Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825 (2026)

Jurisdiction of board; limitations; effect on circuit court jurisdiction

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

      197.825 Jurisdiction of board; limitations; effect on circuit court jurisdiction. (1) Except as provided in ORS 197.320 and subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the Land Use Board of Appeals shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision or limited land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency in the manner provided in ORS 197.830 to 197.845.

      (2) The jurisdiction of the board:

      (a) Is limited to those cases in which the petitioner has exhausted all remedies available by right before petitioning the board for review;

      (b) Is subject to the provisions of ORS 197.850 relating to judicial review by the Court of Appeals;

      (c) Does not include a local government decision that is:

      (A) Submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development for acknowledgment under ORS 197.251, 197.626 or 197.628 to 197.651 or a matter arising out of a local government decision submitted to the department for acknowledgment, unless the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development, in the director’s sole discretion, transfers the matter to the board; or

      (B) Subject to the review authority of the department under ORS 197.412, 197.445, 197.450 or 197.455 or a matter related to a local government decision subject to the review authority of the department under ORS 197.412, 197.445, 197.450 or 197.455;

      (d) Does not include those land use decisions of a state agency over which the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction for initial judicial review under ORS 183.400, 183.482 or other statutory provisions;

      (e) Does not include any rules, programs, decisions, determinations or activities carried out under ORS 527.610 to 527.770, 527.990 (1) and 527.992; and

      (f) Is subject to ORS 196.115 for any county land use decision that may be reviewed by the Columbia River Gorge Commission pursuant to sections 10(c) or 15(a)(2) of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act, P.L. 99-663.

      (3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, the circuit courts of this state retain jurisdiction:

      (a) To grant declaratory, injunctive or mandatory relief in proceedings arising from decisions described in ORS 197.015 (10)(b) or proceedings brought to enforce the provisions of an adopted comprehensive plan or land use regulations; and

