433.735
Definitions for ORS 433.735 to 433.770. As used in ORS 433.735 to 433.770 and 433.990 (7):
(1) “Organizer”
includes any person who holds, stages or sponsors an outdoor mass gathering and
the owner, lessee or possessor of the real property upon which the outdoor mass
gathering is to take place.
(2) “Outdoor mass
gathering,” unless otherwise defined by county ordinance, means an actual or
reasonably anticipated assembly of more than 3,000 persons which is held
primarily in open spaces and not in any permanent structure and within any
three-month period is expected to continue for more than 24 hours and not more
than 120 hours, excluding hours required for ingress to and egress from a
gathering that is located on lands zoned for exclusive farm use that are 60
miles or farther from the nearest interstate highway.
(3) “Permanent
structure” includes a stadium, an arena, an auditorium, a coliseum, a
fairgrounds or other similar established places for assemblies.
(4) “Temporary
structure” includes tents, trailers, chemical toilet facilities and other
structures customarily erected or sited for temporary use. [1971 c.597 §1a;
1981 c.82 §3; 1985 c.758 §1; 2001 c.104 §157; 2007 c.445 §32; 2019 c.408 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Fence v. Jackson Cnty., 900 P.2d 524 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 12× “” He contended that some or all of the county’s regulations are preempted by ORS 433.735 to ORS 433.770, that the regulations are inconsistent with the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 USC § 2000bb, et seq), and that they violate religious and communicative…”
Landsem Farms, LP v. Marion Cnty., 78 P.3d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 5× “015(10)(d) exempts from the definition of “land use decision” authorization of “an outdoor mass gathering as defined in ORS 433.735, or other gathering of fewer than 3,000 persons that is not anticipated to continue for more than 120 hours in any three-month period[.”
Thomas v. Wasco Cnty., 392 P.3d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 3× “015(10)(d) (excluding from the definition of a “land use decision” the “authorization of an outdoor mass gathering as defined in ORS 433.735”). Nonetheless, petitioner argued, the county’s approval encompassed a separate land use decision to approve permanent alterations to the…”
S. Oregon Barter Fair v. Jackson Cnty., 372 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Or. Rev. Stat. § 433.735 (1). . "Organizer” is defined to include "any person who holds, stages or sponsors an outdoor mass gathering and the owner, lessee or possessor of the real property upon which the outdoor mass gathering is to take place.”
Greenfield v. Multnomah Cnty., 317 P.3d 274 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“283(2)(a) (allowing as a conditional use “[c]ommercial activities that are in conjunction with farm use”); ORS 433.735 to 433.770 (regulating outdoor mass gatherings).”
Scappoose Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. Columbia Cnty., 984 P.2d 876 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
“The county maintains that LUBA did not have jurisdiction over some of the issues, at least, because they pertain to regulation of matters unrelated to land use, and are therefore not ‘land use decisions.”
Rhodes v. City of Talent, 104 P.3d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“360; “(c) Does not include a decision by a school district to close a school; “(d) Does not include authorization of an outdoor mass gathering as defined in ORS 433.735, or other gathering of fewer than 3,000 persons that is not anticipated to continue for more than 120 hours in…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 433.735(1) — 3 cases
Landsem Farms, LP v. Marion Cnty., 78 P.3d 103 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
“015(10)(d) exempts from the definition of “land use decision” authorization of “an outdoor mass gathering as defined in ORS 433.735, or other gathering of fewer than 3,000 persons that is not anticipated to continue for more than 120 hours in any three-month period[.”
Fence v. Jackson Cnty., 900 P.2d 524 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“” He contended that some or all of the county’s regulations are preempted by ORS 433.735 to ORS 433.770, that the regulations are inconsistent with the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 USC § 2000bb, et seq), and that they violate religious and communicative…”
Thomas v. Wasco Cnty., 392 P.3d 741 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“015(10)(d) (excluding from the definition of a “land use decision” the “authorization of an outdoor mass gathering as defined in ORS 433.735”). Nonetheless, petitioner argued, the county’s approval encompassed a separate land use decision to approve permanent alterations to the…”
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.