Terrazas v. Blaine County

Terrazas and Weseloh (plaintiffs) sought a subdivision permit that the Blaine County Board (defendant) denied as disturbing the Mountain Overlay District, defined by the ordinance as hillside slopes exceeding 25% (or 15% in the Scenic Corridor) and areas above such slopes; the Board specifically rejected planning staff's opinion that the ordinance contained an exception for developments on "bench slopes" rather than "hillside slopes," and Terrazas argued the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague, citing Board members' own comments about difficulty interpreting it, along with due-process and estoppel arguments, and the district court affirmed the Board's denial.