City to proceed with parking structure

After four hours of debate, public comment and working through a few “gobbledygook” motions, Whitefish City Council on Monday voted 4-3 in favor of moving forward with designing a new City Hall to be built at its current site with an attached parking structure.

As part of the decision, council will consider establishing a Business Improvement District with annual assessments on downtown businesses to help fund operation and maintenance costs that are expected to be between $100,000 and $200,000 annually.

Mayor John Muhlfeld broke a 3-3 tie vote with councilors Phil Mitchell, Bill Kahle and Chris Hyatt in opposition. The final vote came a few minutes prior to the stroke of midnight after the meeting was extended twice.

“Last night’s vote reaffirms the City Council’s commitment to supporting Whitefish locally owned and operated businesses,” Muhlfeld said Tuesday morning in a statement to the Pilot. “This project will serve as a catalyst for further private reinvestment in the tax-increment finance district, which is a win-win for all Whitefish businesses, including the Highway 93 corridors.”

Muhlfeld added that it’s only fair that businesses that directly benefit from the investment contribute to the project through a BID assessment.

The crux of Monday’s debate was whether the city should build a new City Hall at the current site and combine it with a three-story parking garage or build a new City Hall with a surface parking lot.

Combining a parking structure with a new City Hall is estimated to cost about $11.5 million. Tax-increment finance funds are suggested for the project.

Recent studies show a parking shortage of more than 200 spaces currently exists in downtown Whitefish. That deficit could grow to more than 700 spaces if development associated with the downtown master plan is realized, consultants say. The proposed parking structure could add up to 193 spaces for parking close to Central Avenue.

Going into Monday’s meeting, there was no evident consensus among councilors in favor or against structured parking, although Councilor Phil Mitchell suggested in a Pilot opinion column last week that the decision should be left up to voters.

Councilman John Anderson quashed that idea Monday by saying councilors were elected to make tough decisions.

“This is a decision that’s been brewing for several years,” Anderson said.

“We’ve had quite a few weeks to talk to different people. I sought out a broad spectrum and talked to other communities. I believe that same level of thoroughness has been done by my fellow councilors.”

Anderson said the chosen location is the perfect spot for structured parking and that there is sufficient funds in the TIF for the proposd project and other TIF priorities. His lone concern was the ongoing operations and maintenance costs.

Bill Kahle strongly shared that concern and asked about creating a BID.

“Before we write a big check, we need to figure out operations and maintenance,” he said. “That’s a deal breaker for me.”

Establishing a BID requires petition of 60 percent of the property owners within the district, a task that city manager Chuck Stearns says can be challenging.

Saying there are too many unknowns about funding maintenance, Kahle motioned to postpone council’s vote until September in order to more thoroughly investigate a BID assessment.

Hyatt was a second on the motion, but asked that council also investigate a Special Improvement District to fund construction of the project. An SID is sometimes used to help finance public improvements such as streets, sidewalks and parking lots.

Muhlfeld said an SID was excessive. Downtown commercial businesses have already paid into the TIF, he said.

“You’ll be hitting them twice,” Muhlfeld said.

Kahle said he would withdraw the condition to investigate an SID, but Hyatt refused to second.

Anderson said the proposed motion had become “gobbledygook” with too many unclear parts.

The motion to postpone the vote eventually failed with Anderson, Frank Sweeney and Richard Hildner in opposition and Muhlfeld breaking the tie.

Following a short recess and more discussion, Anderson made the final successful motion.

Nearly 30 residents spoke at Monday’s meeting during public comment.

Numerous downtown business owners spoke in favor of the structure, noting the 2-hour parking shuffle employees go through daily.

Montana Coffee Traders manager Tex Paige said the current parking situation is not working.

“I hear on a daily basis from customers about there not being enough parking,” Paige told council. “Visitors will come down from Lethbridge, spend the whole day downtown spending money here, but they’re limited to two hours of parking.”

Rick Nelson, owner of Nelson’s Ace Hardware downtown, said they are confronted with the lack of parking every day. He said the proposed parking structure makes sense.

“The city owns this site and there are no other location available in the downtown core,” he said. “You have TIF funds available. This is going to ensure that our historic downtown will continue to thrive. A strong downtown benefits the entire community.”

Other public comment focused on the total cost of the parking garage and the use of TIF dollars.

Mountain Mall manager Tom Krause said he didn’t think TIF was appropriate for this project. He said creating an SID would be a viable and appropriate finance tool.

Porter Gifford, of West Venture Real Estate, said the parking garage and city hall combo is a mistake. City Hall, he said, should be placed in another location to open up the half block as valuable commercial retail space.

He said the businesses downtown should carry the burden of building the parking garage, “not the public at large.”

Still, others said City Hall should remain a stand-alone structure and that the proposed designs were too massive.

“This looks like an awful lot we’re trying to fit in here,” Fred Jones said. “Building both a parking structure and City Hall is not a sensitive use of the land. Maybe we are trying to fit too much in this spot.”

City Hall steering committee member George Gardner bluntly said the preliminary designs “should be placed in the dust bin.”

Muhlfeld said the parking structure is just one part of the parking solution.

The city needs to address employee parking in the downtown and develop policies that require new developments to pay their fair share for parking, such as a parking in lieu fee, he said.

He also hopes the council moves forward with re-establishing the Parking Commission.

“We need to be thinking long term and position the city for the inevitable expansion of the downtown core south of Third Street and between Baker and Spokane avenues,” he said.