[0:22] Yes, I do.
[0:32] Thank you.
[0:36] » Okay. Thank you.
>> You're welcome. [clears throat]
[0:50] » Bring it up for us.
[1:26] Okay.
>> Yeah, sure.
[1:30] Make it easy and comfortable for you
guys.
[1:33] » Thank you.
Long day for all of us.
[1:40] Get the truth there.
[1:54] » [clears throat]
[2:26] » I don't think you are.
>> You're just
[3:28] Don't make me do this.
[3:54] questions because
[4:34] Okay, it's 9:00, so we'll call the
special meeting of the Madison County
[4:38] Board of Commission. Order. We'll start
with the pledge of allegiance. The
[4:41] pledge in the back of the room. Please
join us.
[4:44] Aliance to the flag of the United States
of America to the republic stands. One
[4:51] nation under God
and justice for all
[4:59] [clears throat]
[5:05] present. Commissioners are here.
[5:11] We uh
this meeting was created as a result of
[5:16] the application of the resolution
which
[5:22] put before the broken recorder and the
was approved the signatures were valid
[5:29] and the percentage was correct.
So before we start the hearing, I just
[5:34] have and some of you have it already,
but I'll read it to you. Public comment
[5:40] guidelines.
If you wish to speak, please line up at
[5:44] the podium. Before you begin your
comment, state your name and address. If
[5:50] you're speaking on behalf of other
people, groups, or entities, please
[5:54] state the nature of that representation.
Public comments by those physically
[6:00] present will be heard first, followed by
public comments from those attending
[6:05] virtually.
All comment should be directed to the
[6:09] chairman and commission, not to other
audience members or applicants. You may
[6:14] have questions.
Understand that this public hearing is
[6:18] not a question and answer session. It's
an opportunity for you to provide public
[6:23] comment to the commission on the matter
described in the abcast.
[6:28] Speakers are encouraged to support a
previous speaker's comments, but not
[6:33] repeat the same comments. If you agree
with what a pre previous speaker has
[6:37] said, simply state you agree with the
comment and move on to the next issue
[6:42] you wish to address.
The commission wishes to hear from as
[6:46] many people as possible.
To that end, no person will be permitted
[6:52] to speak a second time until everyone
who wishes to make a public comment has
[6:57] been provided the opportunity to do so.
Do not interrupt others as they are
[7:03] speaking. Additionally, there should be
no applause, whistling, cheering, or
[7:09] booing during or after any particular
call. Such conduct is unduly disruptive
[7:16] and will not be tolerated.
The purpose of this public hearing is to
[7:21] discuss the federal matters before the
commission and nothing else. Your
[7:26] comments must be limited to this topic.
The commission is not collecting public
[7:32] comments or any others.
Once the chairman is closed to public
[7:37] comment, no further comments are
received. At that point in time, the
[7:41] public has asked the sort of meeting
observed deliberations of the
[7:45] commission.
The commission may have questions to
[7:49] confirm what a particular member of the
public said and may ask that member to
[7:54] clarify. However, that does not mean
more comments are received. If members
[8:00] of the public continues to disrupt the
commissioner's discussions that a
[8:05] disruptive individual asked the meeting
with that I'll start the public hearing
[8:14] of the chief mountain citizen initiating
zone district at 93.
[8:23] I move to incorporate all written
comment to uh the record received since
[8:28] the submission of the petition so we can
avoid duplication of effort. Second.
[8:34] » Okay. So we have a move to the second
that we record the written comments that
[8:38] we have received so we do not have that
duplication. Any further discussion?
[8:45] Hearing none. I'll call the vote. Mr.
Hi.
[8:48] » Can you speak up so people in the chat
can hear? People in the back can't hear
[8:52] you.
>> Okay. I'm sorry.
[8:54] » No.
>> Mr. Gen.
[8:58] » Hi. [clears throat]
>> Cherries.
[9:02] Okay. May proceed.
>> Thank you. Hello. My name is KS and I'm
[9:08] a property owner in Raol Pass as well as
executive director of Preserve Ra Pass,
[9:13] a Montana nonprofit 501c3.
My address is 7 Moonwater Lane, Cameron,
[9:21] Montana. And today, uh, for purposes of
information, we're talking about the
[9:27] Sheep Fountain Citizen Initiated
District, which is in the dark green.
[9:34] Everybody can see which one we're
talking about today.
[9:42] First and foremost, thank you
commissioners and county staff for your
[9:45] work with the Reynolds Pass community
for over three years on these planning
[9:49] and zoning efforts. The proposed citizen
initiated zoning districts in front of
[9:54] you today represent this multi-year
effort by Railsfast property owners for
[9:59] to protect their future and their
property. Everyone in this room, those
[10:05] joining us online, and those citizens
who couldn't participate today, have a
[10:10] keen interest in their future, their
famil family's future and the future of
[10:14] Madison County.
That shared interest is our common
[10:18] ground. And there is no better common
ground from which to respectfully
[10:22] request that the Madison County
Commissioners approve the Sheep Mountain
[10:27] Citizen Initiated Zoning District CISD
before you today. Due to the similarity
[10:32] of the Rainless Pass area, its rural
residential pattern of development,
[10:37] landscapes, wildlife, water concerns,
and surrounding pressures for commercial
[10:41] development. The data and relevant
comments you hear today regarding Sheep
[10:46] Mountain and the two other CICD in
Rainol's Pass may appear duplicative,
[10:50] but the data and comments are true for
each critically loc.
[10:56] Each CICD before you today is necessary
for the public interest or convenience,
[11:01] as you will hear from much of the public
comment.
[11:04] Consider this. In our lifetime, we've
seen a good deal of change. Farms and
[11:09] ranches use heavy equipment instead of
plow horses and mules. Internet access
[11:15] allows people to work anywhere,
including more desirable rural locations
[11:20] like Madison County. Big Sky sprang from
forested public lands and scrub brush
[11:25] ranches became a skiill community and is
now host to commercial and resort
[11:31] development. Multi-million dollar homes
and movie stars spilling into Madison
[11:36] County. There is no infrastructure to
support this scale of development in
[11:40] Randol's past now or in the future.
Montana's population has more than
[11:46] doubled from 477,000
in 1945 to 1,144
[11:52] 694 in 2025.
In our children's lifetime, the greater
[11:58] Yellowstone ecosystems population where
Madison County sits at the heart and
[12:02] hosts the Missouri headarters is
forecasted to reach between 763,000
[12:08] and 846,000
by 2050 to60
[12:14] where these people live and the
corresponding impacts to Madison County
[12:18] are what is on the table today. Today
you have the opportunity based upon the
[12:23] petition of a super majority of citizens
in the sheet mountain cicd to protect
[12:28] the agricultural and rural residential
of this area of Reynolds Pass. Reynolds
[12:33] Pass is located This is a map of Madison
County. This is Madison Valley and
[12:40] Reynolds Pass is located right here. G
is about right there.
[12:47] You can tip the scale in favor of the
affected property owner's quality of
[12:51] life by adopting the sheet mountain cisd
which will protect its limited natural
[12:56] resources, water, wildlife, wildlife
habitat, agriculture and open space and
[13:02] sustain our economic drivers of
agriculture, hunting, fishing, and
[13:06] tourism. These are the reasons the sheep
mountain cisd is necessary for the
[13:11] public interest. The Montana legislature
created the CIZ tool in 1953 for
[13:17] citizens to petition for zoning. Those
representatives understood the citizens
[13:22] right to and interest in protecting
their property.
[13:26] In an August 13, 2024 public meeting,
the commission said they would like to
[13:31] see signatures for zoning. Again, a
super majority of those signatures have
[13:36] been provided. Today, the community of
the proposed sheet mount CICD asked the
[13:40] commission to adopt this CICD and the
proposed land use planning regulations
[13:46] which protect the existing agricultural
and rural residential development
[13:50] pattern existing uses and allow citizens
to request exceptions and to amend the
[13:55] regulations. This is in the public
interest for convenience.
[14:00] The sheet mountain cig and zoning
development pattern and uses clearly
[14:04] adhere to and are consistent with the
2025 Madison County policy land use
[14:09] objectives. MC3 preserve existing open
space and protect valuable agricultural
[14:15] land. MC4 plan for responsible,
reasonable and managed growth and
[14:20] development. MC5 protect the public
health and safety of county residents.
[14:25] MC6 support zoning efforts. MC7, protect
private property rights. MC8, encourage
[14:33] municipal growth versus urban sprawl.
And the 2025 Madison County growth
[14:38] policy environment objectives. MC9,
protect wildlife habitat. MC10, preserve
[14:44] natural resources and protect water
resources. MC11 support growth in
[14:49] agriculture, forestry, recreation, and
tourism, and small service-based
[14:54] businesses in a manner that does not
impact established residential
[14:58] communities. Discourage development that
would financially strain public
[15:03] services. MC13 support infrastructure
improvements within incorporated and
[15:08] unincorporated communities. For these
reasons, among others, the public's
[15:13] interest or convenience require adoption
of the sheet mountain cicd and zoning
[15:17] regulations.
The proposed regulations aim to protect
[15:21] the rain's past development pattern by
preventing high impact commercial
[15:24] business from bringing highdensity human
activity to remote agricultural and
[15:29] rural residential lands in this area
with little to no p public
[15:34] infrastructure. High density development
and corresponding population increase
[15:38] are proven to disrupt wildlife
corridors, increased consumption of
[15:42] limited water resources, and increased
traffic, a public safety hazard. People
[15:47] are attracted to the rural lands and
access to the Madison River available in
[15:51] Reynolds Pass. However, more people in
the banks and in the waters of the
[15:55] Madison River and already burdened
fishery is not sustainable. This river,
[16:00] the lifeblood of the Madison Valley,
provides an economic benefit to a wide
[16:03] swath of the county and it is in the
public interest and necessity to protect
[16:07] it. It is also in the public interest
and necessity to protect the lands that
[16:12] surround it. Wildfire is top of mind
every year and Reynolds Pass has been
[16:16] fortunate this year. The proposed CICD
and regulations reinforce Madison
[16:21] County's fire hazard mitigation
practices by containing future parcel
[16:26] sizes at 40 acres maintains density
consistent with the current development
[16:30] pattern. Maintaining density at this
level is critical given the limited
[16:35] public resources in this area of the
county and their distance from emergency
[16:39] service providers which is definitely in
the public interest or convenience.
[16:45] The proposed sheet mountain cis
regulations are forward-looking, not
[16:49] retroactive. If adopted, land owners
will not be surprised by disruption of
[16:53] their peaceful enjoyment of their land
by a casino, resort, hotel, or RV park,
[16:58] or other high impact commercial use
completely at odds with the character of
[17:02] this area. The CICD and zoning
regulations will provide a predictable
[17:07] future.
Some of these lands have covenants, many
[17:11] of which prohibit commercial activity,
but may not be effective at addressing
[17:15] the same taxes addressed by the CICD.
Citizens are aware from previous
[17:21] development applications before the
planning board and commissioners that
[17:24] the county cannot be involved in
covenant disputes. Madison County does
[17:29] not currently have tools to address
impacts from land use. It only has
[17:33] authority when subdivision is proposed.
The CICD is a tool to address impacts
[17:38] from land uses that adversely affect
property owners. Another reason why the
[17:42] public interest or convenience require
adoption of the sheep mountain cisd
[17:48] zoning has a long history in this
country to protect public health,
[17:52] safety, and welfare by separating
industrial and residential areas. And
[17:56] there is long-standing precedent for
part one zoning in Montana. We've
[18:01] identified 136 CIZD in Montana. For
reference, 88% of these CIC ZDS do not
[18:08] bear CI, excuse me, CICD levies. And for
those that do, the levies are typically
[18:13] 1% of a property's taxable value. With
these zoning regulations, property
[18:18] owners within a CICD have a chance to
protect their property interest. Please
[18:23] do what is clearly in the public
interest or convenience and adopt the
[18:27] sheet mount CICD regulations. Thank you.
And I'm gonna hand a copy to Sarah for
[18:33] the record. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[18:40] » Good morning. My name is Maline Mason.
My address is 97 Gulliard A Boseman. I'm
[18:46] here at preserve Reynolds Pass. I come
to you today not as a property owner,
[18:51] but simply as a recreator of Madison
County and Reynolds Pass. But I stand
[18:55] before you as part of the Rainol's Pass
community, a community of people who
[18:59] welcomed me in with open arms as I've
joined in their advocacy for protecting
[19:03] their area. Madison County is part of
the greater Yellowstone ecosystem, one
[19:07] of the largest nearly intact tempered
zone ecosystems on Earth. Wildlife
[19:12] flourishes here in a unique and
remarkable fashion. This is meaningful
[19:16] to me as someone who wishes to see much
of the biodiversity today extend into
[19:21] the future of tomorrow and as someone
whose household depends on a freezer
[19:25] full of game come winter. The greater
Yellowstone ecosystem expands outward
[19:29] with Yellowstone National Park as its
core. As the gy expands west into
[19:34] Madison County, the ecosystem blends
into the high divide headarters, an area
[19:39] characterized by vast sagebrush
grasslands unique due to its high
[19:43] elevation.
The high divide provides a vital
[19:46] connection between the greater
Yellowstone ecosystem and broader
[19:49] regions, hosting seasonal migrations of
elk, pong horn, and deer. Each winter,
[19:54] Madison Valley supports approximately
2,000 pong horn, 9,500 elk, and 1500 mu
[20:00] deer. These animal summer ranges,
however, are often outside Madison
[20:05] Valley. This is where Reol's Pass is
key. Elk and Pongghorn move south
[20:09] through Madison Valley and Reol's Pass
to access their summer ranges. Reynolds
[20:14] Pass is a low elevation mountain pass
narrowing down to just a mile wide in
[20:18] sections. This narrow but vital point of
connectivity combined with the risk of
[20:23] animal movement bottlenecks from
obstructions such as homes, roadways,
[20:27] and fences makes Reynolds Pass a
critical area to protect.
[20:32] The land surrounding Reynolds Pass
offers a complex mix of meadows, diverse
[20:36] forest types, productive grassland, and
sage brush rangeand all in close
[20:40] proximity. The Madison, Gravali,
Centennial, and Henry's Lake Mountain
[20:44] ranges come together in the subset of
Madison Valley, making Rean's Pass
[20:48] unique travel corridor through which
species can disperse throughout their
[20:52] historic ranges. In addition to acting
as a travel corridor, Reynolds Pass
[20:56] hosts plentiful habitat, providing
summer range for pong horn and winter
[21:00] range for bigorn sheep. The Madison
County growth policy recognizes Reynolds
[21:04] Pass as prime wildlife habitat and ma
wildlife migration pathways. The policy
[21:09] states, "Residents of the South Madison
enjoy a quiet and rural lifestyle with
[21:14] plentiful open space and access to
outdoor recreation." Those residents are
[21:18] here with us today advocating for Sheep
Mountain, CICD, to protect this very
[21:23] quiet rural lifestyle and open space
that benefits both residents and
[21:27] wildlife. The zoning district
regulations prohibit commercial
[21:31] development to limit high density
development as an effort to preserve
[21:35] open landscapes. Buildings are permitted
on 40 acres to maintain unulate
[21:39] movement. In a recent study released by
University of Wyoming in partnership
[21:43] with US Fish and Wildlife Service and
multiple other federal and state
[21:46] agencies, they studied the use of space
between homes by elk, moose, pong horn,
[21:51] and mu deer in rural areas. In doing so,
the researchers were able to identify
[21:56] ranges of space between homes that were
too narrow for undisturbed use by
[22:00] wildlife. The study concluded that
maintaining spacing between houses
[22:05] greater than 500 meters will likely
facilitate unulate movement. While
[22:10] placement of home on parcels is a
greatest factor in achieving these
[22:13] widths needed to maintain unulant
movement, we can observe that 40 acres
[22:17] is a conservative approach to the parcel
size needed. 40 acres in a line results
[22:22] in a total distance of 2550 meters. If
those 40 acres were in squares next to
[22:27] one another and homes are located on the
outer sides of their parcel, it would
[22:31] roughly roughly be 800 meters between
homes, facilitating the necessary width
[22:36] to allow for unimpeded unbulance.
While larger parcel sizes would fully
[22:41] preserve a functional habitat, 40 acres
is a conservative approach that reflects
[22:46] the minimum threshold intended to
preserve basic wildlife without imposing
[22:50] drastic constraints on land use.
These CICDs allow residents in the
[22:55] county to shape how an area grows as
well as protect the land, the culture,
[22:59] the water, and the wildlife as it stands
now. These regulations are not to hinder
[23:04] residents and their neighbors, but
rather to uphold a community and its
[23:07] values. Montana was coined the last best
place, attributed to vast wilderness and
[23:12] sprawling landscapes and sparse
population. While I'd argue Montana is
[23:17] still the last best place, I fear we
cannot pretend that growth is not
[23:20] coming. The growth is here as we've seen
in places such as Flathead and Gallatin
[23:25] County. While Madison County is known
for vast working landscapes and a high
[23:29] amount of land and conservation
easements, Madison comm excuse me,
[23:34] Madison County is not immune to the
pressures that these other towns have
[23:37] experienced. This shouldn't come as a
surprise seeing as the infamous
[23:41] Yellowstone Club is located within
Madison County. I urge you to listen to
[23:45] the citizens before you and to create
Sheep Mountain Zoning District to uphold
[23:50] the values that Matson County and its
residents stand for. Thank you for your
[23:54] time.
[23:58] » There Sarah. Thank you.
>> So that I'm clear, is this public
[24:03] comment?
Is [clears throat] it my Okay. Not done
[24:07] this before. I wasn't certain if this is
proper opportunity for me to come up. My
[24:12] name is Philip Waters. I'm a property
owner at to be determined upper S slide
[24:15] rock road. I reside at 6353 Delta Drive
in Churchill, Montana. I've been a
[24:20] resident of Gallatin County since 2012.
My wife and uh four or five of my kids
[24:25] live in the same home in Churchill for
the past 14 years. Not an MSU Bobcat and
[24:29] an Mustang. I'm a Madison Bobcat born
and raised on the other side of on the
[24:33] other Madison County on the other side
of the divide. Bear with me with a small
[24:36] disproportionate amount of time getting
to know me. It is gerine because it
[24:40] relates to the fact that I am an
individual citizen having value values
[24:45] congruent with the community that's in
support of this initiative. But I I do
[24:49] not support any special interest and I
do not support this initiative.
[24:53] [clears throat]
I believe I'm allied with Amy Omo
[24:56] Honduro's family. I don't know if she's
here or she emailed me just yesterday
[25:00] where some of us are just getting to
know about this. I don't know if that
[25:03] was her case as well. Um um as for me uh
I I believe they're also adversely
[25:08] affected by this. My grandparents gushed
about their drives around the Norris
[25:12] Hempin West Loop so frequently that I
was well familiar with this area of
[25:15] Montana before I fell in love with the
Madison River when I was 10 years old. I
[25:19] searched my entire adult life to find my
slice of heaven which we found in Sports
[25:22] Guns Paradise on Slide Rock Road in
2019. I exhausted all of my savings to
[25:26] secure a small patch of dirt for my kids
to inherit. Reserve Reynolds Pass
[25:30] originally proposed that our parks will
be included in the sheet mountain zone.
[25:33] I attended the online meetings and was
not shy about my skepticism. As of this
[25:37] morning, it remains unclear to me of
whether or not we've been included or
[25:40] have been gerrymandered out of the
region. My recent calculation is that I
[25:44] were included, there would be an
insufficient percentage of land owners
[25:47] for the initiative to pass. The
initiative, however, would still affect
[25:50] us almost as much as everyone else. The
neighbor immediately to my east, the M
[25:53] neighbor immediately to the north, and
the forest land to the southeast of our
[25:57] property are all included in it proposed
map. Um, just to indicate that I believe
[26:01] I am right here in that little
gerrymandered area that's not included,
[26:05] but there is a new map online as of
today where the screenshot shows this,
[26:09] but the actual PDF shows that all of my
neighbors to the west have been included
[26:12] in this initiative. It is not clear to
me and it has not been clear to me up
[26:16] until last night whether or not I was
included and whether or not I've been
[26:19] taken out so that it will pass.
Um, I work from my home. Let's see. Um,
[26:27] so I'll be affected by this initiative,
but it's out of my control whether I get
[26:30] a vote. I believe that if I were to
include the denominator, my obsession
[26:33] might cause a measure to fail, but if I
object, I could be written out of the
[26:36] boundaries and not be considered. So, I
work for my basement of my home
[26:40] full-time. I'm also the assistant speech
coach of Manhattan High School. And so,
[26:44] I'm inspired by the philosophy of a free
America that empowers society,
[26:47] self-governance, and defense of
inalienable human rights like equality.
[26:51] me. Um, I like to think that my voice
today is as compelling as a
[26:54] well-coordinated political maneuvering,
which this appears to be with respect to
[27:00] the with the people that are the prisons
of Raml's past. Um, they're very
[27:04] organized and much more powerful than I
am to a certain extent. Um, in the 1776
[27:08] pan from Common Sense, Thomas Payne
wrote, "Society is produced by our wants
[27:12] and governance government by our
wickedness. The natural state of
[27:16] Reynolds Pass community is a shared
culture having desired to preserve the
[27:20] nature around us. That is a promise
proposed by the preserve ran past
[27:24] initiative. Observe with me that things
are not always what they seem. First, I
[27:27] want to acknowledge the valor of
preserving the land and applaud the
[27:30] persistence of the organization of Kay
and her supporters. I do not object in
[27:33] principle to what is being presented as
it's being aimed to preserve natural
[27:36] resources. I do find however a paradox a
conflict in how this is achieved. My
[27:41] main point is that while presently I do
not see an imminent threat presented by
[27:44] my neighbors who I love and I find to be
of like thinking, the threat that has
[27:48] been I've been made to imagine is a
boogeyman corporation with money and
[27:51] power who would rob my neighborhood of
the peace we enjoy. But what I see is a
[27:54] professionally b branded well-resourced,
connected, and persistent political
[27:58] action group which is constructed to
magnify the voices of support and de
[28:02] diminish the voices of disscent. Between
work, raising my family, and being
[28:06] involved in my community, I do not
always have time to keep a pulse on
[28:09] what's going on with this initiative.
I'm civically involved. However, and if
[28:12] you have not heard my objections, it
would be because the the the
[28:16] [clears throat] initiative is designed
to redirect those elsewhere or
[28:21] gerrymander me out of the picture. They
do have a comments that they can
[28:24] receive, but those are for support and
awareness of the initiative, which has
[28:28] been persistent these last many many
months. Um, I I'm running short on my
[28:33] time, but the the point that I want to
make is that anything that makes us
[28:37] perceive that we need a government
action to protect us from our neighbors
[28:41] will forever encumber us with legal
bindings that we who wish for freedom
[28:47] will find difficulty escaping over
generations of time. So, I find it
[28:52] ironic that anybody would support it and
and the and the neighbor to my east has
[28:57] said, "But what else can we do?" And I
would suggest that what else we can do
[29:01] is we can wait and see and we can think
about it rather than encumbering
[29:04] ourselves today. And I would suggest
that it's going to take somebody's voice
[29:08] that has already been in favor of this
to change their mind to buy us some time
[29:12] so that we can talk about this. And
that's my position. Thank you.
[29:23] » Good morning. My name is Keith Shine uh
with my wife Barbara Lures in 25 Big Ben
[29:30] Road in Cameron. Our property is not in
the proposed CICD district, but we're
[29:37] here to support its passage because we
see such zoning as the only true hope to
[29:43] protect our property value. We're not
rich people. We've worked and saved all
[29:48] our lives to be able to afford at
retirement a small home on the Madison
[29:53] Valley. Our life's savings are tied up
in that home. It is our legacy to our
[29:59] children and it is the entirety of our
legacy.
[30:04] Our property value is tied to our
immediate development, Sundance Bench.
[30:09] However, it is also inextricably tied to
Madison Valley. If the rural, agrarian,
[30:16] and residential character of the valley
changes because of unchecked commercial
[30:21] development, our property value will
decline and our legacy will be
[30:27] diminished.
If the Madison River is harmed by
[30:31] commercial development, our property
value will be decimated.
[30:37] What if across the river from us there
isn't the driftwater cove RV park but a
[30:44] threestory Hilton hotel?
Our views will be poisoned.
[30:50] Where will the hotel get its water from
a depleted Madison River? And if the
[30:57] river has too little water for fish and
the very tourists the hotel was built to
[31:02] built for stop coming, what happens to
our property values? If ever, it will
[31:09] not come back in our lifetime.
The official growth plan for the Madison
[31:14] Valley recognizes these threats,
identifying Madison County as a quote
[31:21] recreationist dream for fishing, hiking,
and hunting. It speaks of the quote rich
[31:27] agricultural landscape with some of the
most notable rivers in the nation. The
[31:33] guiding principles of the growth plan
are to preserve open space, protect
[31:38] wildlife habitat, preserve natural
resources, specifically water, and to
[31:44] respect our agricultural and rural
character. The goals of that growth plan
[31:49] recognize the need to support zoning
efforts.
[31:54] The goals of preserve rentals pass are
completely consistent with the growth
[32:00] plan. We want the same things. The
proposed 150 space RV park on Highway 87
[32:08] was just the first sold over our bow.
There will be more threats, larger ones
[32:15] coming with regularity and we as
citizens can't be expected to fight them
[32:20] peace meal. We need governance.
We need protection of zoning. Given
[32:28] current and projected growth of the
Madison Valley, the fact that we have no
[32:33] zoning is both willfully blind and
shameful.
[32:38] Please pass the zoning districts. Please
protect our home. Thank you.
[32:58] I'm uh first going to speak for Montana
Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. I'm not a
[33:07] employee of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks.
I'm an ameritus professor from MSU who's
[33:12] run the fish and wildlife program uh for
the last 20 years up there and has
[33:17] trained most or many of the natural
resource professionals and state
[33:22] wildlife biologists. Um
>> what's your name?
[33:25] » In state,
>> what's your name?
[33:28] » State your name.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm I'm Dr. Robert
[33:31] Garrett.
I'm also a resident of of the Reynolds
[33:37] Pass area and I I'll speak as a resident
after I've um spoke with uh representing
[33:45] fish, wildlife, and parks. So, they
provided two letters in it for this
[33:50] initiative for the the various zoning
districts. The first letter was written
[33:55] uh and sent um you August 15, 2025, and
it was signed by Dr. Kelly Profett,
[34:03] who's the region three supervisor. I'm
not going to read all the letter because
[34:08] some of it doesn't pertain to your
decisions today. I'm just going to read
[34:11] the uh the pertinent first first
paragraph.
[34:18] Okay. Dear Madison County Commissioners,
Attorney, and Director of Planning,
[34:23] thank you for the opportunity to comment
on the wildlife values of the proposed
[34:27] Reynolds Pass zoning districts. The
Sheep Mountain proposed zoning district
[34:32] holds important wildlife values and
therefore Montana Fish, Wildlife, and
[34:35] Parks supports the proposed zoning
districts. The Reynolds Pass area is
[34:41] important geographically. It provides an
open and grassy lower elevation access
[34:46] over the Continental Divide bounded by
steep mountains and forested hills.
[34:53] These natural features make it an
attractive border for unullet migrating
[34:57] to summer cabing and spawning ranges and
recent research has demonstrated the
[35:04] importance of this area for migratory
elk and throng horn. Although we have
[35:10] not yet been able to collar mu deer in
this area, we suspect that they would
[35:15] show similar migratory pathways.
Migratory behavior is an important life
[35:20] history component of the wildlife in
this area. And attached to this letter
[35:27] are several maps of the the pong horn
and elk migrations through the Reynolds
[35:32] Pass area to support the statements that
that Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks um
[35:39] has made in this letter.
