Happy Friday, everyone! This time of year it can be hard to get too comfortable about the absence of disruptive and destructive regional wildfires. But it’s possible to get something close to a sense of peace, if only for a little while, given the rainfall we had earlier this week. The official tally I’m seeing from the National Weather Service in Missoula is one-tenth of an inch on Monday, about a half inch for Tuesday, and another one-tenth of an inch on Wednesday. That puts our precipitation totals for this time in July around two-tenths of an inch above normal.

Despite the rainfall, the U.S. Drought Monitor continues to assess Flathead County as experiencing areas of moderate and severe drought, with extreme drought conditions observed to the county’s south and east. And of course, we’ve got lots more warm weather ahead of us this summer.

The Northern Rockies Coordinating Center (NRCC), a federal interagency firefighting organization encompassing Montana, North Dakota, northern Idaho, Yellowstone National Park, and a small portion of South Dakota, is at Preparedness Level 2. Preparedness Level 2 signifies that wildland fire activity is increasing, with one to two geographic zones experiencing large fire activity, and with what appear to be adequate resources available to manage situations.

The scale goes all the way up to Preparedness Level 5, which is indicative of significant wildfire activity, with unsuccessful initial attacks on fires in the area, and significant competition for resources.

The state’s interactive fire information map shows 30 active wildfires in the state, and 1,233 on the year, with 18,157 acres burned so far. About 42 wildland fire incidents have been reported this week, according to the state website.

The NRCC reported no new large incidents this morning, but an additional nine new fires had been reported by late Thursday evening. The bulk of firefighting activity right now in western Montana is in the Bitterroot National Forest, where the 93-acre Observation Point Fire was discovered on Thursday 10 miles south of Hamilton.

A morning update from the U.S. Forest service says that the fire is burning in remote, steep and rocky terrain. Firefighters were successful Thursday in building containment lines around the perimeter of the fire, and with the help of aviation resources and ground crews, they were able to keep the fire from reaching nearby homes. The Ravalli County Sheriff’s Office has issued some evacuation notices (residents are advised to leave the area immediately) and evacuation warnings (residents should prepare to evacuate immediately as fire conditions change). The cause of the fire remains under investigation. Fire behavior was minimal this morning, but the weekend weather forecast calls for more hot and dry conditions.

The National Weather Service in Missoula is expecting thunderstorms this weekend primarily in north-central Idaho and both west-central and southwestern Montana. Those storms could produce rain, lightning, and gusty winds.

The weekend forecast in the Flathead calls for sunny skies, highs around 85 and lows around 53. A slight chance of rain showers is possible Sunday, and a slight chance of thunderstorms is also possible on Monday. Temperatures could rise into the upper 80s by Tuesday.

We’ll continue to keep an eye on things over at the Flathead Beacon, and keep our fingers crossed. I’m Mike Kordenbrock, bringing you the Daily Roundup …

After a Whitefish City Council work session this week, paid parking could come to downtown Whitefish. But I would like to emphasize the “could be” part of that sentence. There’s no firm timeline, many decisions have to be made, and several members of the council expressed skepticism or a need for more information before they could get behind any sort of paid parking system.

As it stands, the council will have further discussion at an early August budget meeting about what it could cost to study the issue further and to gather more data, before making an informed decision.

But allow me to explain what this particular paid parking proposal entails.

At the aforementioned work session, the council listened to a presentation from the city’s Climate Action Plan Standing Committee chair, Dakota Whitman, who urged the city on behalf of his committee to investigate the possibility of establishing metered parking in the downtown area. The committee estimated that their proposal could generate about $1.3 million in annual revenue for the city.

In a memo to the council, the committee wrote that free parking “actively encourages residents and visitors alike to drive rather than walk, cycle, or utilize our public transportation options, such as the Snow Bus.”

