Commissioner hopefuls weigh in on issues

A possible conservation bond referendum to preserve open spaces created the biggest split among three Flathead County commissioner candidates at a Tuesday forum.

This concept is rare in Montana, although Gallatin County set up such a program in 1999.

Under the concept, voters decide if they want to tax themselves to create a fund to buy development rights from rural property owners. This fund would target properties that provide open spaces for views, wildlife habitats and water quality preservation.

The idea is to preserve those features by removing the likelihood of development from those lands.

Democratic candidate Steve Qunell likes the concept, saying it is also a way to pick up extra federal money for the same purposes.

Republican candidate Jim Dupont said Flathead County already has a huge amount of federal land and open spaces, and said he didn't think a bond approach would be necessary.

Incumbent Commissioner Gary Hall, also a Republican, was in office five years ago when commissioners decided not to take a conservation bond to a public vote because the county's financial priorities were elsewhere. However, he said the topic has popped up again in discussions.

About 200 people attended the forum sponsored by the Kalispell Chamber of Commerce and The Daily Inter Lake at the Red Lion Hotel Kalispell.

Retired Sheriff Dupont and Hall face each other in the Republican primary on June 3. Qunell, a planning board member from Whitefish, is unopposed in the Democratic primary.

Here is a rundown of the candidates' answers on Tuesday:

. How would each balance environmental interests and property rights in riparian setback areas?

Right now, the county Planning Board is looking at recommending 250-foot setbacks on the Flathead's main rivers with smaller setbacks on the streams.

Qunell said setbacks are needed to give the county moral clout in dealing with Canadian coal mines and natural gas projects that will affect the Flathead. He views the proposed 250-foot setback as a starting point in the upcoming discussions.

Hall said setbacks are needed, but that no specific distances fit the needs for each riverside area. Dupont said there is a difference between commercial development and residential development, and he doubted that large setbacks were needed for residential properties.

. Should Whitefish have planning control over a two-mile-wide zone around it - the so-called "doughnut"?

All three said the Whitefish and county governments should cooperate on planning matters in that ring of land around Whitefish.

Hall defended his role in setting up the doughnut area several years ago, but said the result had not been good, which is why he now supported returning the area to the county's jurisdiction.

Qunell appeared the least satisfied with the county calling the shots on doughnut planning matters and said residents of that area should not have their planning work tossed out.

. How should the county deal with 700 miles of unpaved, dusty roads?

Dupont said the county should study and prioritize which roads should be paved - and stick to that plan. Hall said the county is already doing so. Qunell said the county needs to do a better job of planning to avoid future dusty roads, but added the government is on the right track with its prioritizing efforts.

Dupont downplayed dusty roads causing health problems, saying his Internet searches found nothing to prove a correlation.

"It's an irritation, not a huge health problem," he said.

Qunell disagreed, saying dusty roads are a health risk.

"Talk to someone living next to [an unpaved] road. They probably won't agree with you," he told Dupont.

. How much should the commissioners control the county's development growth?

All three opposed an across-the-board moratorium on growth.

Dupont and Hall leaned toward letting the market dictate the volume of growth with the commissioners influencing how that growth occurs. Hall said development projects need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

Qunell mostly echoed the other two, but appeared to want stricter and more consistent controls than the others.

. Should the county set up impact fees so new houses and businesses pay a one-time charge to help pay for the county jail and the roads serving them?

Hall opposes such impact fees, saying their costs are passed on to homebuyers, which handicaps efforts to create affordable housing in the county.

Dupont is for "reasonable" road impact fees. "What a reasonable fee is, I can't answer that right now. But we need to figure out what a reasonable fee is," he said.

Qunell said impact fees are needed to help mitigate the effects of the extra roads on the county.

A county committee is studying the possible creation of jail impact fees, and is expected to tackle road impact fees next.

. Should the county commissioners have accepted or rejected the 286-lot, 364-acre North Shore Ranch subdivision next to Somers?

The commissioners rejected that proposal 2-1 a month ago, with Hall in the majority. Hall voiced wildlife and flooding concerns.

Dupont and Qunell agreed with Hall's vote.

Reporter John Stang may be reached at 758-4429 or by e-mail at jstang@dailyinterlake.com