Whitefish 'doughnut' lawsuit dismissed

The city of Whitefish’s lawsuit against Flathead County over control of Whitefish’s two-mile planning “doughnut” has been dismissed in a court ruling that also denies requests by various intervenors and proposed intervenors.

Flathead District Judge Katherine Curtis issued an order Monday granting the city and county’s joint motion for summary judgment to dismiss the lawsuit. A stipulation of the revised interlocal agreement, signed by both the city and county last year to replace the 2005 interlocal agreement, was to ask the court to dismiss the city’s lawsuit.

While the key issue in the original lawsuit was the sharing of jurisdiction in the doughnut area, the city and county “assert that those issues are now moot,” Curtis said, “because the 2005 agreement is no longer in effect, and they have entered into the 2010 agreement.

“The city and the county contend that any issues pertaining to the 2010 agreement are not before this court,” Curtis wrote. “The city and the county as well as any dispute raised by intervenors, all involve and arose solely from the 2005 agreement. That agreement is void and is clearly superseded by the 2010 agreement.

“Any dispute any party may have with the 2010 agreement must be brought in a separate proceeding,” the judge continued. “The same is true with regard to the claims the proposed intervenors wish to raise.”

In separate orders within the ruling, the judge denied recognized intervenors Heiko and Elizabeth Arndt and Westridge Investments’ motion for summary judgment as moot. She also denied a motion to intervene in the lawsuit by Richard Hildner, Dan Weinberg and Ed McGrew — organizers of a proposed ballot referendum to toss out the 2010 interlocal agreement.

Curtis further denied a motion by Lyle Phillips and Diane Smith, members of a committee that drafted the revised agreement, saying there is no need for their motion. Phillips and Smith had asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit and deny the intervenors’ request.

Despite the court ruling, the doughnut wrangling is far from over.

In November Whitefish voters will decide whether to repeal the Whitefish City Council resolution that put the 2010 revised interlocal agreement in place. Referendum supporters believe there’s overwhelming public opposition to the revised agreement and argue the agreement “has crippled the city’s ability to govern itself effectively” because Whitefish City Council members are unsure how the county will react to city legislation that spills into the doughnut area.

Anticipating the effect an upcoming city ballot referendum could have on control of Whitefish’s two-mile planning “doughnut,” the Flathead County commissioners last month began the process of scrapping the 2010 revised interlocal agreement.

The commissioners unanimously adopted a resolution giving a one-year termination notice to the city of Whitefish for the interlocal agreement that had been a compromise for both sides.

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