      (b) To enforce orders of the board in appropriate proceedings brought by the board or a party to the board proceeding resulting in the order. [1983 c.827 §30; 1987 c.729 §14; 1987 c.856 §9; 1987 c.919 §4; 1989 c.761 §11; 1991 c.817 §4; 1995 c.595 §26; 1999 c.348 §16; 2005 c.22 §146; 2005 c.245 §1; 2005 c.829 §10; 2007 c.354 §30; 2025 c.476 §35]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 128 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Flight Shop, Inc. v. Leading Edge Aviation, Inc., 373 P.3d 177 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Flight Shop, Inc. v. Leading Edge Aviation, Inc., 373 P.3d 177 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 7× “Necessarily, we begin with ORS 197.825, the statute that divides jurisdiction over land use matters between LUBA and the circuit courts.”
Doughton v. Douglas Cnty., 750 P.2d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 10× “*52 ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction over local “land use decisions.”
Clackamas Cnty. v. Marson, 874 P.2d 110 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 11× “Douglas County, supra, ORS 197.825 establishes a clean jurisdictional line between the land use decision and review process and the enforcement process.”
Lyke v. Lane Cnty., 688 P.2d 411 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 9× “LUBA found that it lacked jurisdiction, because petitioners had failed to exhaust all remedies available by right as required by ORS 197.825 (2) (a) before petitioning the Land Use Board for review.”
Simon v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 755 P.2d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 8× “ORS 197.825(1) provides, in part: "Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency * * *" ORS 215.”
Heritage Enter. v. City of Corvallis, 708 P.2d 601 (Or. 1985). · cites it 7× “We agree with this assessment by the Court of Appeals: “* * * ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction to review all land use decisions by local governments, except as provided in ORS 197.”
VanSpeybroeck v. Tillamook Cnty., 191 P.3d 712 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “030, as interpreted by the board, established the finality of the decision: “ORS 197.825(2)(a) limits the Board’s jurisdiction to ‘those cases in which the petitioner has exhausted all remedies available by right’ before appealing to LUBA.”
Heritage Enter. v. City of Corvallis, 693 P.2d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 8× “” ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction to review all land use decisions by local governments, except as provided in ORS 197.”
Younger v. City of Portland, 752 P.2d 262 (Or. 1988). · cites it 2× “" ORS 197.825(1). A "land use decision" includes a "final decision or determination made by a local government * * * that concerns the adoption, amendment or application of * * * [a] comprehensive plan provision" or a "land use regulation.”
City of Oregon v. Mill-Maple Props., Inc., 779 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 7× “1 ORS 197.825 provides, in relevant part: “(1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency in the manner provided in ORS 197.”
Grabhorn, Inc. v. Washington Cnty., 297 P.3d 524 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “ORS 197.825 vests LUBA with exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision or limited land use decision of a local government, special district, or state agency as provided in ORS 197.”
Thomas v. Wasco Cnty., 392 P.3d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6× “ORS 197.825(1) (LUBA is vested with exclusive jurisdiction to review land use decision).”
Show all 128 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(1) — 55 cases
Simon v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 755 P.2d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “ORS 197.825(1) provides, in part: "Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency * * *" ORS 215.”
Younger v. City of Portland, 752 P.2d 262 (Or. 1988). “" ORS 197.825(1). A "land use decision" includes a "final decision or determination made by a local government * * * that concerns the adoption, amendment or application of * * * [a] comprehensive plan provision" or a "land use regulation.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. K. W., 476 P.3d 107 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
Flight Shop, Inc. v. Leading Edge Aviation, Inc., 373 P.3d 177 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Necessarily, we begin with ORS 197.825, the statute that divides jurisdiction over land use matters between LUBA and the circuit courts.”
Owen v. City of Portland, 497 P.3d 1216 (Or. 2021).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(2) — 7 cases
Heritage Enter. v. City of Corvallis, 708 P.2d 601 (Or. 1985). “We agree with this assessment by the Court of Appeals: “* * * ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction to review all land use decisions by local governments, except as provided in ORS 197.”
Lyke v. Lane Cnty., 688 P.2d 411 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “LUBA found that it lacked jurisdiction, because petitioners had failed to exhaust all remedies available by right as required by ORS 197.825 (2) (a) before petitioning the Land Use Board for review.”
Heritage Enter. v. City of Corvallis, 693 P.2d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “” ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction to review all land use decisions by local governments, except as provided in ORS 197.”
Wright v. KECH-TV, 707 P.2d 1232 (Or. 1985).
Oregonians in Action v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 795 P.2d 1098 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(2)(a) — 16 cases
VanSpeybroeck v. Tillamook Cnty., 191 P.3d 712 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “030, as interpreted by the board, established the finality of the decision: “ORS 197.825(2)(a) limits the Board’s jurisdiction to ‘those cases in which the petitioner has exhausted all remedies available by right’ before appealing to LUBA.”
Lyke v. Lane Cnty., 688 P.2d 411 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “LUBA found that it lacked jurisdiction, because petitioners had failed to exhaust all remedies available by right as required by ORS 197.825 (2) (a) before petitioning the Land Use Board for review.”
Heritage Enter. v. City of Corvallis, 693 P.2d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “” ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction to review all land use decisions by local governments, except as provided in ORS 197.”
Tarjoto v. Lane Cnty., 904 P.2d 641 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
Nelson v. City of Lake Oswego, 869 P.2d 350 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(2)(c) — 3 cases
Friends of Oregon v. LCDC (Curry Co.), 724 P.2d 268 (Or. 1986).
1000 Friends v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 724 P.2d 268 (Or. 1986).
Citizens Against Irresponsible Growth v. Metro, 40 P.3d 556 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(2)(d) — 3 cases
GUNDERSON, LLC. v. City of Portland, 259 P.3d 1007 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
Oregonians in Action v. Land Conservation & Dev. Comm'n, 795 P.2d 1098 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
Kalmiopsis Audubon Soc'y v. Div. of State Lands, 676 P.2d 885 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(3) — 17 cases
Thomas v. Wasco Cnty., 392 P.3d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “ORS 197.825(1) (LUBA is vested with exclusive jurisdiction to review land use decision).”
Johnson v. Landwatch Lane Cnty., 327 Or. App. 485 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
Grabhorn, Inc. v. Washington Cnty., 297 P.3d 524 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “ORS 197.825 vests LUBA with exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision or limited land use decision of a local government, special district, or state agency as provided in ORS 197.”
Sauvie Island Agric. League v. GGS (Hawaii), Inc., 810 P.2d 856 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
Recovery House VI v. City of Eugene, 946 P.2d 342 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(3)(a) — 25 cases
Clackamas Cnty. v. Marson, 874 P.2d 110 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “Douglas County, supra, ORS 197.825 establishes a clean jurisdictional line between the land use decision and review process and the enforcement process.”
Flight Shop, Inc. v. Leading Edge Aviation, Inc., 373 P.3d 177 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Necessarily, we begin with ORS 197.825, the statute that divides jurisdiction over land use matters between LUBA and the circuit courts.”
State ex rel. Parmenter v. Wallowa Cnty. Court, 835 P.2d 152 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
Sauvie Island Agric. League v. GGS (Hawaii), Inc., 810 P.2d 856 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
State ex rel. Coastal Mgmt., Inc. v. Washington Cnty., 36 P.3d 993 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(3)(b) — 3 cases
Rogue Advocates v. Bd. of Commissioners, 372 P.3d 587 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
Rogue Advocates v. Bd. of Comm. of Jackson Cnty. (Or. 2017).
Rogue Advocates v. Bd. of Comm. of Jackson Cnty. (Or. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(4) — 4 cases
City of Oregon v. Mill-Maple Props., Inc., 779 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “1 ORS 197.825 provides, in relevant part: “(1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency in the manner provided in ORS 197.”
Wright v. KECH-TV, 707 P.2d 1232 (Or. 1985).
Dunn v. City of Redmond, 727 P.2d 145 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
Wright v. KECH-TV, 694 P.2d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(4)(a) — 3 cases
Doughton v. Douglas Cnty., 750 P.2d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “*52 ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction over local “land use decisions.”
Simon v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 755 P.2d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “ORS 197.825(1) provides, in part: "Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency * * *" ORS 215.”
City of Oregon v. Mill-Maple Props., Inc., 779 P.2d 172 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “1 ORS 197.825 provides, in relevant part: “(1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review any land use decision of a local government, special district or a state agency in the manner provided in ORS 197.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(4)(b) — 1 case
Doughton v. Douglas Cnty., 750 P.2d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “*52 ORS 197.825(1) gives LUBA jurisdiction over local “land use decisions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 197.825(l)(a) — 1 case
Tarjoto v. Lane Cnty., 904 P.2d 641 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
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.