The Montana Supreme Court ruled on June 23, 2026, that a proposed wind energy ordinance submitted by Ruth Laura Edlund was invalid. This decision affects local governance in Treasure County and clarifies the limitations of citizen-initiated ordinances regarding land use.
The case, Treasure County v. Edlund, arose when Edlund submitted a petition for an election on a proposed ordinance to regulate wind energy conversion systems (WECS) in Treasure County. The ordinance aimed to set forth a permitting process and various regulations concerning the construction and operation of wind energy systems. However, the county challenged the validity of the ordinance, leading to a legal dispute that reached the Montana Supreme Court.
Ruth Laura Edlund, a resident of Hysham, Montana, initiated the ordinance to address the growing interest in wind energy in the region. The proposed ordinance included detailed regulations on tower height, audible sound, wildlife impacts, and penalties for non-compliance. Following Edlund's submission, the Treasure County Board of County Commissioners expressed concerns about the ordinance's validity, prompting a legal challenge.
In July 2024, the county filed a complaint in the Sixteenth Judicial District Court, seeking a declaratory judgment to declare Edlund's proposed ordinance invalid and unconstitutional. The county argued that the ordinance exceeded the authority granted to local governments for land use regulation and violated existing laws. Edlund responded by asserting the ordinance's validity and constitutionality, claiming it was a legitimate exercise of the citizen initiative process.
The District Court ruled in April 2025, granting summary judgment in favor of the county and denying Edlund's motion for partial summary judgment. The court concluded that the proposed ordinance was invalid because it attempted to regulate land use under the county's general powers, which were already limited by specific statutory provisions governing land use and zoning.
Justice Katherine M. Bidegaray delivered the opinion of the court, affirming the lower court's decision. The court stated, "We hold only that this proposed ordinance, as drafted, cannot proceed because it does not rest on valid statutory authority and because its central permitting and enforcement provisions exceed the County’s legislative jurisdiction and power." The court emphasized that while local electors can propose ordinances affecting land use, such initiatives must remain within the legislative jurisdiction and power of the governing body.
The ruling clarifies the boundaries of citizen-initiated ordinances in Montana, particularly regarding land use and zoning. It reinforces the idea that local governments must adhere to specific statutory frameworks when enacting regulations related to land use. This decision is significant for local governance, as it underscores the need for compliance with established laws governing land use and zoning.
The impact of this ruling extends beyond Edlund's proposed ordinance. It serves as a precedent for future citizen initiatives concerning land use, emphasizing that such proposals must align with existing statutory authority. Local governments and citizens interested in initiating similar ordinances will need to ensure that their proposals comply with the specific regulations and limitations set forth in Montana law.
Looking ahead, it remains to be seen whether Edlund will appeal the Montana Supreme Court's decision. The court's ruling effectively ends her efforts to bring the proposed wind energy ordinance to a vote, but it does not preclude her from submitting a new initiative in the future, provided it adheres to the legal requirements established by the court. As of now, no related cases are pending that would address similar issues.