Lessons learned from prerelease settlement

The Flathead County Board of Adjustment last October shot down a proposal by the state to open a prerelease center in Evergreen, overriding county commissioners’ approval to move forward with the 90-bed facility.

The board’s vote was unanimous — yet, it turns out, it was never their decision to make.  

The prerelease center, described as a community residential facility, presented a somewhat complicated approval procedure. Commissioners were required under state law to vote on whether a facility should operate in the county, which they did in a 2-1 vote. It was then up to the Board of Adjustment to consider the conditional use permit and whether additional restrictions were appropriate to minimize neighborhood impact. 

It was not in the board’s purview to outright reject the project. 

Unfortunately, it appears the board wasn’t adequately prepared for this unique process, which led to the state suing the county over the board’s denial, and ultimately a settlement last week that effectively approved the permit. 

Agreeing to the settlement was the right choice. It kept the county out of unnecessary legal hot water while retaining the board’s authority to place important conditions on the project regarding traffic and parking. 

At the end of the day, it’s a no harm, no foul outcome. But county administrators and the Board of Adjustment would be remiss to not reflect on how the process went awry. 

At last week’s meeting several board members lamented the lack of information provided to the board in its initial decision-making process, with one board member even questioning whether an attorney should be on hand for all matters. It’s a point worth considering. Along with a robust staff report, offering the opportunity for legal counsel would go a long way in ensuring a smooth process for these more intricate and unique land-use decisions. 

For the board’s part, this matter was undeniably emotional for the affected neighborhood, with public comment creating a swell of urgency. But tabling a vote to get more information is always a viable path when faced with such weighty decisions. In this case, it would have been the more prudent choice, even if unpopular in the heat of the moment.