Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610 (2026)

Submission of proposed comprehensive plan or land use regulation changes to Department of Land Conservation and Development; rules

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

197.610 Submission of proposed comprehensive plan or land use regulation changes to Department of Land Conservation and Development; rules. (1) Before a local government adopts a change, including additions and deletions, to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or a land use regulation, the local government shall submit the proposed change to the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The Land Conservation and Development Commission shall specify, by rule, the deadline for submitting proposed changes, but in all cases the proposed change must be submitted at least 20 days before the local government holds the first evidentiary hearing on adoption of the proposed change. The commission may not require a local government to submit the proposed change more than 35 days before the first evidentiary hearing.

(2) If a local government determines that emergency circumstances beyond the control of the local government require expedited review, the local government shall submit the proposed changes as soon as practicable, but may submit the proposed changes after the applicable deadline.

(3) Submission of the proposed change must include all of the following materials:

(a) The text of the proposed change to the comprehensive plan or land use regulation implementing the plan;

(b) If a comprehensive plan map or zoning map is created or altered by the proposed change, a copy of the map that is created or altered;

(c) A brief narrative summary of the proposed change and any supplemental information that the local government believes may be useful to inform the director or members of the public of the effect of the proposed change;

(d) The date set for the first evidentiary hearing;

(e) The form of notice or a draft of the notice to be provided under ORS 197.797, if applicable; and

(f) Any staff report on the proposed change or information describing when the staff report will be available, and how a copy of the staff report can be obtained.

(4) The director shall cause notice of the proposed change to the acknowledged comprehensive plan or the land use regulation to be provided to:

(a) Persons that have requested notice of changes to the acknowledged comprehensive plan of the particular local government, using electronic mail, electronic bulletin board, electronic mailing list server or similar electronic method; and

(b) Persons that are generally interested in changes to acknowledged comprehensive plans, by posting notices periodically on a public website using the Internet or a similar electronic method.

(5) When a local government determines that the land use statutes, statewide land use planning goals and administrative rules of the commission that implement either the statutes or the goals do not apply to a proposed change to the acknowledged comprehensive plan and the land use regulations, submission of the proposed change under this section is not required.

(6) If, after submitting the materials described in subsection (3) of this section, the proposed change is altered to such an extent that the materials submitted no longer reasonably describe the proposed change, the local government must notify the Department of Land Conservation and Development of the alterations to the proposed change and provide a summary of the alterations along with any alterations to the proposed text or map to the director at least 10 days before the final evidentiary hearing on the proposal. The director shall cause notice of the alterations to be given in the manner described in subsection (4) of this section. Circumstances requiring resubmission of a proposed change may include, but are not limited to, a change in the principal uses allowed under the proposed change or a significant change in the location at which the principal uses would be allowed, limited or prohibited.

(7) When the director determines that a proposed change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or a land use regulation may not be in compliance with land use statutes or the statewide land use planning goals, including administrative rules implementing either the statutes or the goals, the department shall notify the local government of the concerns at least 15 days before the final evidentiary hearing, unless there is only one hearing or the proposed change has been modified to the extent that resubmission is required under subsection (6) of this section.

(8) Notwithstanding subsection (7) of this section, the department may provide advisory recommendations to the local government concerning the proposed change to the acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation. [1981 c.748 §4; 1983 c.827 §7; 1985 c.565 §27; 1989 c.761 §20; 1999 c.622 §1; 2011 c.280 §1]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 39 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: State ex rel. Butler v. City of Bandon, 131 P.3d 855 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State ex rel. Butler v. City of Bandon, 131 P.3d 855 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “615 (1995) or any other related statute suggests that every procedural deviation from its requirements is fatal to the validity of an acknowledgement.”

Gisler v. Deschutes Cnty., 945 P.2d 1051 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Any amendment to incorporate a goal, rule or statute change shall be submitted to the department as set forth in ORS 197.610 to 197.625. «Hi * * * * “(3) When a local government does not adopt comprehensive plan or land use regulation amendments as required by subsection (1) of…”

Oregon City Leasing, Inc. v. Columbia Cnty., 854 P.2d 495 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 11× “ORS 197.610 et seq contain procedures for assuring that amendments to acknowledged local land use legislation and enactments of new legislation comply with the statewide planning goals.”

