Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 223.005 (2026)

Appropriation and condemnation for public use within and without city limits

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

      223.005 Appropriation and condemnation for public use within and without city limits. Any incorporated city may:

      (1) Appropriate any private real property, water, watercourse and riparian rights to any public or municipal use or for the general benefit and use of the people of the city, including but not limited to appropriation for an aviation field, park, city hall, city buildings, jail, or to protect the city from overflow by freshets.

      (2) Appropriate any real property, water, watercourse and water and riparian rights, including power sites, to any public or municipal use or for the general benefit and use of the people within or without the city, and to build dams, reservoirs and conduits for the purpose of storing and using water to aid in developing the necessary power to generate electricity for the use and benefit of the people within or without the city.

      (3) Condemn for its use private property for the purpose of erecting and maintaining electric lines thereon for the purpose of generating and conveying power to light and heat the city, and to be used and sold by the city for manufacturing, transportation, domestic and other purposes, either within or without the corporate limits of the city, and for the purpose of constructing electrical systems for municipal uses. [Amended by 1971 c.134 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1984–2006 · leading case: Pacificorp v. City of Ashland, 744 P.2d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
Pacificorp v. City of Ashland, 744 P.2d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “” ORS 223.005 provides: “Any incorporated city may: “(1) Appropriate any private real property, water, watercourse and riparian rights to any public or municipal use or for the general benefit and use of the people of the city, including but not limited to appropriation for an…”
City of Lake Oswego v. Babson, 776 P.2d 870 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “ORS 223.005(1). ORS 223.010 specifically authorizes a city to enter upon, survey, examine and select any property for the purpose of constructing or maintaining a *411 drainage system.”
Time Warner Telecom of Oregon, LLC v. City of Portland, 452 F. Supp. 2d 1103 (D. Or. 2006). · cites it 2× “” Or.Rev.Stat. § 223.005(2). CONCLUSION Qwest’s motion for summary judgment (# 169) is denied.”
Richard L. Martin, Inc. v. City of Lake Oswego, 684 P.2d 28 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “Asa practical matter, such cases are controlled by ORS 223.005 to ORS 223.105, ORS ch. 281 and ORS ch.”
Time Warner Telecom of Oregon, LLC v. City of Portland, 452 F. Supp. 2d 1084 (D. Or. 2006). · cites it 2× “” Or.Rev.Stat. § 223.005(2). I conclude that the City is entitled to the protection of § 253(b).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 223.005(1) — 1 case
City of Lake Oswego v. Babson, 776 P.2d 870 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “ORS 223.005(1). ORS 223.010 specifically authorizes a city to enter upon, survey, examine and select any property for the purpose of constructing or maintaining a *411 drainage system.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 223.005(2) — 2 cases
Time Warner Telecom of Oregon, LLC v. City of Portland, 452 F. Supp. 2d 1103 (D. Or. 2006). “” Or.Rev.Stat. § 223.005(2). CONCLUSION Qwest’s motion for summary judgment (# 169) is denied.”
Time Warner Telecom of Oregon, LLC v. City of Portland, 452 F. Supp. 2d 1084 (D. Or. 2006). “” Or.Rev.Stat. § 223.005(2). I conclude that the City is entitled to the protection of § 253(b).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 223.005(3) — 1 case
Pacificorp v. City of Ashland, 744 P.2d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “” ORS 223.005 provides: “Any incorporated city may: “(1) Appropriate any private real property, water, watercourse and riparian rights to any public or municipal use or for the general benefit and use of the people of the city, including but not limited to appropriation for an…”
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.