Likewise, the assessment must include 100 percent of the completed porch. To say that the house is only 28 percent complete is merely a way of determining the stage of completion. The assessor could have used a different cost method, such as totaling the cost of the work completed as of July 1, 1995. That total would clearly represent the loss to the owner if the property was destroyed. Taxpayer appears concerned that the department's expression of the assessor's authority in its Opinion and Order is too broad and excessive.
Taxpayer maintains that a single structure is subject to a single assessment.
Taxpayer is correct that the assessor's duties are governed by statute and that for each account, the improvements are subject to a single assessment. See Bear Creek Plaza v. However, taxpayer is in error regarding the methods and techniques used to value property. Even though the house and porch may be a single integral improvement, the methods of valuation permit and may even require the assignment of separate values to component parts to ascertain the value of the whole. Separately valuing the parts of the structure to determine the value of the whole is consistent with appraisal theory and Oregon's property tax laws.