Preview:

Oregon Judicial Department Appellate Court Opinions

FILED: December 26, 2007 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON HOOD RIVER VALLEY RESIDENTS' COMMITTEE, INC., an Oregon non-profit corporation; LARRY MARTIN, individually; SARA MARTIN, individually; ERIC RUHLEN, individually; and TAMIKO RUHLEN, individually, Petitioners-Appellants, v. STATE OF OREGON, by and through the Department of Administrative Services; and DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, Respondents-Respondents. Marion County Circuit Court 06C17267; A135490 Don A. Dickey, Judge. Argued and submitted September 4, 2007. Ralph O. Bloemers argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs was Crag Law Center. Denise Fjordbeck, Senior Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondents. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Erika L. Hadlock, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Richard P. Benner filed the brief amicus curiae for Metro. Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim and Sercombe, Judges. EDMONDS, P. J. Judgment vacated; remanded to circuit court with instructions to remand to Department of Land Conservation and Development. EDMONDS, P. J. Petitioners sought judicial review by the Marion County Circuit Court of a final order issued by respondents Department of Administrative Services (DAS) and Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) that approved a claim by property owners submitted pursuant to ORS 197.352 (Ballot Measure 37). On cross-motions for summary judgment, the circuit court entered judgment in favor

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/A135490.htm[4/19/2013 10:23:44 AM]

Oregon Judicial Department Appellate Court Opinions

of respondents. Petitioners appeal. After petitioners filed their petition for judicial review in the Marion County Circuit Court, this court decided Corey v. DLCD, 210 Or App 542, 152 P3d 933, adhered to on recons, 212 Or App 536, 159 P3d 327, rev allowed, 343 Or 363 (2007). In Corey, we determined that DLCD's decision to waive enforcement of certain land use regulations in lieu of paying compensation under Measure 37 should be reviewed as an order in a contested case pursuant to ORS 183.482. 210 Or App at 552. Accordingly, we concluded that jurisdiction for judicial review of such an order lies in this court, not in the circuit court. Id. Also, after petitioners filed their petition for judicial review, the voters passed Ballot Measure 49, and it establishes new criteria that must be applied by respondents. See Ballot Measure 49,

Download A135490.pdf

Oregon Law