Boundary decision postponed yet again

Hearing on new language sought

An initial offering of new language for an interlocal agreement on planning and zoning jurisdiction between the city of Whitefish and Flathead County failed on a 3-3 City Council vote Monday.

The council resurrected the measure, however, with a 4-2 vote (Garberg, Wagner opposed) and will hold a public hearing on the newly revised agreement on Aug. 16.

The mayor was not present and therefore a majority could not be reached.

The commissioners, wanting to shape a county growth policy before the 2006 state-imposed deadline, have proposed reducing the city's planning jurisdiction from 4.5 miles to 2 miles, but zoning jurisdiction would extend to two miles instead of the current one-mile zone. The exact boundaries have been a contentious issue.

Two members of the audience, Mayre Flowers from Citizens for a Better Flathead and Ron Buentemeier, vice president for Stoltze Lumber, urged the council to consider the need for further public scrutiny.

"It's one of the largest land changes that Whitefish has seen in 20 years. On its face value, this document affords the right to a (public) hearing. You need to go through the process," said Flowers, who cited the Montana Constitution and a recent Supreme Court decision that increased the public's right to a hearing as reasons for additional time on the proposal.

Buentemeier agreed, but for different reasons.

"I, too, am concerned. What do you mean by watershed? I think you're moving kind of fast," he stated, referring to a map that challenged whether or not certain parcels of Stoltze land were actually in the city's watershed. Buentemeier also pointed out some parcels that are in the watershed that had not been included.

City attorney John Phelps conceded that a recent Supreme Court decision had created additional rights for public review, but said he felt the council was within legal boundaries to act with a review.

"I believe we've legally complied, but the decision surprised attorneys. We're not sure how far (the decision) will go," Phelps explained.

Speaking on behalf of Citizens for a Better Flathead membership, Flowers also urged council to use this chance to ask the county to adopt the Whitefish Growth Policy as part of the package. She also requested that the state trust lands remain under joint jurisdiction, instead of the county having final authority.

The council held further discussion on the finer points.

"It would be in good faith to hold another public hearing. I think this is a different document and a big enough issue," said council member Cris Coughlin, questioning whether lines had been drawn based on friendships and not pure planning. "I have lots of questions, but we're getting closer."

The issue of another public hearing brought out some questions.

"Where is the point where we say we've had enough public hearings?" asked council member Doug Adams, citing December's hearing. "While I don't disagree with the concept, I disagree with its usefulness."

Lingering feelings on pressure to decide resurfaced.

"I always felt a rush to judgment on this. We're still moving forward, but I don't like having a gun to my head. I find that distasteful. And I will vote against it until we iron out the politics," asserted council member Tom Muri.

Aug. 16 was selected because a full council will be present.