Flathead Warming Center Files Federal Lawsuit Against City of Kalispell
The low-barrier homeless shelter’s leaders have partnered with the Institute for Justice to file a federal lawsuit against the City of Kalispell after councilors revoked the shelter's conditional use permit last month
By Maggie Dresser
In a partnership with the Institute for Justice (IJ), a Texas-based nonprofit, public interest law firm, the Flathead Warming Center has filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Kalispell after officials revoked the low-barrier homeless shelter’s conditional use permit last month.
Attorneys with the institute on Wednesday announced the lawsuit during a press conference at the Flathead Warming Center on North Meridian Road, arguing the revocation was unconstitutional and it violated private property rights. Lawyers also filed a motion for an emergency temporary restraining order in U.S. District Court to allow the center to continue operating while the lawsuit proceeds.
“The Warming Center and the Institute for Justice have teamed up in federal court to teach the City of Kalispell that in Montana, private property rights matter,” IJ Senior Attorney Jeff Rowes said during the conference. “What Kalispell did was completely unprecedented. The Warming Center never broke any laws, it never violated any condition of its permit.”
Kalispell city officials declined to comment on the lawsuit.
Following several months of public meetings, the Kalispell City Council last month revoked the Flathead Warming Center’s conditional use permit in a 6-3 vote, citing widespread complaints from neighbors.
Councilors accused the homeless shelter’s leaders of not following the criteria outlined in the conditional use permit. The permit allows the 50-bed center to operate on North Meridian Road in neighborhood business zone B-1.
Proponents of the revocation have blamed the Warming Center for attracting homeless individuals to the neighborhood where, according to complaints, many of the clients exhibit frequent disruptive behavior including public defecation, drug use, mental health episodes and criminal activity.
IJ attorneys argue the Warming Center has never been cited for violating any laws and its permit to operate was granted in full compliance with the city’s zoning rules and their accusations are baseless.
Additionally, attorneys say the revocation violates both the U.S. and Montana constitutions, arguing the city is using zoning laws as a weapon against unpopular or marginalized groups and said they would take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
“The ability to shelter people on their private property is an important national issue and this case is likely to become a test case for the rights of private property owners to use their land to protect the homeless,” Rowes said.
According to the complaint filed Oct. 8 in U.S. District Court by David Knobel of Crowley Fleck PLLP and Jeff Rowes and Christen Hebert of the Institute for Justice, the Flathead Warming Center alleges the City of Kalispell violated the Civil Rights Act of the U.S. Constitution and the Montana Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act of the Montana Constitution.
The plaintiff seeks declaratory relief, injunctive relief and just compensation, according to the complaint.
At the conference, Flathead Warming Center Executive Director Tonya Horn described the high demand for services and the critical timing of the revocation as winter approaches.
“It’s going to get very cold … we serve elderly people and we serve people with disabilities – we serve people who are ill,” Horn said. “We’re worried about the loss of life and the loss of limb. What is wrong with us in the Flathead? There’s something wrong in the Flathead – but it’s not the Flathead Warming Center. We will continue to defend the rights of those who need our services, and we will continue to defend our right to serve people in need.”
In 2021, the IJ won a similar case when the Western District of North Carolina ruled that the homeless shelter in Wilkes County should be allowed to open its property and that the town violated the constitution when the zoning board denied the permit, saying it wasn’t “harmonious” with its neighbors.
As part of the Zoning Justice Project, the IJ works to “protect and promote the freedom to use property” across the country, with lawsuits filed primarily in the southeast.
