Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 199.461 (2026)

Study of proposed boundary change or other action; hearing; action by commission; judicial review; notice to public officials

✓ current as of May 2026

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

199.461 Study of proposed boundary change or other action; hearing; action by commission; judicial review; notice to public officials. (1) When the boundary commission receives a petition in a boundary change proceeding or an application for any proceeding allowed under ORS 199.464, it shall:

(a) Cause a study to be made of the proposal.

(b) Conduct one or more public hearings on the proposal.

(2) After the study and hearings, the boundary commission may alter the boundaries set out in a petition for formation or a minor boundary change of a city or district or in a petition for consolidation of cities so as either to include or exclude territory. If the commission determines that any land has been improperly omitted from the proposal and that the owner of the land has not appeared at the hearing, in person or by a representative designated in writing, the commission shall continue the hearing on the petition and shall order notice given to the nonappearing owner requiring appearance of the owner before the commission to show cause, if any, why the land should not be included in the proposal. For minor boundary change modifications, notice to nonappearing owners may be given by personal service or by letter sent by first-class mail, at least 10 days prior to the date to which the hearing has been continued. For major boundary change modifications, notice to nonappearing owners may be given by personal service, by letter sent by first-class mail or by a legal advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in the area at least 15 days prior to the date to which the hearing has been continued. The required notice may be waived by the nonappearing owner.

(3) After the study and hearings the boundary commission may alter the application for extraterritorial sewer or water line extensions to include or exclude line and connections thereto, and may alter the application for formation of a privately owned sewer or water system or allocation of territory to a community water supply system to include or exclude territory. If the commission determines that any land has been improperly omitted from a proposal to form a private water or sewer system or allocate territory to a community water system, or that any line or connections have been improperly omitted from a proposal to extend extraterritorially a water or sewer line, and that the owner of the property to be included or to which the line is being extended has not appeared at the hearing, in person or by a representative designated in writing, the commission shall continue the hearing on the proposal and shall order notice given to the nonappearing owner requiring appearance of the owner before the commission to show cause, if any, why the land or line or connection should not be included in the proposal. Notice to nonappearing owners may be given by personal service or by letter sent by first-class mail, at least 10 days prior to the date to which the hearing has been continued. The required notice may be waived by the nonappearing owner.

(4) On the basis of the study and on the basis of the facts presented at the hearing, the boundary commission shall approve the proposed boundary change or application under ORS 199.464 as presented or as modified by the commission or disapprove the proposed change, by an order stating the reasons for the decision of the commission. Jurisdiction for judicial review of such an order is conferred upon the Court of Appeals. Except as provided in ORS 183.315 (1), any person interested in a boundary change may petition for judicial review of the order under ORS 183.482.

(5) Immediately after the effective date of a final order entered under subsection (4) of this section and a proclamation declaring a minor boundary change approved if any is entered under ORS 199.505 (3), the commission shall file a copy of the order and proclamation, if any, with the Secretary of State, the Department of Revenue, the assessor and the county clerk of each county in which the affected territory, city or district is located, and the clerk of the affected city or district. If the commission disapproves a minor boundary change, it shall send a copy of the final order to the person who actually filed the petition and to the affected city or district.

(6) Immediately after the effective date of a final order on an application under ORS 199.464, the commission shall file a copy of the order with the applicant, the Oregon Health Authority, the Department of Environmental Quality and the county planning department. [Formerly 199.475; 1979 c.772 §16; 1981 c.265 §9; 1983 c.336 §6; 1989 c.92 §16; 2009 c.595 §176]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases, 1974–2010 · leading case: McGowan v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 795 P.2d 560 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McGowan v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 795 P.2d 560 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 9× “1 The statute specifically makes the public hearing and related procedural requirements of ORS 199.461 to ORS 199.463 inapplicable. No notice is required by ORS 199.”

Donaldson v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 761 P.2d 1349 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 6× “ORS 199.461(4) provides, in part: “Except as provided in ORS 183.”

League of Women Voters of Cent. Lane Cnty. v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 573 P.2d 1255 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 5× “” Petitioners answer this contention by pointing to the language of ORS 199.461(3), which specifically provides: "* * * Any person interested in a boundary change may, within 30 days after the date of a final order, appeal the order for review under ORS 34.”

Consol. Metco, Inc. v. City of Portland, 681 P.2d 1184 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “1 There have been subsequent amendments to ORS 199.461: Or Laws 1981, ch 265, § 9, Or Laws 1983, ch 336, § 6 and ORS 183.”

