Procedure for minor boundary changes or transfers of territory
Source:
Section 199.490 — Procedure for minor boundary changes or transfers of territory, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors199.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Where boundary commission issued annexation order after Court of Appeals decision holding statewide planning goals inapplicable to annexation proceedings and before Supreme Court decision requiring boundary commissions to make findings addressing applicable statewide planning goals, LCDC followed lawful procedure when it reviewed record to determine whether boundary commission adequately considered substance of planning goals. Rivergate Residents Assn. v. LCDC, 38 Or App 149, 590 P2d 1233 (1979), Sup Ct review denied
So-called “triple majority” annexation no longer depended for validity on constitutionality of ORS 199.495 (1) as it related to annexations initiated pursuant to this section where territory in dispute was annexed by other means, legislative command by subsequent legislation. Mid-County Future Alt. v. Metro Area LGBC, 304 Or 89, 742 P2d 47 (1987)
Contiguity is not required for annexations of land within boundary commission jurisdictions. Donaldson v. Lane County Local Govt. Bdry. Comm., 99 Or App 430, 782 P2d 449 (1989)
Double majority annexation procedure of this section does not violate Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution. Mid-County Future v. Port. Metro. Area LGBC, 106 Or App 647, 809 P2d 1354 (1991), Sup Ct review denied
Double majority method of annexation is subject to same constitutional standards regarding voting rights as conventional election. Hussey v. City of Portland, 64 F3d 1260 (9th Cir. 1995)
Resolution that initiates annexation does not need to identify whether city calculated consent pursuant to triple majority requirement or double majority requirement. Citizens Against Annexation v. Lane County LGBC, 233 Or App 587, 226 P3d 711 (2010)
Attorney General Opinions
Withdrawal of territory from a district, (1975) Vol 37, p 737