Published
Canal assessments follow the lot: the five things a seller must disclose in writing.
A rule that survives the subdivision it guards
Dividing ground that sits inside an irrigation district or canal company takes one of two routes before Fremont County will record a plat, and this site has already set out both. What the code adds next is the case nobody plans for: the lots get sold anyway, with neither route completed. Section 5.19.020 is the county's answer, and it is not a prohibition. It is a disclosure duty that lands on the seller, in writing, before any lot changes hands.
The opening move is blunt. If either route was not complied with, the assessments of the irrigation entity for operation, maintenance, construction and other valid charges permitted by statute shall in no way be affected. The failure does not erase the money. It decides who has to be told about it, and when.
“A disclosure statement executed by the purchasers and duly acknowledged, containing the representations required in this subsection of this section, shall be obtained by the seller at the time of receipt of the earnest money from the purchaser, and affixed to the proposed sales contract and a copy thereof shall be forwarded to the appropriate irrigation entity.”
— Fremont County Development Code, 2011 Edition (Ordinance 2011-04), section 5.19.020.b. Consolidated through Ordinance 2026-03. Retrieved 7 September 2026
Read the timing. Not at closing, when the file is thick and the movers are booked — at the time of receipt of the earnest money, the first cheque in the transaction. The signed statement is affixed to the proposed sales contract, and a copy goes to the irrigation entity itself. The entity whose assessments are at stake is put on notice, in writing, deal by deal.
The five disclosures, in the code's own order
The seller must advise the purchaser in writing of five things, and the code numbers them. A table is the honest way to show them, because the order is doing quiet work: it moves from what was not done, to what still binds, to the one way out.
| Disclosure | What the purchaser is told, in writing |
|---|---|
| First | That suitable water deliveries have not been provided |
| Second | That the purchaser of the lot must remain subject to all assessments levied by the irrigation entity |
| Third | That the individual purchaser shall be responsible to pay such legal assessments |
| Fourth | That the assessments are a lien on the land within the irrigation entity |
| Fifth | That the purchaser may at a future date petition the appropriate irrigation entity for exclusion from the irrigation district |
The fourth line is the one that outlives everything else on the list. A lien on the land is not a bill addressed to a person — it attaches to the lot, survives a sale, and can be enforced against whoever owns it next. The fifth line is the counterweight: exclusion exists as a process, but it belongs to the purchaser, at a future date, by petition. The county's rule neither grants nor predicts the outcome; it tells you the door exists.
Why the lien matters more than the disclosure
A disclosure requirement looks like consumer protection, and it is. But notice what it does not do: it does not cure the underlying obligation. The assessments continue, the purchaser pays them, and the lien stands until the entity or a court says otherwise. The disclosure moves information, not money.
| Question | What the code's answer is |
|---|---|
| Does telling the buyer erase the assessment? | No. Disclosure and obligation are separate: the money side is in no way affected |
| What does the disclosure actually move? | Information — the buyer knows in writing, the irrigation entity gets a copy, and the contract carries the statement |
| Who enforces, and against what? | The entity enforces against the land — the charge follows the lot to whoever owns it next |
| When is it too late to matter? | After earnest money. The code fixes the handover at receipt of the earnest money, the first cheque in the deal |
| Is there a way out? | Only the petition route — the purchaser, at a future date, asking the entity itself for exclusion |
That is why the timing rule matters so much. A buyer who reads the five lines before earnest money can price the obligation — ask the entity what the annual assessment runs, treat it as a carrying cost, and weigh the exclusion petition against simply offering less. A buyer who first sees the language at closing has already removed every one of those options from the table.
On the valley floor this is not a corner case. Much of the ground around St. Anthony, Parker and Egin is served by canal systems, and inherited ground is divided informally for decades before anyone records anything. The lot you are offered may sit inside an irrigation entity boundary drawn a century ago, on a map the listing never mentions.
