City zoning and plat decisions would rely on relevant facts

A city governing body would need a higher vote threshold to approve certain protested zoning changes. This applies to proposed changes to city zoning rules, restrictions, or district boundaries. The higher vote applies if protests are filed by owners of at least 20% of the area being changed or at least 50% of the area within 300 feet of it. A three-fourths vote applies in a governing body with more than seven members; a three-fifths vote applies in one with seven or fewer.

A person challenging a city zoning decision would have to prove it lacks a substantial public connection or is an unreasonable, arbitrary use of city authority. This applies to challenges to municipal zoning decisions. The challenger would need to prove, using objective and relevant facts, that the decision lacks a substantial relation to public health, safety, or general welfare, or is an unreasonable, arbitrary use of police power. A challenge to a city governing body's action, decision, ruling, or order under this law would have to be filed in district court within 30 business days.

A city planning commission and governing body would review plats using adopted subdivision rules, applicable laws, and objective, relevant facts. These provisions concern preliminary and final plats reviewed by a municipal planning commission and governing body. A plat would be approved if it meets adopted subdivision rules and applicable ordinances and the city accepts any proposed dedications. A comprehensive plan could guide a decision, but following it would not be required for plat approval. If requested at the meeting where the city votes, the city would have to state the reasons for denying a preliminary or final plat on the record or in the meeting minutes.

A person appealing a board of adjustment decision would need to ask the district court for a stay to pause that decision. This applies during a district court appeal of a board of adjustment decision. After a stay request is filed, proceedings to carry out the appealed decision would pause until a hearing, which must take place within 30 days. The court would weigh the chance of success, harm to the applicant's property interests, effects on others, and public policy. If it grants a stay, it would require a bond or other security, but a city governing body would not have to post a bond. The court would hold a hearing within 30 days after a stay request is filed. Any stay would end when the court files its final decision on the appeal.