A freelance news gathering service

Providing an interactive investigative news site designed to inform & elicit communication focusing on matters impacting Crooked River Ranch matters & beyond

Part of an award winning journalism team

LANDWATCH v. JEFFERSON COUNTY

1/29/23, 12:08 PM

UPDATE:

CENTRAL OREGON LANDWATCH v. JEFFERSON COUNTY

As reported earlier, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners held two public hearings regarding the MacPherson’s family re-zoning application before rendering their decision.

On December 7, 2022, the Commissioners met at the Crooked River Ranch (CRR) Chapel and gave everyone that wanted to speak an opportunity to voice their opinions, concerns and ask questions. Someone asked the Commissioners what they thought things would look like a year later. Chair/Commissioner Fording suggested an “APPEAL.”

At the Commissioner’s second meeting held on December 14, 2022, they approved the MacPherson’s re-zoning application and made it official by signing the decision December 28, 2022.

.

LATEST

.

“Central Oregon LandWatch v. Jefferson County, LUBA No________ Notice of Intent to Appeal”

On January 17, 2023, LandWatch filed their Notice of Intent to Appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) in Salem, Oregon.

Letter Attached

 

Ranch Matters reached out to Jefferson County Community Director Scott Edelman for his take-explanation regarding LandWatch’s Appeal Notice and the County’s response. He provided the following statement:

“It appears that Central Oregon LandWatch filed their Notice of Intent to Appeal within the 21- day appeal period for the County’s final decision on December 28. Here is the process with the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA):

1. Within 21 days after the Notice of Intent is filed with LUBA, the county has to file the complete record of the decision with LUBA.

2. Within 14 days after receiving the complete record, any party can object to the contents of the record.

3. Unless an objection is filed, within 21 days after receiving the record, the petitioner (LandWatch) must file a ‘Petition for Review’ (Petitioner’s brief). This sets forth the reasons for the appeal.

4. Within 42 days after LUBA receives the complete record, the responded (the county or, in this case, the applicants attorney), submits a Respondent’s Brief.

5. Once all of these steps are complete, LUBA will hold a hearing in which all parties can present oral arguments-this is generally scheduled to take place about two weeks after the Respondent’s Brief is due.

6. LUBA issues a written decision. There is no set timeframe but it is usually issued a few weeks after the oral arguments.

The written decision, called an Order, will end with one of the following actions:

‘Affirm’ (uphold) the challenged decision;

‘Reverse’ (overrule) the challenged decision;

‘Remand’ the challenged decision (return it to the county for further action);

‘Dismiss’ the appeal; or

‘Transfer’ the appeal to the circuit court

A remand is pretty common result-this is when LUBA finds a limited number of ‘errors’ in the decision. It is sent back to give the jurisdiction the opportunity to correct these.

The County Counsel will have limited involvement. It will be the applicant and their attorney who will defend the decision before LUBA. County staff, including counsel, will assist with information as required.

This does not require a response from the Board of Commissioners or Planning Commission- the primary role is for the county staff to file the complete record.

As far as the county’s view-we stand by the decision of the Board of Commissioners and believe it is a sound decision well within the bounds of state land use law. At the same time, we value the State’s emphasis on public participation and respect the right of any interested party to appeal this decision..”

End of Edelman’s Statement

**********************************************************

Ranch Matters Staff

Verified by MonsterInsights