Missoula County will defend zoning and easement decisions after Arrowleaf Gulch appeal

An agency official told commissioners at an April 9 administrative meeting that Missoula County will defend its interpretation of a conservation easement and related zoning approvals after Arrowleaf Gulch LLC appealed to district court.

The official said the plaintiff is Arrowleaf Gulch LLC and the defendants include Key Holdings LLC, Brad Isbell and Missoula County. The official described the property at issue as being on Gilman Creek, a tributary of Deep Creek, and said both Key Holdings and Arrowleaf Gulch own adjacent parcels encumbered by the same conservation easement held by Missoula County. "Our office is going to defend this this lawsuit as it relates to Missoula County," the official said, and added they would arrange to accept service properly from the plaintiff's counsel.

County staff said Brad Isbell (through Key Holdings) applied last summer for a zoning compliance permit under the A140 agricultural/working‑lands zoning district to allow a range of recreational and support uses, including two 10‑by‑12 structures, a connex box near the road, porta‑potties, a parking area, an 18‑hole disc golf course, a gaga pit, an amphitheater/gathering area, a BB gun range and an archery range. Planning, Development and Sustainability reviewed the application and concluded those proposed uses were not in conflict with the conservation easement and approved the permit.

Arrowleaf Gulch appealed the PDS decision to the Board of Adjustments. The board affirmed the county's zoning decision but, the official said, did not have statutory authority to interpret the conservation easement; neighbors had raised easement concerns at the hearing. Arrowleaf Gulch subsequently appealed the Board of Adjustments' ruling and the county's interpretation of the conservation easement to district court.

The official said a process server attempted to serve them at their residence, but that personal service at the official's home is not an authorized method for serving Missoula County under Rule 4 of the Rules of Civil Procedure; the county will coordinate with plaintiffs' counsel to accept or acknowledge service in a permitted way. When commissioners asked how the county would frame its arguments, the official confirmed the county intends to defend both PDS's zoning determinations and its interpretation of the conservation easement in court.

A commissioner also asked whether Missoula County maintains a stewardship fund for easement monitoring; the official said they do not believe the county has such a fund and that PDS typically contracts with Five Valleys Land Trust for annual easement stewardship tasks.

No formal court dates were announced at the meeting; the county will proceed with legal representation and next steps to formalize service and response to the district court filing.