to correct] the 2006 and/or the 2007 tax years. This resulted in an artificially high assessed value for those two years.

Exhibit L – Current appraisal

This is a copy of the current appraisal set up for this property. A site visit will occur in the next two weeks to verify contents of the appraisal. One of the main components of the appraisal to address is the loft barn being classified as a 137.


This is my interpretation of the history of appraisals and actions taken on tax account # 10082966 with the records kept in the Jackson County Assessor’s Office.

Josh Oliver Gibson
May 28th, 2014