Legal Opinion

1000 Friends v. Land Conservation & Development Commission

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 26, 1992No. 91-CERT-714, 91-CERT-713; CA A68782, A68783Published

1Opinion of the CourtButtler, P. J.

In this consolidated review, petitioner seeks reversal of LCDC’s certification under ORS 197.1801 of the Department of Forestry’s (DOF) and Department of Transportation’s (DOT) state agency coordination programs.

Petitioner’s first assignment is that LCDC erred in concluding that certain programs that DOF administers and that confer preferential ad valorem tax treatment2 on forest lands are not programs affecting land use and, therefore, are not subject to ORS 197.180(1). For the reasons we stated in Springer v. LCDC, 111 Or App 262, 826 P2d 54 (1992), we agree with LCDC.

Petitioner also argues…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Foland v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Springer v. Land Conservation & Development CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  3. Oregonians in Action v. Land Conservation & Development CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API