Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 198.855

Annexation election; annexation without election when petition signed by all landowners or by majority of electors and owners of more than half of land

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

      198.855 Annexation election; annexation without election when petition signed by all landowners or by majority of electors and owners of more than half of land. (1) If the annexation petition is not signed by all the owners of all the lands in the territory proposed to be annexed or is not signed by a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be annexed and by the owners of more than half of the land in the territory and an election is ordered on the proposed annexation as provided by ORS 198.815, the county board shall order an election to be held in the territory and the county board also shall order the board of the affected district to hold an election on the same day, both elections to be held for the purpose of submitting the proposed annexation to the electors. The district board shall certify the results of the election to the county board. The order of annexation shall not be entered by the county board unless a majority of the votes in the territory and a majority of the votes in the district are in favor of the annexation. If a majority of the votes cast in both elections do not favor annexation, the county board by order shall so declare.

      (2) Two or more proposals for annexation of territory may be voted upon at the same time. However, within the district each proposal shall be stated separately on the ballot and voted on separately and, in the territory proposed to be annexed, no proposal for annexing other territory shall appear on the ballot.

      (3) If the annexation petition is signed by all of the owners of all land in the territory proposed to be annexed or is signed by a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be annexed and by the owners of more than half of the land in the territory, an election in the territory and district shall be dispensed with. After the hearing on the petition, if the county board approves the petition as presented or as modified or, if an election is held, if the electors approve the annexation, the county board shall enter an order describing the boundaries of the territory annexed and declaring it annexed to the district. [1971 c.727 §35; 1987 c.818 §5]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1988–2000 · leading case: Mid-County Future Alternatives Committee v. City of Portland
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mid-County Future Alternatives Committee v. City of Portland (1990) or · cites it 2× “534 reads: “Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter or ORS chapter 222, territory annexed or transferred to a city or district by a minor boundary change approved by a boundary commission’s final order adopted after January 1, 1985, but before July 18,1987, shall be…”
Johnson v. City of La Grande (2000) orctapp · cites it 3× “115 in formulating annexation proposals or petitions under ORS 198.855, 199.490(2), 222.125 or 222.170 for properties whose owners have signed such consents to annexation.”
Donaldson v. Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission (1988) orctapp “534, which provides: “Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter or ORS chapter 222, territory annexed or transferred to a city or district by a minor boundary change approved by a boundary commission’s final order adopted after January 1, 1985, but before July 18,1987,…”
Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority v. City of Medford (1994) orctapp “175 or any other requirement for obtaining consent to annexation, a city or district may use a consent to annexation contained in contracts authorized by section 2 or 4 oí this 1991 Act in formulating annexation proposals or petitions under ORS 198.855, 199.490(2), .222.125 or…”
Mid-County Future Alternatives Committee v. City of Portland (1989) orctapp “However, the codified version erroneously substituted the words “by operation of ORS 198.855, 199.490, 199.531, 199.534,222.”
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.