[35:43] Um, that's all I need to do to represent
Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. And
[35:50] now I'd just like to make a a personal
statement as a resident of the Reynolds
[35:54] Pass area. My address is 75 uh Highway
287 South Cameron.
[36:02] When my wife and I were looking for a
place to put down our roots 45 years
[36:06] ago, we spent yet several years looking
for a small plot of land to build a home
[36:12] in western Montana where we've been
living for the past 10 years, primarily
[36:17] in the Bitterroot Valley. But we've been
watching the rapid conversion of one
[36:21] ranch after the other into housing
developments and commercial enterprises
[36:26] that we feared would change the rural
agricultural character of the valley. So
[36:30] after several years of of looking, we
turned our attention to the upper
[36:35] Madison Valley where we had some family
and some friends. The valley offered
[36:40] everything we were looking for. Ready
access to public lands and waters,
[36:45] abundant fish and wildlife, open
agricultural landscapes, and welcoming
[36:50] neighbors, but not too many of them. We
purchased 20 acres in the Reynolds Pass
[36:55] area, built a modest home over several
years, moved in and started our family
[37:01] at the Andis Hospital in 1986.
Educational opportunities and developing
[37:07] careers forced us to become nomadic for
about 10 years. Uh, but we were finally
[37:12] able to uh settle in southwestern
Montana in 19 permanently in 1994.
[37:20] » [clears throat]
>> Madison Valley is a special place that
[37:22] has for the most part escaped the rapid
and mostly uncontrolled development that
[37:28] has dramatically changed the characters
of other Montana valleys like Flatheads,
[37:34] Bitterroot, Paradise, and more recently
the Gallop valleys. But it seems Montana
[37:39] is now on the map. folks that are
seeking to escape more urban
[37:43] environments
and the valley's ranchers, rural
[37:47] residents, and wildlife are going to
have to share um the valley and its
[37:52] resources with more people. Change is
inevitable and we're not opposed to
[37:58] developing and new folks moving in. In
fact, we are newcomers um compared to
[38:03] the valley's ranchers, many of which
have been in the in the valley for many
[38:07] generations. But we want to see the
valley maintained
[38:12] of at least the mountains path area
maintained in its rural agricultural
[38:16] character while accommodating more
people and an expanding economy. The
[38:22] beauty of valley, the open spaces,
abundant fish and wildlife and unlimited
[38:27] recreational opportunities are cherished
by most of the residents of the valley
[38:32] and desired by those who want to become
the residents.
[38:36] My family doesn't want to see the valley
lose those attributes over the coming
[38:40] decades because of uncontrolled
development and neither do a lot of our
[38:44] neighbors in the spass area that have
put time, money, and energy over the
[38:49] past three years developing the citizen
zoning initiatives we are considering
[38:54] here today.
The proposed zoning districts are modest
[38:58] and are generally less restrictive than
many of the subdivision covenants we
[39:03] reviewed when we were searching the
valley for our home. The valley is a
[39:08] wonderful place to live and work because
of the people that have lived here have
[39:12] taken care of it. As as more people move
in and development pressures increase,
[39:18] it is important for the county to help
moderate and direct future development
[39:24] so that we don't become yet another
bitter root or flathead valley and lose
[39:28] what we all cherish in this place. I
encourage you to support the citizen
[39:33] zoning petition you are considering
today to help continue the legacy of the
[39:38] longtime residents of the valley that
have given us what we enjoy here today.
[39:43] Thank you.
[40:02] » Good morning, commissioners, and thank
you for listening to my comments today.
[40:05] My name is Samantha Arbagas. My husband
and I are property owners in Rainol's
[40:09] Pass and I am also a board member with
Preserve Rains Pass.
[40:14] There are many reasons
we should all do the right thing and
[40:18] plan growth more thoughtfully in this
area, but I will speak to just one.
[40:22] Montana's citizen initiated zoning
statutes were created by the legislature
[40:27] so the people could petition for zoning
to assist in protecting their property
[40:31] and have input as to what development
occurs around them. State statutes
[40:37] uh statute states that zoning must be in
public interest or convenience. There's
[40:41] no denying that promoting public health
and safety and general welfare meets
[40:45] that requirement. The purpose and intent
of our zoning district and zoning
[40:49] regulation are to protect public health
and safety, a compelling governmental
[40:53] interest by guiding growth and
development in the area. The primary
[40:58] land management goal is to provide
reasonable guardrails to prevent
[41:01] commercial development from encroaching
through Madison Valley's gateway in the
[41:05] south and spreading through agricultural
and resident rural residential lands.
[41:10] Commercial and highdensity development
brings more people. More people equals
[41:14] more emergencies and a greater need for
response by fire, ambulance, and police.
[41:20] This affects public health and safety
and places additional demands on Madison
[41:24] County's already limited services to an
area over an hour away. There are no
[41:29] manned fire stations in Madison County.
There are no volunteers assigned at fire
[41:34] station 2 located in Rain's Pass on
Highway 287. This means all emergency
[41:39] response has to come from Enis, a
distance of 45 to 48 miles when
[41:44] considering the boundaries of Sheet
Mountain District.
[41:48] Madison Valley Medical Center currently
has two ambulances assigned to the
[41:51] entire val valley. Often one ambulance
will provide patient transport to other
[41:56] areas, which then only leaves one
ambulance to respond to emergencies. If
[42:00] a call came in from Reynolds Pass, the
total response time could be two hours
[42:04] or more and may critically impact the
rest of the citizens of the valley. I've
[42:10] heard that at times there may be only
one active ambulance for the entire
[42:13] valley while the other is out for
repairs and maintenance. Police response
[42:17] is variable and impossible to predict
because deputies are mobile and the
[42:21] sheriff's office in Virginia City is
58.3 miles from the edge of proposed
[42:26] sheet mountain cis orders.
Long response times are a risk to public
[42:31] health and safety in Rain's Pass. Summer
traffic, wildlife, weather, and road
[42:36] conditions can further already slow
response times and create additional
[42:40] dangers for first responders. Adding
commercial development with the
[42:44] associated increase in people and
activities exacerbates this concern for
[42:48] public safety. More fire department
responses to the area is also a strain
[42:53] on the volunteer firefighters who have
jobs, families, and commitments.
[42:58] [clears throat] Highdensity remote
development significantly increases cost
[43:01] to the county, i.e. taxpayers in the
form of maintenance, repair, and
[43:05] replacement of emergency vehicles. On
August 13, 2025, the Horn Fire burned
[43:10] 3,000 acres of grassland and was a
glaring example of how quickly fires can
[43:15] become catastrophic during red flag
extreme fire weather. Emergency crews
[43:20] responded from Madison County, Gallatin
County, Island Park, DNR, US Forest
[43:24] Service, as well as deputy sheriffs and
ambulance. Had this fire jumped the
[43:29] highway into the residential area, which
it came very close to doing, the outcome
[43:33] would have been tragic. With this level
of response, it left little to no
[43:37] coverage for the rest of the county. The
following day, on August 14th, a
[43:41] lightning strike started yet another
fast-moving fire in Norris Hill, and
[43:46] crews were then quickly pulled from one
site to the other.
[43:50] Another example is when Bob Glassman
experienced a severe medical emergency
[43:53] in his Mile Creek home and nearly died
due to a 90-minute response time. Simply
[43:58] stated, there are limited health and
safety resources available to these
[44:02] remote areas, and the distance is too
great to support increased commercial
[44:06] development. In Madison County's updated
growth policy, it states, "Protect the
[44:11] public health and safety of county
residents, support zoning efforts, and
[44:16] specific to Rain's pass, it notes,
support zoning efforts, preserve
[44:20] existing open space, preserve wildlife,
preserve natural resources. Purpose and
[44:25] intent of these two CIZDS are to guide
growth and development which are clearly
[44:31] in both the public interest and
convenience. I I ask you to support and
[44:36] pass the CIDs CDs as presented because
we have met the statutory requirement.
[44:41] Thank you.
[44:47] » Thank you.
[44:52] » [clears throat]
[44:55] » My name is Larry Ray. I live at 42 Elles
Ranch Road in Cameron. So I'm not part
[45:01] of the specific
zoning districts, but if I was, I would
[45:07] uh I would welcome it. I didn't do a
prepared monologue. I mean, there's a
[45:11] lot more eloquent speakers in terms of
fire and water and wildlife and, you
[45:17] know, people that have much more
knowledge. What I will say is that I'd
[45:20] ask you guys and the commission to
envision what happens to the valley if
[45:26] we don't try to understand and control
growth or at least try to preserve what
[45:31] we have up there and if we don't
implement some kind of breaks from
[45:36] what's going on or some kind of guard
rails which we all accept. We all have
[45:40] to get our septics
approved. We we want to control wild
[45:46] weeds. We can't just build a house on
the river. I mean, we allow uh society
[45:51] to impose constraints on us to protect
things that society deems important.
[45:57] What I see is that we've got a group of
people that live in the area that have
[46:01] come to you of their own initiative and
their own time and their own work and
[46:05] have asked you to consider putting some
reasonable guard rails on what's going
[46:10] on in the southern Madison Valley. This
isn't about government control because,
[46:17] you know, pure private property is a
myth. We all pay taxes. We all rely on
[46:22] federal highways and federal systems. We
we rely on water projects at the federal
[46:27] governments. We're we're already in it
together. And if we want to preserve
[46:33] what we have in that valley, if we don't
do anything, then I would ask you to
[46:38] articulate what your vision is for what
happens to the southern end of the
[46:42] valley. I think I think what we see
right now is that that's not going to be
[46:46] a pretty picture. But I would ask you to
approve this and and at least put some
[46:52] guard rails in place that are reasonable
and and are not overly prohibitive and
[46:58] ex and allow um you know allow some
thoughtful uh constraints on what we
[47:04] what we do in that portion of the valley
while not limiting people that want to
[47:09] build a home or newcomers coming to the
valley. In the absence of that, I would
[47:14] challenge you to tell us what your
vision is. If you just arbitrarily say
[47:19] this is no good, give us give us a path
forward to help protect what we consider
[47:24] and we're all standing here and deem
being important. If you just reject it
[47:29] out of hand without some alternative or
without some vision and you and you say
[47:34] to us that we're going to wait until the
valley's fully developed before we
[47:38] develop a plan that seems unacceptable
to me. So in the absence of uh adopting
[47:45] something, provide us a proposal if if
in fact you don't think this is the
[47:50] right way to go. Because I think we can
all agree that this isn't the world of
[47:56] 30 years ago. It's not the world of 40
years ago. It's the world today. And
[48:00] this this area is changing and growing
quite fast. And it would it would seem
[48:06] to me logical that we we get in front of
that and our medicine says that uh you
[48:12] know cure a prevention is better than a
cure.
[48:16] You know growth is the philosophy of a
cancer. So somewhere in the middle you
[48:22] know we need a plan. We need to have
some belief that you know that we're
[48:27] going to protect what we all moved here
for what's important to us. So my
[48:31] challenge to you is, you know, in the
absence of supporting this by the people
[48:35] who came here, did all the work argued
that this is what they want. If if
[48:41] you're not in support of that, give us a
vision of what you are in support of.
[48:45] I'd also suggest that doing nothing uh
is a decision in itself and not a very
[48:51] good one. That's all I have to say. I
guess the last thing is I, you know, I
[48:57] strongly support the initiative. I'm not
part of it. If I was, I'd still strongly
[49:01] support it.
Okay. Thank you.
[49:13] Greetings. Good morning. I'm Linda
Owens. I wear a few different hats. um
[49:19] project director for the Madison Valley
Ranchline Group, which is a locally led
[49:24] nonprofit uh supporting keeping ranching
viable, egg viable in the Madison
[49:30] Valley. It's also means that we tried to
work together to keep our wildlife
[49:36] connectivity improvement. Um in the last
few years, we've tried to also become
[49:43] more of try to net the community
together. Uh we work with the river
[49:49] foundation. We all are here for one
reason or another. We love this place is
[49:54] the key I would say for most of us.
There are those of us that are just in
[49:59] it for the money. We're just buying lots
or whatever as investments.
[50:05] So I will work backwards from what
everyone is saying. I'm not reading from
[50:09] my notes. I had eye surgery yesterday so
I still can't read well. Pat Todd will
[50:14] help me with that part. But I just want
to say that
[50:18] we're looking at this is citizen
initiated. But let's go to the other
[50:22] side of this which is where just this
last year we had talk about this being
[50:28] the corridor
for an interstate.
[50:33] How will that impact us? Everybody's
going to have a say on that, too. So,
[50:40] I'm just saying that change is
inevitable, but that doesn't mean that
[50:44] we stand back. It's like it's like
trying to work cattle in a corral and
[50:48] just opening the gates and let them go
wherever. You want to be able to sort
[50:53] them out and get them where you want
them. Otherwise, you've got chaos and a
[50:57] wasted day. Well, we don't need a wasted
valley.
[51:00] Um, I'm very very proud of this group up
there and the C community whether
[51:06] they're for or against it. They're
showing up. They're interacting.
[51:11] In the early 2000s, North Meadow Creek
out of Mallister, we tried to do uh
[51:17] citizen initiated zoning. We got shot
down after three years of working really
[51:23] hard. So, but what I will say was very
few of them were local people. It was
[51:29] people coming in from out of the county,
some of them out of the state
[51:35] having a say in our future and how we
were able to live there. So, please keep
[51:41] your minds open and realize that the
majority of these people care so much
[51:45] about where they live and change is
constant. If we say, "Well, it's too
[51:50] late."
I remember when I was on the planning
[51:53] board and uh Lonesome Dove came in and
it wasn't even addressed
[52:00] logically. Everybody laughed that lived
here in the county because they said who
[52:04] in their right mind would live there.
Well, you go down there and look at who
[52:08] in their right mind lives there. They
may not be in their right mind, but that
[52:11] place is very full of people. So, I'm
going to let Pat come up and read this
[52:18] part of it. I apologize. I cannot read.
This is Pat Todd. She is National Parks
[52:23] Conservation and she is also part of a
group that I am just a member in called
[52:29] Madison Passages which is trying to
address the increased traffic through
[52:33] the Madison Valley from where it meets
at 87 comes to 287
[52:40] and we're trying to find ways to solve
and keep our wildlife in the valley.
[52:46] Thank you.
>> Thanks, Linda. My name is Pat Todd. I
[52:50] work in this valley and I'm part of
Madison Passages. Um, speaking for
[52:54] Madison Passages, we support the
adoption of the proposed citizen
[52:58] initiated zoning districts in the
Reynolds Pass area. We are a community
[53:02] partnership working to improve safety um
for people and wildlife. As Linda said,
[53:07] and um we know that Reynolds Pass is
identified by Montana Fish Wildlife and
[53:11] Parks as critical wildlife linkage
connecting Henry's Lake Flats and the
[53:16] Madison Valley and surrounding
ecosystems. Alk meal, deer, pong horn,
[53:20] moose, and bears and other species rely
on movement routes through their daily
[53:25] and seasonal habitat to access forage
and breeding areas. And maintaining
[53:29] these connections is really vital to the
long-term health of our wildlife
[53:32] populations. So, as development pressure
increases, habitat fragmentation and
[53:37] increment activity can disrupt this
movement of wildlife, reducing
[53:42] connectivity of habitat and affect the
wildlife collision risks on the highway.
[53:47] Collisions with wildlife pose safety
risk to motorists, create economic costs
[53:51] for folks in the valley, and result in
wildlife mortality. So protecting
[53:56] Reynolds Pass is a key pathway for
wildlife will be important part to any
[53:59] solutions aimed at reducing the
collisions and maintaining the wildlife
[54:03] connectivity.
We know that the Madison County growth
[54:07] policy recognizes the importance of
preserving wildlife habitat and
[54:10] migration corridors and that the
proposed CICDs are consistent with those
[54:15] goals and reflect the communitydriven
effort to balance future development
[54:20] with the protection of the area's
heritage and wildlife resources. Madison
[54:25] Passages believes that maintaining
connectivity in Reynolds Pass is in the
[54:28] public interest. that protecting
migration corridors and connected
[54:32] habitat today will help our efforts to
further reduce wildlife vehicle
[54:36] collisions um while supporting wildlife
passage. So, we appreciate the
[54:40] significant effort that local land
owners and community members have
[54:43] invested in developing developing these
proposals and respectfully encourage the
[54:48] county commissioners to adopt the
proposed citizen initiated zone
[54:52] districts. Thank you for your time.
[54:59] Good morning. My name is Lisa Roberts.
Um uh I don't live in Reynolds Pass. I
[55:05] actually live in town on a small plot
there. Um I'm just I just wanted to make
[55:09] a few comments about um zoning being a
tool. Um in Nis we have seen u our
[55:18] zoning code has not been updated since
1996. And we have seen where uh not
[55:23] having zoning zoning or an updated
zoning um can lead to issues. Um zoning
[55:30] is fundamentally about giving citizens a
voice and how their community grows and
[55:33] changes.
>> Excuse me. Can you speak up?
[55:36] » Oh, I'm sorry. Zoning is a fundamentally
uh about giving citizens a voice and how
[55:42] their community grows and changes.
Citizen initiated zoning is especially
[55:47] important because it starts with the
people who live in the area. It allows
[55:51] residents to identify what they value
and establish reasonable standards to
[55:55] protect those values. Um, without
zoning, communities are often
[56:02] end up often reacting to individual um,
developments one at a time. Um, zoning
[56:09] regulations can be amended over time.
Um, which, you know, NIS is looking at
[56:14] doing now, uh, looking to amend those
and to meet our needs. Um, and I just
[56:21] want to briefly say that Madison County
is experiencing growth and development
[56:26] pressure. The question is whether or not
change will occur, but whether or not
[56:32] the citizens will have the meaningful
tools to help shape that change for
[56:36] their community.
I would encourage you, I'm in support of
[56:42] the citizen initiating something.
[56:52] Good morning. My name is Tom Schroeder.
My wife and I live at 144 Continental
[56:57] Divide Ranch Road in Cameron. Um, first
of all, I'd like to thank you, Mr.
[57:02] Chairman, commissioners, and staff for
the opportunity to speak to you today
[57:06] about what is obviously a very uh
important issue to many of us in the
[57:10] valley. Um, like I said, I live in
Continental Divide Ranch. We are a part
[57:15] of the Sheep Mountain uh zoning
district. I'm speaking in support of all
[57:20] three of the districts. Um these
districts are defined uh by the rivers,
[57:26] its open land, and the wildlife that
depend on both. Uh the corridors and
[57:31] habitat that CIZDS are designed to
protect aren't just scenic backdrops.
[57:37] They're working ecosystems. their
support. They support fisheries, big
[57:41] game migration, and water quality that
every resident and every visitor to this
[57:46] valley ultimately relies on. These
requirements don't just protect a
[57:52] resource on a map. They preserve the
open space, the clean water, and the
[57:57] wild character that makes these
districts feel like Madison County in
[58:02] the first place. When that habitat is
impacted by unregulated development, it
[58:06] doesn't come back. We have one chance to
get this right and these proposals is a
[58:11] sound this proposal is a sound
reasonable measured way to do it. I also
[58:17] want to speak to something I think
deserves some real weight today and that
[58:20] is 60% of the residents in three
affected districts signed a petition in
[58:26] support of these requirements. Getting
60% of support on anything in this
[58:32] county is hard because of significant
shared property owners here that are
[58:37] part-time or seasonal.
Many of them are difficult to reach uh
[58:43] by mail or phone and many don't find out
about the local land issues until
[58:47] they're arrive back at their homes.
Under those conditions, 60% isn't just a
[58:53] bare majority. It's an over it's
overwhelming support. In most local
[58:58] votes or surveys, getting even a third
of eligible participants to respond at
[59:03] all is considered a strong turnout. To
get 60% of the residents, many of them
[59:08] hard to reach
and many of them absentee. To actively
[59:12] sign on in favor of zoning restrictions
on their own land tells you something
[59:16] important. People who signed on to these
districts understand what's at stake and
[59:22] they want it protected.
Uh just as importantly, every citizen
[59:26] had the opportunity to take part in
shaping these requirements and a great
[59:30] many of them did, attending meetings,
submitting comments throughout the
[59:35] process. And while um some may object to
the timing or the need of having these
[59:42] uh requirements in these districts, I
haven't heard anybody object to the
[59:48] goals and objectives of the zoning
district. Um, this wasn't support that
[59:53] was gathered after the fact. It was
built uh from the start. So, with that,
[59:58] I urge you to adopt the CICD
requirements as proposed to protect
[1:00:02] Madison County's critical resources and
wildlife habitat and to honor the clear
[1:00:08] will of the residents who took the time
to make sure their voices were heard.
[1:00:12] Thank you very much.
[1:00:23] My name is Sandra Olaf Coparuda and I am
part of the Olaf Ranch at 850 Highway
[1:00:29] 287 in Cameron.
Chairman Nye, Commissioner Gilman, and
[1:00:34] Commissioner Todd. Thank you for
allowing me the opportunity to speak. My
[1:00:38] mother, brother, sister, and I own the
Olaf Ranch, more than 1,800 acres in the
[1:00:42] Madison Valley, extending from the
Madison River up to the public lands,
[1:00:48] managed by the Forest Service and the
BLM. My grandfather, John Olaf,
[1:00:52] homesteaded the main property in 1898,
only a few years after Montana became
[1:00:58] state. Our family has cared for this
land ever since with the hope that it
[1:01:02] could remain in the family and be
responsibly managed for years to come.
[1:01:07] I want to make clear that our opposition
to these proposed zoning districts is
[1:01:11] not opposition to conservation,
responsible growth, wildlife protection,
[1:01:16] or preserving the rural character of
this community. Approximately 1500 acres
[1:01:20] of our ranch are already in conservation
ement held by the Forest Service. We
[1:01:25] provide public access along the Madison
River, participate in block management
[1:01:29] hunting, and use grazing practices that
allow elk cing to occur undisturbed
[1:01:34] while protecting our waterways.
We have made these commitments
[1:01:38] voluntarily because we believe in being
good stewards of the land. But
[1:01:42] supporting convers excuse me supporting
conservation does not necessarily mean
[1:01:48] supporting citizen imposed zoning. We
also believe strongly in private
[1:01:52] property rights and in allowing land
owners to have a meaningful voice in
[1:01:56] determining how their own property is
used. [clears throat] Today's decision
[1:02:00] is bigger than one property or one
family. It establishes a precedent for
[1:02:04] how part one citizen initiated zoning
districts will be evaluated in Madison
[1:02:07] County. Meeting the 60% petition
requirement allows a proposal to come
[1:02:12] before the commission. It does not by
itself established that creating that
[1:02:16] district is in the public interest and
convenience.
[1:02:20] A zoning district places regulations on
everyone within its boundaries,
[1:02:23] including land owners who do not support
the petition. I respectfully ask that
[1:02:27] the interests of property rights of all
affected landowners be given equal
[1:02:31] consideration.
I believe the commission should ask what
[1:02:35] specific public problem are these
regulations intended to to solve and are
[1:02:40] those restrictions necessarily to
address that problem? If the goals are
[1:02:46] to protect agriculture, wildlife, water,
open space, and rural character, are
[1:02:51] there existing laws, conservation
programs, voluntary agreements, or other
[1:02:54] less restrictive approaches that can be
accomplish these goals?
[1:03:00] Before imposing regulations on all
property owners within the proposed
[1:03:03] boundaries, landowners deserve
regulations that are clear, legally
[1:03:07] sound, enforcable, and fair. There's
also the question of cost and
[1:03:11] administration. These districts will
require county resources and involvement
[1:03:15] from multiple departments. Before
determining that they are in the public
[1:03:18] interest, the commission should
understand the long-term staffing,
[1:03:22] enforcement, and financial requirements.
Who will administer these regulations?
[1:03:26] What will enforcement cost? Will
additional staff or equipment be
[1:03:30] necessary? And what costs or fees will
ultimately passed on to land owners and
[1:03:34] taxpayers?
Finally, please consider the precedent
[1:03:38] and cumulative effect of these three
proposed districts. How will zoned and
[1:03:42] unzoned properties interact? How will
enforcement work across those
[1:03:46] boundaries? And what standard will
today's decision establish for future
[1:03:50] when zoning petitions throughout Madison
County?
[1:03:54] I believe citizen initiated zoning can
be a useful planning tool when affected
[1:03:58] land owners genuinely collaborate on
regulations that are broadly supported,
[1:04:03] clearly written, legally sound, and
beneficial to the community as a whole.
[1:04:08] But there is a significant difference
between landowners voluntarily agreeing
[1:04:10] to restrictions on their own property
and having those restrictions imposed on
[1:04:14] land owners who do not agree. Our family
believes strongly in conservation,
[1:04:18] responsible land management, and
preserving the character of this valley.
[1:04:22] We also believe strongly in private
property rights. Those principles do not
[1:04:25] have to be in conflict. I respectfully
ask the commission to look beyond the
[1:04:29] petition percentage and determine
whether these proposed districts are
[1:04:32] necessary, legally sound, enforcable,
administratively practical, fair to all
[1:04:38] affected land owners, and truly in the
public interest and convenience. If
[1:04:41] those questions cannot be answered
affirmatively, I respectfully ask you to
[1:04:44] not create
for your time and consideration.
[1:05:02] Hello, my name is Diane Olaf and along
with my mother, my sister who just
[1:05:07] spoke, my brother and I are the owners
of the Olaf Ranch. Our property property
[1:05:12] is located within the proposed Big Horn
Crossing CIZD which is not on today's
[1:05:18] agenda. However, I feel compelled to
comment on the other proposed CIDs
[1:05:23] because I believe the decisions being
made today could establish a precedent
[1:05:26] that may ultimately affect the Madison
Valley as a whole. Our grandfather
[1:05:31] homesteaded this ranch in 1898. For 128
years, our family has been proud to be
[1:05:38] part of the Madison Valley. We take our
responsibility as stewards of this land
[1:05:43] very seriously. Our goal is to maintain
the property in a sustainable manner and
[1:05:48] keep it in our family for generations to
come.
[1:05:53] Every major decision we make is
considered with that goal in mind. As
[1:05:57] part of that commitment, 20 years ago,
we placed the majority of our property
[1:06:01] under a conservation easement. That
easement significantly restricts
[1:06:06] commercial residential development. We
have noticed that some properties
[1:06:10] included in the proposed CIDs are also
already protected from development
[1:06:14] through conservation easements. This
raises two important questions for us.
[1:06:19] First, if a property is already
protected by a conservation easement
[1:06:24] that accomplishes the stated goals of
the proposed CIZD,
[1:06:29] why does that property need to be
included in the district?
[1:06:32] Second, if the requirements of a CIZD
differ from or potentially conflict with
[1:06:38] an existing conservation easement, which
restrictions would take precedence,
[1:06:43] conservation easement or the CICD?
Our other concern is the administration
[1:06:49] and financial impact of these proposed
districts. Where will the funding come
[1:06:53] from to administer these districts? Who
will be responsible for overseeing them?
[1:06:59] And most importantly, will property
owners within these districts be subject
[1:07:03] to increased property taxes or other
financial obligations? I want to be
[1:07:08] clear that our family supports the goal
of protecting the Madison Valley, its
[1:07:12] wildlife, agricultural lands, and open
spaces. Our concern is whether
[1:07:17] additional zoning restrictions are
necessary on properties that are already
[1:07:21] protected from development.
Our family has voluntarily taken
[1:07:25] significant steps to protect our land.
We want to understand why additional
[1:07:29] zoning restrictions are necessary, how
those restrictions would interact with
[1:07:33] our existing conservation easement, and
what financial obligations would
[1:07:37] ultimately be placed on land owners. I
respectfully ask the commissioners to
[1:07:41] consider these questions carefully and
to provide clear answers to land owners
[1:07:45] before moving forward with these
proposed districts. Thank you for your
[1:07:49] time, consideration.
[1:07:58] Good morning. My name is Gail Among
Handra.
[1:08:02] Property is located on Sage Brush Way in
Cameron. We spend our our winters in
[1:08:09] mind, Nevada, which is our home. I've
been coming to the Madison Valley uh
[1:08:14] since my youth. Um, in 1988, my husband
Tom and I were fortunate enough to
[1:08:21] purchase property in the upper Madison
River corridor. As a family, we cared
[1:08:27] deeply about preserving the character
and the natural wonders of this
[1:08:32] beautiful place and being good stewards
of the land. Our property is not
[1:08:38] included in any of the three proposed
CIZDs being discussed today, but I do
[1:08:45] have experience with the preserve
Reynolds passport group and I have
[1:08:50] concerns about the use their use of the
CICD process.
