The Montana Land Board voted Monday to overhaul the process it uses to evaluate land-swap proposals. This is the first time the Land Board has made sweeping changes to Montana鈥檚 land-swap policy in more than 20 years, and it happened with limited public notice.
State Auditor James Brown introduced the proposal. Jack Connors, the chief lawyer working for the State Auditor鈥檚 Office, described the change as a 鈥渞ed-tape reduction鈥� initiative that eliminates 鈥渦nnecessary bureaucracy.鈥� Brown added that it will address water- and corner-crossing related disputes and create multiple opportunities for interested parties to comment, thereby adding transparency to the process.
But opponents pointed out that the proposal itself didn鈥檛 incorporate a robust public notice and comment period. They argued, unsuccessfully, for more time to evaluate it.
鈥淭his is big,鈥� said Kevin Farron with Montana Wildlife Federation. 鈥淭his is opaque. This is something that was given to the public seven days ago in its full form 鈥� A 30-day scoping and comment period should be the very least that we should be getting out of this.鈥�
Gov. Greg Gianforte鈥檚 motion to add a 30-day comment period to Brown鈥檚 proposal failed on a 3-2 vote. At the close of Monday鈥檚 meeting, the board voted Brown鈥檚 proposal through, 4-0. Gianforte abstained from the final vote.
Land swaps allow state land managers to exchange public land for private land of 鈥渆qual or greater value鈥� to the state, which and other government programs. There are more than 5 million acres of state trust lands in Montana that are administered by the Land Board, in coordination with the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation. The Land Board, which is composed of Montana鈥檚 top five elected officials, has the authority to approve exchanges, which are often used to consolidate land ownership in areas where public and private land are interspersed in a checkerboard pattern that creates public access challenges.
Key pieces of Brown鈥檚 plan adhere to the existing policy and the state laws from which they flow. But there are some notable shifts in the use of consultants and in the process for evaluating a property鈥檚 economic and recreational value.
One section of the policy, for example, specifies that while trust land should generally 鈥渂e valued for its highest and best use,鈥� considerations will be made for 鈥渓imiting factors.鈥� It instructs the DNRC to apply a 鈥渃ommercially reasonable discount鈥� for state lands lacking a documented legal access 鈥� e.g., land that is in the checkerboard.
Another change pertains to a state law specifying that state lands with bodies of water that have significant public use 鈥� or access to navigable lakes and streams 鈥� can only be swapped for private land with similar water resources. Brown鈥檚 policy narrows the definition to specify that the state water resources must have a 鈥渄ocumented history of being meaningfully used for crop irrigation, livestock watering, fishing, recreational floating activities or waterfowl hunting鈥� to be subject to that law.
Multiple opponents appeared to reference the in their comments as evidence of what can go wrong when powerful landowners use paid consultants to broker deals with public agencies. That agreement was executed with help from a pair of real estate consultants and a public relations professional hired by the Yellowstone Club, the private ski and golf club near Big Sky and one of the parties to the exchange. The in January of 2025.
鈥淩ecent third-party brokered land exchanges in Montana have produced deals where the public received high-elevation terrain of limited utility, while giving up productive lower-elevation land and established recreational access,鈥� argued Russell Fruits with the Montana chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers during comment on the proposal. 鈥淭hose outcomes are not accidents. They鈥檙e what happens when no one is in the room to independently be accountable to the public.鈥�
The proposal drew support from several well-known lobbyists who frequent the halls of the Capitol, including Raylee Honeycutt with the Montana Stockgrowers Association, Clayton Elliott with Trout Unlimited, Ben Lamb with the Montana Conservation Society and former Democratic lawmaker Tom Jacobson, who lobbied for eight entities during the 2025 Legislature, including the Taylor Luther Group, which represents the interests of some of Montana鈥檚 highest-profile businesses and landowners.
鈥淢ontana鈥檚 Constitutional guarantees are unchanged: land values must at least be equal (and) acreage as close to equal as possible,鈥� Jacobson said. 鈥淟and swaps are not inherently bad. Controversy arises from lack of early public input, and this policy directly fixes this. I ask for a do pass.鈥�
Discussion among the all-Republican Land Board was tense during the board鈥檚 hourlong meeting. Brown enumerated his attempts to engage DNRC in the policy revision and expressed frustration with the agency鈥檚 unresponsiveness. Gianforte interrupted 10 minutes into Brown鈥檚 comment, directing him to stop repeating himself and wrap up his thoughts.
Attorney General Austin Knudsen supported the proposal, arguing that Brown and his office had used 鈥渢houghtful outreach鈥� to garner support from unlikely allies.
鈥淐layton, I鈥檓 not sure I鈥檝e ever seen a time when you and stockgrowers may be on the same sheet of music,鈥� he said, referring to Clayton Elliott with Trout Unlimited. 鈥淚 think this puts the power back where it needs to be, which is with the five of us right here and not inside the bureaucracy (of the DNRC).鈥�
Secretary of State Christi Jacobsen said little during the Monday meeting. Susie Hedalen with the Office of Public Instruction voted to approve the change, arguing that issues arising from the use of consultants 鈥渃an always be proposed for us to review again.鈥�
___
This story was originally published by and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
