Growth petitions fall short

A Kalispell grass-roots group failed to secure enough petition signatures to force a vote on a recent city growth policy amendment.

The amendment, approved by the Kalispell City Council in August, outlined future growth options for about 8,200 acres on the city's north side - including the 480 acres proposed for the Glacier Mall.

Town Champions began circulating a petition in September calling for a public vote on the amendment during the next city election.

A second, related petition would have replaced the original amendment with an alternative version. Among other things, the revision would have limited new commercial buildings to a maximum of 60,000 square feet, effectively blocking any possibility of the mall being built within city limits.

After some initial confusion about who could sign the petitions, it eventually was determined that 2,653 signatures were required for either proposal to

succeed. The deadline for gathering the signatures was Tuesday.

However, the group issued a press release Tuesday saying it was withdrawing both petitions in favor of a new strategy involving "voluntary" criteria for future annexations.

In a brief telephone interview Tuesday, Town Champions spokeswoman Jo Ann Nieman acknowledged the signature drive had failed, but she refused to say how many signatures had been gathered.

"I'm not interested in discussing that issue at all," she said. "The [Inter Lake] was no friend to us. It was clearly hostile. So you can all just go and cheer."

Town Champions co-founder Roxanna Brothers did not return a phone call seeking comment.

The Inter Lake mentioned Town Champions in editorials, recommending that people not sign the group's petitions in part because the group was so secretive (refusing at first even to discuss the petitions publicly) and because the revised amendment hadn't gone through the same public review process as the original amendment.

The group eventually said it was concerned about Kalispell's rapid growth. It felt projects and annexations were being approved without adequate safeguards to protect local taxpayers, and it was concerned about the amount of commercial development taking place outside of the downtown core.

"Town Champions formed in response to continued rapid increases in the city budget, and in response to the city's decision to encourage extensive growth through annexations," according to Tuesday's press release. "There is no reason to believe the developers of this new growth will be providing for adequate infrastructure, [including] traffic, police, fire, and regional park and trail needs.

"It's time city staff and elected officials are held responsible for the consequences of their actions. It's time developers are required to pay their way. It's time the taxpayers of Kalispell are given due consideration by those who by law must work for us."

There were several opportunities for public comment on the growth-policy amendment before the council voted on the matter in August. Only a few people spoke one way or the other; Town Champions didn't unveil its alternative amendment until after the vote was final.

Now that these initial petitions have failed, Town Champions said it will pursue a new initiative.

Shortly after the new year, the group said, it plans to propose "a set of voluntary criteria for the city to follow in approving requests for annexation."

These criteria will require the city to document the tax impacts of all new development within the entire Kalispell growth policy area, which covers the city and the surrounding county. Some sort of cost-benefit study also would be required to demonstrate that new development will have a positive impact on taxpayers.

"Should the city decline to provide taxpayers with these assurances," the press release indicates, "Town Champions will hold it accountable to the voters through a new petition and referendum process … There's more than one way to accomplish these things, and we intend to do whatever becomes necessary."

Town Champions isn't the only one calling for more-stringent annexation criteria. For years, Kalispell City Councilman Bob Hafferman has asked city officials for an analysis of each new annexation request, estimating the long-term tax benefits as well as the long-term costs for police, fire and other services.

The impacts of new growth are increasingly important issues for county taxpayers as well.

It's unclear whether the "voluntary criteria" will focus exclusively on the tax implications of annexations or if Town Champions will try to cap the size of new retail buildings or limit how much commercial development can take place outside the downtown core - restrictions that were included in its revised amendment proposal.

The press release didn't clarify this issue and Nieman refused to discuss it.

"I'm not going to answer that," she said. "Just print the press release the way it was written."

Reporter Bill Spence may be reached at 758-4459 or by e-mail at bspence@dailyinterlake.com