Pillsbury SALT partners Carley Roberts and Breann Robowski will be presenting during the 2023 ABA/IPT Advanced Tax Seminars in March.
Pillsbury SALT partners Carley Roberts and Breann Robowski will be presenting during the 2023 ABA/IPT Advanced Tax Seminars in March.
Pillsbury partners Breann Robowski and Jorge Medina will be participating in the Wichita Property Tax Conference taking place on July 24-28. Continue Reading ›
Pillsbury SALT partner Breann Robowski will present during the 2022 ABA/IPT Virtual Advanced Tax Seminars in March.
Pillsbury SALT partner Craig Becker will participate in the CalTax webinar series on February 8.
California Supreme Court holds that courts can entertain arguments that a BID assessment scheme violates certain provisions of Proposition 218 when raised by a party who did not articulate these objections in public hearings held to consider protests.
On December 20, 2021, the California Supreme Court reversed the court of appeal which had concluded that petitioners failure to present their objections to proposed business improvement districts (“BIDs”) and related assessment schemes at the appropriate public hearings meant they had not exhausted their extrajudicial remedies, a lapse that prevented the court from deciding petitioners’ claims on the merits. Hill RHP Housing Partners, L.P. et al. v. City of Los Angeles, No. S263734.
Pillsbury SALT partner Craig Becker will present during the California Alliance of Taxpayer Advocates Annual Conference on December 10.
Pillsbury SALT attorneys Craig Becker, Robert P. Merten III and Zachary Atkins will present during COST’s Annual Property Tax Workshop September 22 – 24.
Pillsbury attorneys Zachary T. Atkins, Breann E. Robowski, Craig A. Becker, Jay E. Silberg, and Jeffrey S. Merrifield discuss the New York law raising property tax issues and how it could become a national concern in Pratt’s Energy Law Report. Read more here.
In Tesoro Logistics Northwest Pipeline LLC v. Department of Revenue (002), the Oregon Tax Court, Regular Division, held that although a unit of property acquired by one centrally assessed company from another qualified as “new property” for purposes of Or. Const. Art. XI, § 11 (Measure 50), the unit of property’s existing maximum assessed value (MAV) was preserved in the hands of the new owner. Tesoro Logistics Nw. Pipeline LLC v. Dep’t of Revenue, No. TC 5252, 2021 WL 6700471 (Or. Tax Ct., Reg. Div., Feb. 19, 2021). As a result, the Oregon Department of Revenue was not entitled to redetermine the MAV on account of the acquisition.
Pillsbury SALT partner Breann Robowski will present during ABA/IPT’s 2021 Advanced Property Tax Seminar on March 18.