Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 67-6521 (2026)

Actions by affected persons.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Actions by affected persons.

(1) (a) As used herein, an affected person shall mean one having a bona fide interest in real property which may be adversely affected by:

(i) The approval, denial or failure to act upon an application for a subdivision, variance, special use permit and such other similar applications required or authorized pursuant to this chapter;

(ii) The approval of an ordinance first establishing a zoning district upon annexation or the approval or denial of an application to change the zoning district applicable to specific parcels or sites pursuant to section 67-6511, Idaho Code; or

(iii) An approval or denial of an application for conditional rezoning pursuant to section 67-6511A, Idaho Code.

(b) Any affected person may at any time prior to final action on an application required or authorized under this chapter, if no hearing has been held on the application, petition the commission or governing board in writing to hold a hearing pursuant to section 67-6512, Idaho Code; provided however, that if twenty (20) affected persons petition for a hearing, the hearing shall be held.

(i) Grant or deny an application; or

(ii) Delay such a decision for a definite period of time for further study or hearing. Each commission or governing board shall establish by ordinance or resolution a time period within which a recommendation or decision must be made.

(d) Every final decision rendered shall provide or be accompanied by notice to the applicant regarding the applicant’s right to request a regulatory taking analysis pursuant to section 67-8003, Idaho Code. An affected person aggrieved by a final decision concerning matters identified in section 67-6521(1)(a), Idaho Code, may within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted under local ordinances seek judicial review as provided by chapter 52, title 67, Idaho Code.

(2) (a) Authority to exercise the regulatory power of zoning in land use planning shall not simultaneously displace coexisting eminent domain authority granted under section 14, article I, of the constitution of the state of Idaho and chapter 7, title 7, Idaho Code.

(b) An affected person claiming "just compensation" for a perceived "taking," the basis of the claim being that a final action restricting private property development is actually a regulatory action by local government deemed "necessary to complete the development of the material resources of the state," or necessary for other public uses, may seek a judicial determination of whether the claim comes within defined provisions of section 14, article I, of the constitution of the state of Idaho relating to eminent domain. Under these circumstances, the affected person is exempt from the provisions of subsection (1) of this section and may seek judicial review through an inverse condemnation action specifying neglect by local government to provide "just compensation" under the provisions of section 14, article I, of the constitution of the state of Idaho and chapter 7, title 7, Idaho Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 71 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Taylor v. Canyon Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 210 P.3d 532 (Idaho 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Taylor v. Canyon Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 210 P.3d 532 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 62× “The Vickers filed their appeal for judicial review based on I.C. § 67-6521 (LLUPA), I.C. § 67-5270 et seq.”

Highlands Dev. Corp. v. City of Boise, 188 P.3d 900 (Idaho 2008). · cites it 32× “The Court's opinion would exclude judicial review for zoning decisions, based on the fact that those are not specifically called permits in LLUPA.”

Burns Holdings, LLC v. Madison Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 214 P.3d 646 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 52× “Idaho Code § 67-6521 (d) provides: "An affected person aggrieved by a decision may within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted under local ordinances seek judicial review as provided by chapter 52, title 67, Idaho Code.”

Friends of Minidoka v. Jerome Cnty., 281 P.3d 1076 (Idaho 2012). · cites it 14× “A timely notice of appeal and notice of cross-appeal were filed with this Court. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA) allows judicial review of an approval or denial of a land use application for an affected person, as provided for in the Idaho…”

Giltner Dairy, LLC v. Jerome Cnty., 249 P.3d 358 (Idaho 2011). · cites it 40× “3d 900 (2008), precluded the use of I.C. § 67-6521 to allow judicial review of the case, and that the more specific judicial review provisions of the Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA, I.”

Evans v. Teton Cnty., 73 P.3d 84 (Idaho 2003). · cites it 10× “STANDARD OF REVIEW The Local Land Usé Planning Act (LLUPA) allows an affected person to seek judicial review of an approval or denial of a land use application, as provided for in the Idaho Administrative Procedural Act (IDA-PA).”

City of Ririe v. Gilgen, 515 P.3d 255 (Idaho 2022). · cites it 18× “Therefore, it held that “affected person” as used in Idaho Code section 67-6521 included the City. Considering whether the City had “an interest in real property,” the court determined that the City was asserting an “interest” even if it was not claiming an ownership interest.”

Neighbors for Responsible Growth v. Kootenai Cnty., 207 P.3d 149 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 10× “Giltner argued that the district court had jurisdiction to review the commission’s decision under I.C. § 67-6521, which grants the right to judicial review in accordance with the Idaho Administrative Procedure Act to “[a]n affected person aggrieved by a decision.”

Davisco Foods Int'l, Inc. v. Gooding Cnty., 118 P.3d 116 (Idaho 2005). · cites it 12× “Idaho Code § 67-6521 (1)(d) (2001). This Court must affirm a decision of the Board of Commissioners unless it determines that the Board's findings, inferences, conclusions or decisions: 1) violated constitutional or statutory provisions; 2) exceeded its statutory authority; 3)…”

Johnson v. Blaine Cnty., 204 P.3d 1127 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 6× “Idaho Code § 67-6521 provides that a person who has “an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a permit authorizing the development” and who is “aggrieved by a decision” granting or denying the permit may seek judicial review,…”

Giltner Dairy, LLC v. Jerome Cnty., 181 P.3d 1238 (Idaho 2008). · cites it 6× “During oral argument, Giltner Dairy relied upon Idaho Code § 67-6521 for a right to appeal.”

Halper v. Jerome Cnty., 152 P.3d 562 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 6× “Idaho Code § 67-6521 (d) regarding local land use planning and the general IDAPA provision in § 67-5273 provide a 28-day time limit within which an appeal must be filed.”

