An annexation spat between Jefferson County and the City of Helena resulted in a state Senate bill that goes to public hearing today at 3 p.m. in Room 317 at the Capitol.

SB339, sponsored by Sen. Terry Murphy, R-Cardwell, requires that cross-county annexations have permission from the affected county.

The bill gained some momentum last week, when a powerful ally, the Montana Association of Counties, sided with Jefferson County.

It appears that Jefferson County and Helena isn't the only area of the state facing cross-county annexation issues.

Murphy recently heard that Madison County may face the same problem with the community of Big Sky in Gallatin County.

Madison County commissioners fear that Big Sky could someday annex Moonlight Basin property, Murphy said.

So far, most of the Helena-JeffCo annexation debate has been in the political arena or the courtroom, after Jefferson County sued Helena.

There has been little room for the voices of the citizens.

On the one side is Jefferson County developer Jim Paulsen, who purchased land in Jefferson County that borders the city.

When Paulsen sought a septic permit from the Department of Environmental Quality to develop his property for multi-family housing, he was directed to hook up his property to Helena's water and sewer.

That would require annexation, which Paulsen favors.

He said he believes there are other developers in the vicinity whose properties are better suited to city-lot development than large-lot sizes.

And officials from the City of Helena have expressed concerns at numerous meetings about potential impacts on water quality.

Helena policies forbid sewer hookup to properties that aren't in the city.

On the other hand, annexation opponents say they fear that if annexation is allowed, it will forever affect their citizen-initiated zoning and the county's control over how it grows in the future.

Many of those interviewed intend to testify at today's hearing.

Zoning commission

"The Queen City may be the Queen City, but it's not a monarch," quipped Jefferson County Zoning Commission member Ed Hall.

"For me, the issue is not annexation, per se, but how it's done," he said.

"It needs to be done with consideration of those being annexed."

If annexation takes place, city zoning, which allows for higher densities, will trump Jefferson County's citizen-initiated zoning.

"We just need to have the ability to say, 'no,' " he said.

All of the zoning done in Jefferson County has been from the bottom up, starting with citizen initiatives, he said.

The community developed zoning standards in the mid-1990s through a long and somewhat contentious process. It eventually involved assistance from a mediator with the Governor's Consensus Council.

"People need to know what they're getting," he said of any zoning changes.

Zoning Commission member Kris Minard said she thinks the issue comes down to money.

"He (Paulsen) can make more money if he comes down to smaller lots," said Minard.

"I do feel sorry for Jim Paulsen. I hold him no ill will," she said.

The issue is not one of water quality, she said.

"Our lots are not smaller than two acres," she said. "We are larger than the minimum lot size (required by law). I don't think we're polluting the aquifer."

"I think growth will happen," she added. "I have no problem with a city/county planning board. But the buck should stop with the county to determine how we grow."

What is needed is a transition area from city to county, she said.

The area she lives in is zoned for lot sizes varying from two to 160 acres.

Cement plant

Dick Johnson, plant manager of Ash Grove Cement Company, said high-density development near the plant would shut it down.

Ash Grove is the fourth largest tax payer in Jefferson County, he said.

When the cement plant was built by Kaiser Cement in 1963, it had no neighbors.

"We can't handle the traffic," he said. "Too many people, too close -- that's the bottom line."

The county already has zoning regulations, and Ash Grove works closely with the Jefferson County commissioners, he said.

School district

Mary Bryson, chair of the Montana City School Board, also will speak in support of the bill.

"If the city crosses its boundary into Jefferson County, we could have urban zoning," she said.

"We have a plan for growth over the next three to five years; that could shorten our time frame," she said.

"It could put more pressure on the current facility."

The school board recently passed a resolution in support of the county's one-year moratorium on annexations into Jefferson County.

The board also requested notification of any pending zoning issue affecting property within the school district and representation in the decision-making process.

Developer perspective

Paulsen also will testify. His zoning and annexation conundrum dates back two and a half years when he purchased the property.

He said the annexation benefits him and Jefferson County.

While it allows him to build at a greater density, it also will increase Jefferson County's taxes. Plus, there will be no drain on the county to provide services.

He said he thinks the issue is actually a power struggle between the county commissioners and the city.

There are reasons cities exist, he said, because they provide a different level of services than a county.

In this particular case, he said, it makes more sense for the properties to be on city services.

"The other thing I learned, is that zoning is supposed to be a living, breathing, changing document," he said.

He initially thought the annexation of the property was not going to be a big deal, he said.

"It's an example of how governments become territorial and apparently that's how there are wars."

"My point is that in 10 years will this be a big issue? No. I think the governments will be working closer together."