[1:08:55] In July of this year, I was contacted by
two preserverless past representatives.
[1:09:02] They shared with me their success about
the CICD process and then in the same
[1:09:08] breath I was told that we our property
is next.
[1:09:15] They shared that the subdivision across
the river from us uh wanted to impose
[1:09:20] the same regulations that are before you
today on our property.
[1:09:25] Our property 228 acres is undeveloped.
The subdivision across the river has
[1:09:34] approximately 140 lots of 20 acres or
less,
[1:09:39] many of which are developed, but only a
small fraction of that subdivision would
[1:09:44] be included in this freshly proposed
CICD.
[1:09:49] This raises the question of how are
these boundaries drawn? Are there are
[1:09:55] there objective planning principles that
determine which properties are included?
[1:10:00] What are those principles for the
districts before you today? In the case
[1:10:05] of Sheet Mountain, I believe that those
boundaries have already shifted since
[1:10:09] inception.
In August of this year, the preserve
[1:10:14] rentals pass quote kickoff meeting for
this initiative that included our
[1:10:19] property was supposed to include
affected property owners. Um yet none of
[1:10:25] the um affected property owners from the
subdivision across the river were
[1:10:30] present.
We raised questions and we were told in
[1:10:34] summary that CIZDS are inevitable and
that they would eventually extend from
[1:10:40] Apoose Creek or the rest stop at Lion's
Bridge all the way to the Idaho border.
[1:10:47] We were told that we had no choice.
This is this experience has acted as the
[1:10:54] impetus for us to participate in this
process. Today I would like to
[1:10:59] understand how a patchwork of citizens
initiated zoning districts organized by
[1:11:05] one well-funded and professionally run
group can adequately reflect public
[1:11:11] interest or convenience of the
communities that they are seeking to
[1:11:15] govern.
Drawing from my recent experience, I
[1:11:20] also wonder about the ways in which
proposed regulations have been presented
[1:11:25] to land owners who signed the petitions.
Is a signature collected in the spirit
[1:11:31] of conservation
indicative of a land owner who was
[1:11:35] informed of the regulatory financial
burden of the CIZD.
[1:11:41] Finally, I have questions
about the inclusion of public lands,
[1:11:46] public roads and public rivers, CICD.
Likewise, I wonder about the regulatory
[1:11:53] because there's necessity of including
already highly regulated properties
[1:11:58] either by conservation easement or HO.
You know, why are these additional
[1:12:03] layers of regulation necessary?
In the case of the occlusion of public
[1:12:08] lands, why should or how can uh this
regulatory burden be borne by such a
[1:12:14] small subset of a landowned
communities or population I should say.
[1:12:22] In summary, preserve rentals past group
frequently calls the CICD process
[1:12:28] voluntary zoning.
It's not.
[1:12:33] We have voluntarily been good stewards
of our land as have many of the affected
[1:12:37] land owners in the um proposed CIZDS
before you today. I ask that you
[1:12:44] consider pro private property rights on
balance with the interests of preserving
[1:12:50] this past. I feel as though this group
has a solution in such problem. Thank
[1:12:57] you for your consideration.
[1:13:03] Good morning. Um, my name is Amy
Alejandro. I'm Gail's daughter. Our
[1:13:07] property is in Seed Bush Way in Cameron,
Montana. I spent every summer of my
[1:13:11] childhood here trying to fly fish poorly
and reading books by the banks of
[1:13:16] Madison River. The integrity of this
piece of Montana has been deeply
[1:13:21] instilled in my values and in the values
of my siblings and has shaped our
[1:13:26] relationship with nature much more
broadly. We all want to protect this
[1:13:30] incredible environment. Conservation is
a lotable goal and it's an important
[1:13:34] goal, but conservation and individual
liberties are not mutually exclusive.
[1:13:40] This is a precedent setting moment for
Madison County. Today, I urge you to
[1:13:44] look beyond whether the petitions met
the required threshold of property owner
[1:13:48] support and instead look carefully at
what these regulations actually do. The
[1:13:54] question before you is not whether
conservation is a worthwhile pursuit,
[1:13:58] but it is whether these specific
restrictions imposed through this
[1:14:01] particular process truly serve the
public interest and convenience.
[1:14:07] I don't understand why three different
districts are being subject to the same
[1:14:11] regulatory language. These districts
have different patterns of ownership,
[1:14:15] development, and land use, but they are
being subjected to essentially the same
[1:14:20] set of highly restrictive standards. If
these communities have different
[1:14:24] circumstances and planning needs, then
the regulations should reflect those
[1:14:28] differences. On the other hand, if the
circumstances are similar enough to
[1:14:33] justify the same regulations, then I
think that raises the opposite question
[1:14:37] of why is this collection of small,
highly restrictive CICDs the appropriate
[1:14:42] planning tool rather than a broader
county-led pursuit that considers the
[1:14:47] region as a whole. Good planning should
respond to the place being regulated.
[1:14:52] Fundamentally, every restriction on the
use of private property should have a
[1:14:56] reason behind it. If we impose a 40acre
minimum, stricter water body setbacks,
[1:15:02] or limits on accessory dwellings, we
should be able to identify a direct
[1:15:06] corresponding benefit to public health,
safety, or welfare. I have not seen
[1:15:11] evidence in this record demonstrating
that these restrictions are necessary or
[1:15:16] that each restriction will produce a
meaningful return on environmental
[1:15:19] protection or quality of life to justify
the burden that it imposes. Without that
[1:15:25] connection, these districts look less
like regulations tailored to
[1:15:28] demonstrated community needs and more
like a regulatory template in search of
[1:15:32] a place to to apply it.
I think that the clearest indication
[1:15:38] that these regulations are not
sufficiently tailored to the communities
[1:15:41] that they seek to regulate is the
extraordinary level of nonconformity
[1:15:45] that they create. In these districts,
nonconformity is not the exception. It
[1:15:50] is the rule. In the Sheep Mountain
District, by my count, there are roughly
[1:15:54] 54 parcels. Only five of those parcels
meet the 40 acre minimum acreage
[1:15:59] standard contained in the regulation and
three of those are already protected by
[1:16:03] conservation easement. That means that
the commission is being asked to adopt a
[1:16:08] minimum parcel standard that bears
almost no relationship to the existing
[1:16:12] pattern of private land ownership in
Sheep Mountain. While there has been a
[1:16:16] lot of discussion about existing uh
properties being grandfathered,
[1:16:19] grandfathered does not mean unaffected.
These regulations still impose
[1:16:23] additional conditions and restrictions
on non-conforming properties, creating
[1:16:28] additional regulatory burdens for both
land owners and the county. I don't
[1:16:32] think that having non-conformity
automatically means that a regulation is
[1:16:36] unreasonable. But when a zoning district
is so disconnected from the community
[1:16:40] that it regulates that almost every
existing parcel fails to meet its basic
[1:16:45] dimensional standard on day one, that
should demand a pretty compelling
[1:16:49] justification for how that minimum
[clears throat] standard produces a
[1:16:52] measurable benefit to public health,
safety, and welfare. Lastly, I want to
[1:16:57] briefly address cost. The county
planning department has raised questions
[1:17:01] about the staff time, equipment,
administrative capacity, and enforcement
[1:17:05] resources that these districts will
require in their staff report. Before
[1:17:10] creating this district, I would
encourage you to answer two very basic
[1:17:14] questions. What will it actually cost
man Madison County to administer and
[1:17:19] enforce these regulations? And who will
pay for it? If the costs are ultimately
[1:17:23] assessed within each district per the
statute, has anyone calculated what that
[1:17:28] means for individual property owners?
The cost may not seem exorbitant if you
[1:17:33] look at it spread out across the entire
district, but it might not feel so
[1:17:37] modest if based on taxable value, one or
two land owners within a district are
[1:17:42] responsible for a disproportionate share
of that cost. Before creating a
[1:17:46] permanent regulatory obligation, I would
ask that the commission know both the
[1:17:50] cost of that obligation and who will
actually bear it. Thank you so much for
[1:17:55] your time and consideration of my
concerns.
[1:18:05] » My name is Pam Townsend. I live at 200
Jensen Road in Cameron. My husband and I
[1:18:11] bought built our house 15 years ago. and
I'm also part of a family that's had a
[1:18:17] footprint in this valley since 1960.
Um my husband and I stand in support of
[1:18:24] the majority of the signators to these
petitions
[1:18:29] initiated zoning districts. Thank you.
[1:18:40] My name is Rebecca the Pike and I'm live
on in the
[1:18:48] Big Horn Sheep uh district. I live on uh
19 Moonwater Lane
[1:18:57] on River and 8/10 of an acre. I'm a
observer by nature.
[1:19:05] No pun intended, but uh nature is my
favorite observation. And these two deer
[1:19:13] came rushing through my yard or not well
close to my yard looking for a way down
[1:19:19] to the river to get out of wherever they
were and they were in trouble and
[1:19:25] obviously in their sense of the word.
And uh so I got to watch them scurry and
[1:19:35] try to find their way to the river. Uh I
assume they made it and I know they
[1:19:41] wanted to get up there on the big
mountain, get out of there. So anyway,
[1:19:47] uh that's uh the most recent
observation and I'm looks like the tail
[1:19:55] of the of the beast this morning. And uh
I am in favor of the positive
[1:20:04] on this wildlife and land preservation.
And I've noticed things like the when
[1:20:14] they put in a new table in our area,
which was this sage brush, uh then they
[1:20:22] planted over it to make it look nice.
They put in a a great big tall grass
[1:20:29] with a lot of seed on it. I don't see
too many animals eating it. Uh none of
[1:20:35] the big animals.
Uh that big horn sheep were looking for
[1:20:40] food one winter came all the way down
the whole and they were on the river.
[1:20:45] the Schwantler River. I crossed on our
my side on Southside and uh they were
[1:20:52] digging around down there trying to find
something to eat. And uh this stuff they
[1:20:58] put in alongside the roads and in the
the trenches where they bury the cable,
[1:21:04] probably the cheapest stuff they can
find. It's kind of a mixed seed. It's
[1:21:09] not clean seed. That's going to be a
problem eventually. and uh with all our
[1:21:16] good brain we've had, it's a problem
now. But anyway, I'm for the positive
[1:21:23] or for the
to the uh whatever we're doing here
[1:21:30] working on. Yeah, I'm not a public
speaker. I'm an observer. So, uh, that's
[1:21:37] I couldn't miss this opportunity to
speak for the wildlife and for the the
[1:21:42] peace and quiet what we have. Uh, and
that's actually what they're selling to
[1:21:47] the to the uh people that come and
visit. So,
[1:21:53] we're going to lose that
if we don't do something.
[1:22:11] guys. Thank you. Thank you.
Um, my name is Jerry Orbula. I uh live
[1:22:18] at 7 lane.
I've been there for quite some time. Um
[1:22:28] going to take this moment to thank you
gentlemen and the staff here for all
[1:22:31] that you do. Uh it we've had the chance
or I've had the chance but to observe
[1:22:38] more carefully over the last several
years what you do and my heads off to
[1:22:42] you.
You guys don't do this for the money
[1:22:45] though, do you? [clears throat]
I mean,
[1:22:51] uh, see, it's out of charact.
And honestly, that's that's why we're
[1:22:55] all here today as we all
speak up. Speak up.
[1:23:01] » I speak up.
>> I'm the one hearing. So, if you want to
[1:23:04] speak,
>> thank you. I thank you. I I'll take
[1:23:07] that. Um,
I want to clear up some misconceptions
[1:23:12] up front here. You know, I was raised in
a coal mining town, small coal mining
[1:23:15] town.
And what we call misconceptions back
[1:23:18] then were rumors and gossip.
So there are a few misconceptions. I
[1:23:24] think I'm just going to take just a few
moments to clear this up. The the
[1:23:28] concern about u if you're not in an
identified zone that you're going to be
[1:23:34] controlled by that that is there's no
connection there,
[1:23:38] right? I mean if you don't that's like
saying [clears throat] I live in
[1:23:42] Gallatin and I'm going be affected by
what you do in Ellis. That doesn't mean
[1:23:46] you'll be directly affected. I mean,
does it affect long term? Well, if we're
[1:23:50] talking about long-term planning, yeah,
maybe it does. Maybe we should be
[1:23:54] affecting some things long term. Um,
[1:24:00] and the idea that I certainly respect
everybody's rights in the valley, but
[1:24:07] then we should also respect those
people's rights who do want to try to
[1:24:11] protect their immediate surroundings.
I think it's a matter of mutual respect
[1:24:17] here.
Um, and the one that really threw me a
[1:24:20] curve since I am on the board for QRP
is the idea that we're well funded. Uh,
[1:24:27] I think I want to just simply state that
all of the funding that's come from PRP
[1:24:33] is by people in Madison Valley who are
neighbors and who care. That's probably
[1:24:39] a significant consideration when you're
looking at public sentiment. This is
[1:24:45] people of their own time, their own
money, their own volition choosing to do
[1:24:50] this. There's nobody being forced here.
So, I just want to clear that clarify
[1:24:56] that moment. I'm going to get on to my
regular conversation here. So,
[1:25:00] uh
so as I mentioned, I've been a property
[1:25:04] owner here in Reynolds Spash for more
than 30 years. I stand here before you
[1:25:09] today under my understanding under the
Montana law
[1:25:14] that citizen initiated zoning u is part
of a citizen's right.
[1:25:23] I respectfully request that you adopt
the citizens initiated zoning district
[1:25:27] um as it represents the views of the
majority. Sorry, my eyes are terrible
[1:25:33] here.
[1:25:41] me to read it for you.
>> You may have to let me just give it one
[1:25:45] more shot, then I'll let you
um
[1:25:51] Okay. So, as I said, I respectfully
ask that you consider this
[1:25:58] request
under the understanding of the You know
[1:26:03] what? Is it allowed for me to read it
for him? He has eye problems.
[1:26:09] » I have some vision issues that I'm just
now dealing with. I can take one more
[1:26:12] shot at it.
>> No, it's okay. We'll just in the
[1:26:14] interest of everybody's time.
>> Yeah. Well, it's
[1:26:17] » your misery. It's
[1:26:21] okay. I respectfully request that you
adopt the citizen initiated signing
[1:26:25] district which represents the views of
the majority of my neighbors. It is also
[1:26:30] in sheet map. It also my understanding
that the term majority is defined by 60%
[1:26:36] or more of the land owners in a district
as required by Montana law and reflected
[1:26:40] by the signatures on the petition. The
request represents more than three years
[1:26:45] of community outreach and time and money
from citizens in Madison County to
[1:26:50] support a campaign of awareness and
education and legal support in preparing
[1:26:54] a petition submitt such as this to
Madison County. The genesis of the CICD
[1:27:00] initiative began four years ago.
Neighbors began having conversations on
[1:27:04] the rapid changes at the south end of
the Madison Valley. Those conversations
[1:27:09] grew to concerns with the increase in
home buildings, existing developable
[1:27:13] parcels of record, expansion of a gravel
pit and the attempt to build 150 RV
[1:27:18] park. Some of these occurring without
much public awareness. We learned
[1:27:23] through numerous local neighborhood
discussions the need for more
[1:27:26] information and the passion in the
community to provide thoughtful input to
[1:27:30] complex challenges and growth of this
amazing valley we all call home Madison
[1:27:35] Valley. Those of us who have lived in
the valley of QD aware of the challenges
[1:27:40] overdevelopment of resources that have
an irreversible impact on water forests
[1:27:44] and wildlife. It is well documented that
these fragile resources are essential
[1:27:49] for future economic stability and
lifestyle. Tourism is manageable.
[1:27:54] Destruction of natural resources is not.
Consistent with Montana history, Madison
[1:28:00] County has historic agricultural
heritage that is essential to preserve
[1:28:04] the lifestyle and economic stability of
the county. The support of police
[1:28:09] medical and fire protection for rural
areas has already been addressed by
[1:28:13] colleague Samantha Arvagast.
Recognition of public demand for
[1:28:17] fishing, hunting, and camping
opportunities in Madison County, which
[1:28:21] drives population relocation here means
local citizens input and support for
[1:28:26] growth policy initiatives and planning
tools. The idea of citizen initiated
[1:28:31] zoning can help address concerns such as
land use compatibility, environmental
[1:28:36] protection, and infrastructure planning.
Let me explain that during my past four
[1:28:42] years of working with PRP, the county
conducted a multi-sight outreach program
[1:28:47] in an effort to understand public
perspective and to listen to the people
[1:28:50] in remote areas of the county. I
attended one of the meetings. By the
[1:28:55] way, I applaud this effort. The
attendance was small but boisterous.
[1:28:58] less than 10% of the land owners for
that area attended. This is not
[1:29:03] criticism. It is quite typical for these
type of outreach programs. Here's the
[1:29:08] point. It was one time in four years
with a less than 10% response. We were
[1:29:12] able to gather detailed public input as
specific to the Rains Pass region and
[1:29:17] share results of our documented outreach
and public opinions. After four years of
[1:29:21] ongoing communication, we've established
a community. This community could also
[1:29:26] be utilized for future county
initiatives. These districts can provide
[1:29:31] thoughtful, organized citizen input to
the county regarding future growth and
[1:29:35] development. CICD does not compete with
the county. It enhances community
[1:29:40] communication.
Finally, I would like to address a
[1:29:43] concern raised about the cost of CICD.
How many of you are familiar with the
[1:29:48] county discussion for a proposal to
build a 150 lot RV park in Rain's past
[1:29:53] four years ago? Fortunately, the
proposal was defeated, but not without a
[1:29:57] lot of discussion, confusion, expense,
and difficult feelings. A quick
[1:30:02] question, how much of the county's
limited and precious resources were used
[1:30:06] to address this issue? I don't know that
number, but I'm pretty sure it involved
[1:30:10] multiple departments over several
months. precious resource resources that
[1:30:15] you folks in this room are acutely aware
of. What many observed during that
[1:30:19] process with confusion and
misunderstanding in the community about
[1:30:24] what people can do with their property,
the public's lack of understanding about
[1:30:28] covenants and their lack of compliance
in rural areas only added to the chaos.
[1:30:33] These type of conflicts are not going
away. Adopting CICD initiatives with
[1:30:38] clear guidelines that are developed and
endorsed by local citizens will reduce
[1:30:42] public confusion and conflict and reduce
the strain on county resources.
[1:30:47] The Montana legislature adopted the
zoning framework in 1953 to allow
[1:30:52] citizens to petition the county to adopt
zoning regulations to protect their
[1:30:57] property. The idea is a law based on two
simple concepts that guide public
[1:31:01] policy, common sense and financial
accountability. Without CICDs, it's more
[1:31:07] expensive to ignore and than adopt. I
urge you to adopt a CICD proposal.
[1:31:21] » Thank you.
[1:31:28] » Good morning. My name is Steve Somatria.
I am a citizen property owner in
[1:31:32] Randol's Pass for the past 12 years. I'm
also a board member of reserve rand
[1:31:38] fully support the sheep mountain cisd
which is in the public interest because
[1:31:41] its purpose and intent is to protect
public health and safety as well as
[1:31:45] properly guide growth and development in
the area which all considered together
[1:31:49] are a compelling governmental interest.
One specific reason why I am supportive
[1:31:54] is driven by my concern with the
declining residential water supply. In
[1:31:58] most recent years, the underground water
table appears to be dropping.
[1:32:02] The static water level from my well has
dropped from 160 ft to 353 feet with the
[1:32:08] total depth of the well still at about
440 ft. I hear about similar situations
[1:32:12] from other citizen property owners in
the area and I'm anxious to preserve
[1:32:15] Rand's past to start its water study in
order to benchmark current well levels
[1:32:19] in addition to bringing greater clarity
and broader awareness to this issue.
[1:32:24] In addition, we have more lots in our
area with no home or well yet compared
[1:32:28] to the number of lots with a home in a
well. Therefore, there is not yet a well
[1:32:31] drawing water from the aquifer on the
majority of lots.
[1:32:35] And let me be clear, these zoning
regulations do not in any way impede
[1:32:38] these current land owners from building
a home on their vacant lot and drilling
[1:32:41] the well eventually. But this potential
future significant increase in water use
[1:32:45] from the aquifer as more and more
residential wells come online does
[1:32:50] present a risk to the aquifer. So, are
we also going to allow large-scale
[1:32:54] commercial development in Randle's Pass
as a material add-on risk which puts an
[1:32:58] extremely high demand on the underground
water supply
[1:33:02] or as these zoning regulations provide
will we wisely prevent large-scale
[1:33:06] commercial development in Randles Pass
is one smart smart way to mitigate the
[1:33:09] risk to this force?
Some may doubt the risks, but surface
[1:33:13] water is a key indicator in what it's
been telling us for a while now. We have
[1:33:18] seen surface water drying up which is an
early indicator and confirms it is
[1:33:21] highly likely that the underground water
table is indeed dropping.
[1:33:25] One of the many examples of the surface
water issue is Mile Creek and Reynolds
[1:33:28] Pass. Mile Creek is a trickle compared
to many years ago to the point where
[1:33:32] ranchers now need to consider drilling a
well to make sure they have enough water
[1:33:36] for their cattle.
How will this possibly new and important
[1:33:40] aggra business uh water-based need for
ranchers which is also unaffected by
[1:33:44] these zoning regulations
affect their affect the underground
[1:33:48] water tape. The agra use should be a
priority in Rain's pass as opposed to
[1:33:53] large scale de uh commercial development
and the water uh draw that it it that it
[1:33:58] takes. Another specific reason why I am
supportive is the potential impact of
[1:34:02] property.
What do you think will happen if we turn
[1:34:05] a blind eye to this challenge of a
declining water supply, kick the can
[1:34:08] down the road, put no control over large
commercial development, and end up
[1:34:12] having water supply problems in Brand's
Pass? At a minimum, property values
[1:34:16] would be materially affected in a
negative way. And if any lot ends up
[1:34:19] having trouble or difficulty finding
water at some point in the future, that
[1:34:22] lot could potentially become nearly
valuous.
[1:34:26] And when I think of the negative impact
on property values, I'm also reminded of
[1:34:29] the common saying of those who oppose
these initiatives. They will quickly
[1:34:32] offer, and I quote, a statement which I
understand and respect, I am a personal
[1:34:37] property rights person. I support
personal property rights. But what that
[1:34:42] statement leaves off or doesn't consider
are these very important words.
[1:34:47] But what happens to my neighbor's
property value when I have a large-scale
[1:34:50] commercial development project on my
property?
[1:34:54] As an example, what do you think would
happen to a neighbor's property value if
[1:34:57] an adjacent property owner is allowed to
build a large hotel or some other large
[1:35:01] commercial development on a lot right
next door or across the river from their
[1:35:05] neighbors residential lot with a single
family home,
[1:35:09] that neighbor's property value would
most certainly be adversely affected in
[1:35:12] a very material way. Finally, I want to
draw attention to the degree of support
[1:35:16] that's been achieved with this zoning
effort. This CICD effort has met the
[1:35:20] statutory requirement for signatures of
over 60% of the affected property owners
[1:35:24] in support of the CIZDS which is why we
are here today. Achieving greater than
[1:35:29] 60% is a very compelling threshold
that's been achieved and I suspect it
[1:35:33] was set by the legislature with exactly
that in mind
[1:35:37] so that when a county grants the
petitioner's request it's not being
[1:35:41] arbitrary and capriccious as it's
responding to a very compelling number
[1:35:45] of people who support the petition. The
legislature deemed 60% to be a
[1:35:49] sufficient number of affected owners to
petition for citizen initiated zoning
[1:35:52] and the petitions have met that bar.
I'll close by saying two more quick
[1:35:57] things. One, it is very rare for any
decision that requires people to sign a
[1:36:02] petition or vote in an election of any
kind whereby one side receives more than
[1:36:08] 60% in support.
This is democracy and action with a very
[1:36:12] compelling result. And two, I hope and
pray that you will see the CICD
[1:36:16] regulations
that they support the public interest or
[1:36:19] convenience and vote yes in support of
the CISD petition. Thank you for
[1:36:24] allowing me to have the opportunity to
speak today.
[1:36:31] » My name is Delio. I live at 101 Sheet
Mountain Road in the Sheep Mountain
[1:36:38] District.
Um, I fully support
[1:36:43] uh the zoning in these three districts
without question. And I also have
[1:36:48] statement to read from somebody else if
I'm allowed
[1:36:52] to whom it may concern. My name is
Darnell Schulty, a resident of Madison
[1:36:57] County, Montana.
I am a Madison County Forester, but I am
[1:37:02] writing this as a resident of the
county, and my thoughts are expressly my
[1:37:05] own and reflect in no way those of
Madison County. I would like to express
[1:37:10] my concerns about the continuing growth
in Madison County.
[1:37:14] One, continued rapid growth, especially
in the remoter areas of our county,
[1:37:19] bring with it several concerns that I
have as a volunteer fireman. Water is
[1:37:24] becoming larger and larger issue across
the west, not only for wildland fire
[1:37:28] suppression, but for residential and
commercial use as well. Our continuing
[1:37:33] drought cycle coupled with lengthening
fire seasons poses a very serious
[1:37:39] challenge for the safety of our citizens
and their homes.
[1:37:43] Travel time to more remote areas brings
with it increased quote unquote wear and
[1:37:48] tear on our emergency vehicles and first
responders.
[1:37:54] travel time. Uh
sorry, uh will homes and dwellings in
[1:38:00] these area be built with or be required
to use firewise building materials and
[1:38:04] practices? These materials and practices
will significantly increase the
[1:38:09] survivability of buildings across the
county. In fact, in the event of a large
[1:38:13] fire, such as the current Sand Creek
fire in Beaverhead County, areas built
[1:38:19] uh and maintained to these standards can
increase safety zones for first
[1:38:23] responders.
My final concern is road maintenance and
[1:38:27] uh access to more remote areas within
the county. I feel that county road
[1:38:31] maintenance groups are doing uh a great
job right now, but as always, things can
[1:38:36] improve. With additional miles added to
their workload and budgets, they will be
[1:38:41] able to maintain them to a standard that
allows safe and rapid access for
[1:38:45] emergency vehicles and evacuation of
residents if needed. I guess this all
[1:38:50] boils down to a question of money.
Additional growth uh generally equals
[1:38:54] more of everything to maintain roads,
emergency vehicles, continued recruiting
[1:38:59] of first responders, etc.
Uh some of the current well-intentioned
[1:39:03] homeowner groups uh in the county have
put in place building requirements that
[1:39:07] do not match or are in direct conflict
with smart building practices in the
[1:39:12] wildland urban interface WUI.
Uh this is what essentially will uh all
[1:39:20] growth outside of a town uh is in
Madison County. Now I feel the growing
[1:39:25] issue of wildland urban interface and
growth should be uh carefully studied
[1:39:29] and thoughtful careful consideration be
brought to bear on any proposed growth
[1:39:34] within the county. This would help
alleviate the issues I've identified
[1:39:37] above and hopefully the ones I haven't
addressed as well. Thank you for your
[1:39:41] time.
[1:39:45] » I apologize I forgot to drop off my
[1:39:54] multiple copies. There you go. Sorry.
[1:40:05] » Thank you.
[1:40:11] » Thank you, commissioners. It's a It's a
pleasure to be here and listen to
[1:40:14] everybody's opinions [clears throat] as
a leader in
[1:40:19] in business and in life. I come to
understand that sometimes you make
[1:40:24] decisions that are tough and sometimes
you don't make decisions and there's
[1:40:28] unintended consequences of not making a
decision. So, I'd like to make a couple
[1:40:34] of comments. I live uh right at 1511
highway 287 right at Lion's Bridge.
[1:40:44] So, I want to create a vision for you.
When you first come into Inennis from
[1:40:50] the north,
I want you to think about that. What do
[1:40:54] you see?
What are the first things you see?
[1:41:00] Junkyards,
buildings that are falling apart. What
[1:41:04] is that impression that you get? You
know, unregulated outside storage,
[1:41:11] no zoning.
Now you're going over Reynolds Pass. Do
[1:41:16] you want to see those sorts of things in
the future?
