Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Family Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve Riser family transfer exemption; staff flagged need for clearer hardship policy
Summary
The Board approved a family-transfer subdivision exemption for the Riser family after staff review and public comment; county planning staff said state law and the county's current process are ambiguous about whether remainder parcels may be sold and whether hardship variances should be requested before or after an exemption is granted.
Broadwater County commissioners approved a family transfer exemption request from the Riser family on Sept. 3, allowing a division of land that the applicant said was intended to help fund a parent's medical needs and to allow the applicant's brother to return to Montana.
Nicole Brown, Broadwater County community development director and planner, told the commission the request raised questions because the affidavit initially suggested the property could be sold "for my mother's medical needs," which prompted staff and legal review. Brown said, "A family transfer exemption is not intended to be created to . . . create parcels for sale on the public market." She explained that Montana Code Annotated provisions cited in the staff report (referenced in the meeting as MCA 76-3-207 and related subsections) limit transfers and include provisions for hardship variances but leave ambiguity about whether hardship relief is sought at the time of initial approval or afterward.
Brown said the supplemental information provided by the applicant's representative clarified that the parcel intended to be transferred would not be sold on the open market and that the recipient intends to move back to Montana and occupy the property. Commissioners reviewed the staff report and related statutory language, discussed how hardship variances have been handled previously and noted that Broadwater County does not have a formal hardship-variance process or definitions for hardship in the exemption application.
Commissioner Randolph said the board must base decisions on objective criteria and fairness to other applicants; she and other commissioners expressed support for approving the exemption while acknowledging the state code's vagueness. Commissioners also advised staff that the county should consider drafting clearer local policy and guidance on hardship variances and family-transfer procedures as subdivision and transfer regulations are reviewed.
The applicant's representative, Kathy Foote, spoke at the hearing and described the situation as a hardship and expressed appreciation for the commissioners' decision. The board approved the Riser family transfer exemption by voice vote.
Next steps: county staff and legal counsel will consider drafting clearer guidance or a hardship policy and incorporate lessons from this review into the county's update of subdivision and transfer regulations.
