o 'e, <br />1 <br />policy Vision Zero's goal of .'Zero:! fatalities or serious" injuries ,ort our <br />. 2- <br />transportation system.- <br />In response, the, city does not object to LUBA's taking official notice of. <br />4 <br />Exhibit B 1,. Resolution No. 5143. However; as the city. correctly `points out, <br />-'S <br />when LUBA takes official notice of a document, that document:-. does- not <br />6 <br />become part of the local evidentiary record and may not be used -"to provide <br />:7 . <br />-evidentiary,: support or. countervailing evidence with, respect,, to :an applicable. : <br />8 <br />approval criterion that is at issue in the challenged. decision." Tualatin <br />-n <br />9 <br />Riverkeepers v. ODEQ, 55 Or LUBA 688,. 692 (2007); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.. v. <br />x <br />.10 <br />City of Medford,. 47 Or LUBA 650, 656 (2004). Petitioners,: motion to take <br />• <br />E <br />11 <br />- <br />official notice of Resolution No. 5143, attached to the motion as. Exhibit B 1, is <br />. <br />f <br />12-- <br />granted. <br />F <br />-13 <br />OTHER MOTIONS <br />14 <br />A. Motion and Amended Motion to Refuse to Consider OMCs <br />15 <br />Response Brief and Oral Arguments <br />16 <br />On November .21, 2017,; OMC filed a 37-page response brief to <br />17 <br />Petitioners' petition for review and an 18-Page response brief to Stedman.'s <br />~ <br />18 <br />petition for review, but the response briefs did not include the,' certificates of <br />'19 <br />compliance required by OAR 661-01070030(2)0),. certifying,_ among other <br />20 . <br />things, that the :brief does not exceed 14,000 words. On November 28, 2017; <br />I <br />21 <br />LUBA issued an order requiring OMC to file and serve the. certificates of- <br />22 <br />compliance required by-OAR 661-010-0030(2)0). within.tliree days of the date ` <br />23. <br />of~. the order: Subse O1VIC filed 'certificates. of com Hance re ardin <br />quentlY°, <br />-41 <br />f. <br />Page 11 <br />t. <br />