Vote ends in a draw

Critical-areas ordinance goes to council without recommendation

A deadlocked Whitefish City-County Planning Board will send the critical areas ordinance to the City Council without a recommendation.

After months of work sessions on the comprehensive piece of legislation aimed at protecting sensitive drainage areas, the board on Thursday ended its quest in frustration and failed amendments to make the proposal palatable enough to approve.

A motion by board chairman Martin McGrew to deny approval of the ordinance failed on a 4-4 vote. Board member Scott Sorensen was absent, leaving an even number for voting.

Then a couple of board members tried to evoke approval by proposing a number of amendments to address issues still nagging the board, such as a complex soil stability matrix for slope construction and limits for sediment discharge from disturbed areas.

All of the amendments failed.

A motion to approve the ordinance failed on a 5-3 vote. Those voting in favor of approval were Frank Sweeney, Lisa Horowitz and Kerry Crittenden. Those against were Steve Qunell, Jack Quatman, Ole Netteberg, Peggy Sue Amelon and McGrew.

The board then voted 7-1 to send it on without a recommendation. Sweeney was the lone opponent on that vote.

"I don't know if it matters if we approve or deny it," McGrew said. "It is flawed, and yet there are some good things in it. Then some things are a mess."

A HALF DOZEN residents who have dogged the critical-areas process since the beginning got another chance to reiterate their concerns.

Ben Cavin, a civil engineer who lives on Whitefish Lake, once again argued that the proposed matrix is counterproductive and "sets the bar too high." He suggested using 30 percent as the benchmark that triggers regulations for slope construction instead of the 40 percent mark in the draft plan.

Karen Reeves also said the matrix formula "needs to be dumped."

"You need to look at something simpler," she said, urging the board to get the focus of the document back on water quality.

Mayre Flowers of Citizens for a Better Flathead pointed out the proposed ordinance hasn't been peer-reviewed by state agencies that govern water issues to see how it dovetails with existing administrative rules.

She urged the board to change the sediment discharge level from .25 tons an acre annually to zero. Critical areas committee member Richard Hildner agreed with the zero discharge limit, but the board shot down an amendment to change the limit to zero, largely because board members have been told a no-sedimentation policy is unattainable.

County Commissioner Gary Hall recommended the board either recommend denial or throw out the "flawed" ordinance and start all over. Hall said he was speaking "on behalf of the hundred of disenfranchised taxpayers in the doughnut area."

"Many of these neighbors are directly affected by this defective ordinance," Hall said.

If the city approves a critical areas ordinance, it should adhere only to land within city limits, he added.

FRUSTRATION abounded among Planning Board members who have pored over the proposal for months, only to find themselves deadlocked in the end.

Lisa Horowitz said a recommendation to deny approval is "absolutely sending the wrong message."

"We've made progress on a complicated document," she said, noting that the consultants' work has been proactive and innovative.

"I want the glass-half-full approach," she said.

Jack Quatman said he feels like "a dog chasing its tail."

"I think Gary Hall is right - we should start over," he said.

Frank Sweeney defended the draft plan, saying he believes it's a "pretty fair" ordinance. The temporary critical areas law on the book expires in a few months, so time is of the essence, he said, to get the permanent version hammered out.

"Starting over is worse than throwing the baby out with the bath water," Sweeney said.

Peggy Sue Amelon perhaps best summarized the critical areas dilemma: "We're in the same place. The same people come and have the same issues."

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by e-mail at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com