Bishop v. Deschutes County

Based on ORS 197.805, LUBA has long held that it will decline to exercise jurisdiction over appeals where review would have no practical effect on the rights of properties.

Petitioners appeal a December 14, 2016 land use compatibility statement that concludes the storage of water in two reservoirs to support various land uses is not regulated by the county’s land use ordinance (2016 Groundwater LUCS decision). Petitioners also appeal a December 30, 2016 decision concluding that there is no right to appeal the 2016 Groundwater LUCS decision. On August 17, 2017, the county issued a new set of LUCS decisions involving water storage. Subsequently, Intervenor-Respondent KC Development Group (KCDC) moved to dismiss petitioners’ appeals, claiming that the new 2017 LUCS decisions implicitly superseded or revoked the 2016 Groundwater LUCS decision. Although initially denied, both intervenor and respondent filed a joint motion to dismiss, citing the county planning manager’s declaration. The declaration explicitly stated that the new LUCS decision was meant to revoke or withdraw the prior LUCS decision.

Petitioners argues that the county planning manager’s declaration is insufficient to constitute a “decision” that supersedes or revokes the LUCS decision. LUBA agrees with respondents that the declaration is a binding county determination that the 2016 Groundwater LUCS decision is no longer valid. Despite the fact that the declaration lacks the traditional formalities, LUBA finds it difficult to rule otherwise when the substance of the declaration would not differ with a more formalized decision. Because the 2016 Groundwater LUCS decision is therefore moot, LUBA must dismiss the appeal. DISMISSED.