Petitioners' Motion to Accept.Partial Transcript <br />2 <br />December. ,7, 20;17, two days after oral argument; - petitionersfled. a <br />„ _ <br />motion, to subnzt a',Partzal transcri t of a recording of a comrntssi on <br />p planning <br />. <br />me( in this, a eal The cit o oses the motion'and the,!transcTi t, ar um <br />g pP Y PP P g g <br />5 ' that while OAR -661!-,01 0=0030(5) allows: a: petitioner to prepare and submit: a fi <br />n 6 <br />verbaiim`transcrzpt as„ a n:'attachment to the petition ,for review;.LLTBA.'s rules <br />7. <br />do not =allow a petitioner to prepare' a, non-verbatim transcript "and subrrirt rt_ to <br />8 <br />LUBA after oral argument The city argues that the late filing of , non <br />9 „ <br />verbatim.transcrzpt.prejudiced.the city's ability. to evaluate; the accuracy of the <br />10 <br />part al-Aranscrip <br />r <br />We agree with the city that the time to submit. a transcript t' LUBA in. <br />12 <br />support- of an ar ument, in the etition. for review ..is when the petition for . <br />g p <br />13 <br />review is filed. Submitting, szzch atranscript :after the deadline for filing the <br />14 <br />p. , <br />etztzon for revzew,is essentially amending the.petition for review., Amending <br />15 <br />the petition, for review long: after the deadline, for filing the petition; 'indeed; <br />16. <br />after oral argument, J5. inherently prejudicial to the ,other :parties' substantial_ <br />1-7 <br />rights, in this appeal;. The motion to accept the:: partzal~ transcript is denied <br />I. <br />" <br />T$:. <br />Dated this l V day of January; 2018: <br />19~: <br />r. <br />20 <br />21 <br />t <br />23: <br />A',.,Bl assham „ . <br />To <br />- 24 <br />Board"Member <br />, <br />. <br />' <br />Page 14, <br />. <br />. <br />