County wants injunction lifted on Lakeside plan

The Flathead County Attorney’s Office has asked a judge to lift a preliminary injunction that prohibits implementation of the Lakeside Neighborhood Plan.

In an answer to the amended complaint in that civil lawsuit, Deputy Flathead County Attorney Paul Nicol responded to multiple points and claims made by the plaintiffs.

In April, a couple dozen people amended their lawsuit against the Lakeside Neighborhood Planning Committee, the county and the county Planning Office related to the development and actions of a committee that was tasked with creating the neighborhood plan.

The amended complaint followed a revised preliminary injunction issued April 21 by District Judge Stewart Stadler. The case is scheduled for a jury trial in December.

The county’s May 16 response contends that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted, that some claims are barred by the statute of limitations and that the plaintiffs lack standing to sue on certain claims.

The county wants the court to declare that the process by which the Lakeside plan was created is valid and complies with state and federal laws. It asks that it be awarded court costs, fees and other relief deemed just and appropriate by the court.

The County Attorney’s Office wrote that the growth policy doesn’t dictate neighborhood plans, as the plaintiffs claim, but rather addresses those plans in a broader sense.

The county also denies that neighborhood plans “play a significant role in determining how a property owner may use” his property. Rather, Nicol wrote, plans “may” play a role in property uses if the property is zoned.

Nicol also disputed the allegation that the Lakeside Neighborhood Planning Committee was not properly created nor were its members properly appointed. He acknowledged that there is no resolution approved by the county commissioners to form the planning committee. But Nicol’s response doesn’t specify whether such a resolution was necessary, as claimed in the lawsuit.

Nicol disagrees with the allegation that taxpayer dollars were used to mail documents sent out by the Lakeside group and denies that county planning office employees were voting members of the group.

He also disputes the allegation that a website used by the neighborhood group was “secret,” but says a site was established. The county denies that the website contained only selected information, and rather claims the site was designed as a primary information source to communicate with the public.

Nicol said that while some committee meetings were held in private homes, the meetings were publicized and open to the public. And, after someone “pointed out that meetings in private homes might discourage public participation,” subsequent meetings were held in public buildings, he wrote.

The county also disagrees with the allegation that surveys seeking public input on the plan were pegged to be distributed only to post-office-box holders at the Lakeside Post Office. Nicol said surveys weren’t even required as part of the process.

The county admits that Lakeside committee members received an email from one person who was concerned that some people might not have been aware of the planning process and then decided to mail out more surveys and to postpone some “workshop meetings seeking public input on matters related to the rewrite of the” plan.

Reporter Shelley Ridenour may be reached at 758-4439 or sridenour@dailyinterlake.com.