[1:41:21] It's something to really think about
because
[1:41:25] the unintended consequences are coming
our way. Our populations exploding.
[1:41:31] We have outside investment.
Money generated other places not in our
[1:41:38] community. Investing in our community
that's increasing the cost for
[1:41:42] everybody. Our land values have risen
faster than the infrastructure we have.
[1:41:49] Over time, individual unregulated
property decisions
[1:41:55] gradually damage the character and
scenery that made Madison Valley so
[1:42:00] valuable to all of us.
Incompatible uses
[1:42:06] end up side by side like a truck stop in
an RV park next to an egg facility.
[1:42:13] development
[1:42:16] causes not only destroys visual and
environmental issues, but it creates
[1:42:23] traffic and and uh road expansion costs.
And as mentioned previously, the water
[1:42:30] resources are impacted,
wildlife corridors impacted,
[1:42:36] land speculation already going ahead.
If you if you can't help but miss the
[1:42:43] threetory development on Main Street
that can't be sold,
[1:42:50] can you imagine that? Can you create a
vision for that going over Reynolds
[1:42:55] Pass? Yes, we have property right
conflicts, but if we don't do anything,
[1:43:00] the unintended consequences
are there's going to be lawsuits,
[1:43:06] more ordinances, more time, more
restricted covenants because we didn't
[1:43:11] do anything. I think it's important to
vote for these zoning issues to protect
[1:43:16] our valley, the countyy's scenic scenic
character, protect tourism and our egg,
[1:43:23] protect our water, and keep our spaces
open in an organized manner. Or we can
[1:43:30] choose to do nothing.
Yes, commissioners, this is a very hard
[1:43:34] decision,
but doing nothing will have consequences
[1:43:39] that last for generations.
And we can't. The tide is coming up and
[1:43:45] we're going to get swamped. Population's
increasing. Outside influence is
[1:43:50] increasing. And if we're going to
protect the collective value of our
[1:43:54] valley, we have to adopt these
initiatives. So, dear commissioners, the
[1:43:58] decision you make today sets the stage
for our future, not just for today or
[1:44:05] next year, but for our grandchildren.
Thank you very much.
[1:44:08] » What's your name? John White,
>> thank you.
[1:44:13] » Does the commission want rebuttals after
public comment online or would you
[1:44:17] accept one now?
[1:44:21] » Public comment.
>> Okay.
[1:44:32] » Quick time out.
>> At some point, we're going to take a
[1:44:35] recess.
>> Yeah.
[1:44:36] » If I sit here for nine hours, I'm going
to die. Yeah,
[1:44:42] » this lady.
>> I think that's a good idea.
[1:44:45] » Great idea.
>> Thank you.
[1:44:51] » N Commissioner Gilman, Justin Bmer, 777
East Main Street here on behalf of the
[1:44:58] petitioners,
including those who are members of
[1:45:01] preserve rains past.
My comments today incorporate by
[1:45:06] reference the September 1st, 2026 letter
in support of the CIZDS that was
[1:45:11] submitted via email yesterday. And given
the limited time for my comments today,
[1:45:17] I want to make sure those were made a
part of the record for this hearing. Can
[1:45:20] you all confirm you received that
letter?
[1:45:24] » That's what they included in
>> it was incorporated in motion.
[1:45:27] » Okay. [clears throat] I just wanted to
make sure. Right. it.
[1:45:30] I just um that letter the written public
comments and the public comment today in
[1:45:36] support of this citizen initiated zoning
district regulation development pattern
[1:45:40] and map demonstrate the public interest
requires adoption of the proposed CACD
[1:45:45] and regulation.
The zoning regulation itself makes clear
[1:45:51] it to protect the rural residential and
agricultural character of the area. the
[1:45:56] existing development pattern included in
the regulation and given the limited
[1:46:00] public services and scarce water
resources available which you've heard
[1:46:04] about.
To be clear, for the record, the
[1:46:07] applicable statute 762101
requires only the public interest or
[1:46:13] convenience be demonstrated to adopt the
zoning district, not both. And I
[1:46:19] mentioned this in response to the staff
report and the findings required to
[1:46:22] adopt the CD.
It looks like there is an attempt to
[1:46:27] over complicate this decision today in
terms of the public comment and the
[1:46:32] staff report. And again, the decision is
whether the CICD or in the public
[1:46:36] interest or convenience. There's no and
and criteria beyond what is required by
[1:46:41] Montana law cannot be added through
definitions of public interest or public
[1:46:45] convenience, but neither one of those
are defined by statute. And the 15 the
[1:46:51] list of 15 questions in the staff report
are also beyond what is required by
[1:46:55] statute. A number of people in the
public have also asked you to consider
[1:46:59] things that are beyond what is provided
in the statute and they do not apply to
[1:47:04] your decision regarding the quested
CICD.
[1:47:07] The cumulative impact of one, two, or
three separate zoning districts on
[1:47:11] Reel's pass is also not among the
criteria adopted by the legislature for
[1:47:17] you to consider when looking at the
CICD.
[1:47:21] The same is true for the capacity of
administration and enforcement and you
[1:47:25] have the authority to levy
which is intended for this very purpose.
[1:47:31] All these considerations are simply
outside the scope of authority granted
[1:47:34] to you by statute and that is clear from
the staff report and we agree the county
[1:47:38] only has the authority granted to it by
statute
[1:47:42] and the statute only requires 40 acres.
You have much more than that in these
[1:47:47] zoning districts. The criteria only
require a petition of 60%. You have as
[1:47:53] much or more of these zoning districts.
And in terms of public lands, that
[1:47:57] section isn't even triggered until the
land is sold or transferred
[1:48:02] and becomes private. So that's not an
issue.
[1:48:07] In addition to statute, you must
consider the wealth of public comment in
[1:48:12] support of the CIZD. The Montana
Constitution at Article 2 Section 8
[1:48:17] provides that the public has the right
to expect governmental agencies such as
[1:48:22] the county to afford reasonable
opportunity for citizen participation
[1:48:25] prior to their final decision and the
public participation statutes
[1:48:30] contemplating more than just eliciting
this eliciting this comment. You must
[1:48:34] address the com comments in your
decision making today and the pertinent
[1:48:39] facts upon which you are basing your
decision.
[1:48:42] This is in order to facilitate judicial
review if it came to that. You also have
[1:48:47] an obligation and required by law to act
in substantial compliance with your
[1:48:51] growth policy. And you've heard numerous
ways in which the CICD are consistent
[1:48:56] with your growth policy.
In fact, the county's own growth policy
[1:49:00] with respect to this area require
supportive zoning efforts.
[1:49:05] In terms of whether the zoning districts
are contiguous due to state highways, I
[1:49:09] did the legal research and in Montana,
roads and highways are not considered a
[1:49:13] barrier to establishing contiguity. The
citations are in that letter.
[1:49:18] You have the authority to adopt the CICD
regulations development pattern as is or
[1:49:23] to amend or modify them. According to
the statute, section 762101 only
[1:49:29] requires that they be similar to the
drafts provided to the county, not
[1:49:33] identif
[1:49:36] And finally, the staff report also
included questions and comments about
[1:49:39] the specific provisions of the zoning
regulations that were applicable to all
[1:49:43] three. Exhibit A, the letter I
submitted, addresses those questions and
[1:49:49] comments and are also applicable to all
three. If you haven't read that yet, I
[1:49:53] encourage you to do so before making a
decision so you have that.
[1:49:57] In conclusion, the state via the
legislature conveyed the power to
[1:50:00] petition for zoning to the citizens and
the authority to adopt zoning to you the
[1:50:06] county based on the part one zoning
statutes. Zoning statutes are designed
[1:50:11] for the purpose of furthering the
health, safety, and general welfare of
[1:50:14] the county. Thus, the part one zoning
statutes are to be afforded liberal
[1:50:18] construction with a view toward
accomplishing their highly beneficial
[1:50:23] objective, which is to adopt zoning. and
you have some discretion, but that
[1:50:28] discretion must be tempered by an
exercise within the statutory framework
[1:50:32] provided by the legislature.
The affected property owners followed
[1:50:36] these statutes in proposing the CICD and
you asked for the signatures
[1:50:42] been given signatures of more than 65%
for this particular zoning district and
[1:50:47] those I'll make clear the public
interest requires adoption of the CACD.
[1:50:52] Based on the record in front of you
today, you arguably have the authority
[1:50:57] to adopt the CICD in the public
interest. And based on the record, a
[1:51:03] decision not to adopt the zoning would
arguably be so lacking in fact and
[1:51:08] foundation, it would clearly be
unreasonable and an abuse of discretion.
[1:51:12] As demonstrated in my letter and in the
testimony of the petitioners in the
[1:51:15] written comments as well as the comment
you'll hear today, the petitioners have
[1:51:19] met their burden per the statute and
they respectfully request that you adopt
[1:51:23] the CICD. Thank you.
>> What was your name again?
[1:51:28] » Jessen, would you like me to spell it?
>> Yeah,
[1:51:30] » it's in the letter. J E C Y N. Last name
B R E M E R.
[1:51:39] » Okay.
Thank you. Of course.
[1:51:42] Okay, with that we'll take a five minute
recess.
[1:51:57] » I'm let
[1:52:09] go ahead sir when you're ready.
[1:52:16] My name is Glenn Patrick and I am
representing LLA Homestead LLC.
[1:52:23] Uh we own land in the area
do not agree with the zoning.
[1:52:31] Um
there's a lot of emphasis put on 60% of
[1:52:36] the people miss agreed with this
zoning.
[1:52:44] I guess I would suggest that those 60%
let's just keep the zone put the zone on
[1:52:50] those 60 people that agreed with it and
leave the rest of us to uh go ahead and
[1:52:56] use our land as we to fit.
Um, a lot of emphasis has been put on
[1:53:04] wildlife, maintaining the wildlife.
I don't know how many of you people were
[1:53:09] here 50 years ago, but 50 years ago,
there was no houses out there. It was
[1:53:17] part of a big ranch in which my boy's
family operated.
[1:53:24] it was sub subdivided and this is only a
small part of that whole subdivision on
[1:53:29] that side of of the highway. So putting
in a small zone division right there,
[1:53:36] right smack in the middle of it that
isn't going to um affect the wildlife. I
[1:53:41] think the effect on the wildlife has
been
[1:53:45] already the damage has been done and I
don't think there's a whole lot you can
[1:53:50] do to to uh
solve that problem. But, uh,
[1:53:57] I guess if if there's 60% of the people
that want that zoning, get it on their
[1:54:04] land and let them live with the
decisions and the requirements they put
[1:54:08] on themselves, not put the requirements
on other people that not favor this.
[1:54:14] It's uh the private land owners just
like them. They should be able to do
[1:54:19] what they want with their land. Um, of
course you guys have some restrictions
[1:54:25] that you're responsible for, but that
can kind of,
[1:54:32] you know, maybe ease some of the
problems on some of these large
[1:54:35] developments. But, um,
we oppose the the zoning and, uh, we
[1:54:41] appreciate the work that you guys are
doing here. So,
[1:54:51] My name is Marina Smith and I live at
141 Elk Meadows Ranch Road.
[1:55:00] 43 years ago, I drove off the Norris
Hill and dropped into Massel Valley.
[1:55:07] Fell in love instantly. It was wild, hug
open, pristine, and felt like home.
[1:55:14] was a brighteyed student at Montana
State University pursuing a degree in
[1:55:19] range science.
Montana was dubbed the last best place
[1:55:24] in 1988 when the literary anthology was
published and the title represents a
[1:55:31] deep pride among Montans who believe
that we lived in one of the last truly
[1:55:36] wild places on earth. Montana has always
celebrated vast open spaces
[1:55:43] of natural beauty and an independent way
of life which values a strong sense of
[1:55:48] community and an unparalleled
quality of life.
[1:55:54] It was these very attributes that led me
to the Reynolds Pass area where I now
[1:55:59] manage two large conservation ranches
and have done so for the past 28 years.
[1:56:05] It was the remoteness and the challenges
that Reynolds Pass represented that drew
[1:56:10] me to live in this area made me proud to
call it home. The ranches I manage have
[1:56:16] always actively supported wildlife and
agriculture and we've developed close
[1:56:21] working relationships with several
generational ranching families that we
[1:56:26] leave summer pasture to and thus help to
support.
[1:56:30] We enrolled 8,500 acres in black
management in an effort to support
[1:56:34] public hunting.
Through the course of my time on the
[1:56:38] ranches, I've seen many changes, but the
most glaring change is that water that
[1:56:44] was once plentiful is now becoming
alarmingly unpredictable.
[1:56:49] After the unprecedented light winter of
last year, I watched with quiet alarm as
[1:56:55] creeks that had never run dry failed to
run water. With no snow in the high
[1:57:01] country to recharge the springs and
creeks, I was very concerned about what
[1:57:05] the summer held. I decided to have a
static level test done on one well at
[1:57:11] the home ranch.
The test showed that the [clears throat]
[1:57:15] well had a total depth of 95 ft with a
static level of 15 ft, a flow of 40
[1:57:22] gallons per minute at the time of
drilling in 1999.
[1:57:27] is now at a static level of 70 ft with a
flow of 35 gallons per minute. One of
[1:57:33] our groundwater fed ponds it in this
same area has always maintained a
[1:57:39] consistent level and is now 2 and 1/2 ft
lower than it was just last year. It's
[1:57:45] worth noting that we are the highest
water user on this particular drainage.
[1:57:51] on our other ranch where we are the
lowest downstream water user and rely
[1:57:55] exclusively on water brought out of the
mountains by ditches and water rights
[1:57:59] that date back to 1888.
We find it extremely challenging to get
[1:58:05] enough water. Every year it's a new
challenge and drilling wells to provide
[1:58:10] water would be cost prohibitive as the
depths of the wells in this area can be
[1:58:15] very deep.
There's no clear way of knowing what
[1:58:18] Oxford is doing. But where we once had
an abundance of water, we have very
[1:58:23] little. Without water, our ranch loses a
tremendous amount of value, not only to
[1:58:29] us, but to the family whose cattle it
supports and to the wildlife that
[1:58:33] utilize it and provide a huge economic
value to Madison County. Potential
[1:58:40] commercial growth in this area can do
nothing but strain an already strained
[1:58:45] aquifer.
It was said not long ago that our
[1:58:50] efforts to zone Reynolds Pass were 40
years too late. I don't disagree,
[1:58:56] but I ask you to allow me a few personal
analogies for your consideration.
[1:59:02] I live in a 40-year-old house.
Occasionally, when it rains, I find
[1:59:07] water on the floor of the utility room
of my finished basement. The tempting
[1:59:12] thing to do when faced with yet another
problem would be to just ignore the
[1:59:17] water, throw a towel on it, pretend it
hasn't happened. But that does not fix
[1:59:22] the problem. And damage is most likely
occurring to my house as a result. The
[1:59:28] best solution, the most uncomfortable
solution would be would be to dig out
[1:59:34] the foundation, find the leak. Daunting
task to say the least. Remember me as I
[1:59:40] present another scenario and I promise
to tie them together.
[1:59:46] Several years ago, I found one of my
mares standing in the pasture, the front
[1:59:51] of her hind leg peeled almost to the
bone from hawk to pasture.
[1:59:58] With that sick feeling in the pit of my
stomach that all horse owners will
[2:00:02] recognize, I ran and got a halter,
caught her up to assess the damage and
[2:00:08] had to decide if doctoring her was an
option or if a wellplaced bullet might
[2:00:14] be the best solution.
I made the decision to try to doctor
[2:00:18] this mirror and hope that she would heal
sound and without a scar.
[2:00:24] I religiously scrub proud f proud flesh
and change bandages on that leg every
[2:00:30] single day for six months until a
personal tragedy brought me to my knees
[2:00:37] and I simply could not do it any longer.
But she was almost completely healed
[2:00:42] when I was forced to walk away.
Life often presents us with choices.
[2:00:49] Choices which are not always easy. The
choice to do nothing when faced with a
[2:00:55] challenge is always option. And while
the easy choices may be more
[2:01:00] comfortable, they may not be the best
choices for the long run. I fully
[2:01:05] recognize that zoning is new to Madison
County, but for that reason, it's an
[2:01:10] unknown and less frightening and
uncomfortable.
[2:01:14] I stand before you today and ask you to
not throw your hands up and say, "You're
[2:01:19] 40 years too late. Just forget about
trying to make a change for the better.
[2:01:25] But I am instead asking you to please
make the difficult choice. Push the
[2:01:30] envelope of what is known and
comfortable. Repair the house. Doctor
[2:01:36] the horse. Preserve what is left of the
quality of life we hold so dear. Please
[2:01:41] support the CICD before it's truly too
delayed. We still have a choice. Thank
[2:01:46] you for your time and consideration.
[2:01:52] Okay, we've run out of time for our
hearing of any more people would like to
[2:01:58] testify.
[2:02:01] [clears throat]
>> We'll take a second.
[2:02:03] » People online
chairman David I think what you're going
[2:02:09] to need to do it see this is obviously
important. There's a lot of people that
[2:02:13] probably online still want to speak and
there people in the room that still want
[2:02:16] to speak. Um so what what Mr. hour I
would suggest is that you continue the
[2:02:22] public comment um to next Wednesday at
9:00 a.m. That'll give you an
[2:02:27] opportunity to advertise the meeting. Um
and people can come back, people can
[2:02:33] participate online, but then you're not
shutting off public comment. Everyone
[2:02:37] participate.
>> Thank you for that. I'll entertain a
[2:02:41] motion that
>> I would move to continue this till next
[2:02:44] Wednesday at 9 o'clock.
[2:02:49] I'll second that.
>> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second
[2:02:52] to continue this hearing at 9:00 next
Wednesday. That's
[2:03:00] 9.
>> Correct.
[2:03:03] » Yes. You just put it at 9. That way you
don't know what's going to happen with
[2:03:06] the next few days and then that way you
can use Wednesday to accommodate any any
[2:03:10] overflow time. Those are necessary as
well. I suggest publishing that on the
[2:03:15] uh the county website.
Okay,
[2:03:18] » there was a blood drive here.
>> Going to have to move in the basement
[2:03:27] discussion.
[2:03:31] » I
[2:03:35] was encouraged that we'll continue this
hearing 9:00 next.
[2:03:42] » Thank you all.
>> Clarification chairman. They still have
[2:03:46] another two other districts.
>> Yes, we do. We have another We have
[2:03:49] another hearing coming up. So, we got to
move on to that.
[2:03:52] » Thank you, sir. Just quick question. So,
I assume those people who have spoke
[2:03:55] will not have an opportunity to speak
again. That's or
[2:04:00] is that [clears throat] reopened again?
>> Yeah, we'll open it up to public comment
[2:04:06] again, then continue this hearing.
>> We can speak again to
[2:04:09] » Yeah, because we're out of time for this
one. So, in fact, we have to move on to
[2:04:13] our next one. So,
[clears throat] we'll do that.
[2:04:17] » I think that'll be subject to the to the
rules that were set forth before. I
[2:04:21] mean, if your comments are duplicative,
there's no need to to speak yet, but
[2:04:26] it's just to allow full public out
[2:04:30] the board.
[2:04:35] » Okay. With that, we'll move on to our 11
a.m.
[2:04:39] creation
>> answering a question at the back of the
[2:04:42] room.
It's a totally separate proceeding.
[2:04:48] » Never mind.
>> Next two hearings are
[2:04:51] different.
[2:05:08] So, can I
[2:05:17] have that?
[2:05:25] » Yeah.
[2:05:38] Okay, we'll move on to the next hearing.
The pronghorn meadow sits in the city
[2:05:44] zone district.
I'll open the hearing at 11:07. So,
[2:05:50] we're ready for public comment.
>> I move initially and move to incorporate
[2:05:55] all written comment received uh related
to this subject into the record.
[2:06:00] » Okay. Second that. Okay, we have a
motion second to all
[2:06:06] record [clears throat]
any further discussion hearing. None
[2:06:12] » I
[2:06:16] motion carries.
[2:06:21] » Hello, my name is KZ. I'm a property
owner in Rel's Pass as well as executive
[2:06:25] director of Preserve Rain's Pass in
Montana nonprofit 501c3.
[2:06:30] First and foremost, thank you
commissioners and county staff for your
[2:06:33] work with the rain community for over
three years on these planning and zoning
[2:06:37] efforts. The post citizen initiated
zoning districts in front of you today
[2:06:42] represent this multi-year effort by
Rain's past property owners to protect
[2:06:46] their future and her property.
>> [clears throat]
[2:06:48] » Everyone in this room, those joining us
online, and those citizens who couldn't
[2:06:53] participate today have a keen interest
in their future, their family's future
[2:06:57] in the future of Madison County. That
shared interest is our common ground.
[2:07:02] And there is no better common ground
from which to respectful request the
[2:07:06] Madison County Commissioners approve the
Ponghorn Meadows citizen initiated
[2:07:10] zoning district for you today. Due to
the similarity of the Randos Pass area,
[2:07:15] its rural residential pattern of
development, landscapes, wildlife, water
[2:07:19] concerns, and surrounding pressures for
commercial development, the data and
[2:07:24] relevant comments you hear today
regarding Bronborn Meadows, and the two
[2:07:27] other CICD and Rails Pass may appear
duplicative, but the data and comments
[2:07:32] are true for each critically located
CICD.
[2:07:35] Each CP before you today is necessary
for the public interest or convenience
[2:07:40] and here for much of the public comment.
Consider this. In our lifetime, we've
[2:07:46] seen a good deal of change. Farms and
ranchers use heavy equipment instead of
[2:07:50] plow horses and mules. Internet access
allows people to work anywhere,
[2:07:55] including more desirable rural locations
like Madison County.
[2:07:59] Big Sky sprang from forested public
lands and scrub brush ranches became a
[2:08:04] skiill community and is now host to
commercial and resort development.
[2:08:08] Multi-million dollar homes and movie
stars spilling into Madison County.
[2:08:13] There's no infrastructure to support
this scale of development in Rain's past
[2:08:17] now or in the future.
Montana's population has more than
[2:08:21] doubled from 477,000
in 1945 to 1,144
[2:08:28] 694 in 2025.
In our children's lifetime, the greater
[2:08:33] Yellowstone ecosystems population where
Madison County sits at the heart and
[2:08:37] host the Missouri red headarters is
forecasted to reach between 763,000
[2:08:43] and 846,000
by 2050 to60.
[2:08:48] where these people live and the
corresponding impacts to Madison County
[2:08:51] are what is on the table today. Today
you have the opportunity based upon the
[2:08:56] petition of a supermajority of citizens
and the pro proposed pong horn meadow cd
[2:09:03] to protect the agricultural and rural
residential character of this area of
[2:09:07] reolds pass. You can tip the scale and
favor the effect of property owner's
[2:09:12] quality of life by adopting the Ponghorn
Meadow CICD which will protect this
[2:09:17] limited natural resources, water,
wildlife, wildlife habitat, agriculture
[2:09:23] and open space and sustain our economic
drivers of agriculture, hunting, fishing
[2:09:28] and tourism. These are the reasons the
prong Meadow CICD is necessary for the
[2:09:34] public interest. The Montana legislature
created the CIC tool in 1953 for
[2:09:40] citizens to petition for zoning. Those
representatives understood the citizens
[2:09:45] right to and interest in protecting
their property. In an August 13, 2024
[2:09:50] public meeting of the commission, they
said that they would like to see
[2:09:53] signatures for zoning. Again, a super
majority of those signatures have been
[2:09:58] provided. Today the community of the
proposed pong horn meadow CACD asked the
[2:10:03] commission to adopt the citizen
initiated zoning district and the
[2:10:06] proposed land use planning regulations
which protect the existing agricultural
[2:10:11] and rural residential development
pattern existing uses and allow citizens
[2:10:16] to request exceptions to and amend the
regulations. This is in the public
[2:10:20] interest or convenience. The Prong
Hormet CICD and zoning development
[2:10:25] pattern and use is clearly adhered to
and are consistent with the 2025 Madison
[2:10:30] growth policy land use objectives.
MC3 preserve existing open space and
[2:10:36] protect valuable agricultural land. MC4
plan for responsible, reasonable and
[2:10:41] managed growth and development. MC5
protect the public health and safety of
[2:10:46] county residents. MC6 support zoning
efforts. MC7, protect private property
[2:10:52] rights, and MC8, encourage municipal
growth versus urban sprawl. And the 2025
[2:10:59] Madison County growth policy environment
objectives are MC9, protect wildlife
[2:11:04] habitat, MC10, preserve natural
resources, and protect water resources.
[2:11:09] MC11 support growth in agriculture,
forestry, recreation, and tourism, and
[2:11:15] small service-based businesses in a
manner that does not impact established
[2:11:19] residential communities. MC12
discouraged development that will
[2:11:23] financially strain public services.
MC13, support infrastructure
[2:11:28] improvements within incorporated and
unincorporated communities. For these
[2:11:33] reasons, among others, the public's
interest or convenience require adoption
[2:11:37] of the Prong Horn Meadow CICD and zoning
regulations.
[2:11:41] The proposed regulations aim to protect
the Rain's past development pattern by
[2:11:44] preventing high impact commercial
business from bringing high density
[2:11:49] human activity to remote agricultural
and rural residential lands in this area
[2:11:54] with little to no public infrastructure.
High density development and
[2:11:58] corresponding population increase are
proven to disrupt wildlife, disrupt
[2:12:02] wildlife quarters, increase consumption
of limited water resources, and
[2:12:06] increased traffic, a public safety
hazard.
[2:12:10] People are attracted to the rural lands
and access to the Madison River
[2:12:14] available in Reynolds Pass. However,
more people on the banks and in the
[2:12:18] waters of the Madison River and already
burdened fishery is not sustainable.
[2:12:22] This river, the lifeblood of the Madison
Valley, provides an economic benefit to
[2:12:26] a wide swath of the county and it is in
the public interest and necessity to
[2:12:31] protect it. It is also in the public
interest and necessity to protect the
[2:12:34] lands that surround it. Wildfire is on
top of mind every year and Reynolds Pass
[2:12:39] has been fortunate this year. The
proposed CICD and regulations reinforce
[2:12:44] Mount Madison County's fire hazard
mitigation practices and by containing
[2:12:49] future parcel sizes at 40 acres
maintains density consistent with the
[2:12:53] current development pattern. Maintaining
density at this level is critical given
[2:12:58] the limited public resources in this
area of the county and their distance
[2:13:01] from emergency service providers which
is definitely in the public interest or
[2:13:06] convenience.
Montana's population has more than
[2:13:10] doubled from four. Whoops. Went back.
[2:13:17] The proposed Ponghorn Meadow CICD
regulations are forward-looking, not
[2:13:21] retroactive. If adopted, land owners
will not be surprised by disruption of
[2:13:25] their peaceful enjoyment of their land
by a casino, resort, hotel, or RV park,
[2:13:30] or other high impact commercial use
completely at odds with the character of
[2:13:34] this area. The CICD and zoning
regulations will provide a predictable
[2:13:39] future. Some of these lands have
covenants, many of which prohibit
[2:13:43] commercial activity, but may not be
effective at addressing the same impacts
[2:13:47] as those addressed by the CIZD.
Citizens are aware from previous
[2:13:52] development applications before the
planning board and commissioners that
[2:13:55] the county cannot be involved in
covenant disputes.
[2:13:59] Madison County does not currently have
tools to address impacts from land use.
[2:14:03] It only has authority when subdivision
is proposed. The CICD is a tool to
[2:14:08] address impacts from land uses that
adversely affect property owners.
[2:14:12] Another reason why the public interest
or convenience require adoption of the
[2:14:16] ponghorn meadow CICD.
Zoning has a long history in this
[2:14:21] country to protect public health and
safety and welfare by separating
[2:14:25] industrial and residential areas and
there is longstanding precedent for part
[2:14:29] one zoning in Montana. We've identified
136 CIZD in Montana. For reference, 88%
[2:14:37] of these CICDs do not bear CICD levies.
