Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Opinion & Editorial

by Charles E. Wissenbach, Pinesdale

Something I learned about taxes in my youth makes me suspicious of these proposed Impact Fees. Living back in the Massachusetts of my birth, we were gullible enough to vote in a sales tax that was supposed to cut property taxes, but actually earned us the nickname of "Taxachusetts."

"Taxes" doesn't rhyme well with either Montana or Ravalli County. We have always defeated the sales tax here. But now a tricky impact-fee tax system is in danger of being adopted by the County Commissioners.

Any impacts for, say, schools, roads, fire departments, law enforcement, etc., will be just passed along to enrich those departments, but there is also a big payoff for the Commissioners as this new tax scheme grows to include a universal building permit regulation that can generate lots of revenue. One visitor to our valley reported that before he could start building on his California lot he had to pay a government fee of $68,500 for the building permit process.

Now, when I was young and naive in Massachusetts and foolishly voted for that sales tax, it started off small. Food and necessities were excluded, and we were promised our property taxes would be reduced. Well, the politicians kept their promise for about one year. Then our property taxes started rising toward where they were before. After that? Well, the sky was the limit for now they had two taxes to raise at the same time. Presto! "Taxachusetts."

How long will our ''Don't-Let-The-People-Vote" County Commissioners promise to keep impact-fee taxes reasonable? Can they guarantee that builders and developers will absorb the increased tax costs without passing them on to the home buyer? Will they promise that these taxes won't grow and that they will never be imposed on those making small improvements to their homesteads? Will they promise that the charges will be fair and they won't falsely impose fees on, for example: school impacts on childless couples, fire impacts on fire-resistant buildings, road impacts on non-drivers, and etc.?

And will the schools promise not to ask for any more mill levies and bond issues once they get these windfall school impact-fee taxes? Note that a recent public opinion survey taken in Montana showed that more than two-thirds of our people say that Montana's level of public school funding is already "about right" or ''too high." I feel that any school district that declares war on its people's finances by imposing impact fees, should never be voted any mill levies or bond issues by those people--anytime, for any purpose, under any condition.

The Commissioners don't have a mandate to turn Ravalli County into a "Little California on the Bitterroot" complete with massive laws and regulations and high-cost government. Any who want to live in a rich man's paradise can take advantage of the beautiful upscale community up on the Stock Farm. But please, Commissioners, don't price our valley out of the range of the average family. Housing is a basic necessity and costs enough already. It shouldn't be taxed as a luxury by greedy government entities. If government revenues are hurting let's start by cutting back on the number of Commissioners and Planners.

Floodplain fiasco

Dear Editor,

I wanted to talk about the building in the Floodplains of the Bitterroot River in Ravalli County. Prior to our general election this month, a reader described how our access to flood insurance would be repealed with the growth policy. As correct as this contributor was regarding flood insurance, floodplains, and the benefits we receive as a member community, the protections are still in tact due to having a state, county, and most likely a city mitigation plan. A mitigation plan protects the designated floodplain from building, so when regular flood events occur, loss of property and life is reduced.

A problem we are facing in Ravalli County is that city and county environmental health departments are issuing permits to whoever comes in the door with money. The arguments these landowners have is that they have the right to build due to having permits. This is clearly showing the problems we all know are occurring within our local government units.

Mr. Robak of the West Fork, and Mr. Fox on the main branch of the Bitterroot River both own properties which would be classified as being in the floodplain. Here is why: if any portion of a property lies below the established floodplain elevation, the entire property is considered in the floodplain for insurance purposes. Building is allowed on a property as long as it is above what is known as the base flood elevation or BFE. I know this due to being a former officer in the Mitigation Division for FEMA, which administers the National Floodplain Insurance Program (NFIP). Floodplain maps can be found online; they include base elevations, or elevations of the water within the floodplain. Any enclosed floor in Ravalli County needs to be 2 feet above this base elevation; they can be found at HYPERLINK "http://www.mapcenter.fema.gov" www.mapcenter.fema.gov. There are maps for Ravalli County, or anywhere else in the US at that site.

In an article about Robak, whose case is currently in District (or state) court in Hamilton, the article describes our County Attorney, George Corn as the hero to this situation; he is not. It was the tens of residents who brought this information to the county floodplain administrator for review. The article further quoted Angela Wetzstone, also of the RCAO, who graduated from UM Law last year as an expert on floodplain issues; again, she is not. The county attorney office is a facilitator for the public, and the laws are national, created in US congress in the mid-sixties.

