Group wants public vote on City Hall

A group of Whitefish residents is seeking to establish a law that would require a public vote before the city can move forward with building a new City Hall and parking structure.

Kalispell attorney Duncan Scott is representing the people who are currently working to create the ballot initiative to amend city code.

The group’s proposed law would require approval from a majority of Whitefish voters prior to the city appropriating money for a City Hall remodel, reconstruction or relocation costing more than $3 million.

The $3 million threshold was chosen, Scott said, because it seemed like a reasonable amount to spend on such a project.

The current City Hall is set to be demolished in September with construction of a new $13.9 million building and attached parking structure to follow at the same location at the corner of Baker Avenue and Second Street.

In addition, the city expects to spend an additional $1 million on moving costs, lease of an interim City Hall and other ancillary expenses.

Tax-increment finance funds are being used to pay for the project. The parking structure makes up about half the total cost.

The proposed law states that if work has started on the City Hall project prior to a public vote, the city would be required to stop work until the vote has happened.

The initiative would not prevent the city from spending money on feasibility studies or preliminary designs.

According to Scott, signatures from at least 15 percent of registered voters in the city are required to have an initiative placed on the ballot in the next election. That equates to about 750 signatures.

If the initiative makes it to the ballot, voters will have to decide if the law requiring a vote should be placed on the books. If that passes, voters would then return to the polls to decide if the city can spend more than $3 million on constructing a new City Hall.

A handful of Whitefish residents recently stepped forward to voice opposition to the City Hall project, saying it’s too expensive and that the new building should be constructed elsewhere to allow for downtown development.

Others counter that the project has been fully vetted and is well underway.

Earlier this year, City Council made a series of votes about the design of the project.

Scott is the same attorney who represented a group of residents who challenged a referendum at the center of the long-running “doughnut” planning dispute between Whitefish and Flathead County.

In that case, the Montana Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision that an interlocal agreement between the city and county was not subject to referendum, ultimately giving control of the planning jurisdiction to the county.

A referendum is brought forth by a legislative body, while an initiative is led by voters.