And for those that do, the levies are
[2:14:42] typically 1% of a property's taxable
value. With these zoning regulations,
[2:14:47] property owners within a CICD have a
chance to protect their property
[2:14:51] interest. Please do what is clearly in
the public interest or convenience and
[2:14:55] adopt the Prong Horn Meadow CICD and
regulations. Thank you, Kate.
[2:15:20] Um
>> 30 seconds we were discussing um
[2:15:24] » sign it
>> let me know when
[2:15:26] » if there are new arrivals please make
sure that you sign in um if there is not
[2:15:30] a sheet we'll take care of that okay
>> that way so
[2:15:36] we will grab that one and then for the
next hearing
[2:15:41] And then just write when you graph it on
there so you build the record correctly.
[2:15:48] » Awesome. Hello againro,
our family owns property at Sage
[2:15:52] Retroway in Cameron, Montana. Um, I
wanted to just extend sort of the
[2:15:56] comments that I had made for the sheet
mountain varian, but also uh I wanted to
[2:16:00] just sort of bring up corresponding
non-conformity numbers for this specific
[2:16:04] district. Um, I find this p specific
district particularly interesting
[2:16:08] because there are only seven parcels of
property contained within the boundaries
[2:16:12] and not a single one meets the 40 acre
minimum acreage standard of the
[2:16:17] regulation. Um, so one of those and also
one of those parcels is already
[2:16:21] protected by conservation easement. So
in Pongghorn Meadows, the commission is
[2:16:26] being asked to adopt a minimum acreage
standard that zero existing properties
[2:16:30] can meet. Um that creates an additional
layer of regulatory burden for the
[2:16:34] county in which we have the land owners
have a burden of proof to prove that
[2:16:40] they have non-conforming properties
prior to the adoption of this regulation
[2:16:44] and they have to maintain that proof
into perpetuity for all we know for the
[2:16:48] next 50 years. So can we guarantee that
a property owner in 50 years their
[2:16:52] children people who inherit the property
people who purchase the property in the
[2:16:55] future will have access to that proof
going forward? Um, I [clears throat]
[2:17:00] think it's a pretty clear example of how
these districts do not meet the
[2:17:05] pre-existing development pattern of this
district. Thank you.
[2:17:14] » Hi, Maline Mason, 97, Julie Gardav,
Boseman. Um, I come to you today not as
[2:17:20] property owner, but simply as a
recreator of Madison County and Rains
[2:17:23] Pass. I stand before you as part of the
Rains Pass community, a community of
[2:17:27] people who welcome you in with open
arms. as I've joined in their advocacy
[2:17:30] feel protected their area. Madison
County is a part of the greater
[2:17:33] Yellowstone ecosystem, one of the
largest and million in fact tempered
[2:17:36] zone ecosystems on Earth. Wildlife
flourishes here in unique and remarkable
[2:17:40] fashion. This is meaningful to me as
someone who wishes to see much the
[2:17:43] biodiversity today extend into the
future of tomorrow. And as someone whose
[2:17:46] household depends on a freezer full of
game come winter.
[2:17:50] The zoning district regulations prohibit
commercial development to limit high
[2:17:53] density development as an effort to
preserve open landscapes. Buildings are
[2:17:57] permanent on 40 acres to maintain
isulate movement. Again, this is just
[2:18:00] one layer to the regulations in terms of
parcels. In a recent study released by
[2:18:05] University of Wyoming in partnership
with US Fish and Wildlife Service,
[2:18:08] multiple other federal and state
agencies, they studied the use of space
[2:18:12] between homes by elk moose from corn mu
deer enrolled areas. In doing so,
[2:18:15] researchers were able to identify ranges
of space between homes that were too
[2:18:19] narrow for undisturbed use by wildlife.
The study concluded that maintaining
[2:18:22] space in between houses greater than 500
meters will likely facilitate unulant
[2:18:26] movement. While placement of homes on
parcels is the greatest factor in
[2:18:30] achieving the widths needed to maintain
unulant movement, we can observe that 40
[2:18:34] acres is a conservative approach to the
parcel size needed.
[2:18:38] While larger parcels parcel sizes would
fully preserve the use of functional
[2:18:42] habitat, 40 acres is a conservative
approach that reflects minimum threshold
[2:18:46] intended to preserve basic wildlife
movement without imposing drastic
[2:18:50] constraints on land use.
Moving slightly to a different topic.
[2:18:54] We're aware of concerns regarding a
potential increase in property taxes for
[2:18:58] property owners within a zoning district
via mill levy. The plain language of
[2:19:02] section 76-2-102
states, "Subject to 15-10-420,
[2:19:08] the finance finances necessary for the
transaction, the planning and zoning
[2:19:12] commission's business and to pay the
expenses of the employees and justified
[2:19:16] expenses of the commissioner's members
must be paid from the levy on the
[2:19:20] taxable value of all taxable property
within the district. However, in our
[2:19:24] research, we found that out of the 137
citizen initiated zoning districts that
[2:19:29] we are aware of across the state, only
12% of them have a levy. The remaining
[2:19:33] 88% of citizen initiated zoning
districts have not required the creation
[2:19:37] of a levy to fund costs of administering
a city. Revoli County, a county very
[2:19:42] similar to Madison in regard to rural
and residential land, has 42 CICDs and
[2:19:48] zero mill levies. Lewis and Clark County
has 35 CICDs and have not enacted any
[2:19:53] mill levies. We see this example for
smaller scales as well. Richland and
[2:19:58] Prairie County both only have one CICD
and have not subjected their
[2:20:02] constituents to a levy. Our research
concludes that the majority of counties
[2:20:05] have conducted citizen initiated zoning
districts without a levy. Therefore, no
[2:20:10] levy on Bron Meadow district would be
unlikely and ultimately up to the
[2:20:14] county. A 1999 version of statute, now
updated, appears to have limited the
[2:20:19] mill amount. Quote, "The finances
necessary for the transaction of the
[2:20:23] planning and zoning commission's
business and to pay the expenses of the
[2:20:26] employees and justified expenses of the
members of the board must be paid from a
[2:20:29] levy of not to exceed 1 mill on the
taxable value valuation of the real
[2:20:34] property within the district. While the
not to exceed levy amount has since been
[2:20:38] removed, the two counties that use mill
levies for CICDs have stayed within the
[2:20:42] prior statutory cap. Dawson County
allows commissioners to levy up to one
[2:20:47] mill on the taxable valuation of real
property within planning zoning
[2:20:50] districts. Gallton County has varying
mill rates averaging 2.53 mills again
[2:20:55] staying within the reach of the prior
statutory cap. If Madison County fell
[2:21:00] into the minority and chose to put a 1m
levy on Pongorn Meadow zoning district
[2:21:04] based on 2026 tax values, the county
would ultimately only raise $21.99
[2:21:09] across the seven property owners.
I urge you to listen to the citizens
[2:21:13] before you and to create the prom that
OCID to uphold the values of Madison
[2:21:17] County and its residents stand for.
Thank you for your time.
[2:21:24] » Thank you.
[2:21:27] » Hi, Pamela Townsend again representing
my husband. I live at 200 Jensen Road
[2:21:34] um in Reynolds Pass and I'm here just to
state our support for the CID. Thank
[2:21:41] you.
[2:21:45] [clears throat]
>> Philip Waters again, 6353 Delta Drive,
[2:21:47] Church Hill. I'm also a property owner
on Slide Rock Road here in Cameron. Um,
[2:21:53] I want to just speak durain to the Prong
Meadows, which if I am correct indicates
[2:21:58] this this little section up on the top,
the northern end of the section that
[2:22:02] affects me. And again, I did review
since this morning that I am actually I
[2:22:06] actually have been apparently been
gerrymandered out of what was originally
[2:22:11] proposed. So I just want to point to the
commission that related to Ponghorn men
[2:22:15] meadows, it is somehow convenient and in
the interest of that public that that be
[2:22:20] carved out of a section that's adjacent
to us. But then somehow the rest of the
[2:22:26] community has been brought into a larger
section. And so I don't know, you know,
[2:22:29] who has the power to do this if it's if
everything is in order and the
[2:22:32] commission is willing to motion that
these be sectioned into smaller sections
[2:22:37] like that so that that community can
speak more to their neighborhood. There
[2:22:42] are seven, eight parcels over here. And
it makes sense that one or two people
[2:22:46] might object, but they object to the
rest of their neighbors, which is an
[2:22:49] obvious majority, versus I objected and
so I was kicked out of the the other
[2:22:54] section in order to facilitate success
of the of the motion in despite the
[2:23:00] opposition. So, Germaine to Pranghorn
Meadows, um, was it convenient? Was it
[2:23:06] in the interest of the the surrounding
property owners to do that or could that
[2:23:10] be your golden bridge to suggest for
some of these other areas, it is not
[2:23:15] convenient. It is not in the interest of
the rest of the public to have such a
[2:23:17] large swath. So, um, as we can contrast
those two, the smaller sections versus
[2:23:23] larger sections, Ron Horn Meadows, like
I would object generally to this
[2:23:27] initiative, but I have no reason to
object to that small neighborhood doing
[2:23:31] their what they desire. On the other
hand, I would point out that if those
[2:23:35] seven neighbors are in cahoots, somehow
they could turn around and decide to
[2:23:39] vote to build a hotel right there and
leaving the rest of us hanging and them
[2:23:43] cashing in. And so, uh, it does not seem
to be convenient or in my interest that
[2:23:50] I be I I assert myself as being the
public that that statute applies to,
[2:23:55] whether I'm included or not. It is not
convenient or in my interest to have me
[2:23:59] gerrymander that out for their own
success. Um, versus apparently it is
[2:24:05] totally feasible to cut it down into
smaller pieces, which another citizen
[2:24:09] suggested and I suggested the commission
move to have that happen. Thank you.
[2:24:14] » [clears throat]
[2:24:20] » I have a question for the commission.
So, I have previously made comments on
[2:24:24] the previous hearings. Can I just ask
that those comments be written into this
[2:24:28] hearing?
>> We'd love that.
[2:24:30] » Save us a little time.
>> Yes. Thank you.
[2:24:32] » I will say that that I support this
initiative. My opinion hasn't changed.
[2:24:37] But if I can just bring those comments
forward to this hearing and also the
[2:24:41] next one, I would I would respectfully
do that.
[2:24:44] » What's your name?
>> Larry Ray.
[2:24:46] » Thank you.
>> You can be an example for everyone.
[2:24:50] » Well, I'm not sure about that. An
example for myself maybe.
[2:24:56] Appreciate it.
[2:25:05] Keith Shine, 25 Big Ben Road, Cameron.
As stated previously, I'm not in any of
[2:25:11] these proposed districts, but my wife
and I are here in support of them, and
[2:25:16] I'm speaking to a different point on
this occasion. I've been working as a
[2:25:21] volunteer preserve past pretty much
since its inception.
[2:25:26] And during the process, as maybe most of
us are aware, there was a chance that
[2:25:31] commission could have taken a look at
these proposed districts without a vote
[2:25:36] of the 60% required. And I despared when
the commission rejected that possibility
[2:25:42] and insisted on a vote
because I thought that it was in effect
[2:25:48] trying to torpedo the whole process and
put an obstacle in it that was
[2:25:52] insurmountable. And I became angry and
frustrated and thought was a done deal.
[2:25:59] Later I changed my mind. I thought no
you guys did exactly the right thing by
[2:26:07] imposing that hurdle.
Why not see results that are
[2:26:11] irrefutable?
An overwhelmed majority of owners in
[2:26:16] support. a referendum announced with a
landslide to be
[2:26:23] the property owners in these districts
did just that. They exercised democracy
[2:26:30] in its most fundamental grassroots way.
They stood together. They voted yes
[2:26:37] together.
The people have spoken.
[2:26:42] The Mont Tennis Legislature by statute
has given citizens the right to create
[2:26:48] citizens in initiated zoning districts.
The formal in the proposed districts
[2:26:55] have exercised exactly that right. I
humbly request that the commission
[2:27:01] respect this democratic action and
approved approve the zoning districts.
[2:27:08] The people have spoken.
[2:27:19] » Hi, my name is Diane Olaf and I along
with my brother, sister, and mother are
[2:27:24] the owners of the Olaf Ranch located at
850 Highway 8287.
[2:27:30] I would also like my remarks from the
earlier meeting to be moved forward to
[2:27:34] the next two meetings.
[2:27:40] Does that mean that the crazy letter
would be
[2:27:43] or go ahead?
[2:27:49] » Hi, my name's
Chris Marino. I don't have any prepared
[2:27:54] statement. I'm one of the parcels in
question at 73 Pond Road.
[2:28:00] Um, and there's no casinos coming
because nobody's ever even reached out
[2:28:06] to me. I have no idea what this petition
is about.
[2:28:10] And uh um so I'm going to be opposed to
it because
[2:28:15] I have no idea what's at.
So uh I would speak to uh hold in what
[2:28:21] everyone likes here, which is the
quality of life. And uh that's really
[2:28:25] fundamental to what we all want.
[2:28:32] Thanks for your time.
[2:28:36] » Thank you for your time today. My name
is Sandra Olaf Kerta and along with my
[2:28:40] sister and and brother and mother, we do
own the Ola Ranch at 28 850 Highway 287
[2:28:46] in Cameron. Um I spoke earlier and I
would like to include my comments from
[2:28:51] earlier into this meeting. I'd also like
to add that there are not necessarily
[2:28:57] two options for you as commissioners.
It's not a it's not a for or against. I
[2:29:01] do believe that we can probably come to
an agreement that is maybe adjusted with
[2:29:06] property boundaries some of the
restrictions. So I just wanted you to
[2:29:10] keep that in mind that is it's not
necessarily a yes or no.
[2:29:16] Thank you for your time.
[2:29:20] Commissioners, you have a hand on the
screen there.
[2:29:25] » We'll go through these and then we'll
[2:29:32] my glasses. Um, good morning,
[clears throat] commissioners. Thank you
[2:29:35] for your um giving me the opportunity to
speak. My husband and I, my name is
[2:29:40] Samantha Arbigas. My husband and I are
property owners at 21 Moonwater Lane in
[2:29:44] Rains Pass. I'm also a board member with
Preserve Reynolds Pass. Um, and I've
[2:29:49] already read you this whole letter. Um,
so I'm going to spare you hearing it
[2:29:53] again, but I do want to make sure that
my comments are submitted in in the
[2:29:56] public record for this particular
hearing. Is that okay?
[2:30:13] » Well, I'm uh Bob Garrett. I'm a merit
professor at MSU and was director of the
[2:30:18] fish and wildlife program um for about
20 years uh at MSU and I'm representing
[2:30:26] fish, wildlife and parks and I was asked
to read a portion of two letters that
[2:30:31] that fish, wildlife and parks provided
on the citizen zoning initiatives. Um
[2:30:38] I'm going to read um
uh part of a letter from August 15th
[2:30:43] signed by Dr. Kelly Profett supervisor
of region three
[2:30:49] that was related to the big horn pass
and uh or the big horn crossing and
[2:30:55] sheep mountain proposal. this one
paragraph that's referred to then in a
[2:31:00] letter in a
a later letter uh that they wrote res
[2:31:06] regarding the pro perm
uh
[2:31:11] citizen zoning initiative. The Reynolds
pass area is geographically important.
[2:31:17] It provides an opening grassy lower
elevation access for the continental
[2:31:22] wide bounded by steep mountains and
forested hills. These natural features
[2:31:26] make it attractive corridor for unullet
migrating to summer cving and spawning
[2:31:32] ranges and recent research has
demonstrated the importance of this area
[2:31:36] for migratory elk and pong horn.
Although we have not yet been able to
[2:31:41] follow mu deer in this area, we suspect
they should similar migratory patterns
[2:31:47] and migratory behavior is an important
life history component of wildlife in
[2:31:53] this area. uh after that uh letter was
was uh drafted for from fish, wildlife
[2:32:01] and parks in June 6 uh 2006. I think you
already have copies of these letters. Um
[2:32:09] Dr. Kelly Profett provided another
letter for the analopee basin and pro
[2:32:15] meadows of proposed districts. Um and
the pertinent paragraph from that one is
[2:32:21] uh in addition to wildlife values
generally discussed in our August 15 25
[2:32:27] letter supporting big horn crossing and
sheet mountain proposed districts the
[2:32:31] proposed analopee basin and prone
meadows zoning districts encompass
[2:32:36] portions of a migratory corridor used by
Madison Valley Prohorn.
[2:32:42] The map attached uh to the to the August
15, 2025 letter clearly outlines these
[2:32:48] pathways. The Madison Ponghorn migratory
corridor is geographically constricted
[2:32:55] to a narrow band of inner mountain
grasslands at Reynold Pass just a mile
[2:33:00] wide in some areas. This migratory
corridor provides connectivity for pong
[2:33:06] horn to move between this summer and
winter range.
[2:33:10] this propo these proposed zoning
districts which limit development in the
[2:33:14] area but help maintain this migratory
corridor.
[2:33:23] So given that uh statement representing
fish wildlife and parks I'd like to make
[2:33:30] a statement as a resident of the um
Reynolds Pass area. Uh I my name is
[2:33:38] Robert Garrett. The uh my address is 75
highway 287 South Cameron. And I've
[2:33:47] already made this presented that
statement in the in the previous
[2:33:51] meeting. And I just like for that
statement to be attributed to this
[2:33:56] meeting as well. Thank you.
[2:34:07] Hi, my name is excuse me, Tom Schroeder.
I live at 144 Continental Divide Ranch
[2:34:11] Road. Uh, and I made comments in the
earlier proceeding. And I just want to
[2:34:17] make sure that those comments are in
support of all the three zoning
[2:34:21] districts are included in the public
record for this district as well as the
[2:34:27] upcoming district, too. Thank you.
[2:34:36] Now, let's go to the online.
[2:34:41] » Well, there's a
publish.
[2:34:46] » Yeah, go ahead.
[2:34:51] » My name is uh my name is Jerry Orbula. I
uh have a place here at Seven Moon Water
[2:34:58] Lane.
um Cameron here on up on the um I'd like
[2:35:05] my previous comments actually read by K
entered into the record and since I
[2:35:10] can't afford K again I'll make my
comments very brief. Um
[2:35:17] I I do want to highlight one one
barrier. I I don't know if people are
[2:35:22] aware of this, but the the guidelines
that are in place for these zones are
[2:35:27] actually less restrictive than any of
the state or county documents.
[2:35:33] And I just want that to go off record
and hopefully people who didn't have a
[2:35:36] chance to learn about this or read it.
Uh any one of us will happy to send you
[2:35:41] information or explain it to you if you
don't understand any of these. Thanks.
[2:35:45] We'd be happy to spend
[2:35:54] Hi, I'm Steve Somatio. I'm at uh I'm on
the uh C I'm one of I'm a citizen owner
[2:35:59] in Rand's past for the past 12 years and
I'm also a member of the preserve rand
[2:36:03] board and I would just like to make sure
that I have the same comments from sheet
[2:36:07] mountain uh district conversation to
apply to the ponghorn. I like to have
[2:36:12] make sure they have that they're entered
into the record and I can hear
[2:36:22] Julie Dulio 101 road. Uh I came up
before and read a statement by Daryl
[2:36:28] Schulty. Um so I'd like to submit that
for this district as well or this zoning
[2:36:34] as well.
[2:36:37] Thank you.
[2:36:42] It's still morning. So I'll say good
morning again. Chair and I county
[2:36:46] commissioners Justin Bremer
J C Y N B R E N E R 7770 East Main
[2:36:55] Street appearing on behalf of preserving
and petitioning property owners.
[2:37:00] I'll try be try to be a little more
brief, but I will incorporate my
[2:37:03] reference the September 1st, 2026 letter
in exhibit A into the record. And um in
[2:37:10] in this particular case, you have 78% of
affected owners petitioning for this
[2:37:16] Ponghorn Meadows CIZD. And again, the
zoning regulation itself demonstrates
[2:37:22] the public interest or convenience
requires the adoption of this zoning
[2:37:26] district and regulation to protect the
rural residential and agricultural
[2:37:30] character of the area and the existing
development pattern in this area. in
[2:37:36] considering the limited public services
that you've heard about this morning as
[2:37:40] well as the scarce water resources.
As I explained earlier, the plain
[2:37:45] language of the applicable statute 76U
101 states only that the public interest
[2:37:50] or convenience
required the adoption of the zoning
[2:37:54] district. And as you and as you've
heard, the finding has been met.
[2:37:58] The staff report goes a little beyond
this in the plain language of the
[2:38:01] statute by providing pages of questions
and considerations and definitions, none
[2:38:06] of which are in statute. And so those
don't apply to your decision today.
[2:38:11] Um, in terms of the public comment
you're hearing today, as explained
[2:38:16] earlier, the Montana Constitution
requires that the public be afforded
[2:38:19] this opportunity to comment and also
that you do more than merely listenit
[2:38:25] and listen to this public comment, but
also that you address your comments in
[2:38:28] your decision making today and the
pertinent facts on which your decision
[2:38:34] is based in order to facilitate judicial
review. [clears throat]
[2:38:38] You've also heard the growth policy,
your growth policy itself, I think
[2:38:42] adopted as recently as last year,
contemplates support zoning
[2:38:48] and you have an obligation by law to
substantially comply with the growth
[2:38:53] policy. The issues in question of roads
and contiguity has been addressed and
[2:38:58] refuted. And in Montana, roads and
highways are not considered a barrier to
[2:39:02] this. And again, you have those
caseations in my letter. And the same is
[2:39:06] true for administration and enforcement.
The legislature provided you the
[2:39:10] opportunity to levy for that. And so
that's not a justification either. Um
[2:39:15] the staff court makes clear the county
only has the authority granted by the
[2:39:19] legislature pursuant to statute and we
agree with that.
[2:39:23] The legislature conveyed the power to
petition to the people and gave you the
[2:39:28] authority to adopt
citizen initiated zoning which zoning is
[2:39:35] enacted for the public health, safety
and welfare. So those statutes must be
[2:39:39] liberally construed to accomplish the
objective [clears throat]
[2:39:42] which is adoption zoning. 78% again of
the effective owners which is more than
[2:39:48] the required percentage substantially
more
[2:39:52] um these signatures in the public
comment and testimony majority of the
[2:39:56] public comment and testimony make clear
that public interest does require the
[2:40:00] CICD and regulations and you have the
authority to adopt them. Arguably, given
[2:40:04] the facts in the record, the decision
not to adopt the CICD would be so
[2:40:09] lacking in fact and foundation again
would be clearly unreasonable and an
[2:40:13] abuse of discretion. And again, as based
on the September 1st letter that I
[2:40:18] submitted and the comments of the
petitioners and the public, the majority
[2:40:21] of the public, they've met their burden,
I respectfully request that you adopt
[2:40:26] this Ponghorn Meadows citizen initiated
zoning.
[2:40:30] Thank you.
[2:40:35] My name is Marina Smith and I will not
bore you with my sad story about my
[2:40:38] leaky house and my perform
[2:40:43] um statements for this CICD. But I do
want to speak to a comment that Glenn
[2:40:48] Patrick made and that's that this was
all part of a big branch at one point
[2:40:53] and I mentioned in my previous comments
that we are the lowest downstream user
[2:40:59] of water and it's been extremely
difficult for us and while we are under
[2:41:04] conservation easement and our property
is protected
[2:41:09] what happens on adjacent properties is
also very effective to us. And so if we
[2:41:15] lose the ability to get water to cattle
or we lose the ability for wildlife to
[2:41:23] pass through either in connectivity or
migration corridors, the whole purpose
[2:41:28] of the 10,000 acres that was purchased
to support agriculture and wildlife is
[2:41:34] lost. So largecale potential commercial
developments in that area pose a threat
[2:41:40] to us that we're very concerned about.
Thank you very much.
[2:41:46] I just need my name in again or
[2:41:51] online.
It's like a lease.
[2:41:57] Go ahead.
[2:42:07] Elise, did you have a comment?
[2:42:17] yours.
Apparently not.
[2:42:29] I'm sorry. We had some technical
difficulties.
[2:42:34] » Turn yours down.
>> Okay. Can I Can I still speak?
[2:42:39] Yes.
>> Okay.
[2:42:42] » Uh my name is Alicia Rosai and um I own
property at 112 Pond Road in um the
[2:42:51] Ponghorn Meadows District. Um I wanted
to speak about a few things. I'm I
[2:42:58] apologize. I don't have anything
prepared. Um and my husband and I wanted
[2:43:04] to be there in person today but because
of some health issues we were not able
[2:43:08] to attend. Um I I wanted to let the
people who are concerned first of all
[2:43:15] who are concerned that uh the the group
of us who went together to try to um to
[2:43:23] try to create this zoning uh at Prom
Meadows are going to somehow come
[2:43:29] together and put a big hotel in the
front. On the contrary, that is the very
[2:43:34] reason that we are trying to get this
zoning in place is to prevent those kind
[2:43:39] of things from happening. We purchased
our property about 35 years ago and we
[2:43:46] have taken our children there
uh all of their lives and now that
[2:43:50] they're adults, they're all coming up
and bringing their families. And our uh
[2:43:55] intent is to leave this property to our
children so that they can continue to
[2:43:59] enjoy and our grandchildren can continue
to enjoy um the property
[2:44:06] as they always have. Uh we have noticed
as we have come up through the years how
[2:44:11] much growth has happened. Um, when we
first started coming there, there were
[2:44:15] just a few cabins right at the very
back. And now there are many cabins
[2:44:20] there. And
we're concerned about um [clears throat]
[2:44:26] » we were concerned about because we get
constantly
[2:44:30] uh things in the mail with people trying
to purchase our property. And they're
[2:44:33] typically usually big companies who want
to come in and put in bigger things and
[2:44:39] divide these up into tiny little spots.
and we we have um covenants. So if
[2:44:48] someone comes in and wants to do
something, we would have to pay for the
[2:44:52] attorneys to try to stop that. And and
most people who live there don't have
[2:44:57] that kind of funding. So this is to pro
protect us so that we don't have to try
[2:45:03] to go to court every time and fight one
one person who wants to come in and put
[2:45:08] in a great big hotel or a great big
because there's none of us that have
[2:45:11] money to fight someone like that. So,
we're asking for these to protect us, to
[2:45:17] protect our children, to protect and and
our grandchildren to let them have the
[2:45:23] beauty of the property and the area that
we bought into and we bought for a
[2:45:27] reason. Uh, another thing that I wanted
to bring up is that um, recently we had
[2:45:34] come up to the property and there was a
beautiful elk laying in the middle of
[2:45:39] the road who had been hit by something
large and was still alive laying there
[2:45:45] right in the center. And it broke my
heart because this is this is an elk
[2:45:52] corridor. This is a pong horn corridor.
We have pong horn on our property all
[2:45:56] all summer.
And it broke my heart that this poor elk
[2:46:00] had to be hit in that road and lay there
and suffer until it died. And this is
[2:46:06] the kind of thing that we get more and
more and more traffic up there. This is
[2:46:11] the kind of thing that's going to happen
more and more frequently. And I think to
[2:46:16] to protect the wildlife, we have to do
something. We have to say we have to
[2:46:23] stand up and try to implement some
zoning. Um, the other thing that I
[2:46:29] wanted to say is when we purchased our
property
[2:46:32] um, long long ago, there was a a creek
that ran through our property and then
[2:46:38] there was also a great big pond there
that had been stocked with fish and the
[2:46:44] kids used to love it. They had so much
fun from the creek and going down to the
[2:46:49] pond. Right now, that is all dried up
because the of the water shortage.
[2:46:56] So, if we continue to allow more and
more and more building, right now it's
[2:47:02] just right up the creek. What's going to
happen next? We're going to not have
[2:47:06] enough water to even even take care of
ourselves.
[2:47:11] And uh the water well is going to have
to go down deeper and deeper, which is
[2:47:16] very expensive. And at some point, it's
there's not going to be water. So, I am
[2:47:21] very concerned about water. I'm very
concerned about wildlife and and I'm
[2:47:27] very concerned about big business coming
in and trying to change the very the
[2:47:35] very beauty the very uh beautiful
Madison County that we have come to
[2:47:39] love. So I want to say that I'm
definitely in support and um I want to
[2:47:45] thank you for the opportunity to speak
today.
