Steering Committee gets closer to neighborhood plan

By ALEX STRICKLAND — Bigfork Eagle

Two “s-words” were debated at the Bigfork Steering Committee’s workshop meeting Thursday for the ongoing update of Bigfork’s neighborhood plan.

The use of “shall” and “should” at various points in the plan were discussed and debated among the BSC and B.J. Grieve of the Flathead County Planning Department, who is assisting the group with their plans.

The difference between the words - even their use at all - was under some scrutiny because of the nature of the plan itself and the ways it can and cannot be implemented.

The BSC’s draft plan was reviewed by Grieve, who then made recommendations in the form of a seven-page report. The goal of the meeting was to discuss issues brought up in the report and decide how to move forward to get the plan in a final stage to put before the Flathead County Planning Board and then on to the county commissioners.

“I did not find anything so onerous that I lost sleep over it,” BSC member Shelley Gonzales said of Grieve’s analysis.

The point of the analysis is to help correct or address any issues before it reaches the higher levels of approval, Grieve said.

One repeated concern was the use of “shall” versus “should” concerning what policies could be implemented with regulatory backing (i.e. zoning) or whether the policy reflected a voluntary measure that future users would be encouraged to abide by.

Particularly clear definitions of the two words were imperative in Grieve’s opinion not because of possible confusion by those creating the plan, but rather by the future boards that will make decisions based upon the wording.

For instance, he said, were a subdivision denied based on an unenforceable provision it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen — not something the plan designers want to set up for the future.

That said, some members felt that softening the language to a point where it was merely making suggestions would water down the intent of the document, which they said was to shape and preserve the character of Bigfork.

“If we’re going to have rules, by God we’re going to have rules,” BSC member Don Loranger said.

Other spots Grieve suggested alterations included enhancing projections for growth out to a distance of 20 years in some cases.

“All assumptions and projections are wrong,” he said. “But you rely on the best available data.”

Those projections, he said, end up being used as a yard stick in the future so that more accurate projections can be made from that point. Grieve said that because all projections end up being wrong to varying degrees, the important part is to have a rationale behind them so they are defensible positions.

As work on the neighborhood plan enters the final stages of its three-year life span, Grieve warned the committee that regardless of the attention to detail and soundness of projections, the county planning board and then the county commissioners are almost certainly going to make changes.

“No matter what this group comes up with the planing board could modify it lightly or heavily,” he said. “And then they will pass those recommendations on to the commissioners.”

One suggestion brought up during the meeting was to simply attach a response letter to Grieve’s report and send it before the planning board addressing each of his concerns with either an affirmation of intent to correct or a defense of the particular position taken.

Grieve said he was unsure of whether there was any precedent for such a move, but in the end decided it could be worth a shot.

“We are an unprecedented community, we are a special place,” said chairperson Elna Darro. “I hope we are not tied to what has happened before.”

The idea had widespread support from the committee, but when time is taken into consideration, some felt it might not be the most expedient method.

Grieve suggested making the corrections they felt necessary and leaving the points that he and the committee differed on and submitting that version to the planning board for their consideration, since changes on that level are likely anyway.

“If time is a factor just make the changes and see what they do,” he said.

The county planning board is already scheduling for December or January so decisions would need to be made quickly in order to get the plan finished by spring.

The workshop session will continue at noon on Oct. 4 in the basement of the Bethany Lutheran Church to go through the rest of Grieve’s assessments and decide on a course of action regarding the planning board.