Case Name: Roy MILLER, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon, and Assessor of Deschutes County, Respondents
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1998-03-19
Citations: 326 Or. 527
Docket Number: OTC 3934; SC S44521
Parties: Roy MILLER, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon, and Assessor of Deschutes County, Respondents.
Judges: Before Carson, Chief Justice, and Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Graber, Durham, and Leeson, Justices.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 326
Pages: 527–529

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted March 4,
judgment of the Tax Court affirmed March 19, 1998
Roy MILLER, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon, and Assessor of Deschutes County, Respondents.
(OTC 3934; SC S44521)
953 P2d 72
Roy Miller, appellant pro se, argued the cause and filed the brief.
Bruce W. White, Deschutes County Legal Counsel, Bend, filed the brief for respondent Assessor of Deschutes County.
James C. Wallace, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, waived appearance for respondent Department of Revenue.
Before Carson, Chief Justice, and Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Graber, Durham, and Leeson, Justices.
PER CURIAM
Kulongoski, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In this proceeding on appeal from the Oregon Tax Court, plaintiff sought to challenge both the legal permissibility and the accuracy of a $40 "capital charge" that was levied against certain of his real property by Water Wonderland Improvement District, a public nonprofit corporation. ORS 554.130. The Tax Court dismissed that portion of the proceeding on the ground that the capital charge was not a "tax" and, therefore, the Tax Court did not have jurisdiction under either of its jurisdictional statutes, ORS 305.410(1) (Tax Court is "sole, exclusive and final judicial authority for the hearing and determination of all questions of law and fact arising under the tax laws") or former ORS 305.115(4) (Tax Court has jurisdiction over appeals from decisions of Department of Revenue "arising under the tax laws").
Plaintiff appeals the ruling of the Tax Court. We have considered plaintifPs arguments, but conclude that the Tax Court's ruling was correct.
The judgment of the Tax Court is affirmed.
Former ORS 305.115 was repealed by Oregon Laws 1995, chapter 650, section 114.