[2:48:02] Yes. Um if I could.
>> Okay.
[2:48:09] » Um my name is Dan Wank. Um
uh I'm
[2:48:14] I'm the u former superintendent of
Yellowstone National Park and been
[2:48:19] engaged with with different people and
different groups and organizations in
[2:48:23] the Madison Valley for a long time. I
first came to uh Yellowstone in 20 in
[2:48:30] 1979 as a member of the superintendent
staff and my job at that time was
[2:48:36] outreach to local communities and land
owners uh surrounding the park the park
[2:48:41] throughout the region. Uh the concept of
the Yellowstone ecosystem was first
[2:48:46] discussed in the early 1980s and it was
brought by an understanding that the
[2:48:52] health of Yellowstone extends and
depends beyond the park boundaries
[2:48:58] especially in places like the Madison
Valley in the critical wildlife
[2:49:01] corridors. I returned to Yellowstone as
superintendent in 2011. The development
[2:49:07] in the ecosystem had changed
dramatically and continues to evolve.
[2:49:12] The amount of development that was
eye-opening and the effect on the
[2:49:15] wildlife corridors and natural
environment is incremental, substantial
[2:49:19] and increasing.
Perhaps one of the best places that this
[2:49:23] is explained was under the May 2016
issue of National Geographic which was
[2:49:28] devoted to Yellowstone in the ecosystem.
I commend that to you to see, to look
[2:49:33] at, and to understand the wildlife
corridors.
[2:49:37] The work done by individual land owners
by placing their lands in conservation
[2:49:41] easements are an important tool used by
some concerned land owners as you have
[2:49:46] heard today. But that's a minority of
land owners in the area.
[2:49:52] More is needed to protect the wildlife
corridors and the natural systems.
[2:49:56] Adopting these citizens initiated zoning
initiatives will provide a framework to
[2:50:01] preserve, manage, and provide for
appropriate development of these
[2:50:05] critical lands. Most agree that this
ecosystem deserves protection.
[2:50:10] Initiatives such as this are a great
state step in understanding and
[2:50:14] implementing necessary steps to protect
what we all love.
[2:50:19] I'd like to thank you for the
opportunity to comment and I really
[2:50:23] appreciate the work that's been done by
local groups to try to preserve this
[2:50:28] incredible resource. Thank you.
[2:50:33] Anyone
[2:50:38] else?
>> Yep. Hi,
[2:50:42] my name is Fredley. My sister Alice and
I both own property at two Sheep Creek
[2:50:47] Road in Cameron and we stand in support
of the CIZD and everyone trying to
[2:50:54] preserve wildlife and preserve our um
property in that area.
[2:51:00] Thank you.
[2:51:07] You got
good Gary.
[2:51:18] Me
Carrie Kensinger.
[2:51:24] » Hi, I'm Carrie Kensinger. Um I we my
father he's 95. I'm at his house right
[2:51:31] now. So bear with me if there's any
interruptions. Um we have property at 55
[2:51:37] Moonwater Lane up at Reynolds Pass. Um
first of all, I'd like to thank the
[2:51:42] commissioners so much for entertaining
and listening to all of the very
[2:51:48] wellfounded and great points made for
and against. Um, however, I'm going to
[2:51:54] say um with all passion that I am so for
these um districts to have some
[2:52:03] regulation and zoning. Um, as a former
chairperson for the NIS planning board
[2:52:09] uh before it was dissolved, I know the
uh importance of having management and
[2:52:18] especially when it comes to the growth.
And just an aside, just something that I
[2:52:24] thought of when I was listening to
everybody is that we would do outreach
[2:52:28] for the growth policy and went to the
airport commission and the county
[2:52:33] commissioners and the art association
and we would ask the question um how
[2:52:38] would you like to see NS 5 years from
now? And inevitably there would be
[2:52:42] comments to the effect of we want it to
go back to the way it was 50 years ago.
[2:52:49] Well, that train has left the station
and if we don't have something in place,
[2:52:56] then it will be left to its own devices,
meaning that part of the valley uh in
[2:53:03] the south. Um, we've had the cabin up
there since 1994. It was built in 1971.
[2:53:10] I think it was the first cabin that was
built on that section of the river. Um
[2:53:15] I'm well aware of the different uh water
usages and what's happening with the
[2:53:21] water resources up there and I just
would say that it's imperative to have a
[2:53:27] plan to protect the existing resources
for the residents and for the wildlife.
[2:53:34] Um it's never too late to do the right
thing.
[2:53:38] Uh I support uh having these districts
with the zoning
[2:53:44] um implemented so that we have uh the
the chance to keep and preserve and
[2:53:50] conserve what we already have up there
and enjoy and love. Um I'm very much in
[2:53:56] favor of the citizen initiated zoning
because I think that's a very very
[2:54:02] critical part of our democracy. So,
thank you for listening and I appreciate
[2:54:07] everybody that's spoken. Thank you,
[2:54:16] » Gary Yak.
[2:54:26] While we wait for Gary, can I speak
[2:54:31] over here? Hi, my name is Rana Sarcis.
I'm at 25 Rocky Road South in Cameron
[2:54:39] and um it's part of the Sportsman's
Paradise uh subdivision. And I'm just
[2:54:44] speaking here today to uh support uh the
CZID initiative and to thank the
[2:54:51] commission and K and the group for
advocating so um uh strongly and
[2:54:57] wholeheartedly for this initiative. That
is all. Thank you.
[2:55:10] Gary, are you there?
[2:55:23] » We lost Eric.
>> Randy, you want to go ahead?
[2:55:28] » Yes, I do. Can you hear me?
Yes.
[2:55:32] » Thank you. Um, at the risk of being
redundant and wasting more time, um, I'd
[2:55:38] like to have my comments applied to all
three zoning district hearings, Sheep
[2:55:42] Mountain, Prong Horn Meadows, and
Analopee Basin. Um, my name is Randy
[2:55:48] Arbaggast. I am a resident of Madison
County in the Reynolds Pass area,
[2:55:53] specifically at 21 Moonwater Lane with
my wife Samantha. I want to express my
[2:55:59] support of CIZD or citizens initiated
zoning in all three of the zoning
[2:56:06] districts. Um, my father once told me
when I was learning to drive, "Don't
[2:56:12] overdrive your headlights. You won't be
able to see what's coming." I think we
[2:56:18] can all understand this metaphor because
we all know what's coming. That is
[2:56:24] commercial development. So,
commissioners, I urge you to please
[2:56:29] support initiated zoning to primarily
stop commercial development in this
[2:56:34] area.
Our collective voices need to be heard
[2:56:38] and please, let's not overdrive our
headlights. It's not too late. Let's
[2:56:44] plan for the rest of the future. That's
it. Thank you very much for listening.
[2:56:49] Thank you for your time.
[2:57:09] Why don't you go ahead, Bill?
[2:57:33] Bill Maslin.
[2:57:54] Finally, maybe I got it right. This is
Bill Masslin. Can you hear me? Okay.
[2:57:58] Now,
>> yes.
[2:58:00] » Sorry about that. Um,
my wife and I I own property up in uh
[2:58:08] the uh Sheep Mountain Zoning District,
133 Sheep Mountain Road. Cameron, we
[2:58:15] strongly support all three of the CIZDS
and would like you to include our
[2:58:21] comments in all three. I will not
duplicate what others have said, but I
[2:58:25] just wanted to make a point that I think
captures a lot of what you've got to
[2:58:30] deal with. And that is the philosophy of
think globally, act locally.
[2:58:37] Um when we look at the bigger picture,
we can see all kinds of challenges ahead
[2:58:42] of us. But taking on those challenges
holistically is oftentimes not possible.
[2:58:48] May not even be within the realm of our
control. But we can take actions
[2:58:53] locally.
related to that, it's important to look
[2:58:58] at not the perfect because it gets in
the way of the good, but what is good
[2:59:05] relative to that local interest.
And so in that regard, uh I just
[2:59:11] encourage you to look at this that way,
both in terms of geographically as well
[2:59:16] as temporally the time frame. Uh things
aren't going to get better. They're not
[2:59:21] going to get easier. Now is the time.
And I think the citizens initiated
[2:59:26] zoning accomplishes that task consistent
with your policy.
[2:59:31] Thank you.
[2:59:42] » David and Natalie.
[2:59:49] » Yeah. Hello. Uh David Six here. Um
my wife Natalie and I own uh property
[2:59:56] currently at 33 Dutchman Trail in
Cameron. Um, we've actually owned
[3:00:02] property in the past within the mountain
uh proposed district and uh I don't want
[3:00:09] to repeat or take a lot of time to
repeat what others have said well um but
[3:00:16] we do wish to um express our strong
support for adopting these uh zoning
[3:00:24] districts. Um, I think that uh anyone
who would dismiss or discount the risk
[3:00:34] of highdensity commercialization in the
area need only look back at what
[3:00:39] happened four years ago and the enormous
effort that it took on the part of PRP
[3:00:45] and all the other residents in the area.
Uh, not just in time but in their own
[3:00:50] personal finances, which I'm sure is
still the case today. Uh there's no
[3:00:55] outside source of funding I'm aware of
that that supports this effort. Um but
[3:01:01] anyway, it was a significant effort. We
we uh we all felt good about um the
[3:01:08] outcome and and uh appreciated very much
the commissioners uh all of you and the
[3:01:14] staff for supporting uh those hearings
and and efforts that went on for that
[3:01:19] and and for this new uh effort as well.
just so that those of us who own
[3:01:26] property up there um
can can look forward to to more years of
[3:01:32] of uh the enjoying the pristine
environment, the wildlife
[3:01:37] uh that that that uh inhabits that area.
Um, I have no doubt that if we allow
[3:01:45] this to pass along without endorsing it
and adopting these uh uh these districts
[3:01:52] that there will be challenges equal to
or much greater than what we've already
[3:01:57] faced uh just four years ago. and there
it will just set the stage and open the
[3:02:03] door for more of that kind of effort and
the enormous effort that it would place
[3:02:09] not only on all the citizens but on you
as commissioners as well to deal with
[3:02:14] and address those in the future. So
again, uh we would just like to uh
[3:02:21] strongly endorse and and and uh uh state
our our uh position in favor of adopting
[3:02:29] these these citizen initiated districts.
So that's all I have to say. Thank you
[3:02:34] very much again for your time.
[3:02:45] Chris, you want to go ahead?
[clears throat]
[3:02:49] » Sure. Uh, good afternoon. My name is
Chris Peekham and I own property at 31
[3:02:55] Tory Road in Cameron. Uh, I don't have
anything new that has not already been
[3:03:02] articulated by prior speakers. So, in
the interest of brevity, I will say only
[3:03:07] that I fully support uh all three uh
proposed citizen initiated zoning
[3:03:14] districts. And I hope that uh although
my property is not presently included in
[3:03:20] any of the three, I do hope that one day
uh they will there will be a new one
[3:03:25] that will encompass my property or one
of the three proposed uh districts will
[3:03:31] grow to include my property. I think
they're a fabulous idea and I appreciate
[3:03:35] all the effort that has gone into this
by uh PRP. So again, just offering my
[3:03:41] support for all three. Thank you for
your time.
[3:03:50] Angie, you want to go ahead
[3:04:32] and Jarbulla.
[3:05:17] Last call for Angie.
[3:05:27] » Eric Nord,
>> go ahead.
[3:05:31] » Thank you. Um, my name is Eric Nord. I
have property at 79 Highway 287 South.
[3:05:37] It's just south of the 87 intersection.
Neighbors with Bob Garrett. I want to
[3:05:43] say thanks to Bob and Marina for their
their words and all all the work that
[3:05:49] they've done on this. But I do support
the CIZD
[3:05:54] um and really any efforts to kind of
limit the uh unplanned growth or the the
[3:06:02] crazy growth that goes on. We've owned
about 15 years and and the population in
[3:06:07] that area has tripled. Um and so I you
know I appreciate
[3:06:14] uh that you have this Zoom meeting so
that we can join the the the meeting. I
[3:06:21] I do appreciate that and I hope you'll
uh listen to everybody's comments. Thank
[3:06:27] you.
[3:07:09] Brian
[3:07:13] may be having technical difficulties.
>> Brian,
[3:07:18] » excuse me. Angie just text that she is
kicked out of the meeting and she can't
[3:07:23] find it.
But I just want to let you know that
[3:07:26] that's what happened. I don't expect you
to
[3:07:28] » She just disappeared.
>> She just disappeared here.
[3:07:34] [clears throat]
[3:07:40] » If you would like to testify, go ahead.
>> My name is Dr. Diane Love. I live at
[3:07:47] Ford Greenville Lane in Cameron.
And I would like to start out by saying
[3:07:52] that my husband Steve and I right there
um fully support this initiative.
[3:07:59] And in sitting in
the um first meetings this morning, a
[3:08:05] lot of things were brought up about
costs,
[3:08:08] cost of water, cost of health care, cost
of hospital issues and so on. And gosh,
[3:08:17] I'm really nervous saying this. When I
speak for public for a living, I guess
[3:08:22] that's because I really care about this.
I would like to ask you to look at the
[3:08:27] long-term cost if something isn't done.
Like Marina said, you know, this might
[3:08:34] be 40 years too late, but it's in all of
our hands now to do something about
[3:08:41] this. And there's people who are
adamantly, you know, have issues against
[3:08:47] it, which, you know, I hear you and
respect you. And I also hear and respect
[3:08:53] what everyone is saying about this. And
the bottom line is everybody
[3:08:59] loves this area. We love it or we
wouldn't be sitting here all these hours
[3:09:04] and you guys wouldn't be doing what
you're doing. And none nobody here has
[3:09:09] said we want a Walmart. We want a love
truck stop. We want a Marriott. All we
[3:09:15] want is to preserve what we have. And we
want guidelines in place for you helping
[3:09:21] us to do this before it's too late. So I
want to thank you for your service.
[3:09:28] And we say that to our police. say thank
you and thank you to Kay, Marina, Sam,
[3:09:35] and everybody that's here that's
speaking their heart and their soul
[3:09:40] because we all want what's best. So
obviously we support this and I would
[3:09:45] like my comments to go in all three of
these initiatives. So I'm going to turn
[3:09:50] it over to my much smarter and
significant husband.
[3:09:55] Sure.
>> Um, when I came here today, my name is
[3:09:59] Steve Law. We live on for Greenland
right on the river [clears throat] off
[3:10:04] 28787.
I came here putting myself as a judge
[3:10:11] and uh kind of what you're doing here
and knowing that you have to make this
[3:10:18] decision. I've been businessman, been on
many boards my life. understand how
[3:10:24] tough these decisions are that you have
to make.
[3:10:28] But again, my situation is um I was kind
of neutral on this thing. Uh my wife's
[3:10:35] big on it. I do support it. I wrote a
few checks
[3:10:40] and but also I'm a property rights guy
and I don't like the government meddling
[3:10:46] in my situation. Well, this really isn't
the government. This is us. This is the
[3:10:51] people that live here. And I mean, you
can't get 65%
[3:10:57] of the people to vote for the president
of the United States, let alone vote for
[3:11:02] for this referendum. So all I would like
to do, all I know listening as a judge,
[3:11:10] the only negatives I've heard is people
like that have a con a conservative
[3:11:15] easement, conservation easement, and
they kind of did the same thing we're
[3:11:19] trying to it was it's almost the same
because nobody can build on on their
[3:11:25] property because they have the easement
and we're trying to do the same thing.
[3:11:29] Um,
I uh we I have a company and we put
[3:11:35] trusses on an apartment or not an
apartment, a hotel in Island Park.
[3:11:42] A great big gigantic hotel. Okay. Well,
when you go there in the summer, it is a
[3:11:51] mad house. Didn't used to be. So, how
would you like a Love's truck stop on
[3:11:58] 287
and 87? And they somebody said, "Oh,
[3:12:03] we've already ruined the wildlife. Put
that thing in and you see what it does
[3:12:07] to wildlife." So, um, and somebody else
said, "This is big money driving this."
[3:12:14] No, this isn't this is a grassroots
thing that Kay and some others put
[3:12:19] together. And so this is a people's
decision. This isn't a government
[3:12:24] decision. And like I said, I respect
people too that are against it. But this
[3:12:30] is the majority. And that's what you
grew up to do that. But all I can say is
[3:12:36] I was a judge in this deal. I pass it.
Thank you.
[3:12:50] Okay.
Also,
[3:13:12] I don't think it sounds
>> [clears throat]
[3:13:17] » broad public
[3:13:21] one more time. Real short. My name's
John Lake and I'm short.
[3:13:27] [laughter]
>> Yes. There's a really great and I'm 1511
[3:13:33] Highway 287.
There's a really good short Christian
[3:13:40] song starts out, I can only imagine.
I can only imagine. Think of that song.
[3:13:50] What my eyes would see
[3:13:56] in a valley without protection
[3:14:00] without rules and guardrails. I can only
imagine open storage
[3:14:07] of 87
truck stops, trailer parks, pop stores,
[3:14:13] and a degraded Madison River. It takes
courage
[3:14:19] to make guard rails. And I encourage the
support of all these CI
[3:14:25] areas.
[3:14:32] Believe I understand that after the
online comments there I could come up
[3:14:35] again. So um follow us a rebuttal really
quickly. I full I can't promise that
[3:14:41] because
um I just want to address our judge
[3:14:46] Steve here who says this it's not the
government and and and I hope that it
[3:14:50] was not a misconr that that's what I
believe that hey the government's after
[3:14:55] us. I actually applaud the effort. I
applaud the intention. Um but I do think
[3:15:02] that some of this has come about in bad
faith. It's not representative of the
[3:15:06] the public. Um and and and also I
understand that um in terms of I respect
[3:15:14] the commission's decision-making ability
here, but it has come to you from
[3:15:19] another governing body that has put
these things together and it's it's
[3:15:24] almost today it looks like a binary
decision whether or not we will adopt it
[3:15:28] or not. and and and that is without
having addressed my concerns about the
[3:15:36] the um the provisions of these uh zones
which are again somebody mentioned that
[3:15:42] they were all the same. They're very
similar. Um to address that
[3:15:46] specifically, I have no desire to have
commercial uh endeavor. I wouldn't know
[3:15:52] how I don't know how to make money. I
just work my job for a living. But I do
[3:15:58] I did specifically look for 40 acres
where there would be enough room that I
[3:16:02] could build a home small home. We have a
thousand acres that we're trying to not
[3:16:05] thousand a thousand square feet that we
would like to build once we have money
[3:16:09] because we don't have a lot of money and
then someday maybe an out cabin for my
[3:16:14] daughter and I have five children. But
as the provisions are stated I would be
[3:16:19] allowed one primary building, one
auxiliary building and one other
[3:16:22] building. Our dream if we were included
in these zones would effectively be
[3:16:27] crushed. And we looked for a very long
time and we rejected the Sphinx Mountain
[3:16:32] subdivision. There's Hog something over
there because 20 acres that we were
[3:16:36] going to buy because of the covenants
were effectively reduced to a single
[3:16:39] acre of usable land. and and we wrote a
letter to the to that area and we said
[3:16:45] we would like to be lot 65 exempt this
from this covenant because we love the
[3:16:50] area but we want this to be a place for
our family to come enjoy for generations
[3:16:55] but the provisions as stated for all of
them you know speaking der mainly for
[3:16:59] the for this topic and applying them if
you will to all the rest some of these
[3:17:02] comments I've already emailed for the
other ones are the fact that if adopted
[3:17:07] these provisions would prevent my family
forever from using the property property
[3:17:11] for the purpose that we bought it for
because the intention is to prevent
[3:17:16] commercial endeavors from coming in.
That has not ever been our intention. It
[3:17:20] is a beautiful piece of property. We
would love to spend our summers there.
[3:17:23] We would love to grow it over time. I
don't have money to do that with today.
[3:17:29] um speaking to I am not aware that there
are ex there's external money coming
[3:17:34] into this um either but I I do get the
sense with for my own senses from my
[3:17:39] eyes that sees a very professional
website persistent hours that are spent
[3:17:44] into this a professional um law firm
representing
[3:17:49] you know the the the positive side of
this I feel passionate about it because
[3:17:54] they've had three years to prepare their
case and we essentially have beginning
[3:18:00] today and referencing the statute I'm
aware that beginning once that if that
[3:18:06] zone was accepted there would be six
months to object um we as citizens some
[3:18:11] of us would look to the commission like
what can you do for us that is not your
[3:18:15] role if if our us as citizens wanted to
come together and object to this we
[3:18:19] would have to mass amass the same kind
of support that's been garnered over the
[3:18:24] last three years we would have to do
that in six months and so My my prayer
[3:18:30] to the to the committee is effectively
that they consider ways to buy us time
[3:18:36] so that the opposing um voice can be
heard. I am concerned that that 60% that
[3:18:42] everybody's leaning on the statute for
was acquired in bad faith that that that
[3:18:47] well-intentioned if there was somebody
like me who objected they would go find
[3:18:51] somebody else that approves so that they
can get their way and I as an individual
[3:18:55] citizen would have to amass support to
object to that within the next six
[3:18:59] months. Um Alicia Rosati was concerned
they don't have money to file for
[3:19:04] covenants. That's our position today,
that within the next six months, we
[3:19:09] would have to amass a a opposition to
this in order to legally defeat the the
[3:19:16] statute that's before us right now. And
so I'm concerned that it's it's it's a
[3:19:20] foregone conclusion. And it's been said
that over the course of time, some of
[3:19:25] people are hoping that they will be
enveloped into this. If my property was
[3:19:29] eventually enveloped into this, despite
my objection, it would be now and into
[3:19:35] perpetuity, my family could never could
never achieve the dream that we bought
[3:19:41] the property for. And so I would ask
that more time be bought and that if
[3:19:48] it's possible for the commission to go
look for those property owners that
[3:19:53] maybe didn't hear about this are the
locals represented as well as the
[3:19:57] foreigners from Connecticut and
Pennsylvania and all their parcels that
[3:20:01] are just people temporary. Is there a
way to know that? I don't think we know
[3:20:04] because we haven't had time. Thank you.
>> [clears throat]
[3:20:09] » Are we allow rebuttal?
[3:20:12] » Don't call it a rebuttal. Call it a
public comment. And he said I'll take a
[3:20:16] second. I'll take a second. Um
question.
[3:20:28] This this instructed me that I was
allowed to come up a second.
[3:20:31] » Okay.
[3:20:35] Have any more public comment? We got a
Robert O'Brien.
[3:20:39] » Okay.
[3:20:42] » Hi. Sorry for the delay here. I have a
baby here that delayed me from talking.
[3:20:46] Uh my name is Robert O'Brien. I'm
speaking on behalf of my parents uh that
[3:20:51] own a parcel uh in the Bigorn district.
Uh which is not being talked about
[3:20:55] today. Uh I actually reside out of state
in Henderson, Nevada. Uh coincidentally,
[3:21:00] the same city that uh the board members
Jerry Rambula and KS live in. Sorry,
[3:21:06] that's my backup
backup singer baby here. Uh,
[3:21:10] commissioners, I'd like to thank Kay and
the PRP uh group that has established
[3:21:15] that she established for all the work
she's been putting in uh to try and
[3:21:18] achieve 60% of votes. Uh, everybody's
already said these would be the first
[3:21:23] districts, zoning districts in the
county and would set a major precedent.
[3:21:27] Uh I'm sure none of us want to see uh
crowded development uh like Bosezeman uh
[3:21:34] especially where where K resides. Uh so
today in support of managing uh
[3:21:39] development and keeping the character of
the area uh we really f thought we
[3:21:43] should lead by example.
Uh we did this rather than supporting
[3:21:47] these CZDs.
We voluntarily imposed covenants on our
[3:21:51] own parcel. uh we did not wish to or
vote to impose covenants on 40% of our
[3:21:58] neighbors. That's what's going on today.
This is not 60% deciding uh to protect
[3:22:04] their land. This is 60% deciding to
impose restrictions on their neighbors.
[3:22:09] Uh self-imposed covenants are voluntary
zoning. The CIDDS today are not
[3:22:15] voluntary. Uh this is essentially
tyranny of the majority. Right? If you
[3:22:20] hit 60%, you are now inflicting all of
these restrictions on your neighbors
[3:22:25] whether you like them or not. Uh so
there's two questions I have today. Uh
[3:22:29] and these can be answered later. Uh
first, what is the limit on the number
[3:22:32] of votes per parcel? So this particular
district has only seven parcels. Uh does
[3:22:39] one parcel with four owners have four
times the voting right of a single owner
[3:22:44] parcel?
Uh is that spelled out anywhere? and has
[3:22:48] that been verified? Uh the same question
applies to the other districts. And that
[3:22:52] also leads me to uh another question.
Why is this split up into four zoning
[3:22:58] districts uh uh with three of which
we're talking about today? Why not one
[3:23:03] large zoning district if we're trying to
protect the whole valley, right? Uh
[3:23:07] gerrymandering. So, it's been brought up
multiple times today. That's the number
[3:23:11] one word that keeps coming to my head
today. Uh is gerrymandering. These CICDs
[3:23:16] have absolutely been gerrymandered into
three small portions so that we can get
[3:23:22] 60% of the votes in each portion rather
than do it for the whole valley. Uh so
[3:23:26] I'd close today by asking uh the 60% of
the majority who voted for this to
[3:23:32] follow our lead and put restricted
covenants on your own properties. Uh
[3:23:36] we've done that. We're trying to be good
stewards of the area. Uh we've been here
[3:23:40] for decades. You do not need to try and
impose these on your neighbors. this is
[3:23:44] not the path forward for this. Uh let's
let's find an alternative to this. Uh
[3:23:49] whether that means waiting to implement
these or looking at alternatives. Uh uh
[3:23:55] if you'd like to impose rules on your
neighbors without their consent, maybe
[3:23:58] California is a better retirement
location for you.
[3:24:16] Looks like
[3:24:23] we're out of public comment. I guess we
could conclude this hearing.
[3:24:29] And
[3:24:33] with that, I guess
[3:24:42] this
decision date.
[3:24:48] » So, you're saying we're done with
listening to public comment, you think?
[3:24:52] Um, how does the uh if people wanted to
discuss further about what other like
[3:24:58] rebuttals and stuff? How do we move
forward with that
[3:25:02] or do [clears throat] we do we just
listen to
[3:25:07] » just trying to understand the process?
Colton,
[3:25:09] » come on. Yeah, I would just call for
additional public comment. Anyone else
[3:25:13] has anything else to say?
Say it. [clears throat]
[3:25:18] Not then, uh, you could entertain a
motion to take this all under
[3:25:22] advisement. Make a decision at future
date. Entertain a motion to make a
[3:25:25] decision if you feel have enough
information.
[3:25:29] It's up to you as commissioners.
>> And once public comments, it's
[3:25:34] exhausted. There's nothing.
[3:25:38] So, I think there was some interest in
rebottling some of the um answer some of
[3:25:43] these questions that they had and I
personally would like to hear um what
[3:25:48] the what some of the answers to these
some of these comments would be.
[3:25:56] So, I
[3:26:00] » it's chairman's prerogative.
>> Yeah. Okay. Well, what I'd like to see
[3:26:05] is let's take this information that we
gathered on advisor and set a a date to
[3:26:12] make [clears throat] the final decision.
And I I think I have that on the agenda
[3:26:17] for September 15th. Is that right?
[3:26:25] November 15th
[3:26:33] to do that.
But for the previous we [clears throat]
[3:26:37] did Yes.
That was the ninth day. Oh, is it? Oh,
[3:26:41] I'm sorry.
>> Uh, the previous one that was the nth if
[3:26:46] you want to do with that same day.
>> The 15th.
[3:26:50] » The 15th is the Tuesday. [clears throat]
>> We got to continue on the other one,
[3:26:56] » right? to do the
>> for Commissioner Gilman's concerns. If
[3:27:03] he'd like to hear rebuttals, I think we
should do it if those people are present
[3:27:08] » because we could we still have some time
on this particular unless we wanted to
[3:27:13] recess for lunch or something. But uh we
do have a little time to listen to a few
[3:27:18] more comments on uh you know some of
these uh
[3:27:24] concerns.
