Permit holder intervenes in county lawsuit

Holt Drive property owner Jolene Dugan filed a motion last week to intervene in a lawsuit against Flathead County over how a permit was awarded to build a bridge to Dockstader Island.

Dugan and Roger Sortino own land on Holt Drive in Bigfork on the north shore of Flathead Lake. Flathead County commissioners granted them a permit to build a bridge from their property to Dockstader Island, which is about 400 feet out into Flathead Lake.

In January, the Community Association for North Shore Conservation filed a lawsuit against Flathead County over the bridge. The lawsuit alleges that the county commissioners violated Montana’s Lakeshore Protection Act by not putting the permit process out for public review. Instead, the commissioners approved the bridge permit on their own.

Dugan’s motion states that because the permit being challenged was issued to her, and the property where the bridge being built is hers, she has a direct interest in the proceedings.

Donald Murray, a Kalispell attorney representing the community association, said he expected Dugan to intervene.

 “We will resist her effort to intervene in the case, which we feel is a public-interest lawsuit between concerned citizens and their county government,” Murray said.

Murray received notice of Dugan’s motion on Monday and said he will be filing a brief opposing the motion. Flathead County District Court Judge Robert Allison will decide if Dugan may intervene.

If the court allows her motion, Murray said that decision cannot be appealed.

Third parties are allowed to intervene in lawsuits when they have a direct interest in the property or transaction, and where the lawsuit may impair their ability to protect their interest.

“Dugan’s interests are protected by the county,” Murray said.

Murray also said there is a clause in the Lakeshore Protection Act that says a permit to work on the Lakeshore doesn’t give the holder any property rights with the permit.  

The Community Association for North Shore Conservation is also waiting to hear from the court on their request to have Allison’s decision on a writ of mandate reconsidered. On Feb. 27, Allison denied the conservation organization’s request for a writ of mandamus, which would have invalidated Dugan’s bridge permit based on the argument that the county issued the permit without following state law.

Murray has filed a request to have the writ reconsidered because Allison judged before either party had the chance to brief the issue.

Even if Allison decides to reconsider the request, it may still be denied. If so, the conservation group will then consider other legal action to revoke the bridge permit.

Work on the bridge was halted temporarily earlier this year, but then permitted to resume.

Sortino and Dugan originally received a permit from the county to build the bridge in 2011. Construction started in March 2014. Four permit extensions have been issued since. The most recent on Jan. 25, before work on the 481-foot bridge resumed, and the lawsuit was filed.