Group seeks to repeal 'doughnut' agreement

A group of Whitefish city and rural

residents are petitioning to put a referendum and initiative on the

November 2011 ballot that they hope will bring control over the

city’s two-mile planning and zoning “doughnut” area back to the

local community.

The group will submit their petition,

referendum and initiative documents to the Flathead County

Elections Office and the city and county attorneys for review

before collecting signatures.

The referendum is aimed at repealing

Resolution 10-46, which approved a restatement of the interlocal

agreement that established the doughnut area. The group will need

to collect signatures from 15 percent of the registered voters

inside the city limits to place it on the ballot.

The initiative calls for creating an

elected community council that will provide representation to the

doughnut area residents. To get the initiative on the ballot, the

group will need to gather signatures from 15 percent of the

registered voters who reside inside the doughnut area.

“Supporters believe that these two

proposals will work together to return decision-making power over

planning and zoning issues within the doughnut to the Whitefish

community, where they feel it belongs,” the group’s Dec. 20 press

release states.

The referendum process is being led by

a group of Whitefish city residents that includes Richard Hildner,

Ed McGrew and former state Sen. Dan Weinberg. The initiative

process is being led by doughnut residents Mary Person, Marilyn

Nelson and John Collins. Former city councilor Frank Sweeney is

providing the group with legal advice, Nelson said.

Supporters of the referendum feel that

Resolution 10-46 “fails to provide adequate representation for

doughnut residents and will continue to breed unnecessary

contention in decisions regarding growth into the perimeter of

Whitefish, the area into which the city will eventually expand,”

their press release says.

Resolution 10-46 was created after

lengthy city-county negotiations as a way to end the lawsuit the

city brought against the county for unilaterally rescinding the

2005 interlocal agreement. The Whitefish City Council approved the

resolution on Nov. 15 by a 3-2 vote. The three Flathead County

Commissioners unanimously approved it on Nov. 30.

The restated and revised interlocal

agreement includes a five-year duration and provides either party

with the opportunity to terminate the agreement with a one-year

notice. A section in an earlier draft that would have given the

county veto power over city legislation that affected property in

the doughnut was deleted after the attorneys involved in drafting

the restatement said it was illegal.

Supporters of the referendum cite

“overwhelming public opposition at both the city and county level”

to the restated agreement and the failure to provide representation

to doughnut residents. They believe that repealing the agreement

“will pave the way for a more collaborative and inclusive process”

which “will lead to better and less divisive decisions regarding

the doughnut.”

As an example, they cite the city

council’s failure to pass “a key piece of legislation” that would

have established a mandatory zoning-compliance permit. The permit

was intended to help city officials enforce zoning on the U.S. 93

strip, which referendum supporters believe is important in

protecting downtown businesses. The zoning area includes city and

doughnut property.

“Unsure about how the county, under the

terms of the new interlocal agreement, would now view the city’s

attempt to enact legislation spilling over into the doughnut, a

majority of councilors simply refused to act without consulting the

county commissioners,” the group’s press release said.

Referendum supporters are also

concerned that if Resolution 10-46 is not repealed, “many key

ordinances designed to protect resources in Whitefish and maintain

the community’s special small town character may be reversed by a

majority of two county commissioners who don’t even live in

Whitefish.”

The initiative calls for creating a

community council with seven members elected at-large. Six members

would each represent one of six geographical areas that comprise

the doughnut area. The seventh member would remain at-large, and a

professional planner from the city’s planning office would serve as

an ex-officio, non-voting member.

The six geographical areas would

include the East Lakeshore area, the Big Mountain Neighborhood Plan

area, the Northwoods to East Edgewood Drive and Haskill Basin area,

the southeast area of Whitefish north of Highway 40, the Karrow

Avenue and Blanchard Lake area, and the area west of town that

includes Lion Mountain.

The initiative itself cites the

authority of the county commissioners to create community councils,

including the land-use advisory committees for Lakeside and

Bigfork. The LUAC proposed by the initiative would forward its

findings and recommendations to the Whitefish City Council for any

legislation that affects property in the doughnut area.

It has been pointed out in past public

hearings about the doughnut area that LUACs have only an advisory

capacity, and the county commissioners have stated that it’s up to

the residents of a planning area to request the creation of a

LUAC.

Voters who wish to assist this group

can contact Richard Hildner at 862-2831, Ed McGrew at 270-0824, Dan

Weinberg at 862-9131, Mary Person at 862-5751, Marilyn Nelson at

862-4642 or John Collins at 862-7486.