hnalogo.jpg (103481 bytes)

 

Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society

Home
Up

 

LOCAL REMAND HEARINGS

LOCAL REMAND HEARINGS

For “The Record” Testimony At Local Remand Hearing
Before The Josephine County Board of County Commissioners

August 15, 2012, Updated September 11, 2012

Hugo Land Use Committee
Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society

The Josephine County Rural Land Development Code (RLDC) 33.130(D), Remand Hearings (http://www.co.josephine.or.us/Files/complete_code_2005.pdf), has illegally limited citizen involvement (CI) in land use remand hearings since 2007 (see Exhibit 1 for more background).

This is a local county issue and an Oregon statewide CI issue since Siporen v. City of Medford, 55 Or LUBA 29 (2007). It had been formally submitted to the Josephine County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) by the Hugo Land Use Committee (HLUC), Rogue Advocates, and the Goal One Coalition on November 30, 2010, and in 2011 by Rogue Advocates on two separate 2009 remand proceedings that had not been initiated by the county as of August 15, 2012 (Sommer v. Josephine County, 58 Or LUBA 505 (2009) and Walker v. Josephine County, 60 Or LUBA 186 (2009)). As far as the HLUC knows the BCC had not acknowledged the three request letters as of August 15, 2012, nor acted on them in any way (i.e., the HLUC believes the county is not in compliance with Oregon Statewide Goal 1: Citizen Involvement, OAR 660-015-0000(1), Component 2, Communication, nor it own local Citizen Involvement Program (CIP)/Ordinance No. 93-13, Section A.1.b.).

On August 15, 2012 Rogue Advocates again challenged the legality of RLDC 33.130(D), which limits the parties at remand proceedings to those that had standing at LUBA. Rogue Advocates was quite clear that it believed from ORS 197.763(7) that when the record is reopened (including in remand hearings) 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 applies to the matter at issue. Siporen v. City of Medford, 55 Or LUBA 29 (2007) goes further in clarifying ORS 197.763(7). It identifies that a remand hearing is open for all interested participants to testify. A party who otherwise has standing to participate in a local government’s land use public hearings under the government’s land use legislation may not be denied standing to participate in public hearings following a remand from LUBA, simply because he or she failed to participate in the LUBA appeal.

The following exhibit web links have specific communications on the Oregon statewide CI local remand hearings issue.

Links

Exhibit 1.    August 15, 2012 Background To Oregon Statewide Citizen Involvement Local Remand Hearings
                  Issue 3
 
Exhibit 2.    November 30, 2010 Letter From Hugo Land Use Committee, Rogue Advocates, and the Goal
                  One Coalition, to Josephine County Board of County Commissioners on Transportation
                  Planning Rule and Party Standing At a Remand Hearing
 
Exhibit 3.    January 26, 2011 Letter From Rogue Advocates to Josephine County Board of County
                  Commissioners on Appeal Fees and Party Standing At a Remand Hearing
 
Exhibit 4.    January 28, 2011 Letter From Rogue Advocates to Josephine County Board of County
                  Commissioners on Transportation Planning Rule and Party Standing At a Remand Hearing
 
Exhibit 5.    August 15, 2012 Letter From Rogue Advocates to Josephine County Board of County
                  Commissioners on Party Standing At a Remand Hearing
 
Exhibit 6.    September 3, 2012 Letter From Local Murphy, Oregon Neighbors to Josephine County and its
                  Planning Director on Party Standing At a Local Remand Hearing
 
Exhibit 7.    September 10, 2012 Letter From Concerned Ridgefield Neighborhood to Rogue Advocates
                  Requesting Assistance on Party Standing At Remand Hearings
 
Exhibit 8.    September 11, 2012 Email/Letter From Mike Walker to the Concerned Ridgefield Neighborhood,
                  Rogue Advocates, Goal One Coalition, and the Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical
                  Society on Advocacy Before the Oregon Citizen Involvement Advisory Committee and the
                  Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development
 
Exhibit 9.    September 17, 2012  Authorization Email/Letter From Jimmy MacLeod, Executive Director,
                  Rogue Advocates, to Mike Walker, Rogue Advocates

Exhibit 10.  Future Oregon Statewide Citizen Involvement Local Remand Hearings Issue Correspondence

Back to Top  

2012 Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society