Show all 71 citing cases →

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(1) — 4 cases

Hawkins v. Bonneville Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 254 P.3d 1224 (Idaho 2011).

Hawkins v. Bonneville Cnty. Bd. of Com'rs, 254 P.3d 1224 (Idaho 2011).

Burns Holdings, LLC v. Madison Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 214 P.3d 646 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 67-6521 (d) provides: "An affected person aggrieved by a decision may within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted under local ordinances seek judicial review as provided by chapter 52, title 67, Idaho Code.”

Burns Holdings, LLC. v. Madison Cnty. (Idaho 2009).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(a) — 19 cases

Taylor v. Canyon Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 210 P.3d 532 (Idaho 2009). “The Vickers filed their appeal for judicial review based on I.C. § 67-6521 (LLUPA), I.C. § 67-5270 et seq.”

City of Ririe v. Gilgen, 515 P.3d 255 (Idaho 2022). “Therefore, it held that “affected person” as used in Idaho Code section 67-6521 included the City. Considering whether the City had “an interest in real property,” the court determined that the City was asserting an “interest” even if it was not claiming an ownership interest.”

Highlands Dev. Corp. v. City of Boise, 188 P.3d 900 (Idaho 2008). “The Court's opinion would exclude judicial review for zoning decisions, based on the fact that those are not specifically called permits in LLUPA.”

Hawkins v. Bonneville Cnty. Bd. of Com'rs, 254 P.3d 1224 (Idaho 2011).

Krempasky v. Nez Perce Cnty. Plan. & Zoning, 245 P.3d 983 (Idaho 2010).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(a)(i) — 2 cases

S Bar Ranch v. Elmore Cnty. (Idaho 2022).

Richardson v. Blaine Cnty. (Idaho 2023).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(b) — 2 cases

Dry Creek Partners, LLC v. Ada Cnty. Commissioners Ex Rel. State, 217 P.3d 1282 (Idaho 2009).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(c) — 2 cases

S Bar Ranch v. Elmore Cnty. (Idaho 2022).

Richardson v. Blaine Cnty. (Idaho 2023).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(1)(d) — 19 cases

Taylor v. Canyon Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 210 P.3d 532 (Idaho 2009). “The Vickers filed their appeal for judicial review based on I.C. § 67-6521 (LLUPA), I.C. § 67-5270 et seq.”

Dry Creek Partners, LLC v. Ada Cnty. Commissioners Ex Rel. State, 217 P.3d 1282 (Idaho 2009).

Krempasky v. Nez Perce Cnty. Plan. & Zoning, 245 P.3d 983 (Idaho 2010).

Davisco Foods Int'l, Inc. v. Gooding Cnty., 118 P.3d 116 (Idaho 2005). “Idaho Code § 67-6521 (1)(d) (2001). This Court must affirm a decision of the Board of Commissioners unless it determines that the Board's findings, inferences, conclusions or decisions: 1) violated constitutional or statutory provisions; 2) exceeded its statutory authority; 3)…”

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(2)(b) — 3 cases

Buckskin Props., Inc. v. Valley Cnty., 300 P.3d 18 (Idaho 2013).

Alpine Vill. Co. v. City of McCall, 303 P.3d 617 (Idaho 2013).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(a) — 1 case

Evans v. Teton Cnty., 73 P.3d 84 (Idaho 2003). “STANDARD OF REVIEW The Local Land Usé Planning Act (LLUPA) allows an affected person to seek judicial review of an approval or denial of a land use application, as provided for in the Idaho Administrative Procedural Act (IDA-PA).”

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(c)(ii) — 1 case

Crown Point Dev., Inc. v. City of Sun Valley, 156 P.3d 573 (Idaho 2007).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(d) — 16 cases

Halper v. Jerome Cnty., 152 P.3d 562 (Idaho 2007). “Idaho Code § 67-6521 (d) regarding local land use planning and the general IDAPA provision in § 67-5273 provide a 28-day time limit within which an appeal must be filed.”

In Re Quesnell Dairy, 152 P.3d 562 (Idaho 2007).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(l)(a) — 11 cases

Friends of Minidoka v. Jerome Cnty., 281 P.3d 1076 (Idaho 2012). “A timely notice of appeal and notice of cross-appeal were filed with this Court. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA) allows judicial review of an approval or denial of a land use application for an affected person, as provided for in the Idaho…”

Johnson v. Blaine Cnty., 204 P.3d 1127 (Idaho 2009). “Idaho Code § 67-6521 provides that a person who has “an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a permit authorizing the development” and who is “aggrieved by a decision” granting or denying the permit may seek judicial review,…”

Hawkins v. Bonneville Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 254 P.3d 1224 (Idaho 2011).

Giltner Dairy, LLC v. Jerome Cnty., 181 P.3d 1238 (Idaho 2008). “During oral argument, Giltner Dairy relied upon Idaho Code § 67-6521 for a right to appeal.”

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(l)(a)(i) — 1 case

Jasso v. Camas Cnty., 264 P.3d 897 (Idaho 2011).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(l)(a)(iii) — 1 case

Neighbors for the Pres. of the Big & Little Creek Cmty. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 358 P.3d 67 (Idaho 2015).

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(l)(b) — 1 case

— Idaho Code § 67-6521(l)(d) — 13 cases

Neighbors for a Healthy Gold Fork v. Valley Cnty., 176 P.3d 126 (Idaho 2007).

Crown Point Dev., Inc. v. City of Sun Valley, 156 P.3d 573 (Idaho 2007).

Eacret v. Bonner Cnty., 86 P.3d 494 (Idaho 2004).

Regan v. Kootenai Cnty., 100 P.3d 615 (Idaho 2004).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.