215.060
Procedure for action on plan; notice; hearing. Action by the governing body of a
county regarding the plan shall have no legal effect unless the governing body
first conducts one or more public hearings on the plan and unless 10 days’
advance public notice of each of the hearings is published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the county or, in case the plan as it is to be heard
concerns only part of the county, is so published in the territory so concerned
and unless a majority of the members of the governing body approves the action.
The notice provisions of this section shall not restrict the giving of notice
by other means, including mail, radio and television. [Amended by 1963 c.619 §5;
1967 c.589 §1; 1973 c.552 §6]
215.070 [Repealed by 1963 c.619 §16]
Notes of Decisions
Fifth Avenue Corp. v. Washington Cnty., Etc., 581 P.2d 50 (Or. 1978).
· cites it 7× “Constitution; Art I, §§ 1, 10, 18, 20 and 33 of the Oregon Constitution; and ORS 215.060. 2 Secondly, plaintiff cited the failure of the Board to request a Planning Commission report on the 1973 Plan before adoption, in violation of ORS 215.”
City of Mosier v. Hood River Sand, Gravel & Ready-Mix, Inc., 136 P.3d 1160 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“050; and that set out various requirements for the county planning commission, ORS 215.060 to 215.110. A parallel chapter, ORS chapter 227, comprises the land use planning laws that apply to cities.”
Warren v. Lane Cnty., 686 P.2d 316 (Or. 1984).
“12 Petitioners contend that as residents of the Lane County Coastal Subarea, they were entitled to the public notice required by ORS 215.060, which provides: “Action by the governing body of a county regarding the plan shall have no legal effect unless the governing body first…”
Colwell v. Washington Cnty., 718 P.2d 747 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “050 and ORS 215.060 require county commission action to effectuate any change in the comprehensive plan.”
Warren v. Lane Cnty., 672 P.2d 1213 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 3× “If we do not so hold, then no one, apparently, would have standing even to challenge the defective notice under ORS 215.060, even though the failure to comply with that statutory requirement renders the action of the local body of no effect.”
Apalategui v. Washington Cnty., 723 P.2d 1021 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“ORS 215.060 and ORS 215.223 require ten days public notice before each board hearing on a comprehensive plan or a zoning ordinance.”
Follmer v. Cnty. of Lane, 480 P.2d 722 (Or. Ct. App. 1971).
· cites it 2× “The trial court held this action was invalid because of failure to give public notice as required by ORS 215.060. Defendants cross-appeal this decision.”
Warren v. Lane Cnty., 662 P.2d 755 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
“2 It appears from the record that the county attempted or purported to comply with the notice procedure of ORS 215.060. Petitioners alleged in their petition to LUBA, but do not detail here, how the county’s notice fell short of what petitioners consider the statute and the…”
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.