222.127
Annexation without election notwithstanding contrary city law upon petition of
all owners of land; declaration of annexation. (1) This section applies to a city
whose laws require a petition proposing annexation of territory to be submitted
to the electors of the city.
(2)
Notwithstanding a contrary provision of the city charter or a city ordinance,
upon receipt of a petition proposing annexation of territory submitted by all
owners of land in the territory, the legislative body of the city shall annex
the territory without submitting the proposal to the electors of the city if:
(a) The territory
is included within an urban growth boundary adopted by the city or Metro, as
defined in ORS 197.015;
(b) The territory
is, or upon annexation of the territory into the city will be, subject to the
acknowledged comprehensive plan of the city;
(c) At least one
lot or parcel within the territory is contiguous to the city limits or is
separated from the city limits only by a public right of way or a body of
water; and
(d) The proposal
conforms to all other requirements of the city’s ordinances.
(3) The territory
to be annexed under this section includes any additional territory described in
ORS 222.111 (1) that must be annexed in order to locate infrastructure and
right of way access for services necessary for development of the territory
described in subsection (2) of this section at a density equal to the average
residential density within the annexing city.
(4) When the
legislative body of the city determines that the criteria described in
subsection (2) of this section apply to territory proposed for annexation, the
legislative body may declare that the territory described in subsections (2)
and (3) of this section is annexed to the city by an ordinance that contains a
description of the territory annexed. [2016 c.51 §2]
Notes of Decisions
City of Corvallis v. State of Oregon, 464 P.3d 1127 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 39× “127 provides that, if certain conditions are met, the legislative body of a city “shall annex” certain territory within its urban growth boundary, “without submitting the proposal to the electors of the city.” Plaintiffs contend that the statute impermissibly interferes with the…”
State ex rel Select Reform Com. v. City of Jefferson, 474 P.3d 399 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 30× “On the merits, the city also argues that the trial court did not err in granting the motion because the city did not act legislatively when it annexed the property as required by ORS 222.127. Held: The trial court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 222.127(2): 2 cases
City of Corvallis v. State of Oregon, 464 P.3d 1127 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“127 provides that, if certain conditions are met, the legislative body of a city “shall annex” certain territory within its urban growth boundary, “without submitting the proposal to the electors of the city.” Plaintiffs contend that the statute impermissibly interferes with the…”
State ex rel Select Reform Com. v. City of Jefferson, 474 P.3d 399 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“On the merits, the city also argues that the trial court did not err in granting the motion because the city did not act legislatively when it annexed the property as required by ORS 222.127. Held: The trial court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 222.127(2)(a): 1 case
City of Corvallis v. State of Oregon, 464 P.3d 1127 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“127 provides that, if certain conditions are met, the legislative body of a city “shall annex” certain territory within its urban growth boundary, “without submitting the proposal to the electors of the city.” Plaintiffs contend that the statute impermissibly interferes with the…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 222.127(2)(c): 1 case
City of Corvallis v. State of Oregon, 464 P.3d 1127 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“127 provides that, if certain conditions are met, the legislative body of a city “shall annex” certain territory within its urban growth boundary, “without submitting the proposal to the electors of the city.” Plaintiffs contend that the statute impermissibly interferes with the…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 222.127(2)(d): 2 cases
City of Corvallis v. State of Oregon, 464 P.3d 1127 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“127 provides that, if certain conditions are met, the legislative body of a city “shall annex” certain territory within its urban growth boundary, “without submitting the proposal to the electors of the city.” Plaintiffs contend that the statute impermissibly interferes with the…”
State ex rel Select Reform Com. v. City of Jefferson, 474 P.3d 399 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“On the merits, the city also argues that the trial court did not err in granting the motion because the city did not act legislatively when it annexed the property as required by ORS 222.127. Held: The trial court did not err in granting the motion to dismiss.”
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.