Toggle Mobile

I apologize for the inconsistency in when this email comes out. I plan to send it out on Monday’s but with the federal holiday I felt the need to get it out sooner than later. Let’s start with a recap of this week.

On Wednesday we testified in support of two bills in front of the Senate Local Government Committee, SB 130 and SB 131.  We kept it short and too the point. There was little opposition to SB 130, and none to SB 131. There is a proposed amendment to SB 130 to include Cities and Consolidated City/County governments, and everyone was on board with that amendment.

Today, we plan to testify on two more bills that were introduced earlier this week.

SB 152 deletes the reference to 1973 for first minors. What this means is any subdivision on a tract of record that is less than 5 lots will likely be considered a first minor. It will expand the number of first minors we see. We have elected to support this bill. There is in inefficiency in researching tract history, and 1973 is now 50 years ago.

SB 158- The family transfer bill. This bill would significantly expand the use of family transfers, extending it to platted lots in subdivisions. So, heads up cities, you don’t see these much, but if this passes you will. This bill is a top priority for Republican leadership in the Senate. MAP in the past has fought any expansion of the family transfer exemption, but we recognize a strategy to kill this bill is going to fail. So, we are working to amend it, and so far, the Sponsor has been receptive to ideas. Our goal is to ensure existing subdivision conditions apply, and that family transfers must follow zoning. There is another state organization that we are coordinating with.

Up next week:

SB 143: Allow a referendum to terminate citizen initiated zoning district


Hearing-01/16/23 (S)Local Gov. 2pm. Rm 405

This bill mirrors a bill the last session that addresses language in Part I zoning that is illegal. We have no issues with this bill and decided to focus our efforts on more consequential legislation.

SB 142: Provide oversight of local impact fee laws

We are opposed.

Hearing-01/16/23 (S)Local Gov. 2pm. Rm 405

This will reduce funding for infrastructure projects making it harder to implement plans. We are still formulating our position and will hopefully have that up this weekend.

Likely to have hearings next week:

SB 170 – Allow for administrative minor subdivision process


This is a bill the MAP Board helped drafted. It would create a process for administrative minor subdivisions. I sent out an email about it earlier this week.

HB 246: Allow for the zoning of tiny dwelling units


We are not sure the issue this bill is trying to address, but it doesn’t seem to do much. Thanks to all the planners from the Planner Advocacy Network who provided information, it was very helpful in trying to understand the problem. In the end, we decided to watch this bill and direct our resources to more consequential legislation.

HB 211: Revise the local subdivision review process


This bill could be labeled as “housekeeping” but does go a little further. See our tracker for more information.