Do not's and the Whitefish Doughnut

Citizens for a Better Flathead recently wrote concerning Whitefish’s problems with land use planning and zoning legislation that sometimes regulations have to be “amended numerous times in an ongoing effort to get it right.”  

I concur with Citizens’ observation that, “It takes time to get fair regulations just right, but in the end thoughtful and well-researched regulations are generally respected and recognized for protecting property values and resources such as water quality.” But this needs to be accomplished on the front end of the process and not the rear end.

When Whitefish fails to take the time and effort to get it right initially, it then faces hostile landowners, increasing lawsuits and now hostile county commissioners.    

Regretfully, the regulation that Citizens for a Better Flathead referenced, Whitefish’s “Critical Areas Ordinance” was not “well-researched” or “thoughtful” at the beginning and that was the reason that many of us objected to its passage over four years ago. It has gone through so many amendments that it is no longer known as the “Critical Areas Ordinance.” It has been amended to the “Water Quality Protection Ordinance.”

When initially proposed, the “Critical Areas Ordinance” was subjective in nature rather than objective. There were many of us that brought this to the city’s attention. I also brought to the council’s attention other communities’ “critical areas ordinances” that were well-researched, tested and well-received by their respective communities.

Rather than take such examples into consideration, the council, with the tacit support of city staff and Citizens for a Better Flathead, pushed for immediate passage and application in Whitefish’s outlying jurisdiction (the Doughnut). This resulted in a lawsuit involving a home being built in Whitefish’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. This lawsuit was lost due to Whitefish’s inconsistency in the application and enforcement of it land use and zoning laws.

Whitefish’s general fund was hit to the tune of $500,000 with the net effect being that Whitefish’s Planning Department has been decimated. Whitefish’s ability to effectuate land planning and zoning has been set back years, if not a decade or more. Ongoing lawsuits will continue to tax Whitefish’s ability to consistently apply and enforce land use and zoning legislation as well as to properly fund the Planning Department.   

While I agree with Citizens that the county commissioners’ recent survey methodology is skewed, the county nonetheless has staked out the high ground by engaging county residents in laws that affect them and their property. In my discussions with many folks that live in the extraterritorial area, they point out that Whitefish has never once corresponded directly with them on this issue.

Whitefish relies upon the bare legal minimum of notice and due process and then wonders why it is facing increasing lawsuits. If Whitefish considers county residents “neighbors” one would think that the city would go the extra mile to correspond and collaborate with them before passing laws that affect them.  

A great deal of the economy of the Flathead Valley and Whitefish is real estate related. A Realtor’s due diligence necessitates certainty. Property owners also require certainty in this use, enjoyment or marketability of their property ownership. This is not accomplished when land-use and zoning laws are rushed through and then amended over the years and decades, contributing to years of uncertainty, lack of enforcement and an unstable regulatory environment.

Whitefish would do itself a big favor by focusing on the quality of legislation passed rather than the quantity. Poorly conceived, noticed, researched and reviewed legislation invites the very thing we are witnessing and like Humpty Dumpty, it is hard to put the pieces back together again.

Tom Muri is a former Whitefish city attorney and City Council member and a Democratic candidate for Whitefish House District 4.