2017 ORS 199.462¹
Standards for review of boundary changes
  • territory that may not be included in certain boundary changes

(1) In order to carry out the purposes described by ORS 199.410 (Policy) when reviewing a petition for a boundary change or application under ORS 199.464 (Commission approval for exercise of additional district function, to extraterritorially extend district or city sewer or water line or to establish privately owned community water system), a boundary commission shall consider local comprehensive planning for the area, economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections pertinent to the proposal, past and prospective physical development of land that would directly or indirectly be affected by the proposed boundary change or application under ORS 199.464 (Commission approval for exercise of additional district function, to extraterritorially extend district or city sewer or water line or to establish privately owned community water system) and the goals adopted under ORS 197.225 (Preparation).

(2) Subject to any provision to the contrary in the principal Act of the affected district or city and subject to the process of transfer of territory:

(a) Territory within a city may not be included within or annexed to a district without the consent of the city council;

(b) Territory within a city may not be included within or annexed to another city; and

(c) Territory within a district may not be included within or annexed to another district subject to the same principal Act. [Formerly 199.515; 1975 c.361 §2; 1979 c.374 §2; 1981 c.748 §18; 1983 c.336 §7; 1989 c.92 §17]

Notes of Decisions

In annexa­tion pro­ceed­ings, boundary com­mis­sion’s findings which recited that evidence existed to show statewide planning goals were not violated were inadequate to meet com­mis­sion’s responsibility under this sec­tion. Norvell v. Portland Area LGBC, 43 Or App 849, 604 P2d 896 (1979)

Boundary Commission should have addressed effect on city’s continuing financial viability of proposed annexa­tion of undeveloped land to neighboring city, effect of proposed annexa­tion on unincorporated “island” which would have been created by annexa­tion, and effect of annexa­tion on existing fire district where sufficient evidence was presented to raise these issues. City of Wood Village v. Portland Metro. Area LGBC, 48 Or App 79, 616 P2d 528 (1980)

Statutory recita­tion of general considera­tions of policy and purpose set forth in ORS 199.410 (Policy) does not constitute specific approval criteria that dictate particular results. Multnomah County Rural Fire v. Portland Metro. Area, 126 Or App 351, 868 P2d 783 (1994)

Boundary com­mis­sion must consider statewide planning goals only when local comprehensive plan does not provide adequate policy direc­tion. Citizens Against Annexa­tion v. Lane County LGBC, 233 Or App 587, 226 P3d 711 (2010)

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.