2017 ORS 199.432¹
Status of commission as state agency
  • application of certain laws

(1) A boundary commission created under ORS 199.430 (Procedure for creating commissions by local resolution or petition) may sue and be sued, enter into contracts and perform such other actions as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of ORS 199.410 (Policy) to 199.534 (Legislative annexation of territory to cities and districts).

(2) A boundary commission is a state agency as defined in ORS 291.002 (Definitions) and is not subject to the provisions of ORS 291.201 (“Tax expenditure” defined for ORS 291.201 to 291.222) to 291.224 (Inclusion of capital construction program in Governor’s budget), 291.232 (Declaration of policy) to 291.260 (Approving, modifying or disapproving requests and budgets to be submitted to the federal government), 291.371 (Salary plan review by legislative review agency), 291.373 (Reporting of substantive program changes) or 291.375 (Legislative review of applications for federal financial assistance).

(3) A boundary commission employing personnel under ORS 199.455 (Expenses of members) shall provide employee benefits provided to state management service employees. [1979 c.545 §3; 1981 c.265 §4; 1983 c.336 §2; 1989 c.92 §11; 2003 c.14 §99; 2003 c.734 §15; 2007 c.239 §11; 2012 c.107 §101]

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.