(1) The county board shall appoint a board of adjustment which shall consist of five members, plus one additional member designated as an alternate who shall attend and serve only when one of the regular members is unable to attend for any reason, each to be appointed for a term of three years and be removable for cause by the appointing authority upon written charges and after public hearing. No member of the board of adjustment shall be a member of the county board of commissioners or county board of supervisors. Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term of any member whose term becomes vacant. One member only of the board of adjustment shall be appointed by the county board from the membership of the county planning commission, and the loss of membership on the planning commission by such member shall also result in his immediate loss of membership on the board of adjustment and the appointment of another planning commissioner to the board of adjustment.
(2) The board of adjustment shall adopt rules in accordance with the provisions of any resolution adopted pursuant to sections 23-114 to 23-114.05, 23-168.01 to 23-168.04, 23-172 to 23-174, 23-174.02, 23-373, and 23-376. Meetings of the board shall be held at the call of the chairman and at such other times as the board may determine. Such chairman, or in his absence the acting chairman, may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. All meetings of the board shall be open to the public. The board shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon each question, or, if absent or failing to vote, indicating such fact, and shall keep records of its examinations and other official actions, all of which shall be immediately filed with the county clerk and shall be a public record.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases, 1976–2009 · leading case:
In re Olmer, 752 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 2008).
In re Olmer, 752 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 2008).
· cites it 3× “We agreed with the Court of Appeals and concluded that the appeal procedure in Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 23-168.01 to 23-168.04 (Reissue 1997) foreclosed the ability to appeal a decision of the board of supervisors to the district court through a petition in error under § 25-1901.”
Conley v. Brazer, 772 N.W.2d 545 (Neb. 2009).
· cites it 5× “APPEAL TO DOUGLAS COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOT REQUIRED The Brazers argue that Neb.Rev. Stat. §§ 23-168.01 to 23-168.04 (Reissue 2007), which generally address the authority of county boards of adjustment, provide the exclusive procedure for challenging decisions relating to…”
Mogensen v. Bd. of Supervisors, 679 N.W.2d 413 (Neb. 2004).
· cites it 6× “We determine that the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the petition in error because Mogensen failed to appeal to the Antelope County Board of Adjustment (Board of Adjustment) as requjred by Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 23-168.01 to 23-168.04 (Reissue 1997).”
Gabel v. Polk Cnty., 695 N.W.2d 433 (Neb. 2005).
· cites it 4× “On appeal, we first noted that under Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 23-168.01 to 23-168.04 (Reissue 1997), when a county board of supervisors or board of commissioners makes a zoning decision, a party adversely affected by the decision may appeal to the county board of adjustment.”
Adler v. Lynch, 415 F. Supp. 705 (D. Neb. 1976).
“§ 23-168.01 (Reissue 1974). The parties do not seem to dispute, that in Douglas County the Commissioners themselves compose the Board of Adjustment.”
Niewohner v. Antelope Cnty. Bd. of Adjustment, 668 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “03 appears to contemplate an appeal from a county board of supervisors to a county board of adjustment, because Neb. Rev. Stat. § 23-168.01 (1) (Reissue 1997) was amended to provide that no member of the county board of supervisors could be a member of the county board of…”
Niewohner v. Antelope Cnty. Bd. of Adjust., 668 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “03 appears to contemplate an appeal from a county board of supervisors to a county board of adjustment, because Neb.Rev.Stat. § 23-168.01(1) (Reissue 1997) was amended to provide that no member of the county board of supervisors could be a member of the county board of…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 23-168.01(1): 1 case
Niewohner v. Antelope Cnty. Bd. of Adjust., 668 N.W.2d 258 (Neb. Ct. App. 2003).
“03 appears to contemplate an appeal from a county board of supervisors to a county board of adjustment, because Neb.Rev.Stat. § 23-168.01(1) (Reissue 1997) was amended to provide that no member of the county board of supervisors could be a member of the county board of…”
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.