Administrative Procedures Act

ORS 183.690
Office of Administrative Hearings Oversight Committee


The Office of Administrative Hearings Oversight Committee is created. The committee consists of nine members, as follows:


The President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall appoint four legislators to the committee. Two shall be Senators appointed by the President. Two shall be Representatives appointed by the Speaker.


The Governor shall appoint two members to the committee. At least one of the members appointed by the Governor shall be an active member of the Oregon State Bar with experience in representing parties who are not agencies in contested case hearings.


The Attorney General shall appoint two members to the committee.


The chief administrative law judge for the Office of Administrative Hearings shall serve as an ex officio member of the committee. The chief administrative law judge may cast a vote on a matter before the committee if the votes of the other members are equally divided on the matter.


The term of a legislative member of the committee shall be two years. If a person appointed by the President of the Senate or by the Speaker of the House ceases to be a Senator or Representative during the person’s term on the committee, the person may continue to serve as a member of the committee for the balance of the member’s term on the committee. The term of all other appointed members shall be four years. Appointed members of the committee may be reappointed. If a vacancy occurs in one of the appointed positions for any reason during the term of membership, the official who appointed the member to the vacated position shall appoint a new member to serve the remainder of the term. An appointed member of the committee may be removed from the committee at any time by the official who appointed the member.


(a) The members of the committee shall select from among themselves a chairperson and a vice chairperson.


The committee shall meet at such times and places as determined by the chairperson.


Legislative members shall be entitled to payment of per diem and expense reimbursement under ORS 171.072 (Salary of members and presiding officers), payable from funds appropriated to the Legislative Assembly.


The committee shall:


Study the operations of the Office of Administrative Hearings;


Make any recommendations to the Governor and the Legislative Assembly that the committee deems necessary to increase the effectiveness, fairness and efficiency of the operations of the Office of Administrative Hearings;


Make any recommendations for additional legislation governing the operations of the Office of Administrative Hearings; and


Conduct such other studies as necessary to accomplish the purposes of this subsection.


The Employment Department shall provide the committee with staff, subject to availability of funding for that purpose. [1999 c.849 §21; 2003 c.75 §19; 2005 c.22 §132; 2009 c.866 §3]
Chapter 183

Notes of Decisions

A legislative delegation of power in terms as broad as those used in [former] ORS 471.295 (1) places upon the administrative agency a responsibility to establish standards by which the law is to be applied. Sun Ray Drive-in Dairy, Inc. v. Ore. Liquor Control Comm., 16 Or App 63, 517 P2d 289 (1973)

Administrative regulation providing that failure to perform responsibilities adequately was a ground for employee's dismissal. Palen v. State Bd. of Higher Educ., 18 Or App 442, 525 P2d 1047 (1974), Sup Ct review denied

Where it was determined that agency invalidly terminated substantive policy, trial court did not have authority to order agency to resume policy in absence of validly adopted agency rule. Burke v. Children's Services Division, 39 Or App 819, 593 P2d 1262 (1979), aff'd 288 Or 533, 607 P2d 141 (1980)

"Trending factors" published by the Department of Revenue and used to appraise property for purposes of property taxation are not "rules" within the meaning of this chapter. Borden Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 286 Or 567, 595 P2d 1372 (1979)

Appellate court may review proceeding meeting definition of contested case whether or not proceeding was formal administrative hearing. Patton v. State Bd. of Higher Ed., 293 Or 363, 647 P2d 931 (1982)

Circuit court could not entertain action for declaratory judgment directed at PERS, because PERS is subject to APA, which provides exclusive method for review of its actions. FOPPO v. County of Marion, 93 Or App 93, 760 P2d 1353 (1988), Sup Ct review denied

Board of Education approval of textbook for use in state public schools was not "rule," but was "order in other than contested case," and jurisdiction for judicial review is in circuit court. Oregon Env. Council v. Oregon State Bd. of Ed., 307 Or 30, 761 P2d 1322 (1988)

Preponderance of evidence standard applies where initial license application is denied based on willful fraud. Sobel v. Board of Pharmacy, 130 Or App 374, 882 P2d 606 (1994), Sup Ct review denied

Completed Citations

Wright v. Bateson, 5 Or App 628, 485 P2d 641 (1971), Sup Ct review denied, cert. denied, 405 US 930 (1972)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

State Speed Control Board subject to Administrative Procedures Act, (1974) Vol 36, p 1024; proxy voting at board meeting, (1974) Vol 36, p 1064; student conduct proceedings as "contested cases," (1976) Vol 37, p 1461; rulemaking authority of Statewide Health Coordinating Council and of Certificate of Need Appeals Board, (1977) Vol 38, p 1229; Oregon Medical Insurance Pool is fundamentally private-sector body, under virtually total private control, created by state to fulfill public purpose and is not state agency or public body subject to Administrative Procedures Act (APA), (1989) Vol 46, p 155

Law Review Citations

51 OLR 245 (1971); 53 OLR 364, 365 (1974); 10 WLJ 373, 420 (1974); 13 WLJ 499, 517, 525, 537 (1977); 57 OLR 334 (1978); 22 WLR 355 (1986); 36 WLR 219 (2000)


Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021