A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact section 54-40.5-04 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to the revocation of a transfer of township zoning authority.
SB 2317 would change North Dakota law governing the revocation or termination of agreements that transfer township zoning authority to a county. Under current law, a township or city that transferred zoning authority can reacquire it by mutual agreement with the county. The bill adds a new unilateral path for townships: if a township previously transferred its zoning authority to the county, it could regain that authority by passing a written resolution, holding an election at an annual or special township meeting, and obtaining majority voter approval.
The bill also requires the township to adopt a comprehensive plan, enact a zoning ordinance, and appoint a zoning administrator before reacquiring zoning authority. If those conditions are met, the county would be required to accept the township’s return to local zoning control. The measure is focused specifically on township zoning governance and the process for shifting land-use authority back from county administration to township administration.
The bill would amend section 54-40.5-04 of the North Dakota Century Code by creating a mandatory procedure for townships to reclaim zoning authority after previously transferring it to a county. It would affect county commissions, township boards, township electors, and local zoning administrators by establishing new procedural and substantive prerequisites for restoring township zoning powers. In practice, it would limit county discretion where a township satisfies the statutory requirements and would expand township autonomy over land-use regulation.
The bill appears to have been introduced as a local control measure, with no recorded committee transcript or vote history available in the provided materials to show detailed debate. Its structure suggests support for township self-determination in zoning matters, but the bill ultimately failed, indicating it did not secure enough legislative support to advance. The available record does not show formal opposition statements, but the failure suggests at least some concern about the practicality or policy implications of requiring counties to surrender zoning authority upon township compliance.
The main point of contention is likely the shift from a mutual-agreement model to a mandatory reacquisition process. Counties may object to losing discretion over zoning arrangements once a township meets the statutory conditions, while supporters would favor restoring local control to township residents and officials. Another likely issue is whether smaller townships have the administrative capacity to adopt a comprehensive plan, pass a zoning ordinance, and appoint a zoning administrator before regaining authority, which could be seen either as a necessary safeguard or as a barrier to reinstating township zoning.