The proposed changes to PCC 7.02.290 separate the requirements that apply to taxpayers when filing a protest with the Revenue Division from the requirements that apply to the division when responding to a protest. This change will provide clarity for taxpayers and their representatives when filing protests.The proposed changes to PCC 7.02.290 also make two additional changes.First, they extend the period the Revenue Division has to respond to taxpayer requests for a penalty or interest waiver to be consistent with the period the division is allowed for responding to protests. While the division strives to respond in a timely manner it is not always possible to respond within 60 days.Second, they recognize there is a consequence for taxpayers that don't meet the time period allowed for a protest but is not a consequence where the division does not meet the time period allowed to respond. Therefore, a consequence is being added modeled on Oregon Revised Statute 305.265(9).PCC 7.02.295 was recently updated for City charter-related changes. The proposed amendment clarifies that the length of the term for appeals board members appointed under PCC 7.02.295 A. 3. are three-year terms. This clarification was requested by the appeals board. The amendments also add a provision for a criminal records check.
Official proposal and impact statementShould Portland amend Protests and Appeals and Revenue Division Appeals Board Code (amend Code Sections 7.02.290 and 7.02.295)?
The proposed changes to PCC 7.02.290 separate the requirements that apply to taxpayers when filing a protest with the Revenue Division from the requirements that apply to the division when responding to a protest. This change will provide clarity for taxpayers and their representatives when filing protests.The proposed changes to PCC 7.02.290 also make two additional changes.First, they extend the period the Revenue Division has to respond to taxpayer requests for a penalty or interest waiver to be consistent with the period the division is allowed for responding to protests. While the division strives to respond in a timely manner it is not always possible to respond within 60 days.Second, they recognize there is a consequence for taxpayers that don't meet the time period allowed for a protest but is not a consequence where the division does not meet the time period allowed to respond. Therefore, a consequence is being added modeled on Oregon Revised Statute 305.265(9).PCC 7.02.295 was recently updated for City charter-related changes. The proposed amendment clarifies that the length of the term for appeals board members appointed under PCC 7.02.295 A. 3. are three-year terms. This clarification was requested by the appeals board. The amendments also add a provision for a criminal records check.
Official impact statementSee the official legal title
Amend Protests and Appeals and Revenue Division Appeals Board Code (amend Code Sections 7.02.290 and 7.02.295)
What this proposal would actually do.
Plain-language orientation first. Every substantive statement below links to its official basis.
The reviewed sources do not clearly identify every existing policy, service, contract, or obligation that would remain unchanged.
Official matter recordThis proposal concerns budget, taxes & finance and requires action through Portland’s public legislative process.
Official matter classification and recordThis legislation is expected to provide clarity for taxpayers and their representatives regarding the process for filing protests in response to Revenue Division adjustments to Business License Law tax return adjustments.
Official community impact statementWhat the record establishes and what it does not.
Votes show choices. They do not, by themselves, prove why a member made that choice.
Passed · 10–0
Read the exact motion or vote question
Final action on 2025-433: Amend Protests and Appeals and Revenue Division Appeals Board Code (amend Code Sections 7.02.290 and 7.02.295)
We will not turn the roll call into invented arguments.
The vote above establishes who supported or opposed that exact motion. A source-validated account of the competing reasons will appear only after human review of the meeting transcript and documents.
The proposed code changes would not have a material impact on City revenue or expenses.
Official financial impact statement- The source-linked record has not yet received a human review of competing arguments. A yes or no vote alone does not establish a Councilor’s rationale.
- What implementation evidence will show whether the intended result occurred?
Official testimony on this decision has closed. Residents can still contact their district Councilors about implementation and follow-up.
Official Council agendaInspect the complete research record.
Official text, source files, exact motions, roll calls, provenance, and the technical completeness check remain available without crowding the explanation above.
Official documents1 sources
The operative official record after Council action.
Open at Portland.govRead the full official text
The City of Portland ordains.Section 1. The Council finds:Portland City Code Sections 7.02.290 and 7.02.295 were amended in Ordinance 191011 on September 28, 2022. The amendments recognized the Revenue Division's expanded role in administering Metro's Supportive Housing Services and Multnomah County's Preschool for All income taxes.The Ordinance 191011 amendments also increased the time allowed to the Revenue Division to respond to protests in recognition that administration of these new income taxes would increase the number of protests the division received.When Ordinance 191011 was proposed, changing the time allowed to the Revenue Division to respond to penalty waiver requests was inadvertently overlooked. The time allowed to the Revenue Division to respond to protests and penalty waivers should be consistent in allowing 180 days.Code Subsection 7.02.290 A. currently includes both the requirements for taxfilers and the Revenue Division regarding filing and responding to protests resulting in a lack of clarity. Separating these requirements as shown in Exhibit A will provide more clarity for both taxfilers and the division.Code Section 7.02.290 imposes consequences on taxfilers that do not meet the section's deadlines. There are no consequences when the division does not meet the section's deadlines. It is reasonable and right to expect consequences which are modeled on Oregon Revised Statute 305.265(9).Code Section 7.02.295 should be clear about the terms served by appointed Appeals Board members and the purpose for staggering those terms. Individuals appointed to the board should have an appropriate level of expertise in accounting and tax regulation. A criminal records check of candidates is appropriate to ensure a candidate hasn't been involved in criminal activities that could negatively impact the City or the board. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council directs:Amend City Code Sections 7.02.290 and 7.02.295 as shown in Exhibit A.
Meetings, motions, amendments, and votes3 meetings · 2 votes
Read all 1 exact motions
Motion to refer the Ordinance, Document Number 2025-433, to City Council with the recommendation it be passed: Moved by Pirtle-Guiney and seconded by Green. (Aye (4): Green, Pirtle-Guiney, Novick, Zimmerman; Absent (1): Avalos)
Final Council action · Dec 3, 202510 yes · 0 no · 2 absent
Final action on 2025-433: Amend Protests and Appeals and Revenue Division Appeals Board Code (amend Code Sections 7.02.290 and 7.02.295)
Meeting-level motion or recommendation · Nov 10, 20254 yes · 1 absent
Motion to refer the Ordinance, Document Number 2025-433, to City Council with the recommendation it be passed: Moved by Pirtle-Guiney and seconded by Green. (Aye (4): Green, Pirtle-Guiney, Novick, Zimmerman; Absent (1): Avalos)
Data quality, timeline, and provenanceRules v2
Unreviewed keyword matches and machine-extracted fragments are not presented as authoritative findings. Only 0 human-reviewed findings are available for this matter.
Technical information-completeness check · Ready With Caveats
This checks whether decision-relevant categories appear in the published packet. It does not recommend approval or opposition.
The official title and operative text identify the requested action.
Official text was found. This check does not certify that every referenced exhibit is complete.
The official impact statement includes financial information.
The impact statement identifies funding information without an explicit unresolved-source qualifier.
No linked attachments were found on the official page.
The text references exhibits. This guide has not yet automatically verified that each referenced exhibit is present, populated, and internally consistent.
The reviewed action is not expressly identified as a non-binding agreement.
A direction, reporting requirement, or deadline appears in the official text.
Stability requires at least two observed snapshots; the system will update this after another ingestion.
- First discovered
- Aug 13, 2026, 1:09 PM PDT
- Last checked
- Sep 13, 2026, 2:27 AM PDT
- Evidence hash
- 3ea6f89907aa08ce
- Guide status
- Deterministic baseline
- SOURCE UPDATED
Passed
- DOCUMENT PUBLISHED
Observed in the official source.
- Council Action
Passed
- Council Action
Passed to second reading
- Council Action
Referred to City Council