Cascadia Wildlands v. Oregon Department of State Lands

(1) Under ORS 183.480(1), a person has standing when they are negatively affected by an order; ORS 183.480(1), provides that “a person is ‘aggrieved’ . . . if . . . (1) the person has suffered an injury to a substantial interest resulting directly from the challenged governmental action; (2) the person seeks to further an interest that the legislature expressly wished to have considered; or (3) the person has such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure concrete adverseness to the proceeding.” People for Ethical Treatment v. Inst. Animal Care, 312 Or 95, 101-02, 817 P2d 1299 (1991). (2) “[a]lthough [the State Land Board] constituted a part of the administrative department of the government under the constitution, it is nevertheless governed and controlled in the exercise of its functions by the legislature and the laws emanating therefrom.” Robertson v. Low, 44 Or 587, 594, 77 P 744 (1904).

Petitioners appealed the trial court’s judgment of dismissal for their petition for judicial review of the Oregon Department of State Lands’ (ODSL) decision to sell a parcel of land. Petitioners assigned error to the trial court’s conclusion that they lacked standing. On appeal, Petitioners argue that they have standing and that ODSL violated ORS 530.450. In response, ODSL argues that Petitioners lack standing and ORS 530.450 violates the Oregon Constitution. First, a person has standing when they are ‘adversely affected or aggrieved’ by an order and ORS 183.480(1), provides in part, “[A] person is ‘aggrieved’ . . . if . . . the person has suffered an injury to a substantial interest resulting directly from the challenged governmental action . . .” People for Ethical Treatment v. Inst. Animal Care, 312 Or 95, 101-02, 817 P2d 1299 (1991). Second, “[a]lthough [the State Land Board] constituted a part of the administrative department of the government under the constitution, it is nevertheless governed and controlled in the exercise of its functions by the legislature and the laws emanating therefrom.” Robertson v. Low, 44 Or 587, 594, 77 P 744 (1904). The Court held that the Petitioners have standing under ORS 183.480(1) and that ORS 530.450 merely direct the manner in which the State Land Board exercises its power to sell and does not give that power to the legislature. Thus, ODSL’s final order selling the parcel in question violated ORS 530.450. Reversed and Remanded.