186 Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene <br />overruled, our earlier decision in League of Women Voters v. <br />Coos County, 82 Or App 673, 729 P2d 588 (1986), in which <br />we had held that an earlier version of the statute, ORS <br />197.830(7) (1985), must be read in conjunction with ORS <br />215.416(8) (1985), which required that written notice of the <br />decision "be given to all parties to the proceeding." Wicks- <br />Snodgrass, 148 Or App at 220, 22413 In League of Women <br />Voters, we had reasoned, in part, "We do not think that <br />the legislature intended to permit the nonperformance or <br />delayed performance of that duty [to give notice of the deci- <br />sion to all parties to the proceeding] to defeat the possibility <br />of a timely appeal from a county's land use decision." 82 Or <br />App at 679-80. We thus held that, "in all LUBA cases to <br />which ORS 215.416(8) applies, the decision becomes final for <br />purposes of appealing to LUBA under ORS 197.830(7) only <br />after the prescribed written notice of the decision is mailed <br />or delivered personally to the party seeking to appeal." Id. <br />at 681 (footnote omitted). In overruling League of Women <br />Voters in Wicks-Snodgrass, we concluded that we had "given <br />inappropriate weight to * * * policy considerations rather <br />than to the language of the statute that we were required to <br />interpret" and incorrectly relied on the notice provisions of <br />other statutes "as support for the proposition that the time <br />for appealing a local decision is tolled beyond the time that <br />ORS 197.830(8) clearly specifies." Wicks-Snodgrass, 148 Or <br />App at 223. <br />We note several salient differences here. First, and <br />most significantly, applicant does not provide any support <br />for the proposition that a motion to intervene, like the notice <br />of intent to appeal at issue in Wicks-Snodgrass, is jurisdic- <br />tional, and we are aware of none. At the time a motion to <br />intervene is filed, LUBA necessarily has jurisdiction over <br />the appeal pursuant to the timely filing of the notice of <br />intent to appeal under ORS 197.830(1). See ORS 197.830(1) <br />("Review of land use decisions or limited land use decisions <br />under ORS 197.830 to 197.845 shall be commenced by filing <br />a notice of intent to appeal with [LUBA]."); ORS 197.830(9) <br />("A notice of intent to appeal a land use decision or limited <br />13 Both ORS 197.830 and ORS 215.416 have been amended several times <br />since League of Women Voters was decided. <br />