[3:27:28] Anybody here want to pull up a rebuttal?
>> Sure.
[3:27:36] » Council owner at seventh and modern
lane. I do not
[3:27:42] I do not want Anderson to that by the
way and um
[3:27:47] I hadn't opted to rebut because I feel
like the facts stand for themselves but
[3:27:53] I do want to answer your questions and
if do you have specific questions that I
[3:27:59] could answer I'm happy to do.
>> Yeah. I mean I just thought I I know the
[3:28:03] gentleman in the back there had had
offered to uh discuss some more. So, I
[3:28:08] just kind of was curious to see what he
wanted to say as far where I was going
[3:28:11] with that.
>> Oh, Jerry. Oh,
[3:28:16] » well, I just
[3:28:22] » Are you going to talk about the average?
>> That's what I was going to talk about.
[3:28:28] » Sounds like we have opportunity to speak
here. Okay.
[3:28:30] » We were trying to be respectful of what
we understood were the
[3:28:35] orders of the of the meeting. Uh I'm
still willing to do that. I want to be
[3:28:40] respectful certainly of your time as
well.
[3:28:42] » Uh so why don't you speak to your piece
because I just collect my thoughts.
[3:28:48] » Okay. Thank you. So the um there were
several things that were said that of
[3:28:53] course each side will say well they said
this and it wasn't true. They said this
[3:28:56] and it wasn't true. And I don't think
that that is really productive for you
[3:29:00] to hear that back and forth. But I would
say we do have documented evidence of
[3:29:05] all of our outreach for over three
years. Uh newsletters, community
[3:29:09] meetings, uh when I personally would be
calling people to make sure they were
[3:29:14] aware of things. Mr. Waters has been
involved in some of our Zooms. He is on
[3:29:20] our email list. So I mean there's no
there's no last minute notification
[3:29:24] unless somebody um gave information
other than whatever the rest of the
[3:29:29] public received. And as far as uh people
who are saying that they are very
[3:29:36] conservationminded,
I would say that not all of the people
[3:29:39] that were speaking against this have
conservation easements on their property
[3:29:43] and that one particular large parcel has
been for sale for a couple of years. And
[3:29:48] it could be that some of the motivate
motivification motivation behind
[3:29:53] opposing this is because they don't want
to do what is going to be in the zoning
[3:29:58] regulations. if these regulations are
adopted and therefore they're just
[3:30:03] opposing it now in anticipation of doing
something else. So I didn't really want
[3:30:07] to do that but I just wanted to explain
that to you Mr. Gilman because you
[3:30:11] haven't been involved in this as long as
Mr. and I or Mr. Todd and you weren't
[3:30:15] here but the RV park situation came
before the commission and we have a long
[3:30:22] history of involvement in the community
and being very transparent. our
[3:30:27] regulations and our maps have been on
our website since August of 2025.
[3:30:32] We have in our we actually said
postcards for property owners in the
[3:30:38] Reynolds Pass area, not just people in
CISDS letting them know that the
[3:30:43] regulations and maps are on the website
and please comment. So, I mean, I feel
[3:30:47] like we've done an exemplary job of
letting people know what is going on.
[3:30:53] And I'll stop with that. And then Jerry,
did you want to say anything?
[3:31:02] Not to hammer another nail in the
coffin, but I mean for you not to be
[3:31:05] aware of what's been going on in Madison
Valley for like the last four years. I
[3:31:10] mean, everybody that lives at that
valley is aware of this, but unless you
[3:31:16] and one of our challenges in fact I can
tell you is
[3:31:21] communicating. This may be answering why
why we had to split up because we have
[3:31:26] limited resources. Five people in terms
of trying to contact that many people
[3:31:31] who don't live here. You gentlemen know
this as well as anybody does. 90% of the
[3:31:36] people don't live here full-time, let
alone trying to contact them on a
[3:31:40] regular basis. It's an incredible
challenge. It's taken us that long to
[3:31:44] get any kind of consistent messaging
out. So, it's not without K's point.
[3:31:49] It's not without a humongous three-year
effort that we've had an ongoing effort
[3:31:54] to communicate, make sure our
communication is correct and accurate
[3:31:58] and legal. It's been a process. And with
limited resources,
[3:32:03] when you don't have enough employees,
you have to trim the business back. You
[3:32:08] guys know that we didn't have we don't
have enough people to reach out
[3:32:14] in such remote areas and communicate.
we're just there's just not enough of us
[3:32:18] or enough money quite frankly to answer
the question about why things suddenly
[3:32:23] be split up. Um the second part is
uh
[3:32:30] I would hate to think
that I would crush somebody's dream of
[3:32:36] living in Montan or serving Medicine
Valley and nor would I even want to be
[3:32:40] any part of that. Uh but the
the other side of that for those of us
[3:32:47] who all appreciate this area is and and
believe me I waited 30 years to finding
[3:32:52] add on to my house.
What happens if in the interim of us
[3:32:57] waiting to do something that somebody
does build
[3:33:02] motel sits next to your property?
[3:33:07] What do you tell your family that they
can go swim in their pool? I mean pro
[3:33:12] progress is happening. I think that's
the message that we're trying to deliver
[3:33:16] here. Things were happening rapidly. If
we don't do things now, who does? And
[3:33:23] will your property be what it was
20 years ago? Will it be that same
[3:33:29] piece? It won't be. We know that
it's happening fast. Just look over the
[3:33:35] hill. And these gentlemen live it every
day. Um,
[3:33:41] I think that's the final thing. I think,
um,
[3:33:45] yeah, I don't want to take in all your
time.
[3:33:47] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Appreciate your
[3:33:52] We have one more on the TV.
>> Okay,
[3:33:57] » Dina, go ahead.
>> Hi, good afternoon everybody. Um, I'm
[3:34:02] hailing from Michigan. I live in the
Manaste National Forest. My just to give
[3:34:06] you background, my husband's born and
raised in Detroit. I was born and raised
[3:34:09] in New York City. We're both first
generation Italians. We bought property
[3:34:13] in Cameron Valley and we're in the zone
that didn't have enough votes. But I
[3:34:17] just want to speak a little bit to this
um on conservation. So we own 10 acres
[3:34:22] in the Manatee National Forest, which is
very hard to come by on a blue ribbon
[3:34:26] trout stream, Pier Marquette. We do a
ton of conservation here. So I applaud
[3:34:32] 100%. My daughter's also a fish and
wildlife biologist. that's out west. So
[3:34:36] applaud. Um and yes, you do have we do
have to do something. But hearing people
[3:34:42] I I bought land 20 acres. I have
covenants. However, my covenants are not
[3:34:48] as restrictive of what is being
proposed. So my concern is I just want
[3:34:53] to be allowed to follow my covenants.
But when you read the document, it says
[3:35:00] they have to be enforced or if they I to
me there should be
[3:35:05] looking at homeowners that want to do
homeowner stuff. I think we can parcel
[3:35:09] that out and and I can speak to Kay and
the whole group. They've been nothing
[3:35:14] but open, honest, whatever. Um, I can't
speak enough of that and I wasn't
[3:35:20] following it close enough to catch this
last piece. But I think with the whole
[3:35:24] commercialization, I totally understand.
It's starting to rain so I'm going to go
[3:35:28] inside in case it makes too loud. I
understand the commercialization. I
[3:35:32] think there may be a way um to look at
this in a different that when you talk
[3:35:37] about commercialization of property, you
can create restrictions
[3:35:43] to you know
[3:35:48] come through and widen 287 and create it
all the way and destroy it through the
[3:35:52] whole Tetons and National Forest which
is insane that even anybody would even
[3:35:56] speak of that. But I think there's a
marriage in the middle here and and I
[3:36:02] know Kay and her group are willing to
meet us in the middle. Um and this
[3:36:06] sometimes it comes out this way and it
flushes out. I implore everybody to
[3:36:11] stick with it. Um let's work through
this. Let's get it in place, but let's
[3:36:16] get the people that do have property
that are I want to build on my property.
[3:36:20] I'm just not at the place yet. Um we're
getting there. But I I I want to have it
[3:36:25] for my kids, too. and I have 20 acres
and if those the loophole that could
[3:36:31] potentially lose that covenant then I
would have 20 acres I can't do nothing
[3:36:35] with. So that is my concern. um not that
it can't get resolved, it can be
[3:36:40] resolved, but I think we can all come
together with the committee as well as
[3:36:44] this initiative with the and get a good
marriage in between. And I think we can
[3:36:49] parse out the commercialization
um because those are two different ways
[3:36:54] you can zone it. You can zone it as all
residential, you can zone it all
[3:36:58] commercial. we can figure out another
way to do this um that protects the
[3:37:04] sanctity of the land and what it was
there for and protect the wildlife,
[3:37:09] protect what we need. But yet those that
are here that want to build a home um
[3:37:14] can do so and keep it even with their co
their covenants that they do have
[3:37:19] somehow grandfather them in indefinite.
So that protects them for the purchase
[3:37:24] for the reason why we why I chose that
property was to have my retirement home
[3:37:28] out there and have my kids have a home
too on the property. So again, I I
[3:37:34] applaud it. I know it's not an easy
place for anybody to be. I am totally in
[3:37:38] support of doing something for sure. Um,
but I do think this is a good
[3:37:43] opportunity to get some more information
and tweak it a little bit and maybe just
[3:37:48] really parse out the whole
commercialization of you can't put in a
[3:37:52] hotel, you can't put in a a buck B, you
can't put in, you know, um, a Motel 6 or
[3:37:58] you can't put in a property and put a
bunch of little cabins in it and shove
[3:38:02] people on there. You know, I totally get
that. Um, and that's not something that
[3:38:06] we wanted to do. We're conservationists.
We have a conservation easement and we
[3:38:11] stick to the here and adhere to it. And
that would be what we would steward with
[3:38:14] our 20 acres, but I need to be able to
build on my 20 acres, not potentially
[3:38:20] lose that covenant if I don't follow if
they somehow are not followed or not
[3:38:24] enforced. And I don't know what that
means. What does that mean? You know,
[3:38:28] exactly who what who enforces? We don't
have a homeowners association to
[3:38:32] enforce. So technically per the law,
[clears throat]
[3:38:35] the way it's written, I would not have I
wouldn't be protected by the covenant
[3:38:39] rule. So again, I'm all about working
together. I'm all about making this
[3:38:44] work. I'm all about protecting the
water, all of it. I get it. Um but I do
[3:38:49] think we need to speak to people who
live there, that have property, that
[3:38:53] have dreams, and I think there's a good
marriage in the middle. We just got to
[3:38:56] get there. Thank you.
[3:39:02] Okay. With I think we'll conclude. Come
on out.
[3:39:08] » Oh, okay. Is there any more public
comment? Sorry.
[3:39:21] » Yeah. If there's no more public comment,
maybe the commissioners can entertain a
[3:39:25] motion to close the hearing for the
particular district.
[3:39:34] » Second that.
>> Okay. So hearing more comment we have
[3:39:39] motion second to conclusion hearing. Any
further discussion hearing for the vote?
[3:39:47] Mr.
a little tie.
[3:39:52] » Procedurally, what we're discussing is
continuation of the first hearing to the
[3:39:56] 9th and then you're anticipating
decisions on the 15th just so we're
[3:40:02] being open with everyone.
>> Yes. Um
[3:40:08] yeah
[3:40:11] sure is maybe would you it could be a
good idea to try to advertise the next
[3:40:17] day be making a decision.
So but maybe you want to set it out an
[3:40:21] additional week from that.
>> Okay.
[3:40:27] » Thank you. I agree with that.
>> At your discretion
[3:40:31] » is there a statutory requirement for
that?
[3:40:35] No, unless you're if you want to notice
by newspaper, you'd have to notice for
[3:40:39] two weeks,
>> which month,
[3:40:42] » but in terms of going for a resolution,
[3:40:54] » what's your prerogative, Mr. Chairman?
[clears throat]
[3:41:06] I think it would be good to advertise it
if we can. I really do. That's more
[3:41:11] transparent
and
[3:41:14] said it'll be on the agenda for the
15th, September 15th. So to make the
[3:41:20] final decision on
this hearing and then I guess probably
[3:41:24] all of
them are done.
[3:41:28] you it would run once if you did that,
but since there's no statutory
[3:41:34] requirement, you don't need to have the
10e period.
[3:41:37] » So, we're saying that we'll make the
final decision on all three of these on
[3:41:41] the 15th.
>> Yes.
[3:41:42] » Is that what you're telling me? And so,
but we will uh continue the um comments
[3:41:49] on the previous u
proposed uh CICD on the 9th 10th, isn't
[3:41:59] it?
>> N
[3:42:05] Okay, you're right. The nth. You're
right. [clears throat]
[3:42:08] Okay. Yes,
that's correct. Okay. And then um but we
[3:42:15] still have the next hearing to
>> Yes.
[3:42:21] » Okay.
[3:42:26] Thanks.
Did we not make a motion? I thought you
[3:42:30] had We could do that.
>> You made a motion to close the hearing,
[3:42:35] » but no motion has been made.
>> Oh, then I would move to do what I just
[3:42:40] said.
Okay,
[3:42:43] » I will second that.
>> Okay, so we have a motion to second
[3:42:46] continue the [clears throat]
[3:42:50] J mountain citizen of district hearing
September 9th
[3:42:59] to make the final decision
for all of the hearings on September
[3:43:05] 15th of our meetings. Any further
discussion?
[3:43:10] Right. I will call to the board.
>> I didn't quite hear motion except
[3:43:17] » pardon me.
>> I thought I heard you say the night.
[3:43:21] » Yeah,
>> he was reiterating that there will be a
[3:43:24] continuation on the sheep mountain one
for behind but the decision on all of
[3:43:29] these will be granted I mean will be
made on the 15th.
[3:43:37] » Yeah.
>> Okay. All right.
[3:43:41] Any further discussion on call of the
vote? Mr. T.
[3:43:44] » Hi,
>> Mr. Hi.
[3:43:47] » Chair. Okay, we'll take a break until
1:00. Thank you everybody.
[3:44:07] Grab my glass
[3:44:20] every
[3:44:23] day.
[3:44:52] That's what I'm saying.
[3:45:04] And that was unmuted.
[3:45:12] » Okay, it's one o'ce.
[3:45:19] » Thankfully, I've never had which is the
ation of the
[3:45:29] analopee bas
[3:45:35] district.
So with that it is exactly 1:00.
[3:45:42] I'll start the hearing at one o'clock
and we'll take public comments.
[3:45:49] » Thank you. uh before uh so I will state
that for the record the comments that I
[3:45:57] made for the other two CICDs apply to
Analopee Basa but I want to take my
[3:46:02] moments to address some confusion in the
room that I think it's been picked up
[3:46:07] online and the confusion is that if
there's a 40 acre minimum in the
[3:46:13] regulations that you cannot build for 20
acre parcel and that is absolutely not
[3:46:17] the case. So the way the regulations
state very clearly is that you your
[3:46:24] property is grandfathered and therefore
you have 20 acres now you could build on
[3:46:29] it just as your covenants say that you
can build on it. If you have more than
[3:46:35] 40 acres in the future the property
can't be reduced to less than 40 acre
[3:46:39] parcels. That is in the interest of uh
the migration quarter just as Matthew
[3:46:45] was explaining earlier. So in no case in
fact we have spreadsheets of the
[3:46:50] covenants of everything that we had
access to which is I think all of them
[3:46:56] except Mr. O'Brien's I didn't know they
had covenants on their land now they
[3:47:00] didn't before uh that the
in those covenants commercial dis
[3:47:09] commercial development is almost
universally
[3:47:12] uh not allowed. So that is when people
bought their property and they the
[3:47:18] covenant said no commercial development
that is not a surprise to people. We
[3:47:21] were very deliberate about that. It also
in most cases will say that 20 acres can
[3:47:28] be divided into five acres and we don't
address any of that. We don't address
[3:47:33] short-term rentals. We really are not.
The only thing that we are asking for is
[3:47:38] no billboards, that for future
construction have downward-f facing
[3:47:43] lights, and that you adhere to Madison
County fire regulations,
[3:47:48] and that you do not have recreational
fires within certain number of feet of a
[3:47:53] flammable structure or a flammable body
without it being in a a pit or a uh some
[3:48:01] sort of container. that'll be monitored
at all times, which is again Madison
[3:48:04] County fire regulations. And then we
also say that if you're going to have an
[3:48:08] open burn, [clears throat] that you need
to follow Madison County fire
[3:48:12] regulations, which requires a burn
permit. So, we're just mirroring the
[3:48:17] county in those things. The unique thing
in the districts before us now, and some
[3:48:22] speakers are not in those districts, is
the commercial development. And the
[3:48:27] reason that it was created this way is
because so many of the covenants cannot
[3:48:31] be enforced because there's no HOAs and
it pits neighbor against neighbor in
[3:48:36] enforcing it. So people will call us and
say what can I do about this and we can
[3:48:40] say you can't do anything
because you're not enforcing your ho
[3:48:45] your covenants and that's not what we
do. We do not deal with people's
[3:48:48] covenants. We're separate. The
regulations also clearly state that in a
[3:48:53] case of covenants versus uh regulations,
the stricter the two apply. And on
[3:48:58] almost all of the cases, the covenants
are far more strict than the
[3:49:01] regulations. We do not tell you how uh
what color your building could be, what
[3:49:06] kind of roof you can have. We do not do
any of those things. So, I just like to
[3:49:10] clarify that for the record and then
I'll just give this to Sarah.
[3:49:36] Hi, Maline Mason 97. A um I'd like to
continue my comments over from the last
[3:49:42] zoning districts and pertaining to
Analope Basin specifically. Um just in
[3:49:46] terms of the levy, I have the following
information. If Madison County fell into
[3:49:50] the minority and chose to put a 1 mil
levy on Animal Basin zoning district
[3:49:54] based on 2026 tax values, the county
would raise $236.87
[3:50:00] across all the 28 property owners.
>> Thank you.
[3:50:17] I do want to just uh put into the public
record my comments earlier member uh
[3:50:21] meetings. My name is Samantha Arbaggast.
My address is 21 Moonwater Lane in
[3:50:26] Cameron. Uh my husband and I own a home
down there and I'm also board member of
[3:50:30] preserve Pass. Um some specific things
um that I wanted to point out with with
[3:50:35] regards to public health and safety for
the Analopee Basin. um district. When
[3:50:42] we're speaking about um response times
and distances, uh I just want to point
[3:50:48] out that the um distance to the
uh Analopee [clears throat] Basin
[3:50:54] District from the Inspire Station is 48
to 50 miles. That's um considerable
[3:50:59] travel distance for emergency vehicles.
And for uh police response, it would be
[3:51:04] 61.5 miles from the Sheriff's Office,
which is a considerable distance as
[3:51:10] well. Um and then the remaining of my
comments, I'll spare you reading the
[3:51:13] whole letter again. You've heard it. I
just like to enter them into the record.
[3:51:18] Thank you. Ryan's in support of the
districts.
[3:51:25] [clears throat]
[3:51:28] » Keith Shine, 25 Big Ben Road in Cameron.
Uh my wife and I again are not in any of
[3:51:34] proposed districts, but we're here in
all of them.
[3:51:38] I don't envy the commission the task you
have considering these proposed zoning
[3:51:43] districts resolving differences between
people finding common ground. These are
[3:51:48] not easy things easy things to do. My
wife serves on the board of our local
[3:51:54] homeowners association. Got 14 homes, 40
members. were often in conflict just in
[3:52:00] that small neighborhood.
And some of us don't think there should
[3:52:05] be any rules at all because they want to
exempt themselves from conflict on that
[3:52:10] basis.
Respectfully, I don't see it that way. I
[3:52:16] believe society's rules create the basis
for people to be neighbors even when
[3:52:21] they don't know each other or even in
some cases when they don't like each
[3:52:25] other.
When we built our home, we had to submit
[3:52:29] plans to our association for the size of
the home, color of the siding, color of
[3:52:35] the roof. We didn't think that was
ownorous or limited our freedom or took
[3:52:41] away our private property rights. We
thought that was the basis for us to
[3:52:46] join our neighborhood because that was
the neighborhood rule.
[3:52:51] We got to think as individuals that our
rights are greater or more fundamental
[3:52:57] than the rights of the majority around
us. At the same time, it's wrong for a
[3:53:02] majority to impose rules that deny
fundamental individual rights.
[3:53:08] But the zoning guidelines offered by
PRP's plans don't do that. The proposed
[3:53:14] zoning doesn't supplant or take primacy
over current neighborhood existing
[3:53:20] bylaws or covenants. They don't attempt
a way to rest away individual property
[3:53:26] rights. Zoning has as its primary goal
keeping in check large commercial
[3:53:32] development
that threatens all owners and the rural
[3:53:37] and agrarian character of the Madison
Valley and it's blunted but limited
[3:53:44] natural resources.
Such rules are in every homeowner's best
[3:53:49] interest and advance the protection of
the land. It's the right and necessary
[3:53:55] thing to do, particularly since built
built into [clears throat] the rules, is
[3:54:02] the flexibility to change them in the
future. Of course, there's opposition.
[3:54:09] People don't want rules in their way.
They don't want government telling them
[3:54:14] what to do, especially with their
private property.
[3:54:18] But the Madison Valley, its people, and
the wildlife are not in the Wild West.
[3:54:25] We're way past that because our
population has grown and is projected to
[3:54:30] further grow. The land faces severe
threats.
[3:54:35] Governance is needed. Controlled growth
is needed. Zoning is needed. Please do
[3:54:44] write by the majority on the land and
pass the zoning districts. Thank you.
[3:54:58] Ma'am Townsen 200 Jensen Road
Cameron. And this time I have a letter
[3:55:03] to read and to be submitted to the
record
[3:55:12] to the commissioners.
[3:55:16] I topped the rise and beheld creation
and only the tongues of angels could
[3:55:23] tell what I have seen. I doubt there's
anyone in the room for whom these words
[3:55:28] have not responded res resonated every
time they [clears throat] come over
[3:55:33] Norris Hill and behold the Madison
Valley.
[3:55:37] We never tire of it. Hopefully, we never
will. We're here today because of an
[3:55:44] opportunity to give this awe to our
children and to all those lucky enough
[3:55:50] to top that rise.
This opportunity is inspired by a
[3:55:55] community effort over several years to
protect the land, its resources, and a
[3:56:02] way of life which has brought us and all
those before us to this place.
[3:56:09] But we can't do it without you.
As commissioners, you're our avatars.
[3:56:16] You represent the beliefs and uphold the
rights of this count of the county
[3:56:21] residents in the complex world of
government.
[3:56:26] Your work is difficult and often
unappreciated.
[3:56:30] But you're more than just county
officials. You too live here and love
[3:56:35] this valley.
But it's you who decide if the Madison
[3:56:40] Valley will roll over rather than
protect itself from the inevitable.
[3:56:46] and unspeakable permanent damage of
unbridled
[3:56:51] commercial development.
You face an enormous burden.
[3:56:59] As you wrestle with this decision to
support this community effort to protect
[3:57:03] the land through CICDs,
let the place itself speak to you.
[3:57:11] The chaos of the river, the spring,
the wind sculpted grasses of midsummer,
[3:57:20] the herds as they gather in the fall to
mate with the naive belief that they
[3:57:26] always will.
These are voices.
[3:57:31] These are pleas.
These are responsibilities.
[3:57:38] I'll close with the words of Terry
Tempest Williams.
[3:57:44] Very hard not to be.
This is the hour of the land
[3:57:51] when our mistakes and short companies
shortcomings
[3:57:55] must be placed in the perspective of
time.
[3:58:10] My name is Diane Olaf and I along with
my family own the Olaf ranch at 850 I
[3:58:16] weigh 287 in Cameron. Like my remarks
from the earlier meeting this morning to
[3:58:23] be forwarded and I do have another
statement as well. I as I've listened
[3:58:28] today I have heard an awful lot about
the commercial development and I have
[3:58:32] not heard a single person in this room
including our families who has said they
[3:58:38] want commercial development.
My issue is that there's a lot more in
[3:58:45] those petitions besides just limiting
commercial development. And I urge the
[3:58:50] commissioners to to truly look through
there and see how those impact
[3:58:56] the petition has statements that impact
other things besides commercial
[3:59:02] development.
[3:59:07] Thank you.
[3:59:13] My name is Sandra Olaf Kokerta and I am
here along with my sister and my family
[3:59:18] representing the Olaf ranch. And I would
like my comments from earlier to be
[3:59:24] included in this this zoning meeting as
well. And I have um one question
[3:59:30] regarding if these
restrictions are not as strict as many
[3:59:37] of the homeowner associations,
then why are those properties even
[3:59:42] included in these boundaries?
I just have a question on that and I'm
[3:59:47] hoping that as commissioners you can
look at that and and decide if that is
[3:59:52] necessarily where the battery should be.
Thank you.
[4:00:06] Having
[4:00:13] a view here, gentlemen. Uh
name's Jerry Rambula property
[4:00:19] water lane Cameron
and just ask you my previous comments as
[4:00:27] well as this list.
[4:00:42] Good afternoon. My name is Dave
Arterburn. I live at number seven Sturdy
[4:00:47] Lane. We built our home there next to
the Grizzly Bar 27 years ago. I want to
[4:00:54] urge you to adopt these citizen
initiated zoning districts. I think it's
[4:01:00] the right thing to do and protect our
valley. Thank you for your time.
[4:01:14] Hi, my name is Virginia Pova and we own
143 acres at the south end of the uh
[4:01:23] CICD.
Um, and I don't live there. I live on
[4:01:30] Highway 20, off of Highway 20 in West
Yellowstone. And I just want to paint a
[4:01:36] picture of what that used to look like
when I came over Tari Pass
[4:01:43] back in 1975.
It's pretty much an open valley. And now
[4:01:48] from the top of Tari Pass to the Madison
Arm Road which is about five miles. We
[4:01:55] have about 40
driveways. Some are used now, some are
[4:02:01] not. And we have all the biggest gate
going into Yellowstone Park. So you can
[4:02:08] imagine the traffic we have there. And
there's no speed reductions.
[4:02:14] And in that five miles we have
animals crossing with, you know, the
[4:02:22] analopee, believe it or not, come from
the Madison Valley over Tari Pass and
[4:02:27] some will summer there in our basin. And
we have three named subdivisions.
[4:02:35] We have two KOAs. We have Forest Service
roads. We have a county road to Hegen
[4:02:40] Lake. All these things recreational. We
have wetlands. We have riperian habitat.
[4:02:47] We have a rodeo. We have two horse
rentals. We have a glamping resort. We
[4:02:54] have a private ranch, a couple private
ranches. We have all these ATV trails
[4:03:01] beside the road and in the mountains.
They're
[4:03:06] constantly running around. And we have
three pot dispensaries now.
[4:03:13] marijuana, whatever you want to call it,
within that five miles and then starts
[4:03:18] the forest service. So, luckily things
quiet down and then we have a river
[4:03:25] corridor there. We lose moose all the
time there. And then we have the signs.
[4:03:33] We have all the billboards starting at
the base of the pass for Bearw World in
[4:03:37] Idaho, for hotels, for restaurants, for
museums,
[4:03:42] for camera stores, for saving wolves. We
have we have it all till the Forest
[4:03:48] Service starts. And so, you know, you
know, for the hotels and the restaurants
[4:03:54] and everything else in town and so and
all this, you know, if you go through
[4:03:59] Idaho in Island Park, you've seen what's
happened to that. And, you know, we have
[4:04:05] a signal now on 20 going through there.
And we have, you know, every little bird
[4:04:12] you go through, you go down to 45 miles
an hour. And we don't have any of that.
[4:04:16] So anyhow, I just want you to think
about those things when you think about
[4:04:22] Highway 87, 287,
you know, and on down, you've all seen
[4:04:29] the increase in all this. So we c, you
know, if anybody wants to go over there
[4:04:35] and look at all the skid marks, you
know, at every one of these little
[4:04:39] places and these three named
subdivisions, you know, we can't even
[4:04:43] get out of our road, you know,
sometimes, you know, and then you add
[4:04:47] the semi traffic that we already have on
Reynolds Pass. So it's just, you know,
[4:04:56] take a look at what can happen and will
happen. So consider all these things
[4:05:01] please. Thank you.
