State high court hands Blaine County a
defeat
Decision could affect land-use
planning statewide
"In our view, the decision is seriously
flawed, and it has pretty big and drastic implications statewide."
— TIM GRAVES, Blaine County deputy
prosecuting attorney
By GREG STAHL
Express Staff Writer
The Idaho Supreme Court handed Blaine
County a defeat last week in a decision that could have far-reaching effects for
local zoning and land-use planning in Idaho.
In a 4-1 ruling on Wednesday, July 23, the
Supreme Court overturned an earlier ruling by 5th District Judge James May that
gave the county regulatory authority over state trust lands. Specifically, the
high court ruled that Blaine County could not ban or regulate a gravel mining
operation on state-owned land in Ohio Gulch, about midway between Hailey and
Ketchum.
It is unclear, however, whether the
decision applies to county zoning authority over other uses on state-owned
property. The state employs the land for a wide range of uses, including
grazing, communications facilities, logging and commercial uses.
Blaine County Commissioners apparently
found the decision hard to swallow and emerged from an executive session on
Monday, July 28, and ordered the Blaine County Prosecutors Office to ask the
court for a rehearing.
A rehearing is when a plaintiff or
defendant asks the court to reconsider its prior decision and is different from
an appeal, explained Blaine County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Tim Graves.
"In our view, the decision is seriously
flawed, and it has pretty big and drastic implications statewide," Graves said.
"The commissioners feel a need to state their case. We don’t feel it was
adequately argued before the court, and the decision and the basis on which the
court is resting its decision is seriously flawed."
Chief Justice Linda Copple Trout and
Justices Wayne Kidwell and Daniel Eismann voted for the overturning decision,
which was written by Justice Jesse Walters. Justice Gerald Schroeder cast a
dissenting opinion.
The majority of justices ruled that
although the state law does not specifically exempt the Department of Lands from
complying with local zoning regulations, state lands are exempt by implication.
"We conclude that the provisions of (the
law) operate to exempt the Land Board from compliance with the Local Land Use
Planning Act, thus resolving the conflict between the Blaine County zoning
ordinance and the Land Board’s constitutionally mandated authority and control
over endowment lands," the four justices ruled.
In his dissenting opinion, Justice
Schroeder interpreted the same laws cited by his colleagues.
"The statutory scheme for the management
of the endowment lands does not expressly exempt those lands from the local
zoning ordinances adopted pursuant to the Local Land Use Planning Act," he
wrote.
Called school endowment lands, Idaho’s 2.5
million acres of property must be used under a state constitutional mandate to
generate money, in part, for the benefit of Idaho’s schools.
The issue escalated into the courts after
Hailey-based McStay Construction was served in 1999 by Blaine County with a
Cease and Desist Order for a sand and gravel extraction operation on state land
in the Ohio Gulch area. Blaine County asked the company’s owner, Gary McStay, to
apply for a conditional use permit to operate in the area’s agricultural zone.
However, the Blaine County Planning and
Zoning Commission in 2000 denied McStay’s application, and the P&Z’s decision
was later affirmed by the Blaine County Commission.
The state then filed a complaint for
declaratory judgment in the district court, and on June 12, 2002, the 5th
District Court in Hailey granted a summary judgment in favor of the county. The
state then appealed Judge May’s ruling to the high court.
McStay said this week that the Supreme
Court’s ruling is "a plus," but declined to comment further, pending a 23-day
waiting period that must transpire before he can resume operations in Ohio
Gulch. Blaine County’s request for a rehearing, should the court grant it, could
extend that period.
Idaho Department of Lands Director Winston
Wiggins said the department will continue to consult with counties regarding the
use of the state’s lands, but added that "it’s going to be in the context of our
constitutional trust mandate."
"We’re pleased, obviously," Wiggins said.
"This is consistent with our position all along. It’s good to have the issue
resolved."
Graves said the Blaine County Prosecutor’s
Office would file the appeal for a rehearing within the next two weeks. He said
the court would probably issue a decision on the request by late-summer or early
autumn.