Leathers v. Marion Cnty., 925 P.2d 148 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “As relevant here, respondents contended, and LUBA agreed, that ordinance 826 was not “deemed acknowledged” under ORS 197.610 et seq, because, LUBA found, the county had not given DLCD the notice of adoption required by those statutes.”

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 844 P.2d 251 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 3× ““(6) Notwithstanding subsection (5) of this section, the 120-day period set in subsection (1) of this section does not apply to an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation or adoption of a new land use regulation that was forwarded to the director…”

Wicks-Snodgrass v. City of Reedsport, 939 P.2d 625 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “*221 “A notice of intent to appeal plan and land use regulation amendments processed pursuant to ORS 197.610 to 197.625 shall be filed not later than 21 days after the decision sought to be reviewed is mailed to parties entitled to notice under ORS 197.”

Foland v. Jackson Cnty., 807 P.2d 801 (Or. 1991). “ORS 197.610 et seq. LCDC is also required to review periodically acknowledged plans to ensure their continuing compliance with the goals.”

Orenco Neighborhood Org. v. City of Hillsboro, 899 P.2d 720 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 4× “The ordinance amends the city’s zoning ordinance, and was adopted pursuant to ORS 197.610 to ORS 197.625 in April 1994.”

Root v. Klamath Cnty., 320 P.3d 631 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “A notice of intent to appeal plan and land use regulation amendments processed pursuant to ORS 197.610 to 197.625 shall be filed not later than 21 days after notice of the decision sought to be reviewed is mailed or otherwise submitted to parties entitled to notice under ORS 197.”

Ludwick v. Yamhill Cnty., 696 P.2d 536 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “” See also ORS 197.610 to 197.650. Petitioners’ argument is circular.”

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 863 P.2d 1259 (Or. 1993). · cites it 6× “ORS 197.610. 1 On September 26, 1990, the county notified DLCD of the proposed plan amendment and zone change.”

Rest-Haven Mem'l Park v. City of Eugene, 28 P.3d 1229 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “’ The term encompasses actions taken in accordance with ORS 197.610 through 197.625, including amendments to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation and the adoption of any new plan or land use regulation.”

Show all 39 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(1) — 7 cases

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 844 P.2d 251 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). ““(6) Notwithstanding subsection (5) of this section, the 120-day period set in subsection (1) of this section does not apply to an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation or adoption of a new land use regulation that was forwarded to the director…”

Oregon City Leasing, Inc. v. Columbia Cnty., 854 P.2d 495 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “ORS 197.610 et seq contain procedures for assuring that amendments to acknowledged local land use legislation and enactments of new legislation comply with the statewide planning goals.”

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 863 P.2d 1259 (Or. 1993). “ORS 197.610. 1 On September 26, 1990, the county notified DLCD of the proposed plan amendment and zone change.”

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 849 P.2d 1125 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).

North East Medford Neighborhood Coalition v. City of Medford, 162 P.3d 1059 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(3) — 4 cases

Volny v. City of Bend, 4 P.3d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 863 P.2d 1259 (Or. 1993). “ORS 197.610. 1 On September 26, 1990, the county notified DLCD of the proposed plan amendment and zone change.”

Edney v. Columbia Cnty. Bd. of Com'rs, 863 P.2d 1259 (Or. 1993).

Dept. of Land Conservation v. Clackamas Cnty. (Or. Ct. App. 2024).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(3)(b) — 2 cases

Dept. of Land Conservation v. Clackamas Cnty. (Or. Ct. App. 2024).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(4) — 2 cases

Dept. of Land Conservation v. Clackamas Cnty. (Or. Ct. App. 2024).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(4)(a) — 1 case

Volny v. City of Bend, 4 P.3d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(4)(b) — 1 case

Volny v. City of Bend, 4 P.3d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.610(7) — 2 cases

Dept. of Land Conservation v. Clackamas Cnty. (Or. Ct. App. 2024).

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.