Teton County commissioners decline settlement for Trestles/Wildflower; residents vow court challenge

TETON COUNTY — The Teton County Board of Commissioners on Dec. 22 refused to sign a proposed settlement allowing Liberty LLC and Darby Development to restart the Trestles and Wildflower subdivision process under terms many residents called unfair. The board voted 2‑1 to reject the agreement after an executive‑session review and lengthy public comment that included objections from nearby city officials and neighbors.

The dispute drew a steady stream of speakers during the meeting’s public‑comment period. Brian McDermott, the county’s former head of economic development, told the board the proposed settlement “gives the developer everything, and it gives the citizens nothing,” and urged commissioners to require the developer to reapply under the county’s current land‑development code.

Opponents raised a long list of concerns — incomplete applications, traffic and wildlife impacts, groundwater and water‑table questions, inconsistent historic surveys and possible ex parte communications during prior executive sessions — and several speakers said they would challenge a settlement in court. Attorney Anna Trinidadue told the commissioners she would file suit if the board approved the agreement.

Commissioners debated whether settlement would limit the county’s exposure to legal bills and speed a resolution, or instead create unequal treatment and further litigation. One commissioner said the county had evidence of potential liability and preferred the judicial review process, which would let a judge decide whether earlier denials were legally correct.

When the vote came, the board rejected the settlement and directed staff to continue with the judicial‑review pathway. The commissioners warned the issue is unlikely to disappear: opponents signaled legal challenges will proceed, and proponents said they still seek a path to move the projects forward.

What’s next: Because the board declined to settle, the dispute remains in the court process or will return to the planning record if a judge directs further review. Several speakers who opposed the settlement said they will press for code conformity and transparency in any future handling of the applications.