Frontier Institute Statement in Support of SB 146

SB 146 protects Montanans’ fundamental right to use property

HELENA – Today, the Frontier Institute offered support for SB 146, the Private Property Protection Act (PPPA), a bill that follows Frontier Institute’s recommendations to secure greater legal protections for the rights of Montana property owners who are subject to onerous land use regulation.

“State and local governments are regulating nearly every aspect of private property in Montana, often going far beyond what is necessary to protect public health and safety,” said Kendall Cotton, President & CEO of the Frontier Institute. “The Private Property Protection Act makes it crystal clear that our fundamental constitutional right to use property must be respected.”

Frontier Institute’s 2023 Montana Zoning Atlas report detailed how landowners in our fastest growing counties are subject to over 5,000 pages of local zoning regulation in 500+ individual zoning districts, a labyrinth of strict local zoning regulations that worsen Montana’s housing shortage by obstructing property owners from building homes on their own land.

The PPPA builds on sweeping pro-housing reforms passed by the 2023 Montana legislature that broadly restored the rights of property owners in cities to build affordable starter homes, extending robust protections for all other uses of property.

What the PPPA Does:

1. Renewed Commitment: Makes crystal clear that the Right to Use Property is a fundamental constitutional right and should not be infringed unless the government can demonstrate it is absolutely necessary to protect public health or safety. 
2. New Standard: All future local zoning and land use regulations issued under Title 76 Ch. 1, 2, 3 & 25 must be limited only to those necessary and narrowly tailored to fulfill a “compelling governmental interest” in public health or safety. The bill creates an exception for regulations that address nuisances.
3. Shift the Burden of Proof: Grants standing for property owners to challenge local zoning and land use regulations that reach beyond what is necessary for health or safety in the courts. The regulation will be struck down by the court unless the government can prove that the regulation is:
   1. necessary to advance a compelling interest in public health or safety,
   2. narrowly tailored to achieve that purpose, and
   3. uses the least restrictive path possible to achieve its purpose.