WHITEFISH – At a crowded public meeting, speakers invoked images of the Revolutionary War, football and oppression, but perhaps the most lasting image was of a doughnut, finally being released from the grips of a governmental tug of war.
On Sept. 14 at the Whitefish Library, a joint city-county committee voted unanimously to move forward with a revised interlocal agreement that seeks to establish fair governance for residents living in an area called the “planning doughnut” outside of Whitefish city limits.
The revised agreement, now symbolically referred to as the “cooperative interlocal agreement,” requires the city of Whitefish to get consent from the Flathead County Commission when implementing new legislation in the extraterritorial jurisdiction.
It also includes a mechanism allowing the county to initiate and conduct a review of legislation enacted since Feb. 1, 2005, when the current interlocal agreement was established. The Whitefish City Council is expected to discuss the revisions at its first October meeting, while county commissioners must also approve it.
But despite the apparent compromise between the county and city, the meeting’s atmosphere indicated that the question of representation in the doughnut hasn’t been fully answered. A community council plan is still circulating, while a number of disgruntled residents left the meeting unconvinced.
Nevertheless, the decision is a landmark moment in a struggle that has strained the relationship between Whitefish and the county for several years. It offers an alternative solution to the pending lawsuit between the two governments, which has been in front of Flathead County District Court Judge Katherine Curtis.
The joint committee has been meeting since March 23, generally twice a month. It consists of three city and three county representatives: City Manager Chuck Stearns and Councilors Chris Hyatt and Bill Kahle on the Whitefish side, and Commissioner Jim Dupont and doughnut residents Lyle Phillips and Diane Smith for the county.
If approved by both sides, the revised agreement will allow one year for the county to initiate reviews on existing legislation. The law most likely to be up for review, as evidenced by substantial public testimony, is the critical areas ordinance, a controversial storm water law enacted in 2008.
The committee and members of the public also brought up the dark skies ordinance, which monitors light pollution. While more than 60 ordinances could be reviewed, Stearns said only a handful will likely be considered.
After initiation, the city has 12 months to complete the review. Flathead County’s interim planning director, B.J. Grieve, and Whitefish Planning and Zoning Director Dave Taylor both said the review process would be lengthy.
Dupont said the county agrees to pay “reasonable” costs for the review process, which includes labor, materials and public notices. He said some aspects of the process will only require a phone call and, taking a joking stab at Whitefish’s financial struggles, offered to pay for the calls.
“I’ll pay the 25 cents for a phone call,” Dupont said. “I know you guys are broke.”
The committee looked at two options within the agreement containing different suggestions on how to deal with legislation. By the end of the meeting, the agreed-upon document combined elements of both options, though Stearns said it wasn’t clear whether either was entirely legal.
Using sports references, the committee agreed that it was important to fairly distribute responsibility and work to both sides.
“This goes into the question of who’s holding ball and how long are they holding it while the analysis goes on,” Smith said. “That’s what we’re trying to achieve. Nobody is hogging the ball.”
Members of the committee said they would favor pursuing a community council down the road, but added that theit committee wasn’t the appropriate entity to make such a decision. Phillips said the proposal must come from the doughnut residents. Several members of the public supported a community council proposal that is currently being circulated.
A community council would be similar to the councils created in Bigfork and Lakeside, though it was pointed out that those entities are advisory, not legislative.
Marilyn Nelson said a community council is preferable because it achieves local representation, coming from within the doughnut’s population. The revised agreement, she said, doesn’t do that.
“It’s not going to fix anything because I still don’t feel like I have local representation,” Nelson said.