2017 ORS 199.430¹
Procedure for creating commissions by local resolution or petition

(1) A boundary commission may be created as provided by this section with territorial jurisdiction in one county or in two or more contiguous counties. A commission may be created by:

(a) Similar resolutions creating a commission adopted by the county board of each of the counties within the jurisdiction of the commission; or

(b) Similar petitions, signed by the electors of each county within the jurisdiction of the proposed commission, requesting the creation of a commission having jurisdiction within the counties, filed with and approved by order of the county boards of each county in the jurisdiction of the commission.

(2) Each petition filed with a county board requesting creation of a boundary commission shall be signed by not less than 10 percent of the registered electors of the county. The petition shall be approved by the county board if it finds that the needs of the local government units in the territory described in the petition and the public interest would be benefited by the establishment of a boundary commission to carry out the purposes described by ORS 199.410 (Policy).

(3) A resolution creating or an order approving the creation of a boundary commission is effective on:

(a) The date the last county board in the jurisdiction of the commission adopts the resolution or order; or

(b) The date specified in the order, or resolution, but not more than 60 days after the adoption of the resolution or order.

(4) When a commission is created under this section, copies of the resolutions or orders of the county boards shall be filed with the Governor, the Secretary of State, and the county clerk and the assessor of each county within the jurisdiction of the commission.

(5) A commission created as provided by this section shall not have jurisdiction of any proceeding initiated prior to the effective date of the resolution or order creating such commission. [1969 c.494 §5; 1971 c.462 §3; 1979 c.645 §1; 1980 c.14 §4; 1981 c.265 §3; 2007 c.239 §10]

Notes of Decisions

The statutory scheme of authority and pro­ce­dures for com­mis­sions created by this Act, plus adherence to the prescribed pro­ce­dure as set out in the Act, release the com­mis­sions from the limita­tions placed upon local govern­mental bodies in zone-change matters in Fasano v. Washington County Comm., 264 Or 574, 507 P2d 23 (1973). Marion County Fire Dist. 1 v. Marion-Polk County Local Govt. Boundary Comm., 19 Or App 108, 526 P2d 1031 (1974), Sup Ct review denied

In Proceeding Involving Proposed Merger of Three Water Districts

1) no elec­tion was re­quired before com­mis­sion order approving merger could take effect; 2) com­mis­sion made the findings re­quired by statute; 3) com­mis­sion’s findings were supported by substantial evidence, adequate for review and sufficient to support its order; and 4) these sec­tions did not constitute invalid delega­tion of legislative power. Redland Water District v. Portland Metro. Area LGBC, 63 Or App 641, 665 P2d 1241 (1983), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Dissolu­tion of insolvent metropolitan service district, (1972) Vol 35, p 1117

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 199—County Consolidation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors199.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 199, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano199.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.