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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 222.524 (2026)

Procedure for withdrawal of part of district from district

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      222.524 Procedure for withdrawal of part of district from district. (1) If as authorized by ORS 222.520 the governing body of the city elects to cause the withdrawal from a district named in ORS 222.510 of that part of such district theretofore incorporated in or annexed to the city, it shall hold a public hearing on the question of such withdrawal. At the hearing, the governing body of the city shall hear objections to the withdrawal and shall determine whether such withdrawal is for the best interest of the city.

      (2) The governing body shall fix a date, time and place for the hearing and cause notice of the date, time, place and purpose of the hearing to be published once each week for two successive weeks prior to the date of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and shall cause notices of the hearing to be posted in four public places in the city for a like period.

      (3) After the hearing, the governing body of the city may by ordinance declare that the part of the district which was theretofore incorporated as or annexed to the city is withdrawn from the district.

      (4) The ordinance referred to in subsection (3) of this section is subject to referendum.

      (5) The city may withdraw from all of such districts at the same time in one proceeding under this section or may withdraw from each district in separate proceedings at different times.

      (6) The public hearing and ordinance referred to in this section may be the same as the public hearing and ordinance in ORS 222.120. [1957 c.401 §3; 1963 c.347 §3; 1965 c.509 §3; 1985 c.702 §14]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: Khosroabadi v. North Clackamas Parks & Rec. Dist., 347 Or. App. 465 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Khosroabadi v. North Clackamas Parks & Rec. Dist., 347 Or. App. 465 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 12× “The city’s petition asserted that the intergovernmen- tal agreement that it entered into with the district provided for a unilateral right to withdraw pursuant to ORS 222.524, through a city council vote.”
Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego, 493 P.2d 163 (Or. Ct. App. 1972). “See ORS 222.524 and 222.111. Our decision in this appeal renders unnecessary a determination whether the City, by! approving ■ the proposed PUD plan, intended .”
Khosroabadi v. North Clackamas Parks & Rec. Dist., 347 Or. App. 465 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 12× “The city’s petition asserted that the intergovernmen- tal agreement that it entered into with the district provided for a unilateral right to withdraw pursuant to ORS 222.524, through a city council vote.”
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.