Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee hears cleanup to Montana Land Use Planning Act; sponsors say fixes clarify implementation
Summary
Senate Local Government heard testimony on SB 121, a technical 'cleanup' to the Montana Land Use Planning Act (LUPA). Sponsor Forrest Mandeville and municipal and housing groups said the bill clarifies definitions, extraterritorial zoning, municipal facility review, joint boards and appeal procedures; Commerce and DEQ provided technical support.
Senator Forrest Mandeville, sponsor of Senate Bill 121, told the Senate Local Government Committee the bill is a limited, implementation-focused cleanup to the Montana Land Use Planning Act intended to fix ambiguities discovered since LUPA’s passage. “This is a cleanup bill,” Mandeville said, outlining added definitions for “development application,” clarified public-notice language, cross-references to municipal facilities review, explicit rules about extraterritorial zoning where a county may refuse a city’s extraterritorial regulatory reach, continuation of joint city–county planning boards, and an appeals process requiring a public hearing.
Supporters from municipal and housing organizations described the changes as narrowly targeted. Kelly Lynch, executive director of the Montana League of Cities and Towns, told the committee the state recently won a $7,000,000 HUD grant to help the ten LUPA communities and one opt-in community complete required planning work; “$5,000,000 will be going to the 10 LUPA communities… and $2,000,000 will be going to the Montana Department of Commerce to create a housing planning toolkit,” Lynch said.
Jake Brown of Shelter Whitefish and Dan Brooks of the Billings Chamber of Commerce urged the committee to give the bill a due pass so the LUPA implementation can proceed without unnecessary procedural confusion.
Informational witnesses from the Montana Department of Commerce and the Department of Environmental Quality — including Mandy Rambo (Deputy Director, Dept. of Commerce), Rachel Clark (DEQ engineering bureau chief), and Anne Schwend (Community Planning Program Supervisor) — stood ready to answer technical questions and confirmed the HUD award breakdown and the Commerce role in supporting communities.
Committee members pressed on the interaction between LUPA and a recent family-transfer law (Senate Bill 158). Senator Ellsworth asked whether SB 121 would alter the authority created by SB 158 for family transfers and minimum lot sizes; sponsors and counsel explained family-transfer exemptions remain codified under the subdivision statute (not within LUPA’s core statutory text) and offered follow-up work to ensure the statutes align. Karen Alley of the Montana Association of Counties said county legal opinions and local implementation vary and offered to meet with members to sort particular county-level concerns.
Mandeville closed by stressing SB 121 applies to the 11 cities that opted into the planning act (the original ten LUPA cities plus Lewistown) and that no counties had opted in to date; he offered to work with colleagues to address any lingering family-transfer issues in this bill or subsequent legislation. The committee did not take executive action; sponsor requested a due pass.
