On Wednesday, Montana lawmakers were presented with a significant land planning bill that seeks to revamp the decision-making process for development in and around the state’s rapidly expanding urban regions.
Senate Bill 382 would require additional planning by local governments, rework how and when residents can participate in planning decisions and, supporters say, make it easier to build the housing necessary to accommodate rapid population growth.
The measure, sponsored by Sen. Forrest Mandeville, R-Columbus, was written in large part by Montana League of Cities and Towns Executive Director Kelly Lynch. It’s described by proponents as the outcome of a yearslong collaborative effort to address long-standing concerns about the state’s often-convoluted land use code — including some of the issues raised last year by Gov. Greg Gianforte’s housing task force.
Lynch explained on Wednesday that in Montana, we tend to approach things in a reverse manner. Consequently, it comes as no shock that our permitting procedures are excessively time-consuming. The existing system primarily focuses on reviewing projects instead of proactive planning, which is the root issue. The objective is to completely reverse this approach by prioritizing planning and public involvement from the outset. By front-loading these aspects, the subsequent permitting and platting stages can then become more streamlined and administrative in nature.
Due to the pressing concern of housing affordability, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers at the Legislature in Montana are proposing various ad hoc zoning reform bills. These bills aim to limit city zoning powers and encourage the development of new urban housing, in response to the continuous increase in rents and home prices over the past few years.
House Bill 337, for example, would force cities to allow development on smaller home lots. Senate Bill 323 would require larger cities to allow duplex, triplex and fourplex-style construction in all residential areas. And House Bill 553 would require local governments to permit accessory dwelling units, or smaller homes built on existing lots.
Advocates of these measures contend that strict local regulations have hindered developers from constructing enough homes to accommodate the growing population in Montana, thus exacerbating the current housing shortage. They assert that enacting legislation that compels cities and counties to ease their regulations would stimulate construction and increase the availability of housing, ultimately reducing the bargaining power of home sellers and landlords and alleviating high prices.
The opposition from local government leaders towards one-off zoning measures is based on the belief that many cities are already making progress in zoning reform. They argue that if the Legislature intervenes with top-down mandates, it will disrupt their planning efforts. Instead, they have highlighted Mandeville’s comprehensive overhaul bill as a viable solution that will encourage housing development while allowing local authorities to retain control over land use decisions.
According to Lynch, the language of the bill has been the result of years of negotiations involving a workgroup consisting of city and county governments, land use planners, surveyors, the Montana Building Industry Association, and the Montana Association of Realtors.
The 48-page SB 382 would require city and county governments in the state’s most-populous counties to expand their proactive planning efforts, producing forward-looking land use plans that inventory existing housing, analyze projected population growth and determine specifically where they’ll allow the construction of enough homes to house future residents.
The local governments would need to implement certain measures to promote increased housing construction. They must choose a minimum of five strategies from a list of 15 options aimed at boosting development. These options, many of which align with the suggestions in the ad hoc zoning reform bills, involve actions such as decreasing parking requirements, minimizing minimum lot sizes, and zoning for higher density in proximity to universities and public transportation hubs.
Additionally, the proposed legislation aims to prioritize public involvement in land use planning by encouraging increased public input during the formulation of growth plans and placing restrictions on public comments once specific projects are introduced.
Although the bill’s proponents did not explicitly mention it, the proposed change would essentially limit residents’ ability to oppose subdivisions or buildings that comply with existing zoning regulations, thereby reducing their opportunity to voice not-in-my-backyard-style objections.
We designed this in a way that specifically ensures we uphold the public’s constitutional rights to knowledge and participation.
Montana League of Cities and Towns Executive Director Kelly Lynch
At present, numerous proposed developments face the scrutiny of elected city and county officials during public meetings, irrespective of their alignment with established land use objectives. Lynch argues that this approach creates unnecessary unpredictability in the development process. Conversely, under the framework outlined in SB 382, proposed projects would typically receive administrative approval from a city or county planning director if they meet the “substantial compliance” criteria of existing regulations and do not introduce unforeseen complications.
The proposed legislation enables an individual who feels wronged to challenge administrative rulings through a sequential process: first to a planning board, then to a city or county commission, and ultimately, if necessary, by initiating legal proceedings in state district court.
On Wednesday, Lynch testified that we designed this framework with precision to ensure it aligns with the constitutional right of the public to be informed and engaged.
As introduced, the bill’s provisions would apply by default to counties with at least 70,000 residents as of the 2020 census — Yellowstone, Gallatin, Missoula, Flathead, Gallatin, Cascade, and Lewis and Clark counties — as well as cities and towns in those counties with populations of 5,000 or more. Other local governments would be able to switch to the new planning system on an opt-in basis.
The Montana Legislature’s Senate Local Government Committee heard the planning overhaul bill on Wednesday afternoon, which garnered both extensive support and some criticism.
Sam Sill, a lobbyist for the Montana Association of Realtors, stated that communities must assume accountability for their development by conducting a housing analysis and revising their regulations to adequately address their housing requirements.
The state building association, the Montana Association of Planners, the Frontier Institute, the University of Montana student government, Americans For Prosperity, Big Sky 55+, Trout Unlimited, and the Montana Environmental Information Center were among the other supporters.
According to Ann Schwend, a MEIC staffer, a major environmental concern we have is that each project is assessed individually and the approach is reactive rather than proactive. She emphasizes that adopting this framework would offer essential tools, information, and data to comprehensively comprehend the impacts on our resources.
Certain advocates who prioritize the market aspect of housing expressed their desire for more robust language in the housing-focused section of the bill. They sought to narrow down the range of development-boosting strategies, aiming to provide city governments with a more forceful push.
Jake Brown, a lobbyist representing Shelter Whitefish, expressed his desire for stricter enforcement of the criteria.
The Montana Association of Counties and all three Flathead County commissioners expressed their opposition, stating that the bill would compel them to allocate taxpayer funds towards extensive planning initiatives that are strongly disliked by their rural constituents.
“Given that Flathead County is predominantly rural, this bill is not a suitable fit,” expressed Flathead County Commissioner Brad Abell. “Our county’s residents strongly oppose zoning. If it were to be enforced, they would not hesitate to publicly display their discontent by hanging all three of us in the courthouse yard.”
According to Mandeville, the legislator behind the bill, he is currently making amendments to address the concerns raised by housing advocates and to ensure that county governments have the option to adopt the new code.
He stated that he believes many of the opposition members actually support the overall purpose of the bill.
This story is published by Montana Free Press as part of the Long Streets Project, which explores Montana’s economy with in-depth reporting. This work is supported in part by a grant from the Greater Montana Foundation, which encourages communication on issues, trends, and values of importance to Montanans. Discuss MTFP’s Long Streets work with Lead Reporter Eric Dietrich at [email protected].
