ORS 197.797
Local quasi-judicial land use hearings

notice requirements
hearing procedures

Text
Annotations 7

The following procedures shall govern the conduct of quasi-judicial land use hearings conducted before a local governing body, planning commission, hearings body or hearings officer on application for a land use decision and shall be incorporated into the comprehensive plan and land use regulations:

(1)

An issue which may be the basis for an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals shall be raised not later than the close of the record at or following the final evidentiary hearing on the proposal before the local government. Such issues shall be raised and accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the governing body, planning commission, hearings body or hearings officer, and the parties an adequate opportunity to respond to each issue.

(2)

Intentionally left blank —Ed.

(a)

Notice of the hearings governed by this section shall be provided to the applicant and to owners of record of property on the most recent property tax assessment roll where such property is located:

(A)

Within 100 feet of the property which is the subject of the notice where the subject property is wholly or in part within an urban growth boundary;

(B)

Within 250 feet of the property which is the subject of the notice where the subject property is outside an urban growth boundary and not within a farm or forest zone; or

(C)

Within 500 feet of the property which is the subject of the notice where the subject property is within a farm or forest zone.

(b)

Notice shall also be provided to any neighborhood or community organization recognized by the governing body and whose boundaries include the site.

(c)

At the discretion of the applicant, the local government also shall provide notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development.

(3)

The notice provided by the jurisdiction shall:

(a)

Explain the nature of the application and the proposed use or uses which could be authorized;

(b)

List the applicable criteria from the ordinance and the plan that apply to the application at issue;

(c)

Set forth the street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property;

(d)

State the date, time and location of the hearing;

(e)

State that failure of an issue to be raised in a hearing, in person or by letter, or failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the board based on that issue;

(f)

Be mailed at least:

(A)

Twenty days before the evidentiary hearing; or

(B)

If two or more evidentiary hearings are allowed, 10 days before the first evidentiary hearing;

(g)

Include the name of a local government representative to contact and the telephone number where additional information may be obtained;

(h)

State that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost;

(i)

State that a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at least seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost; and

(j)

Include a general explanation of the requirements for submission of testimony and the procedure for conduct of hearings.

(4)

Intentionally left blank —Ed.

(a)

All documents or evidence relied upon by the applicant shall be submitted to the local government and be made available to the public.

(b)

Any staff report used at the hearing shall be available at least seven days prior to the hearing. If additional documents or evidence are provided by any party, the local government may allow a continuance or leave the record open to allow the parties a reasonable opportunity to respond. Any continuance or extension of the record requested by an applicant shall result in a corresponding extension of the time limitations of ORS 215.427 (Final action on permit or zone change application) or 227.178 (Final action on certain applications required within 120 days) and ORS 215.429 (Mandamus proceeding when county fails to take final action on land use application within specified time) or 227.179 (Petition for writ of mandamus authorized when city fails to take final action on land use application within 120 days).

(5)

At the commencement of a hearing under a comprehensive plan or land use regulation, a statement shall be made to those in attendance that:

(a)

Lists the applicable substantive criteria;

(b)

States that testimony, arguments and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described in paragraph (a) of this subsection or other criteria in the plan or land use regulation which the person believes to apply to the decision; and

(c)

States that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the board based on that issue.

(6)

Intentionally left blank —Ed.

(a)

Prior to the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional evidence, arguments or testimony regarding the application. The local hearings authority shall grant such request by continuing the public hearing pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection or leaving the record open for additional written evidence, arguments or testimony pursuant to paragraph (c) of this subsection.

(b)

If the hearings authority grants a continuance, the hearing shall be continued to a date, time and place certain at least seven days from the date of the initial evidentiary hearing. An opportunity shall be provided at the continued hearing for persons to present and rebut new evidence, arguments or testimony. If new written evidence is submitted at the continued hearing, any person may request, prior to the conclusion of the continued hearing, that the record be left open for at least seven days to submit additional written evidence, arguments or testimony for the purpose of responding to the new written evidence.

(c)

If the hearings authority leaves the record open for additional written evidence, arguments or testimony, the record shall be left open for at least seven days. Any participant may file a written request with the local government for an opportunity to respond to new evidence submitted during the period the record was left open. If such a request is filed, the hearings authority shall reopen the record pursuant to subsection (7) of this section.

