Clark County ag advisers flag risks in Richfield interlocal agreement while weighing transfer-of-development-rights program
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
Commissioners reviewed a TDR work session and raised concerns that a proposed interlocal agreement could de-designate agricultural land and allow annexation if the county does not adopt a TDR program within two years; consultants warned a countywide TDR program would take roughly two years and require clear goals, market analysis and outreach.
Co-chair Mo McKenna opened the discussion by summarizing a recent transfer-of-development-rights (TDR) work session and saying commissioners broadly support creating a program — but disagree about the order of operations.
"If the county didn't create a TDR program within 2 years, I believe, then that city that land would be automatically annexed by the city of Richfield and could be developed," McKenna said, raising a central concern about the draft interlocal agreement (ILA). McKenna also warned an "urban holding layer" in the ILA could sit on land for 10 years and "lock up" property in ways that would hurt farmers' access to market opportunities.
Commissioner Isaiah Irish said many TDR examples focus on increasing housing density in urban receiving areas and cautioned against importing models that assume the same market dynamics here. "It is generally used to increase the housing density in already existing residential areas," Irish said, noting local conditions may not produce the same demand for development rights.
Justin Berger asked directly whether Richfield’s ILA would effectively de-designate land and include an "out" if the county failed to enact a program. McKenna confirmed that is a feature of the draft he reviewed, and said that outcome — automatic annexation after a county deadline — was a significant concern.
Commissioners and outside consultants emphasized that a TDR program requires a goals-first approach. "You have to establish that first: is it to protect ag land? Is it to support farming? What is it that you're trying to achieve?" said Oliver Hajak, summarizing consultant advice that a countywide program needs a market analysis, stakeholder outreach and a public-process phase.
Joe Zimmerman summarized the consultants' timetable: "about 2 and a half years roughly" to develop and implement a TDR program, including market work and outreach. Commissioners raised the practical question of who would run the program: counties often hold deed and legal responsibilities while intermediaries — conservation districts, land trusts or contracted staff — run outreach and farmer relations.
Looking ahead, commissioners noted the council will hold hearings April 20 (morning) and April 21 (evening) to consider the planning commission’s recommendation and to select a preferred alternative; that selection will drive the final environmental impact statement and the schedule for implementing regulatory changes. Several commissioners urged creation of a subcommittee and consideration of a funding request to the council to hire consultants or staff to carry the work forward.
The discussion did not produce a formal policy vote; commissioners instructed staff and agreed to carry TDR work into upcoming committee and retreat activities. The commission moved on to other agenda items after the TDR discussion.