County Commissioners: West Glacier should incorporate

In a 2-1 vote, Flathead County Commissioners voted against approval of the West Glacier Vision plan late last month.

Commissioners Pam Holmquist and Brad Abell voted against it, claiming the plan had provisions in it the county couldn’t enforce. Commissioner Randy Brodehl voted in favor of the plan, saying it was not a regulatory document.

The West Glacier community has been working on the plan for several years now, with approval from the county planning board.

But Holmquist said some aspects of plan, like dark skies and building standards were untenable from a county perspective.

“They’re difficult, if not impossible to enforce,” she said.

While she said she appreciated the community effort, she noted the county doesn’t have a way to enforce building codes, for example.

“West Glacier should consider incorporating,” Holmquist said. While the plan clearly states it’s not a regulatory document, Holmquist said the plan “would be the first step toward regulation.”

Commissioner Brad Abell agreed, also suggesting the town look at incorporation.

Holmquist also likened the document to the “doughnut” zoning in the county as “regulation without representation.”

Mary T. McClelland, one of the authors of the plan, said in a subsequent interview that the community looked at incorporation, but it doesn’t meet the criteria under state law.

For example, West Glacier only has about 220 full-time residents. State law requires “the inhabitants may apply by petition, signed by not less than 300 registered electors or two-thirds of the registered electors, whichever is less, who are residents of the state and residing within the limits of the proposed city or town, to the board of county commissioners of the county in which the proposed area is situated.”

West Glacier’s population blooms into the thousands during the summer months, but they’re not legal residents, which presents a quandary.

Incorporation aside, Holmquist suggested there was already a lot in the plan that could be implemented without county approval, such as working with state and federal governments on various issues.

The community has already done that, through individual efforts. Monica Jungster, who owns in Montana House in Apgar has organized meetings on how to help protect one’s property in the event of a wildfire.

“The community members pick up what we can,” Jungster told commissioners. “Then you hope and pray a little bit that your neighbors join in.”

McClelland explained to commissioners that some facets included in the plan at the end of the document were just meant to capture some of the comments that were expressed in the community meetings. They were an appendix to the plan itself in the spirit of transparency. She noted that any proposed changes to actual zoning would go through the appropriate planning process.

The Canyon Plan, which is the neighborhood plan for the area, and the Canyon Land Use Regulatory System, which is the zoning for the area, date back to the 1990s and are in need to updating.

In the end, McClelland said the community would continue to work on the document, perhaps as a future amendment to the existing Canyon Plan.