[4:05:15] Paul up here. Uh my name is Pat Pova.
I'm going to read a letter from George
[4:05:22] and Sila Bible that live on Reynolds
Pass. He's having cataract surgery
[4:05:27] today, so he could not attend.
Effective zoning is not a restriction on
[4:05:32] property rights. It is the community's
shared commitment to protecting the
[4:05:37] values, resources, and quality of life
that make rural living desirable.
[4:05:44] his statement in support of the CIZD
CIZD. We strongly support zoning in very
[4:05:51] rural areas of Montana because it is one
of the best tools we have to protect the
[4:05:56] land, open space and rural way of life
that people came here to preserve. In
[4:06:01] places where homes, ranches, farms,
streams, wildlife habitats, and scenic
[4:06:06] views are closely tied together. One
poorly [clears throat] placed
[4:06:10] development can affect many neighbors
for generations.
[4:06:15] Player fair zoning helps prevent
incompatible uses from being placed
[4:06:20] where they do not belong while still
allowing responsible growth that
[4:06:25] respects the land, protects nearby
property owners, and keeps the
[4:06:29] community's rural character intact.
Zoning also creates
[4:06:35] real local benefits for the community.
It helps protect the roads. wells,
[4:06:39] emergency services,
schools, and volunteer fire resources
[4:06:43] that rural residents depend on every
day. So growth does not create costs or
[4:06:49] safety problems the community is not
prepared to hand. It supports good
[4:06:53] neighbor relationships by reducing
conflicts over noise, traffic, water
[4:06:59] use, and incompatible activities.
[4:07:04] Thoughtful zoning gives everyone a
clearer expectation,
[4:07:08] a clearer expectations, protects
property, private property values,
[4:07:13] strengthens local decision making, and
helps preserve the community's identity.
[4:07:19] In a rural Montana community, zoning is
not about stopping change. It's about
[4:07:24] making sure that change happens
carefully, responsibly,
[4:07:28] and in a way that benefits both current
residents and future generations.
[4:07:34] I'll submit this from
George and Sadilla. They live at the
[4:07:40] south end of Madison Valley
uh in the shadows of Horn Mount.
[4:07:46] Uh I submitted this letter to the
commission on May 28th. I just thought I
[4:07:51] would reread it. This is from my wife
and I today for people in the audience
[4:07:57] probably have not seen it. Dear county
commissioners, our name is Pat and
[4:08:02] Ginger Pova. We are property owners at
south end of Reynolds Pass. We're
[4:08:07] writing to let you know our support for
the citizen and n initiated zoning
[4:08:12] districts of Analopee Basin, Sheep
Mountain, Pongghorn Meadows, and Big
[4:08:17] Horn Crossing. Our property is located
in the CIZD of Analopee Basin.
[4:08:24] Our CICD
was submitted on April 14th, 2026 at the
[4:08:29] regularly scheduled Madison County
Commissioners meeting. The Reynolds Pass
[4:08:34] area has historically been agricultural.
This area is also a major wildlife
[4:08:40] corridor for several species.
[4:08:45] Reynolds
uh the concern of unregulated growth in
[4:08:49] very is very real and needs to be
thought through very carefully. As an
[4:08:54] example, surface water is very scarce on
the pass
[4:08:58] and most wells are very deep. We have
one of the few surface springs on the
[4:09:03] pass and its flow rate has diminished
over the last several years.
[4:09:08] Uh in previous years on a good winter,
the spring would flow from near the east
[4:09:14] end of our property, which is close to
the Forest Service boundary
[4:09:19] under the highway. It has not flowed
under the highway in about 15 years now.
[4:09:25] It soaks into the ground before it gets
there anymore. It barely makes it
[4:09:29] halfway down.
The Madison River is already
[4:09:33] overcrowded. Having uncontrolled
development would further exacerbate the
[4:09:37] issue of maintaining the worldass
fishing that we have as a wildlife
[4:09:42] corridor. The el deer and analopee have
a tough enough time in the annual
[4:09:46] migration in the spring and fall. We
took out the woven wire fence on our
[4:09:50] property years ago and put in fencing
that the analopee can go under in a
[4:09:56] smooth top wire that the alpha deer can
jump.
[4:10:02] We also drop our fences in the fall to
help with their migration. This fence
[4:10:07] works very well with the cattle that we
run during the summer. We just pulled
[4:10:11] them off last week.
We would prefer the inclusion of public
[4:10:16] lands, but would be agreeable if they
were moved. The number one priority
[4:10:19] would be adopting the CIZD to help
protect the path from unregulated
[4:10:24] development. for many other valid
reasons that others will and have
[4:10:30] expanded on. We appreciate your time and
dedication to all of us in Madison
[4:10:36] County and hope you consider the
adoption of the CIZD.
[4:10:41] One last thing I'd like to mention that
most people probably are not aware of,
[4:10:45] and I can't speak professionally to it,
but there's a lot of unmarked trucks
[4:10:51] rolling through 287 and 87 with multiple
more axles than your standard 80,000 GBW
[4:10:59] semi. And they're by a very large
carrier. And they're all marked
[4:11:03] dedicated. And if you look at the number
of axles on those trailers, something's
[4:11:08] going through here that is obviously
very secret, potentially very dangerous.
[4:11:13] Might have to look into it.
Thank you.
[4:11:20] Is there an opportunity to share media
or is that not here? Sure.
[4:11:28] If you join the meeting microphone off
you
[4:11:43] what what name
[4:11:51] right
[4:12:13] Okay, it's going to make me reopen that
and rejoin before I can allowed to do
[4:12:17] that. Um I I intend this to be my last
time um speaking and I appreciate the
[4:12:23] opportunity to speak and I want to speak
now to Analope Bas is that Analope Basin
[4:12:27] is the hearing we're talking about now
is um if you go look at the Castro or um
[4:12:33] Analopee Basin uh you will see that
um most of the the properties that
[4:12:40] boundary Idaho and Montana to my
observation are are out oftowners. um
[4:12:46] New Orleans uh trustees. Now, no
objection to that. Part of our
[4:12:51] community. I love that people come here
and it's their vacation home. Um my
[4:12:55] concerns related again and pulling
forward my comments from other other
[4:12:59] hearings um relate to what is the
representation that the statute is
[4:13:04] relying on that 60%. How much of this is
for people from out of town that aren't
[4:13:09] aware of the situation? Has there been
enough time for the opposition to mount
[4:13:13] like some campaign to say, "Hey, dear
locals that are in that organization,
[4:13:19] with respect to to to K, I'm I think
that she has done a a fair job in in in
[4:13:24] bringing that in, but I am concerned
that that 60% is not representative, and
[4:13:28] it would be a shame if locals had to pay
the price of somebody from far away
[4:13:34] voting otherwise." Um
uh and I'm not going to be able to bring
[4:13:39] this in fast enough, so I apologize.
Okay. I intended to to to show in in the
[4:13:46] uh as a kind of response to I missed
what Kay was saying earlier, but there
[4:13:49] is in here um in the the
PDF documents and I got way too many
[4:13:57] tabs open to be able to do this, but
there is on page I think it's page 19
[4:14:02] related to Analope Basin. It talks about
[4:14:07] page page 34 which is also page 19
section C conditional use. That is the
[4:14:12] section that I was referring to and I
wish I could find it and I'll guess I'll
[4:14:16] just draw your attention to that which
talks about there would be need to be a
[4:14:20] conditional use permit and so I guess my
point is is those are additional
[4:14:23] incomprehensib I wouldn't have today. So
those are in there from what I
[4:14:27] understand. Um the
the the
[4:14:33] piece that I want to just read and
continue on from the Thomas Payne piece
[4:14:37] relates to this situation here where we
can choose as a community to to pull
[4:14:41] together as a community or we can choose
to give up our rights to to our local
[4:14:45] government. So S society is produced by
our wants and government by our
[4:14:50] wickedness. The former produ promotes
our happiness positively by uniting our
[4:14:54] affections. The latter negatively by
restraining our vices. The one
[4:14:58] encourages intercourse, the other
creates distinctions. The first is a
[4:15:01] patron, the last is a punisher. Society
in every state is a blessing. But
[4:15:05] government, even in its best state, is
but a necessary evil. In its worst case,
[4:15:10] an intolerable one for which we might
when we suffer or are exposed to the
[4:15:14] same miseries by a government, which we
might expect in a country without a
[4:15:17] government. Our calamity is heightened
by reflecting that we furnish the means
[4:15:20] by which we suffer. Government, like
dress, is the badge of lost innocence.
[4:15:25] The palaces of kings are built upon the
ruins of powers of paradise. For were
[4:15:30] the impulses of conscious clear, uniform
and irresistibly obeyed, man was need no
[4:15:34] other lawgiver but that not being the
case, he finds it necessary to surrender
[4:15:40] up a part of his property to furnish
means for the protection of the rest.
[4:15:44] And this he is induced to do by the same
prudence which in every other case
[4:15:47] advises him out of two evils to choose
the least.
[4:15:51] Yes, we live in a society that requires
rules. Yes, things are growing. Yes, we
[4:15:57] want to preserve our area. Yes, we're
coming together as a community. I think
[4:16:01] we can do that as a community and not
have to give it up to the the legal
[4:16:08] um incumbrances that will last for
generations. And and the the last point
[4:16:13] I want to make is related to
the your commissioners have been
[4:16:19] petitioned to avoid inaction because
something must be done. But you also
[4:16:24] have to be concerned about the ills that
will happen because of action that will
[4:16:29] require further action. And as evidence
of that, I bring what was an unsolicited
[4:16:36] um offer full price times six for my
property, which is no longer concluded
[4:16:42] in the zones apparently. And I don't
know what that means. If somebody was
[4:16:46] trying to buy a boat, I don't know if it
means that they saw that I was
[4:16:49] gerrymandered out and they're like,
"That's an attractive property." I don't
[4:16:52] know if they thought I was in and then
the values went up. But in any case,
[4:16:56] dated um guess I don't know what this is
dated. This is this is just within the
[4:17:01] last week. Somebody who has been sending
me letters since I bought the property
[4:17:07] has thought to offer me, you know, some
meager tens of thousands for my
[4:17:12] property. And I'm like, "No, it's
beautiful. I'm keeping it." and now
[4:17:15] they've given me
a a substantially increased offer for my
[4:17:21] property. I submit that that's going to
happen to the spaces in between the
[4:17:26] moment that this is passed and that the
reason why this was sent to me is
[4:17:29] because they're aware of the meeting
that's happening today and it will be
[4:17:32] the catalyst that will cause the things
that everybody is concerned about. And
[4:17:36] whether or not it's true, it deserves
consideration of whether that might be a
[4:17:42] possibility. And I don't think there's
time between now and September 15th to
[4:17:45] consider that. And with that, that's it.
[4:18:06] » Speakio again. Same drill. If and I do
have one or two additional comments that
[4:18:10] are in
[4:18:16] I just feel compelled to uh address a
couple of things that have come up today
[4:18:20] that I feel an obligation to respond
towards clear. Um [clears throat]
[4:18:25] I'm not aware of anything in the
regulations that would prevent someone
[4:18:28] from building a home on their lot in any
way, shape or form. And I I think Kay
[4:18:34] addressed that earlier that we've been
very careful about that and that this is
[4:18:39] a large commercial development focused
issue. My wife and I came here 12 years
[4:18:45] ago
and we bought our property into the
[4:18:49] Sheet Mountains.
We are blessed that we have eight 20
[4:18:54] acre parcels. When we first came here 12
years ago, we have an improvement on
[4:18:59] one.
We said, "Gee, what could we do with
[4:19:02] these other seven parcels?"
And every week that we were here and
[4:19:07] every additional week after that that we
went, we learned more and more about
[4:19:11] what Montana is all about. Yes, we're
not from Montana. I was born and raised
[4:19:17] in Brooklyn, New York. I'm a city street
kid. I've been here for 12 years now. I
[4:19:23] have learned more about this most
magnificent land and what it has and
[4:19:28] what it means.
And I am so motivated to do everything
[4:19:32] that we can within reason to make sure
that we can keep this wonderful,
[4:19:36] beautiful environment the way it is. And
large commercial development is in
[4:19:41] conflict with that goal. And with our
seven parcels that don't have an
[4:19:46] improvement,
every year that's gone by, we've become
[4:19:49] more and more committed to the fact that
there is nothing that we should do with
[4:19:52] those parcels for commercial
development. not not that we can't or
[4:19:56] even residential development to make
money off of that
[4:20:01] because we realize the need for space in
our area and the need for migratory
[4:20:06] opportunities for the wildlife.
And I don't know if a city street kid
[4:20:10] can kind of understand that and really
get that. I just hope all of us can
[4:20:15] understand that as well and find a way
to make sure that these CIZDS get
[4:20:21] approved because they're restriction on
large commercial development is the
[4:20:25] primary focus of them and that is what
we desperately need in our valley. Thank
[4:20:29] you
[4:20:33] again Julie Delashia 101 she would like
to submit uh comment from uh this person
[4:20:40] uh for to represent anal bas
[4:20:47] Thank you.
[4:20:59] » Afternoon. My name is John Tillworth.
I'm a res I'm property owner at 175
[4:21:03] Jensen Road. I'm from Atlanta, Georgia.
I flew in this week so that I could
[4:21:08] participate with this opportunity and
also be a part of the the great part of
[4:21:13] Montana that I hope to be a resident
here very soon. I want to tell you that
[4:21:17] uh being in Atlanta several thousand
miles away both from FA and from Maddie,
[4:21:24] I have received numerous numerous over
the last two years communications,
[4:21:29] postcards, emails, those types of
things. I have been informed. I am
[4:21:34] confident other people have been
informed. Um, I support this. I do hope
[4:21:39] that you make this uh a reality for us.
It is a gorgeous piece of property that
[4:21:45] we need to maintain. I thank you for the
opportunity to speak.
[4:21:55] Again,
[4:22:03] I'm Bob Garrett, ameritus
[clears throat] professor from Montana
[4:22:06] State University, and I just would like
to add the comments from the Fish and
[4:22:12] Wildlife Services, the two letters I
referred to in the previous meetings
[4:22:18] to be applied uh to this consideration
as well, and also my own personal
[4:22:24] statement.
And again, I'm Robert Garrett. Address
[4:22:28] is 75 highway 287 South.
Thank you.
[4:22:42] » Hi, I'm Pam Whitmore. Um I'm at 20 Tory
Road in Cameron. We've been there for 43
[4:22:48] years. I just want to say that I support
these um citizen initiated zoning
[4:22:53] districts and I would request that you
do as well. Thank you.
[4:23:08] » My name is David Bricker. Uh I live at
867 Mway in Andis. My wife and I own
[4:23:13] another piece of property in the
southern end of the valley. And I uh
[4:23:17] want to um tell you that we support
citizen initiated zoning districts in
[4:23:23] this part of the valley to help protect
the valley. Thank you.
[4:23:38] Chairman I, Commissioners Todd and
Commissioner Gilman. Again, Justin
[4:23:43] Brownark 777 East Main Street hearing on
behalf of the petitioning property
[4:23:47] owners, including those who are members
of Preserve Mills Pass. Again, my
[4:23:52] comments today incorporate by reference
the September 1st, 2026 letter in
[4:23:56] support of the CIZD, including the
exhibit attached um which
[4:24:01] [clears throat] addresses the questions
and comments regarding zoning.
[4:24:05] The state v the legislature conveyed the
power to petition presenting to the
[4:24:08] citizens again and for the C CIZD 62%
of signatures on the petition have been
[4:24:15] certified by the county
with respect to the description of the
[4:24:20] proposed analopee basin district in the
staff report. The percentages included
[4:24:25] there further support the adoption of
the zoning district. If you take out the
[4:24:29] public land 86% have petitioned for the
zoning district.
[4:24:34] This makes clear the CICD is in the
public interest. And again, for the
[4:24:38] record, as I mentioned earlier, the
plain language of the statute requires
[4:24:42] only the public interest or convenience
be demonstrated to adopt the CICD, not
[4:24:47] both.
[4:24:50] The zoning regulation and the majority
of the public comment does demonstrate
[4:24:53] the public interest requires the
adoption of this proposed zoning
[4:24:56] district to protect the rural
residential and agricultural character
[4:25:00] of the area and the existing development
pattern and to account for the limited
[4:25:05] public services that you've heard about
and the scarce water resources.
[4:25:10] As I also explained previously, to the
extent that the staff report includes
[4:25:13] questions, definitions, and
considerations beyond the scope of the
[4:25:16] statutes,
those don't apply. And what must be
[4:25:21] considered is the public comment in
support of the CICD. The Montana
[4:25:26] Constitution provides that the Montana
the public has the right to expect
[4:25:30] governmental ages agencies such as the
county to afford reasonable opportunity
[4:25:35] to participate, which you have done in
abundance as I explained earlier. and
[4:25:39] state for the record again, the public
participation statutes contemplate more
[4:25:43] than just allowing public comment. You
must address the public comments in your
[4:25:48] decision making on the 15th and the
pertinent facts upon which your decision
[4:25:52] is based in order to facilitate judicial
review. As also addressed earlier, the
[4:25:58] zoning regulations are consistent
consistent with the adopted growth
[4:26:02] policy which again for this area of the
county requires support of zoning
[4:26:07] efforts.
you have an obligation and are required
[4:26:10] by law to act in substantial compliance
with that growth policy.
[4:26:15] In terms of the question regarding
contiguity, again, the law is clear that
[4:26:20] does not interrupt the boundaries of the
zoning district.
[4:26:24] And
I'll close my comments by re reiterating
[4:26:29] again the state view the legislature has
conveyed the power to petition for
[4:26:34] zoning to the people and the authority
to adopt zoning to the county based on
[4:26:39] statute and in accordance with Montana
case law.
[4:26:44] This these zoning statutes that further
public health and safety must be
[4:26:48] liberally construed
to effectuate their highly beneficial
[4:26:52] objective which is adopting zoning. And
again, while you have some discretion,
[4:26:56] that discretion must be exercised within
the boundaries of statute. And you need
[4:27:00] not go down the rabbit hole of questions
not included in statute nor
[4:27:05] unsubstantiated claims about
administration and enforcement.
[4:27:09] Again, the [clears throat] county has
the authority to levy for that. So this
[4:27:12] is no justification
stated again. You have the authority to
[4:27:15] adopt the CIC and arguably based on the
comments you've heard in the record and
[4:27:21] the public comment submitted in advance
of that you have an obligation to do so
[4:27:26] and a decision not to do that argue
arguably would be so lacking in fact and
[4:27:32] foundation as to be an abuse of
discretion. The petitioners and land
[4:27:36] owners in Analopee Basin have met their
burden for the statute
[4:27:40] and the petitioning owners respectfully
request that you adopt this Analopee
[4:27:44] Basin citizen initiated zoning district
and regulation. Thank you.
[4:27:54] » Hi againro
from Sageway here Cameron. Um
[4:28:02] I just really quickly want to go back to
the statute. Um it is true that they
[4:28:09] have met the threshold uh for the
petition and that is something that is
[4:28:13] afforded to these communities to our
communities as citizens here right we
[4:28:18] have the power to petition you as the
commissioners but to say that you don't
[4:28:22] have discretionary authority is wrong.
Um, according to the statute
[4:28:26] specifically, I'm just going to read it.
Subject to the provisions of subsection
[4:28:30] 5, whenever the public interest or
convenience may require and on petition
[4:28:35] of 60% of the affected real property
owners in the proposed district, the
[4:28:39] board of county commissioners may create
a planning and zoning district and may
[4:28:45] appoint a planning and zoning commission
consisting of up to seven members. So
[4:28:49] that inclusion of may gives you the
discretionary authority. It is not an
[4:28:52] abuse of discretion for you to ask the
question why these restrictions, why
[4:28:57] these boundaries, why these specific
zoning districts. We are not saying that
[4:29:02] zoning as a whole is bad. We are not
saying that we are opposed to reasonable
[4:29:06] rules. We are not saying that we want
commercial development. None of us do.
[4:29:11] Literally, we are all united in purpose
in that regard. We do not have to be at
[4:29:16] cross purposes. Our questions and our
reservations stem from kind of the fine
[4:29:21] print of this regulation. You know,
there is a lot that is included within
[4:29:24] these regulations that doesn't address
commercial property. There are things
[4:29:28] about, you know, conditions on
non-conforming uses, conditions on
[4:29:31] non-conforming properties. If you aren't
in a property for a year, you lose your
[4:29:35] grandfathered status. And I don't see
personally what that has to do with
[4:29:40] commercial development or highdensity
residential development. So I just want
[4:29:44] to encourage you as the commission to
understand that you have the
[4:29:49] discretionary power. You have the
ability to ask for amendments and to ask
[4:29:53] for analysis and to ask for a very
thorough picture before you adopt an
[4:30:00] imperfect regulation.
>> Thank you.
[4:30:12] Smith 141 Oak Meadows Ranch Road. I will
resubmit my comments from previously,
[4:30:18] but I wanted to just take a moment also
to continue on a little bit with um
[4:30:26] so $3 Ranch was purchased over the
course of about five years and there's
[4:30:32] three contiguous properties that were
all combined. Um the purpose of that was
[4:30:36] for grazing to support agriculture and
also to support migratory corridors and
[4:30:42] wildlife. Uh on August 13th at 2:39 or
PM, not that it made an impression on
[4:30:50] me, I got a phone call from our weed
spreader saying, "There's a lightning
[4:30:56] strike and now I see smoke. What do I
do? Don't call me. Call 911."
[4:31:02] So that began the Horn Creek fire and it
burned 3,000 acres on the ranch. And it
[4:31:10] was the most terrifying thing I've ever
been through. And it was a day much like
[4:31:17] today, a red flag day. 40 plus mph
winds, 90 degree weather.
[4:31:24] we have a fire unit on the ranch and we
quickly responded but we were just a
[4:31:30] small drop in the bucket so to speak and
it you know no through no fault of
[4:31:36] anyone else's it was at least an hour
before the county was able to respond
[4:31:41] and then DNRC came in and the forest
service and it was a full-blown fire
[4:31:47] started on the south ridge of the horn
burned over into a basin and basically
[4:31:52] almost burned over fire crews and they
had to pull back.
[4:31:57] Myself and another neighbor, because I'm
not one to stand around twiddling my
[4:32:03] thumbs, we asked the sheriff's
department if it would be okay if we
[4:32:07] went preemptively doortodoor in the
residential area across the highway and
[4:32:12] alerted people. Obviously, they could
see the fire, but gather your things,
[4:32:16] gather your pets, be prepared to leave.
Um,
[4:32:21] the fire almost jumped the highway and
really the only thing I think that
[4:32:26] caused it to not jump the highway was A,
it burned into a pasture that was grazed
[4:32:31] and b we had a ditch that was full of
water. As water becomes more and more
[4:32:38] scarce,
if we're unable to fill our ditches and
[4:32:43] also unable to fill our ponds, which the
helicopters are dipping out of heavily,
[4:32:48] I don't know that they would have been
able to stop that fire.
[4:32:53] If uh if we hadn't been able to graze
that because we have no water on the
[4:32:58] ranch, that grazed pasture would not
have stopped the fire and it could have
[4:33:03] been a much bigger outcome. And it
terrifies me to think what could have
[4:33:08] happened. So
again, we are protected by easement, but
[4:33:14] what happens across the highway and on
surrounding properties is vitally
[4:33:19] important for us. So thank you very
much.
[4:33:31] online
[4:33:48] in this interreum. I don't think I did a
motion to incorporate written comment
[4:33:52] for this hearing.
>> Yeah,
[4:33:54] » let's do that.
So, I may I make that motion now.
[4:34:00] » Second, you have one first to hand up.
[4:34:06] » Go ahead, Carly.
>> Hello. Um, good afternoon. My name is
[4:34:12] Karly Mosfin and my family has owned
about 23 acres um in this area since
[4:34:18] 1989.
I wanted to start out by saying that I
[4:34:22] understand and support the intent behind
protecting the rural character of this
[4:34:26] area. I don't want to see large
commercial developments, resorts or
[4:34:31] dense development change um what makes
this place special either. But I am
[4:34:37] concerned that in trying to prevent that
kind of development, these regulations
[4:34:40] may unintentionally
restrict longtime property owners like
[4:34:44] my family. Since we've held this land
for nearly four decades, we haven't
[4:34:49] purchased it recently with plans to
develop it commercially, but we've been
[4:34:52] saving money in the hope to someday
build a few modest family cabins where
[4:34:56] our children and future generations
could come together and enjoy this
[4:34:59] property. I'm particularly concerned
because my family situation may
[4:35:03] eventually require me to divide the
existing property with an aranged family
[4:35:07] member. I don't necessarily have control
over whether that becomes necessary.
[4:35:11] Under the proposed regulation, I'm
concerned that dividing an existing
[4:35:15] parcel of less than 40 acres could
jeopardize my ability to build even a
[4:35:19] primary family cabin on the portion of
the property that remains mine.
[4:35:23] I'm also concerned about the limitation
on accessory dwelling units and
[4:35:27] accessory buildings on 23 rural acres
having a few small family cabins, a
[4:35:32] garage or structure for snowmobiles and
equipment is very different from
[4:35:35] creating subdivision or commercial
development.
[4:35:38] I appreciate that the proposal allows
short-term rental of primary drawing
[4:35:43] unit or ADU. I would like to retain the
ability to occasionally rent our cabin
[4:35:48] when our family isn't using it to help
offset the significant cost of
[4:35:51] maintaining and improving our property.
What I'm asking is that you protect the
[4:35:56] purpose of this zoning without taking
reasonable development rights away from
[4:36:01] existing property owners. Existing legal
parcels, particularly parcels that have
[4:36:06] been held by families for decades,
should remain buildable even if they are
[4:36:09] less than 40 acres. And if an existing
parcel has to be divided because of
[4:36:14] family ownership circumstances, the
resulting legal parcels should not
[4:36:18] suddenly lose their ability to have a
primary residence.
[4:36:22] I would also ask that you consider
allowing a reasonable number of small
[4:36:25] family dwellings and accessory
structures based on acreage rather than
[4:36:29] treating a third small cabin on 23 acres
as though it presents some concern of
[4:36:34] high density development.
My family has been responsible stewards
[4:36:38] of this property since 1989. And we want
the same thing that you do to preserve
[4:36:42] this beautiful rural area. We just want
to make sure that preserving it doesn't
[4:36:46] mean that families who have held land
here for generations lose the reasonable
[4:36:49] ability to use and enjoy it. Thank you
for considering my comments.
[4:36:58] » Can you call a vote on incorporating the
written comments, please?
[4:37:04] » Okay. a motion.
>> I move to incorporate all written
[4:37:08] comments into the record for this
hearing.
[4:37:10] » Okay.
>> Second.
[4:37:12] » Okay. So, we have a motion second
[4:37:17] to this hearing. Any further discussion?
Hearing none. I'll call for vote.
[4:37:21] Commissioner Todd
>> I
[4:37:26] vot. Motion carries.
Any more public comment?
[4:37:34] Anybody online? Ryan?
>> Yes, this is Dan Wank. I would only like
[4:37:39] to say that I'd like my comments from
the earlier to be extended to the first
[4:37:43] and third discussions as well. Um and
note that u my concern is is about the
[4:37:51] um everything that that I think we who
appreciate and love this area is uh we
[4:38:00] don't want to do we need to take the
measures or steps we need to take to
[4:38:04] make sure we're protecting um not only
property rights but we're also
[4:38:09] protecting the resources for which
probably attracted almost all of us to
[4:38:14] this area. Any
[4:38:22] more public
[4:38:42] [clears throat]
hearing public comments?
[4:38:49] I move to adjourn the hearing.
>> Second that.
[4:38:52] » So we have a motion second to hear
discussion.
[4:38:59] I'll call for the vote.
>> I
[4:39:06] move to set a decision date for
September 15th.
[4:39:10] » Second that. Motion second.
Final decision
[4:39:16] September 15th.
Further discussion
[4:39:22] calls.
[4:39:31] » Thank you. Thank you.