Nye v. Deschutes Cnty.

• Decision Date: 17 May 2021
• Docket Number: LUBA No. 2021-021
• Parties: DANIELLE NYE and SANDERS NYE, Petitioners, v. DESCHUTES COUNTY, Respondent, and SCOTT SMALLWOOD and CAROL ANN SMALLWOOD, Intervenors-Respondents.
• Court: Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals

DANIELLE NYE and SANDERS NYE, Petitioners, v. DESCHUTES COUNTY, Respondent,andSCOTT SMALLWOOD andCAROL ANN SMALLWOOD, Intervenors-Respondents.

LUBA No. 2021-021

LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

May 17, 2021

FINAL OPINION AND ORDER

Appeal from Deschutes County.

Michael H. McGean represented petitioners.

David Doyle represented respondent.

Laura Craska Cooper represented intervenors-respondents.

ZAMUDIO, Board Member; RUDD, Board Chair; RYAN, Board Member, participated in the decision.

You are entitled to judicial review of this Order. Judicial review is governed by the provisions of ORS 197.850. Zamudio, Board Member.

NATURE OF THE DECISION

Petitioners challenge a board of county commissioners decision approving two property line adjustments and a 10-lot subdivision.

MOTION TO INTERVENE

Scott Smallwood and Carol Ann Smallwood (intervenors) move to intervene on the side of respondent. No party opposes the motion and it is allowed.

MOTION TO DISMISS

Petitioners filed the notice of intent to appeal. Before transmitting the record, the county withdrew its decision for reconsideration pursuant to ORS 197.830(13)(b) and OAR 661-010-0021(1). After the county issued its decision on reconsideration, petitioners filed an amended notice of intent to appeal challenging that decision. See OAR 661-010-0021(5) (providing procedure for challenging a decision on reconsideration).

On April 12, 2021, the Board received the county's record transmittal. No party objected to the record and the deadline for filing the petition for review was May 3, 2021. OAR 661-010-0030(1). Petitioners did not file a petition for review. On May 10, 2021, petitioners mailed LUBA a letter that copied the other parties and stated that the parties had reached a settlement and that the appeal may be dismissed. We treat that letter as petitioners' motion to voluntarily dismiss this appeal for purposes of this decision.

That same day, intervenors filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for failure to timely file the petition for review. OAR 661-010-0030(1). In their motion, intervenors dispute petitioners' contention that the parties have settled the matter.

Failure to file a petition for review within the time required by OAR 661-010-0030(1) or any extensions of that time under OAR 661-010-0067(2) shall result in dismissal of the appeal. OAR 661-010-0030(1). Petitioners did not file a petition for review. Petitioners' motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, which was filed after the deadline for filing the petition for review,...