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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 222.115 (2026)

Annexation contracts; recording; effect

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      222.115 Annexation contracts; recording; effect. A contract between a city and a landowner containing the landowner’s consent to eventual annexation of the landowner’s property in return for extraterritorial services:

      (1) Must be recorded; and

      (2) When recorded, is binding on successors in interest in that property. [1991 c.637 §4; 2012 c.46 §§1,2]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1994–2000 · leading case: Johnson v. City of La Grande, 1 P.3d 1036 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Johnson v. City of La Grande, 1 P.3d 1036 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 17× “The first, ORS 222.115, provides: “A contract between a city and a landowner relating to extraterritorial provision of service and consent to eventual annexation of property of the landowner shall be recorded *38 and, when recorded, shall be binding on all successors with an…”
Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Auth. v. City of Medford, 880 P.2d 486 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 12× “It contended, as it does here, that ORS 222.115, which relates to property owners’ consents to city annexations in exchange for receiving city services in unincorporated areas, does not authorize cities to require such consents as consideration for services provided by other…”
Crist v. City of Beaverton, 922 P.2d 1253 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “See ORS 222.115. Whether the city’s obligation to provide services was contingent on the PUD approval only or on both that and annexation does not affect the jurisdictional analysis.”
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.