City council should lead by example

It's time to move on. The present city government needs to change, and we need a council that respects individual ideas and opinions, keeps the city out of court and better exercises its fiscal responsibilities.

The new council should lead by example not by force. Here are examples of how the council should not act:

1. When you remove a polarizing employee, you don't immediately hire him back as a consultant at a higher salary.

2. You don't agree that land on Whitefish Lake is fairly priced at $36,000/ft. Were you just trying to drive up land prices on the lake? And where was the study that proved the need for the land? You must have done one preparing for such an occasion.

3. According to a recent newspaper article, our city manager has a higher salary than the governor of Montana plus $22,000 to his pension plus $7,000 vehicle expenses plus health insurance.

Also, it appears the city attorney is paid about the same as the state's attorney general. With a little research it appears that the top-nine city employees are costing taxpayers $1,000,000 a year.

Assuming 8,000 citizens in Whitefish, that's $500 in taxes for a family of four. Perhaps these salaries are typical for a town our size, but please show us the salaries other towns our size pay their employees.

4. You have a noxious weed ordinance — great. You have an employee who sends out enforcement letters — again, great.

One of the worst areas of noxious weeds is the city's new bike path along both sides of the railroad. Did you fail to get a letter? I've never seen anything done to remove the weeds since the path opened.

5. You promise bike paths on Wisconsin Avenue, but where are they? I was rushed into signing an easement in May so that it could be done in the summer. That was May 2005.

5. You have become adversarial with the citizens of Whitefish. Your response letter to Tim Grattan's opinions was an attack piece (using "torpedo" in your headline tended to set a negative tone), not a well-thought-out informational piece.

And you used our tax money to send out your opinions. You knew the rules when you ran for election — the citizens can yell at you (they shouldn't) but you can't yell back.

6. Your clean water act is written backwards. Any ordinance that offers the possibility of exceptions, mitigations, etc. to every landowner is a disaster waiting to happen.

Whitefish will drown in losing lawsuits and go broke. Sean Frampton will be in the Forbes 400. The more the people point this out, you just dig in your heels and fight. Why not just:

a. scientifically define clean runoff water in parts per million, etc.,

b. sign a contract with a private water-testing firm,

c. let the landowner hire his own experts to decide how to attain the clean water goal?

If people build and don't meet the standards (which will be scientifically measured by the private firm), they can't move into the building until the standards are met. Presto, no lawsuits against the city and you have clean water.

7. Remember that the city is probably the biggest polluter of our lake due to all the sand that was placed on City Beach for several years.

Why not set an example and clean up the mess the sand made in the south end of the lake. Action speaks louder than words.

Now it's up to the voters to decide whether to continue down this present path.

Rich Atkinson is a resident of Whitefish.