A recent amendment, worth knowing about
In the county's current consolidated code — the one carrying revisions through February 2026 — this subsection sits beside an amendment marker: amended by Ordinance 2026-03. That is a 2026 change to this exact language, not a legacy rule quietly resting since 2011. For a buyer it means one practical thing: quote the current code, not a summary of it. What that implies, concretely:
- Anyone advising you — a lender, a title officer, an agent — should be reading the consolidated text retrieved this year, not a copy from an old closing file.
- The disclosure statement you are handed should track the five numbered items as they read now, in substance and in order.
- If a form circulating in a deal looks older than 2026, that alone is worth a question, because the marker says the language moved.
What to establish before earnest money moves
- Ask which irrigation entity, if any, the parcel sits within — by name: district, canal company or ditch association.
- Ask whether suitable water deliveries were provided for the lot, or whether the lands were excluded from the entity before the plat was recorded.
- If neither, ask for the written disclosure statement — the code requires it to be executed by the purchaser and obtained by the seller when the earnest money is received, not later.
- Read it against the five numbered disclosures and check all five appear, in substance.
- Confirm a copy went to the irrigation entity, as the code requires, so the record is complete from day one.
- Price the assessment: call the entity, ask for the annual amount and the arrears, and treat it as a cost of holding the lot.
- Ask the entity, not the seller, what a petition for exclusion involves and what its odds are — the county code creates the door but the entity decides what comes through it.
- Re-read the county's own canal question on the zoning questionnaire, which flags irrigation ground early in the permit path.
None of this is a reason to walk away from canal-side ground. It is a reason to read one page before the first cheque clears — the page the county's code requires you to be handed.
Common questions
What is the irrigation disclosure in Fremont County?
A written statement a seller must give the purchaser of a lot in a subdivision inside an irrigation entity, when water deliveries were not provided and the lands were not excluded. It must be obtained when the earnest money is received and affixed to the proposed sales contract.
What are the five things the seller has to disclose?
That suitable water deliveries have not been provided; that the purchaser remains subject to all assessments levied by the irrigation entity; that the purchaser is responsible to pay them; that the assessments are a lien on the land within the entity; and that the purchaser may at a future date petition the entity for exclusion.
When does the seller have to hand it over?
At the time of receipt of the earnest money from the purchaser. The code is specific: the disclosure statement is obtained by the seller then, executed by the purchasers, affixed to the proposed sales contract, and a copy is forwarded to the appropriate irrigation entity.
If the seller skips the disclosure, do the assessments go away?
No. The code states that where the delivery and exclusion routes were not complied with, the irrigation entity's assessments for operation, maintenance, construction and other valid charges permitted by statute shall in no way be affected. The duty to disclose and the obligation to pay are separate things.
What does it mean that the assessments are a lien on the land?
The charge attaches to the lot itself rather than to the person who incurred it. It survives a sale, binds the next owner, and can be enforced against the land. That is why it belongs in the price conversation before earnest money, not after closing.
Can a buyer get out of the irrigation entity?
The fifth disclosure says the purchaser may at a future date petition the appropriate irrigation entity for exclusion from the irrigation district. The county code creates the petition route; whether exclusion is granted is the entity's decision, and the code does not promise an outcome.
What if water deliveries actually were provided?
Then the disclosure duty tied to noncompliance is not triggered. The code's disclosure requirements attach where the statutory routes for subdividing irrigated land were not complied with and the assessments therefore continue to bind the lots.
Does this apply inside St. Anthony city limits?
The disclosure duty follows irrigation entity boundaries rather than city boundaries. What differs inside a city is who approves a subdivision's irrigation system — the code routes that approval to city authority with the entity's advice — and permit routing generally is the city-limits question this site covers separately.
Is this rule current?
Yes. In the consolidated Development Code current through February 2026, the subsection carries an amendment marker reading amended by Ordinance 2026-03, so the language was revised in 2026. It was re-read against the county's live consolidated PDF on 7 September 2026.