Yellowstone County adopts Laurel-area growth policy after heated public testimony over Northwest Energy project

Yellowstone County commissioners adopted Resolution 24-63 on April 2 to approve an updated growth policy for the area around the city of Laurel following an extended public hearing that drew multiple residents and advocates.

Kurt, a staff member for the City-County Planning Board, summarized the board’s year-long process, saying the planning board met repeatedly with workshops and public hearings in late 2023 and early 2024 before forwarding its recommendation to the commissioners. The resolution directs the county to adopt the maps and policy language prepared by the City-County Planning Board.

Multiple residents told the commissioners the plan, and the maps attached to it, were confusing and in some cases contradicted earlier documents residents had relied on when they purchased property. Michelle Kelly, who identified herself as a Russell Minor Subdivision resident, said the draft maps showed heavy-industrial designation on land immediately west of her backyard and asked commissioners not to adopt the policy or rezone nearby agricultural land. “I ask you not to adopt this growth policy and to not rezone the agricultural land west of my property,” Kelly said.

Steve Crum, a Laurel resident, said the planning process had been marred by repeatedly changing maps, missing minutes and a lack of clear public notice for some workshops. “It just seems like somebody was trying to hide these meetings to keep the public not involved,” Crum told the board, and warned the shortcomings could lead to litigation if the county adopted the policy without further review.

Karen Jerussi of Billings said she believed the planning process favored Northwest (sometimes recorded as Northwestern/Northwest) Energy’s methane plant project and charged the county with a lack of transparency and meaningful public participation. Jerussi cited state zoning law’s public-purpose standard (referred to in the record as statute 76 2 2 0 1) and urged the board to either send the plan back for more study or defer adoption until 2025, when a statutory update would otherwise be due.

County staff repeated that the City-County Planning Board held multiple public hearings and workshops and that the planning board’s maps and recommendation had been forwarded to the county for the commissioners to adopt, modify or reject under state growth-policy statutes. After public testimony, a commissioner moved to adopt Resolution 24-63 and the board approved the motion by voice vote.

Supporters of delaying adoption asked the commissioners to commission additional study of commercial and industrial development near major transportation routes, to ensure public-health and environmental protections are prioritized, and to clarify the public-comment process and the history of map changes. The commissioners did not publicly identify any specific changes to the plan at the meeting.

The county’s formal adoption of the growth policy does not itself rezone parcels; zoning changes typically require separate proceedings. The board set several subsequent public hearings and administrative steps on related items during the same meeting.