Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee hears bill to streamline county zoning text amendments
Summary
Senate Bill 175 would create a streamlined statutory procedure for county zoning text amendments, shortening public-notice periods and clarifying the process; proponents including planners and environmental advocates generally supported the bill while seeking minor clarifying edits to notice language and the statute heading.
Senator Forrest Mandeville introduced Senate Bill 175 to the Senate Local Government Committee as a statutory fix to create a clearer, faster process for county zoning text amendments.
Mandeville (Senator Forrest Mandeville) told the committee that adopting new county zoning frequently requires a lengthy process—about four months under current statute—and that simple text amendments (for example, to allow a dentist in a commercial zone) should be able to proceed on a shorter timetable. The bill, he said, would require public notice and a public hearing with a shortened publication window (15 days) and provide a streamlined path for text amendments while preserving public inspection of proposed changes at the clerk and recorder’s office.
Proponents said the change balances efficiency with meaningful public participation. Daniel Cox of the Montana Association of Realtors supported the streamlined process. Laura Collins of the Montana Environmental Information Center said the proposed timeline ‘‘meets those expectations’’ for notice and is consistent with other review procedures, adding that the purpose, goals, objectives, and boundaries already are established by county growth policies. Stephanie Baucus, an attorney in Billings who often works on zoning matters, urged additional notice options such as posting proposed changes on county websites or mailed notices to potentially affected property owners.
Aaron Wilson, president of the Montana Association of Planners, testified online that MAP supports the bill’s intent and recommended two minor clarifications that the sponsor had already noted: change the heading on page 1, line 12 to read ‘‘Procedure for Adoption and Amendment of Regulations and Boundaries’’ and allow a general description of proposed changes in the notice rather than publishing line-by-line text that could be costly and unreadable in newspaper format.
Committee members questioned whether some large or complex amendments might still merit a longer review; Mandeville said the bill’s 15-day notice period is comparable to standard notice for major subdivisions and that the bill preserves access to the full proposed amendments at the clerk and recorder’s office. Mandeville closed by saying he appreciated the broad engagement from proponents and opponents and that he expects to work with stakeholders on any technical amendments.
The committee held the hearing and closed testimony; no committee vote on SB 175 is recorded in the provided transcript.
