Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.225 (2026)

Preparation; adoption

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      197.225 Preparation; adoption. The Department of Land Conservation and Development shall prepare and the Land Conservation and Development Commission shall adopt goals and guidelines for use by state agencies, local governments and special districts in preparing, adopting, amending and implementing existing and future comprehensive plans. [1973 c.80 §33; 1981 c.748 §27a]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2021 · leading case: Save Our Rural Oregon v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 121 P.3d 1141 (Or. 2005).
Save Our Rural Oregon v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 121 P.3d 1141 (Or. 2005). · cites it 3× “ORS 197.225 to 197.250. ORS 469.503(4) provides that the council may not issue a site certificate approving an ASC unless the proposed facility complies with the statewide planning goals.”
Friends of Oregon v. LCDC (Curry Co.), 724 P.2d 268 (Or. 1986). · cites it 2× “" ORS 197.225. The legislature defined "goals" only as "the mandatory statewide planning standards adopted by [LCDC]" and did not dictate their content; the goals are general expressions of state policy, and "guidelines" are "suggested approaches designed to aid" cities,…”
Jurgenson v. Cnty. Court for Union Cnty., 600 P.2d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 3× “” Second, ORS 197.225 provides that the Statewide Planning Goals shall be used *508 by local governments "in preparing, adopting, revising and implementing existing and future comprehensive plans.”
Ochoco Constr., Inc. v. Dep't of Land Conservation & Dev., 667 P.2d 499 (Or. 1983). · cites it 2× “ORS 197.225 through 197.245 establish the steps which the Department and Commission must follow in the preparation and adoption of statewide planning goals and guidelines.”
South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. Bd. of Commissioners, 569 P.2d 1063 (Or. 1977). “*17 ORS 197.225, enacted in 1973, required LCDC to adopt, not later than January 1, 1975: "* * * state-wide planning goals and guidelines for use by state agencies, cities, counties and special districts in preparing, adopting, revising and implementing existing and future…”
Lane Cnty. v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 942 P.2d 278 (Or. 1997). “The legislature directed LCDC, in preparing, adopting, and amending goals and guidelines, to “[g]ive consideration” to multiple “areas and activities,” including agricultural land.”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco Cnty. Court, 703 P.2d 207 (Or. 1985). “* * *” 2 ORS 197.225 requires the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) to “adopt goals and guidelines for use by state agencies, local governments and special districts in preparing * * * comprehensive plans.”
Stop the Dump Coal. v. Yamhill Cnty., 435 P.3d 698 (Or. 2019). “225 ("The Department of Land Conservation and Development shall prepare and the Land Conservation and Development Commission shall adopt goals and guidelines for use by state agencies, local governments and special districts in preparing, adopting, amending and implementing…”
Petersen v. Mayor Etc. City of Klamath Falls, 566 P.2d 1193 (Or. 1977). “The LCDC goals were adopted by the LCDC in late 1974, effective January 1, 1975, as required by ORS 197.225. Pursuant to ORS 197.175 (as amended) and ORS 197.”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 642 P.2d 1158 (Or. 1982). “We therefore examine whether LCDC, by goal, can lawfully require local government to make land available for urban development on the sole basis that the land is within a city boundary.”
Wetherell v. Douglas Cnty., 160 P.3d 614 (Or. 2007). “Energy Facility Siting, 339 Or 353, 361 , 121 P3d 1141 (2005); see also ORS 197.225 (LCDC “shall adopt goals and guidelines” for government agencies to use in preparing comprehensive land use plans).”
Neuberger v. City of Portland, 603 P.2d 771 (Or. 1979). “ORS 197.225; Sunnyside Neighborhood v. Clackamas Co.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.