Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT · CHAPTER 12. IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS · Part 21. Rural Improvement Districts
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 7-12-2108 (2026)

Extension Of Proposed District

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 7
  3. CHAPTER 12
  4. Part 21
  5. 7-12-2108 Extension of proposed district

TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT

CHAPTER 12. IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS

Part 21. Rural Improvement Districts

Extension Of Proposed District

7-12-2108. Extension of proposed district. Whenever a contemplated work or improvement, in the opinion of the board of county commissioners, is of more than local or ordinary public benefit or whenever, according to the estimates furnished by the county surveyor or the engineer, the total estimated cost and expenses thereof would exceed one-half of the total assessed value of the lots and lands assessed (if assessed upon the lots and lands fronting upon such proposed work or improvement according to the valuation fixed by the last assessment roll whereon it was assessed for taxes), the board may make the expense of such work chargeable upon the lots and lands fronting upon such proposed improvement and upon other lots and lands not fronting on the improvement and which the board shall declare, in its resolution of intention, to be the property benefited by said work or improvement and to be assessed to pay the cost and expense thereof.

History: En. Ch. 123, L. 1915; superseded by Ch. 156, L. 1917; amd. Ch. 67, L. 1919; superseded by Sec. 3, Ch. 147, L. 1921; re-en. Sec. 4576, R.C.M. 1921; re-en. Sec. 4576, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 16-1603; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 665, L. 1985.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1998–1998 · leading case: Seypar, Inc. v. Water & Sewer Dist. No. 363, 1998 MT 149, 960 P.2d 311.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Seypar, Inc. v. Water & Sewer Dist. No. 363, 1998 MT 149, 960 P.2d 311. · cites it 8× “Furthermore, Seypar asserts that the reference in § 7-12-2120(2), MCA, to § 7-12-2108, MCA, does not empower the District to assess sewer hook-up inspection fees, and, moreover, the District did not follow the procedure of notice, hearing and objection in establishing the fees…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.