Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 759.570 (2026)

Application of law to local government

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

759.570 Application of law to local government. (1) ORS 759.500 to 759.570 may not be construed or applied to restrict the powers granted to cities to issue franchises or to restrict the exercise of the power of condemnation by a municipality. If a municipality condemns or otherwise acquires equipment, plant or facilities from another person for rendering local exchange telecommunications service, the municipality acquires all of the rights of the person whose property is condemned to serve the territory served by the acquired properties.

(2) ORS 759.500 to 759.570 may not be construed to restrict the right of a municipality to provide local exchange telecommunications service for street lights, fire alarm systems, airports, buildings and other municipal installations regardless of their location.

(3) ORS 759.500 to 759.570 may not be construed to confer upon the Public Utility Commission any regulatory authority over rates, service or financing of cooperatives or municipalities. [1987 c.447 §67; 2005 c.232 §31]

759.575 [1987 c.447 §68; repealed by 1993 c.204 §5]

(Unserved Territory)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1999–2002 · leading case: Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1231 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1231 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “500 to ORS 759.570, to which the PUC referred in its order adopting the proposed rules, are preempted by the Telecommunications Act, and that, consequently, OAR 860-032-0010(4) and (5) are invalid.”

At&T Commc'ns of Pac. Nw., Inc. v. City of Eugene, 35 P.3d 1029 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “ORS 759.570, for example, provides that the state regulation of telecommunications services through the allocation of service territories “shall not be construed or applied to restrict the powers granted to cities to issue franchises” to providers of telecommunications services,…”

Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1240 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “4 **4 Finally, Beaver Creek argues that the PUC’s determination that the certification requirements of ORS 759.020 apply to cooperatives is precluded by federal preemption under Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.”

Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 986 P.2d 592 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). “500 to ORS 759.570 (authorizing PUC to allocate cooperatives’ territory and customers).”

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.