Public Comments - Laserfiche WebLink

Page 3 September 6, 2016 appealed to the planning commission * * (Emphasis added). EC 9.7655(2) provides: "The appeal shall be submitted on a form approved by the city manager, be accompanied by a fee established pursuant to EC Chapter 2, and be received by the city no later than 5: 00 p.m. of the 12`h day after the notice of decision is mailed." (Emphasis added). If an appeal is not filed within this 12-day period, the Hearings Officials' decision automatically becomes the City's final decision.' EC 9.7335(5). In this case, the notice of the Hearings Official's decision was mailed on August 9, 2016. Therefore, the 12th day after the notice of decision was mailed was August 21, 2016. There is no question that the Applicant failed to file its appeal by the August 21 deadline. The appeal was filed on August 22, 2016, one day after the deadline. Pursuant to EC 9.7335(5) and 9.7655, the appeal was not timely filed and the Hearings Official's decision is the City's final decision. Since the Applicant failed to meet the required appeal deadline, the Planning Commission must dismiss the appeal. Thomas v. Wasco County, 30 Or LUBA 142 (1995); Hick v. Marion County, 30 Or LUBA 1, 3 (1995). Valley River Inn anticipates that the Applicant will raise two issues in response to their failure to file a timely appeal, neither of which provides the City the authority to accept the late appeal. First, the Applicant may argue that the City's notice of appeal listed the appeal deadline as August 22. While it is true that the City's notice mistakenly listed the appeal deadline as August 22, a mistake or defective notice does not provide the Applicant a legal excuse to file, or the City the authority to accept, a late appeal. Thomas, 30 Or LUBA at 145-146; Kevedy v. City of Portland, 28 OR LUBA 227, 240 (1994). To the extent the Applicant has a remedy for a defective or incorrect notice that it prejudicial, the Applicant's exclusive remedy is an appeal to LUBA. Id. Second, the Applicant may argue that the appeal deadline is August 22 because August 21 was a Sunday and the appeal could not be filed that day because the City offices were closed. However, neither EC 9.7335(5) nor 9.7655 provide such an extension or allow an applicant to file the appeal late if the deadline falls on a Sunday. To the extent local jurisdictions and/or state agencies allow for extensions when the deadline falls on a weekend or holiday, they must adopt specific code provisions, statutes or rules that expressly provide for such extensions. See e.g. Gensman v. City of Tigard, 29 Or LUBA 505, 508 (1995) (City code provided that appeal period was 10 days "unless the last day falls on a legal holiday for the City or on a Saturday, in which case, the last day shall be the next business day"); ORS 174.120 (deadlines for civil and criminal procedure statutes are extended if "the last day falls upon any legal holiday or on Saturday"); OAR 661-010-0075(8) (LUBA deadlines provides that "If the last day is Saturday, Sunday or other state or federal legal holiday, the act must be performed on the next working day."). Since EC 9.7335(5) and 9.7655 do not contain similar express language allowing for such an extension, the City cannot allow for it. Kevedy, 28 Or LUBA at 240. The Applicant could have, EC 9.7335(5) provides: "Unless appealed pursuant to EC 9.7655 Filing of Appeal of Hearings Official or Historic Review Board Initial Decision, the decision is final on the 13' day after notice of the decision is mailed." (Emphasis in original).