The committee specifically proposed a paid parking system that would involve designated free parking areas for locals, which could allow for most of the parking revenue raised to come from tourists and non-residents. That revenue, in the view of the committee, could be used to fund an expansion of bike and pedestrian infrastructure and public transportation options, both of which the committee notes are outlined as goals in portions of the city’s Climate Action Plan.

Additional details of the proposal include wholly exempting handicapped parking spaces from the metered pay system, and requiring that tourists pay to park in all city-owned street parking spots and parking lots from Lupfer to Spokane and Railway to Fourth. Dynamic pricing would be used to try to keep the spots 75% full on an annual basis, with an average of $2 an hour at each spot. Parking would require pay from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. with the first 15 minutes free. The policy would be enforced with the use of existing license plate scanners on city parking enforcement vehicles, which would determine who is a resident or a worker.

Ahead of its presentation, the committee met with Julie Dixon the principal consultant with Dixon Resources Unlimited, a California-based consulting firm that specializes in municipal parking. Between meeting with Dixon and reviewing academic literature, the committee concluded that it could not find evidence paid parking reduces business traffic in downtown business districts, and suggested that sometimes the opposite can be true.

“We’re taking a long-term view of community health because with climate, you don’t have an option other than to take a long-term view,” Whitman said. “So we do consider short-term interest, but ultimately our goal is, how do we make suggestions to you guys that will help the city become long-term climate friendly and sustainable. And we are subject to the same laws and market dynamics of capitalism that every other tourist town in the nation is also subject to. I don’t think Whitefish is that unique in this regard.”

During public comment, Chris Schustrom, representing the nonprofit Heart of Whitefish, was adamantly opposed to the idea. Schustrom prefaced his comments by noting his work coordinating the Snow Bus for 20 years, his time on the working group that created a parking special improvement district in the city, and his time as chair of the city’s employee parking permit program committee.

Saying that Whitefish is unique from an economic standpoint, Schustrom told the council that paid parking would create a competitive disadvantage for downtown businesses who rely on customers throughout the year. Further, he argued that the city should not even talk about reducing parking access until a suitable pedestrian and bicycle access system is in place.

“Paid parking will kill the very locally owned small businesses that define your community,” Schustrom said, adding that “the idea of targeting only visitors would create a negative perception that will damage our downtown.”

Councilor Rebecca Norton said she was open to more discussion, but overall does not like the idea of regular paid parking in downtown. “I like the idea of seasonal and event parking having a cost. I think that’s worth exploring,” she said.

Councilor Giuseppe Caltabiano said that he was all for exploring the idea, but that he believes decisions needed to be based on data.

Councilor Andy Feury prefaced his support for further exploring the issue by sharing skepticism that it could change anyone’s behavior in the short-term, and noted that the city’s winter conditions mean that few people will be biking to downtown between the months of November and April. He also suggested that even with the possible revenue from paid parking, the city would still be a ways off financially from being able to establish a multi-modal transportation system with bus routes.

“I think there’s a relatively compelling argument to revisit parking in general, and I would like to do that, and if paid parking ultimately is something that comes out of that is something we want to move forward with, then I would support that,” Councilor Andy Feury said.

Councilor Ben Davis had questions about implementation, and said that anecdotally he hasn’t run into the problem of downtown parking being completely full, but that taking on paid parking could make more sense with further growth in the city. “I admit that I don’t know everything. I think at some level there could be studying to do, but I’m just feeling maybe a little skeptical that now’s the time.”

Speaking last, Councilor Frank Sweeney said that he has lots of questions about how it could work functionally and fairly. His concern with dynamic pricing is that it could result in locals being bought out of parking opportunities.

“I’ve seen perfect examples standing right in front of me where very well-to-do visitors come in, and they literally will walk to the head of the line and say, here’s two, three, four hundred dollars, take me first. And it happens. And it happens. And that’s what’s going to happen with parking. And that’s kind of my concern here when we start analyzing on those kinds of things. I’m open to studying this thing.”