(d)

A continuance or extension granted pursuant to this section shall be subject to the limitations of ORS 215.427 (Final action on permit or zone change application) or 227.178 (Final action on certain applications required within 120 days) and ORS 215.429 (Mandamus proceeding when county fails to take final action on land use application within specified time) or 227.179 (Petition for writ of mandamus authorized when city fails to take final action on land use application within 120 days), unless the continuance or extension is requested or agreed to by the applicant.

(e)

Unless waived by the applicant, the local government shall allow the applicant at least seven days after the record is closed to all other parties to submit final written arguments in support of the application. The applicant’s final submittal shall be considered part of the record, but shall not include any new evidence. This seven-day period shall not be subject to the limitations of ORS 215.427 (Final action on permit or zone change application) or 227.178 (Final action on certain applications required within 120 days) and ORS 215.429 (Mandamus proceeding when county fails to take final action on land use application within specified time) or 227.179 (Petition for writ of mandamus authorized when city fails to take final action on land use application within 120 days).

(7)

When a local governing body, planning commission, hearings body or hearings officer reopens a record to admit new evidence, arguments or testimony, any person may raise new issues which relate to the new evidence, arguments, testimony or criteria for decision-making which apply to the matter at issue.

(8)

The failure of the property owner to receive notice as provided in this section shall not invalidate such proceedings if the local government can demonstrate by affidavit that such notice was given. The notice provisions of this section shall not restrict the giving of notice by other means, including posting, newspaper publication, radio and television.

(9)

For purposes of this section:

(a)

“Argument” means assertions and analysis regarding the satisfaction or violation of legal standards or policy believed relevant by the proponent to a decision. “Argument” does not include facts.

(b)

“Evidence” means facts, documents, data or other information offered to demonstrate compliance or noncompliance with the standards believed by the proponent to be relevant to the decision. [Formerly 197.763]

Source: Section 197.797 — Local quasi-judicial land use hearings; notice requirements; hearing procedures, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors197.html.

Notes of Decisions

County ordinance violated this section by restricting time within which opponents could file evidence but was consistent with this section in allowing applicant to present additional evidence within 20-day period between county’s notice and hearing. 1000 Friends of Oregon v. Lane County, 102 Or App 68, 793 P2d 885 (1990)

As used in this statute, “sufficient specificity” requires no more than fair notice to adjudicators and opponents and is not analogous to specificity necessary for preservation in judicial proceedings. Boldt v. Clackamas County, 107 Or App 619, 813 P2d 1078 (1991)

When record of proceeding is reopened at LUBA’s direction on remand, “new issues” include remanded issues, but not issues that LUBA affirmed or reversed on their merits. Beck v. City of Tillamook, 313 Or 148, 831 P2d 678 (1992)

Reference to application for land use decision does not prevent use of quasi-judicial proceeding in other types of land use decisions. Department of Transportation v. City of Mosier, 161 Or App 252, 984 P2d 351 (1999)

Requirement of 20 days’ notice applies to new evidentiary hearing process initiated to comply with order of reviewing body. Hausam v. City of Salem, 178 Or App 417, 37 P3d 1039 (2001)

Where city’s public notice of limited hearing announced that hearing would not permit new evidence but prior record was reopened to new evidence during hearing, this section required city to give corrective notice of opportunity for any person to address new evidence. Trautman/Conte v. City of Eugene, 280 Or App 752, 383 P3d 420 (2016)

Law Review Citations

77 OLR 845 (1998); 36 WLR 441 (2000)

California:	Codes
Colorado:	C.R.S.
Nevada:	NRS
New York:	Laws
Oregon:	OAR, ORS
Texas:	Statutes
World:	Rome Statute, International Dictionary

ORS 197.797 Local quasi-judicial land use hearings

(1)

(2)

(a)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(b)

(c)

(3)

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(A)

(B)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(4)

(a)

(b)

(5)

(a)

(b)

(c)

(6)

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(a)

(b)

Notes of Decisions

Law Review Citations

ORS 197.797
Local quasi-judicial land use hearings