Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to coordinate exempt‑well review with subdivision planning; agency seeks staff and IT to meet timelines
Summary
The Department of Natural Resources and Conservation and stakeholders said House Bill 681 will move exempt‑well review to the front of the subdivision/planning timeline and require mapping and tracking by lot; DNRC requested additional FTE and database work to meet proposed 10‑day timelines.
Representative John Fitzpatrick presented House Bill 681, saying the measure and related bills grew from court decisions that raised questions about exempt wells and subdivision approvals. The sponsor asked the committee to consider the package as a whole rather than treating each bill in isolation.
Anna Pakenham Stevenson, DNRC Water Resources Division administrator, testified the bill shifts the process from a notice of completion (filed after construction and well use begins) to a notice of intent at the planning stage. That change creates a need for new workload: DNRC must coordinate water‑use analyses with county subdivision review, map water allocations to individual lots, and make that information publicly available to prevent a later lot owner from finding no water available.
Pakenham Stevenson said DNRC lacks statutory timelines today and that department reviews average about 116 days; HB 681 would impose a 10‑day decision timeline to enable concurrent planning, sanitation, and water reviews. Because the change front‑loads reviews and requires tracking and mapping, DNRC included additional full‑time staff and database programming in its fiscal note.
Representatives of Trout Unlimited and the Montana League of Cities and Towns supported the bill and said timely, reliable water information at the subdivision stage would protect senior water rights and help local planning. County associations also supported the fiscal request so counties receive water determinations they can rely on during land‑use review.
Ending: Committee members asked technical questions; DNRC reiterated the need for staff and IT funding to meet timelines. The committee held executive action pending additional information.