Fosses v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 603 P.2d 1235 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 4× “The petitioner does not allege that the commission failed to follow the statutory procedures specifically set forth for commission hearings in ORS 199.461 through 199.463, nor does he allege that the commission failed to follow its own rules of procedure.”

Tidewater Barge Lines, Inc. v. Oregon Env't Quality Comm'n, 974 P.2d 807 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “040, as amended in 1973, one of the statutes governing writs of review, provided that the writ was available to challenge decisions of inferior bodies “other than an agency as defined” in the APA.”

Mid-Cnty. Future Alternatives Comm. v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 728 P.2d 63 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 3× “ORS 199.461; ORS 199.463. Any interested person may seek judicial review of the commission’s order.”

Rivergate Residents Ass'n v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 689 P.2d 326 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “” 7 Petitioner’s argument that the Commission violated ORS 199.461(2) is not clear. While that statute requires that if the Commission finds that property has been improperly omitted from a proposal, it shall modify the proposal to include it, petitioner has contended throughout…”

Brooks v. Smith, 556 P.2d 696 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 9× “In October 1973 the Boundary Commission posted and published notices of a public hearing on the proposed annexation of the Smith property pursuant to ORS 199.461 and 199.463. On November 14, 1973, a hearing was held, at which plaintiff Burton M.”

Marion Cnty. Fire Dist. 1 v. Marion-Polk Cnty. Boundary Comm'n, 526 P.2d 1031 (Or. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “425 (2) as a state agency; its seven members are appointed by the Governor. Authority and procedure for the Commission are provided in ORS 199.”

Pioneer Trust Bank, N.A. v. Mental Health Div., 742 P.2d 51 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “480 prevailed over the earlier enacted ORS 199.461(3), which provided for review by writ of review.”

Redland Water Dist. v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 665 P.2d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “Such a proceeding may be initiated by petition, see ORS 199.461 and 199.476, or, as was done in this case, by a boundary commission’s adoption of a resolution proposing the change.”

Show all 23 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 199.461(1) — 1 case

Peterson v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 535 P.2d 577 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 199.461(2) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 199.461(3) — 9 cases

League of Women Voters of Cent. Lane Cnty. v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 573 P.2d 1255 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “” Petitioners answer this contention by pointing to the language of ORS 199.461(3), which specifically provides: "* * * Any person interested in a boundary change may, within 30 days after the date of a final order, appeal the order for review under ORS 34.”

Consol. Metco, Inc. v. City of Portland, 681 P.2d 1184 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “1 There have been subsequent amendments to ORS 199.461: Or Laws 1981, ch 265, § 9, Or Laws 1983, ch 336, § 6 and ORS 183.”

Tidewater Barge Lines, Inc. v. Oregon Env't Quality Comm'n, 974 P.2d 807 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). “040, as amended in 1973, one of the statutes governing writs of review, provided that the writ was available to challenge decisions of inferior bodies “other than an agency as defined” in the APA.”

Brooks v. Smith, 556 P.2d 696 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “In October 1973 the Boundary Commission posted and published notices of a public hearing on the proposed annexation of the Smith property pursuant to ORS 199.461 and 199.463. On November 14, 1973, a hearing was held, at which plaintiff Burton M.”

Pioneer Trust Bank, N.A. v. Mental Health Div., 742 P.2d 51 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “480 prevailed over the earlier enacted ORS 199.461(3), which provided for review by writ of review.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 199.461(4) — 11 cases

Donaldson v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 761 P.2d 1349 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “ORS 199.461(4) provides, in part: “Except as provided in ORS 183.”

McGowan v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 795 P.2d 560 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “1 The statute specifically makes the public hearing and related procedural requirements of ORS 199.461 to ORS 199.463 inapplicable. No notice is required by ORS 199.”

Mid-Cnty. Future Alternatives Comm. v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 728 P.2d 63 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “ORS 199.461; ORS 199.463. Any interested person may seek judicial review of the commission’s order.”

Donaldson v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 795 P.2d 549 (Or. 1990).

Mid-Cnty. Future Alternatives Comm. v. Portland Metro. Area Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 809 P.2d 1354 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 199.461(5) — 4 cases

Donaldson v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 761 P.2d 1349 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “ORS 199.461(4) provides, in part: “Except as provided in ORS 183.”

Bellinger v. Lane Cnty. Local Gov't Boundary Comm'n, 915 P.2d 430 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).

Mcgowan v. Lane Cty. L. Gov. Bdry. Com'n, 795 P.2d 560 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

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.