fbpx

Petition to Expand Egan Slough District Denied, Meeting Scheduled

Local group plans meeting to keep community updated on efforts to fight proposed water-bottling plant in Creston

By Beacon Staff

A local group that organized after the introduction of a proposed water-bottling plant in Creston will host an informational meeting on Feb. 1 to update the community.

Water For Flathead’s Future planned to host a valley-wide meeting at the Flathead High School Auditorium on Feb. 1 at 7 p.m. Deirdre Coit, chairperson of WFFF, said the event would include updates from her group, including from former attorney David Eychner.

The group formed last spring when news first broke about the proposed Montana Artesian Water Co., owned by Creston resident Lew Weaver.

According to permit applications, the water company has asked to pump 710 acre-feet of water annually from the aquifer, or roughly 1.2 billion 20-ounce water bottles. The facility would be allowed to run 24 hours a day, all week.

Weaver’s plans are still under scrutiny at state agencies, with the water-right application still at the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation and the wastewater discharge permit at the Department of Environmental Quality.

Last November, the county commission voted against a proposed expansion in the zoning district seeking to add more than 500 acres to the existing acreage in the district.

Coit said she and Eychner would speak for about half an hour to update the community on what the group has been doing. She also said a representative from the Egan Slough Zoning District will speak to the petition filed by John and Amy Waller seeking a special election that would let Flathead County residents to vote on the proposed district expansion.

According to Monica Eisenzimer, the election supervisor for Flathead County, the petition was sent to the county attorney’s office to be reviewed for form and substance, and was found lacking in form and denied.

Eisenzimer reported that the letter said a special election is only allowed if it concerns funding and this wasn’t an election for funding. The denial doesn’t bar the petitioners from reworking the petition and bringing it back at a later date, Eisenzimer said.