Chapter 330

      330.003

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Tax base and territory of reorganized Education Service Districts, (1994) Vol 47, p 58

      330.090

NOTES OF DECISIONS

      Boundary board permissibly denied petitioners’ attempt to transfer school property from Polk County to Yamhill County where petitioners did not prove that change would have “no substantial adverse effect” as required by this section. Kumley v. Polk Co. District Boundary Board, 75 Or App 315, 706 P2d 562 (1985)

      When districts under jurisdiction of more than one boundary board are involved in boundary change, approval by board in which larger district lies is only preliminary action and change is not effective unless board in which smaller district lies concurs. Central School Dist. v. Marion Dist. Boundary Bd., 88 Or App 85, 744 P2d 284 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

      Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to review school district boundary change approved by appropriate boundary boards even if no remonstrance for election is filed under ORS 330.101. Butte Creek Sch. Dist. v. Clackamas Co. Dist. Boundary Bd., 88 Or App 89, 744 P2d 286 (1987)

      Where petition for boundary change did not contain 100 percent of contiguous property owners nor contain at least three signatures, petition did not comply with requirements of this section. Butte Creek School Dist. v. Clackamas Co., 91 Or App 300, 754 P2d 926 (1988)

      Where requirement of statute that person seeking boundary change must show that change will not adversely affect educational programs in “area affected,” area refers to area proposed for change, not all territory within affected districts. Rural Dell School Dist. v. Board of Education, 97 Or App 31, 775 P2d 852 (1989)

      State Board of Education on appeal from district boundary board has de novo authority and may conduct new hearing before hearings officer. Rural Dell School Dist. v. Board of Education, 97 Or App 31, 775 P2d 852 (1989)

      330.095

NOTES OF DECISIONS

      When districts under jurisdiction of more than one boundary board are involved in boundary change, approval by board in which larger district lies is only preliminary action and change is not effective unless board in which smaller district lies concurs. Central School Dist. v. Marion Dist. Boundary Bd., 88 Or App 85, 744 P2d 284 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

      330.101

NOTES OF DECISIONS

      When districts under jurisdiction of more than one boundary board are involved in boundary change, approval by board in which larger district lies is only preliminary action and change is not effective unless board in which smaller district lies concurs. Central School Dist. v. Marion Dist. Boundary Bd., 88 Or App 85, 744 P2d 284 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

      Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to review school district boundary change approved by appropriate boundary boards even if no remonstrance for election is filed under this section. Butte Creek Sch. Dist. v. Clackamas Co. Dist. Boundary Bd., 88 Or App 89, 744 P2d 286 (1987)

      Where petition for boundary change did not contain 100 percent of contiguous property owners nor contain at least three signatures, petition did not comply with requirements of this section. Butte Creek School Dist. v. Clackamas Co., 91 Or App 300, 754 P2d 926 (1988)

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Second election for school district boundary change, (1973) Vol 36, p 626