2017 ORS 222.115¹
Annexation contracts
  • recording
  • effect

A contract between a city and a landowner containing the landowner’s consent to eventual annexation of the landowner’s property in return for extraterritorial services:

(1) Must be recorded; and

(2) When recorded, is binding on successors in interest in that property. [1991 c.637 §4; 2012 c.46 §§1,2]

Notes of Decisions

City may not require con­sent to annexa­tion by city as considera­tion for pro­vi­sion of services by other govern­ment bodies. Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority v. City of Medford, 130 Or App 24, 880 P2d 486 (1994), Sup Ct review denied

Consents or contracts to con­sent to annexa­tion given by prop­erty owners prior to 1991 in exchange for services are ineffective unless annexa­tion plan was submitted to owner before con­sent was requested. Johnson v. City of La Grande, 167 Or App 35, 1 P3d 1036 (2000)

Chapter 222

Notes of Decisions

Provisions of this chapter do not require final decisions on small tract annexa­tions to be made in quasi-judicial pro­ceed­ings rather than by popular vote. Stewart v. City of Corvallis, 48 Or App 709, 617 P2d 921 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 222—City Boundary Changes; Mergers; Consolidations; Withdrawals, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors222.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 222, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano222.­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.