A controversial right-of-way ordinance will remain on the books while the Ward County Commission pursues a potential rewrite of the county’s comprehensive plan.

The commission voted 2-3 to reject a Ward County Planning Commission recommendation to erase the ordinance, which requires applicants seeking plats of up to 40 acres donate road right of way to the county or township. The Ward County Farm Bureau, Ward County Farmers Union and Northwest Landowners Association have opposed the ordinance, described by some landowners as an illegal “taking” of property. The ordinance has been in place for a number of years, but opposition has increased with the number of plats being proposed.

Ward County Farm Bureau President Brock Axness, Des Lacs, said the organization will continue to fight for the rights of landowners who apply for variances to the ordinance to avoid having to donate land when they plat properties.

“We are not going to settle down,” he said. “This is where we want our voices heard. We want to protect the people who own the land.”

The commission’s vote on first reading eliminated the need for a public hearing and second reading on the proposed ordinance change. The majority of the commission has shown support in recent weeks for keeping the existing right-of-way policy. However, the desire to see a new comprehensive plan approved before changing the ordinance also influenced commissioners to reject an ordinance change.

Commissioner Jim Rostad noted the county’s comprehensive plan hasn’t been regularly reviewed since it went into effect more than 25 years ago.

“That’s why we are looking at a lot of variances and disputes,” he said.

Dana Larsen, county highway engineer, voiced concern that failing to deal with the right-of-way controversy will cause the issue to dominate discussion on a new comprehensive plan and draw focus from the bigger picture.

“I am concerned the hostilities are still going to be there during the comprehensive plan (discussion). That’s all we are going to be talking about is right of way,” he said.

Commissioner John Fjeldahl agreed.

“Do you want that driving your discussion? I don’t think so,” he said.

Fjeldahl suggested lifting the right-of-way requirement while the comprehensive plan is being developed. Estimates are it would take nearly a year and half to create the comprehensive plan once undertaken, which could not occur until the commission approves the funding. The commission voted to direct Larsen to prepare a scope and estimated cost of comprehensive plan development for consideration in the county’s 2018 budget.

Attention shifted from the right-of-way ordinance to a comprehensive plan after Larsen reported on a meeting with planners from McKenzie, Williams and Mountrail counties to talk about how those counties have dealt with right-of-way issues in the planning process. Rostad and Commissioner Shelly Weppler also attended the meeting.

Larsen said one item he gleaned is agricultural plats should be treated differently from commercial and residential plats. Ward County is largely treating all outlets the same, he said. The county also should look at easements rather than right-of-way dedication in many instances, he said. Ward County’s policy requires dedication of 40 feet of right of way from the center line on each side of a township road and 75 feet on a county road.

Weppler, Rostad and Larry Louser voted against approving the ordinance change and eliminating the right-of-way policy. Fjeldahl, who has been the commission’s main opponent of the right-of-way policy, was joined by Alan Walter in voting for the ordinance change on first reading. Walter, who also had reservations about changing the policy before rewriting the comprehensive plan, supported the change on first reading because it would have only moved the matter to a hearing.

In other business, the commission received a clarification from the state’s attorney related to an easement request for a replacement water pipeline along a township road near Minot Air Force Base. Russ Gohl with Earthmovers had requested clarification because both Eureka Township and neighboring property owner were uncertain about the property’s ownership and were reluctant to sign the easement. The landowner dedicated the property to the township for road right of way when the land was platted.

State’s Attorney Rozanna Larson said the neighboring landowner can sign because the township would only own the amount of surface property needed for road purposes. However, she advised Gohl to consult with the township regarding the project as well.