Opinion ID: 2603509
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: South River Road

Text: This property of 6.15 acres includes a residence, a barn and a detached garage with a workshop. Roy Masters described it as a [p]arsonage and staff quarters; [it] provides a place for staff to get away from students   . He called it a retreat from the retreat. It was used during the assessment period as a temporary residence for the ministers and counselors on a rotating basis. The Foundation claims that the property was essential to accomplish the religious objectives of the Foundation. Its primary use was to provide a refuge for the counselors where they could escape from the stress of their counseling work at the ranch. In German Apost. Christ. Church v. Dept. of Rev., 279 Or. 637, 643, 569 P.2d 596 (1977), we held that a minister's residence may be exempt if the location of the residence near the church is necessary to accomplish a religious objective, for example, to ensure the minister's constant availability to attend to the religious needs of the congregation. The Tax Court denied an exemption for the property in the instant case because it was located 20 miles from the ranch where those needing counseling lived, a distance the Tax Court found too far. The proximity of the property may be one factor in determining whether the subject property is reasonably necessary to the religious activity at another site. In this case, however, the property does not fall within the exemption because of its use. It is not used so that counselors will be available to retreatants. Rather, it is used by the counselors as a respite from retreatants. The Foundation asserts that some residence away from the ranch is necessary in order that the counselors can perform their work well. This may be true. Nonetheless, the use of the property benefits the employees directly and the organization only indirectly. We find that the South River Road property is not reasonably necessary to accomplish the objectives of the Foundation.