197.235 Public
hearings; notice; citizen involvement implementation; submission of proposals. (1) In preparing the goals and
guidelines, the Department of Land Conservation and Development shall:
(a) Hold at least
10 public hearings throughout the state, causing notice of the time, place and
purpose of each hearing to be published in a newspaper of general circulation
within the area where the hearing is to be conducted not later than 30 days prior
to the date of the hearing. At least two public hearings must be held in each
congressional district.
(b) Implement any
other provision for public involvement developed by the State Citizen
Involvement Advisory Committee under ORS 197.160 (1) and approved by the Land
Conservation and Development Commission.
(2) Upon
completion of the preparation of the proposed goals and guidelines, or
amendments to those goals and guidelines, the department shall submit them to
the commission, the Local Officials Advisory Committee, the State Citizen
Involvement Advisory Committee and the appropriate legislative committee for
review.
(3) The
commission shall consider the comments of the Local Officials Advisory
Committee, the State Citizen Involvement Advisory Committee and the legislative
committee before the adoption and amendment of the goals and guidelines.
(4)
Notwithstanding subsection (1)(a) of this section, when a legislative enactment
or an initiative measure is inconsistent with the adopted goals and guidelines
or directs the commission to make a specific change to the adopted goals and
guidelines, the commission may amend the goals and guidelines after only one
public hearing, at a location determined by the commission, if the proposed
amendment:
(a) Is necessary
to conform the goals and guidelines to the legislative enactment or the
initiative measure; and
(b) Makes no
change other than the conforming changes unless the change corrects an obvious
scrivener’s error. [1973 c.80 §36; 1981 c.748 §28; 2005 c.147 §1; 2007 c.354 §9]
Notes of Decisions
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco Cnty. Court, 703 P.2d 207 (Or. 1985).
“310(8), but different procedures are specified for goal preparation, adoption and amendment, see ORS 197.235 to 197.245, than are specified for promulgation of rules under the Administrative Procedures Act, ORS 183.”
Friends of Oregon v. LCDC (Curry Co.), 724 P.2d 268 (Or. 1986).
“LCDC may even choose to address that issue and other definitional problems noted in this opinion by amending the goals, guidelines, or definitions in accordance with ORS 197.235 to 197.245, or by promulgating new or amended administrative rules, in accordance with ORS chapter…”
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco Cnty. Court, 686 P.2d 375 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Goals are adopted and amended through special procedures, ORS 197.235 to 197.245, which are more rigorous than those provided by the Administrative Procedures Act for adoption of administrative rules.”
Willamette Univ. v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 608 P.2d 1178 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
“ORS 197.235 to 197.245. From this scheme, we conclude the legislature did not intend that the statewide planning goals could be indirectly repealed or amended by any exercise by LCDC of its general rulemaking power.”
Oregonians in Action v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 795 P.2d 1098 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“The adoption of amendments to or of new goals shall be done in the manner provided in ORS 197.235 and [ORS] 197.240 and shall specify with particularity those goal provisions that are applicable to land use decisions before plan revision.”
1000 Friends v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 724 P.2d 268 (Or. 1986).
“LCDC may even choose to address that issue and other definitional problems noted in this opinion by amending the goals, guidelines, or definitions in accordance with ORS 197.235 to 197.245, or by promulgating new or amended administrative rules, in accordance with ORS chapter…”
1000 Friends v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 629 P.2d 831 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
“ORS 197.235 to 197.245. From this scheme, we conclude the legislature did not intend that the statewide planning goals could be indirectly repealed or amended by any exercise by LCDC of its general rulemaking power.”
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.