Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Code Amendment Events topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Umatilla County adopts code amendment to allow weddings and gatherings as home occupations in farmland
Summary
After public testimony for and against, Umatilla County commissioners on March 12 adopted a text amendment creating a permit path for weddings and commercial gatherings as a subtype of home occupations in Exclusive Farm Use zones, including limits on employees and a cap on events per year.
The Umatilla County Board of Commissioners voted March 12 to amend the county development code to allow weddings and commercial gatherings as a specific form of home occupation on Exclusive Farm Use properties, after a public hearing that included proponents, an attorney representing a rural landowner, and commissioner deliberation.
County planning manager Megan Dauchowski told commissioners the proposed text would create a subsection of the Umatilla County Development Code to establish criteria and a permit path for “commercial gatherings and weddings” under home-occupation standards. She said the proposed language includes statutory requirements and limits, “such as the limited number of employees, which is limited to 5,” and that staff modeled some provisions after other Oregon counties, including Hood River.
Why this matters: The amendment changes how the county treats certain event uses on farmland by creating a regulatory path under home-occupation rules rather than treating each event as a separate land-use application. Opponents told the board the change risks allowing large, concentrated events on farmland that could conflict with farm operations and state policy on accessory uses.
Proponents, represented in the hearing by applicant Jim Whitney, said the amendment would provide an additional revenue stream for farmers and help preserve farm buildings. “It would be important for the county to give another alternative income stream for the properties in their ranch buildings,” Whitney said, arguing that agritourism and venue uses could help owners maintain historic barns and outbuildings.
Opposition came from attorney Jeff Kleinman, who said he represents a Umatilla County farm owner and submitted a written letter. Kleinman cited recent state rule changes and LUBA precedent and argued the change would allow uses that are not accessory, incidental and subordinate to residential farm life. “The use has to be accessory, incidental, and subordinate,” Kleinman said, quoting the standard he attributed to the state Land Conservation and Development Commission and LUBA guidance. He urged caution, warned of conflicts with farm practices and pointed to experience in other counties where events and farming have clashed.
Staff noted a relevant LUBA decision (referenced in the record as LUBA case 2022-085086 involving Marion County) and provided a highlighted exhibit from that decision; staff also said Planning Commission review had recommended approval. Dauchowski told the board the Planning Commission hearing was held Feb. 23, 2025; she said the commission “unanimously recommended approval” but the staff report as read in the hearing recorded a vote string that appears inconsistent in the transcript.
During deliberations several commissioners said venues run by people who live on the property are commonly operated by household members and provide revenue and local economic activity. One commissioner noted tasting rooms and farm events in other parts of the county operate without conflicts; another said the ordinance brings operations into a monitored, regulated framework rather than leaving them “in the shadows.” The board moved, seconded and voted to adopt the amendment as written by staff.
What the ordinance does (as described in staff documents and the hearing): it creates a new home-occupation subsection for weddings and gatherings; includes a limit of five employees; proposes a maximum of up to 50 events per calendar year in the applicant’s draft language; retains other home-occupation limits including a parking/vehicle reference in the existing code (staff said the existing cap is no more than 10 parking spaces for home occupations). The record also includes opposition letters from Thousand Friends of Oregon and Oregon Land Watch.
Next steps: The board adopted findings and closed the hearing record; the amendment takes effect according to the county’s ordinance schedule and remains subject to any appeals available under state land-use law.