The real message is this: where the city and county governments fail, the floodplain personnel, county, state, and federal are doing their jobs well. The city had no business issuing permits to Mr. Fox whose property sits adjacent to the West Main St. Bridge on the south side. Regardless of the outcome of the district court case, or the findings (to be determined) for Mr. Fox and Mr. Robak, these landowners unknowingly have put our community in danger of losing our status as a protected community for flood events, and protective flood insurance.

FEMA is an emergency financing entity that provides very basic, and as most flood victims attest, non-sufficient repair monies at times of disaster. Without flood insurance, the majority of repairs are on the owner. The federal SBA (Small Business Administration) offers low interest loans to disaster victims, so being a member community with an approved mitigation plan to provide flood insurance and disaster assistance is critical. After working several flood disasters, and seeing the bottom line of the federal and state share of the expenses, neither Mr. Fox nor Mr. Robak could come up with this sum for their decisions to build in a floodplain. These decisions which some are confusing as "property rights" would exclude us as a member community by building in a designated 100 year floodplain (or Zone A or AE). While I believe in property rights, I also believe in a community's choice to have an approved mitigation plan (which protects the 100 year floodplain from building) and thereby gain federal protections to property and life via flood insurance and disaster assistance.

After seeing a photograph of the Robak property, and observing the Fox construction, these buildings will eventually be underwater, no matter what type of external mitigation, if any is erected. Water finds its bottom, and the return interval in 2005 estimates for a 100 year event is now 27 years. Since our last major event was reportedly in the 1970’s (when the Bitterroot River topped West Main St.) we are due for historic flooding within 5 years, or at the outset 25 years. Within one generation, Mr. Robak’s house, and Mr. Fox’s construction project at riverbank level, are both within 100 yards of the natural channel and will be inundated. The next question is: what will be the impact of the septic, and the structure itself when it will be destroyed? Let’s hope Mr. Fox and Mr. Robak will consider demolishing their projects for the betterment of the community. As an example, the only allowed structure in a floodplain is a non-residential pavilion, or a hay barn type structure with no septic capabilities.

Unfortunately, these forays into the floodplain are examples of a county government that has problems communicating between departments. We lack the leadership of a county commission which refuses to hire a county planning director since June of this year. We have a county attorney who wishes to get the positive spin of helping the community, when in fact he has hurt it, and developed its reputation in the state that we now are labeled with. The real heroes are the state flood administrator, who has opened up investigations into these building situations, and once again, a county flood administrator, a true professional we are lucky to have working for us in Ravalli County.

We all love the river, and enjoy playing on it. If you have a million dollars to build a home on the river, hire a competent engineer or geologist to give you good advice on safe and legal building sites on your property. The days should be gone where money and property rights will get you what you want. Less land is available for building, let’s not jeopardize our protections like flood insurance and disaster relief to our community because we have wealthy individuals who have no idea what they are jeopardizing by building their dream homes within the floodplain. This is a community education issue, not a judicial one, or an individual one.

Michael Spreadbury, geologist
Hamilton

Take the Hamilton community survey

Dear Editor,

Hamilton Parks Users!

Birdwatchers, walkers, dog owners, fishermen, picnicers, wildflower lovers, swimmers, music lovers, parents or grandparents, disabled people -- if you enjoy using the parks in Hamilton, whether it is walking along the river and meadows of Hieronymus Park, among the cottonwood forest in River Park, listening to music in Legion Park or playing with your children or grandchildren in Claudia Driscoll Park – join me in letting the city know what you would wish for the parks in the future.

Visit www.cityofhamilton.net and click on “Survey” to go to the fast and easy Hamilton Community Survey, where many of the questions are about what the city parks should be like in the future.

The extended deadline is December 31, 2008 for you to take the survey. Tell your park-loving friends and co-workers too! You do not need to reside within the city limits to take the survey. Any information you give is confidential.

Dorinda Troutman, Member
Hamilton Park Board

Airport situation outrageous

Dear Editor,

This is the incredible saga of political chicanery, double cross, attempted secretive favoritism and serious questions about the honesty of the Ravalli County Board of Commissioners.

When the Federal Government came to town with the proposal to build a new and larger General Aviation Airport on the site of the existing Light Aircraft General Aviation Airport the County Commission accepted the proposal, appointed a Airport Advisory Board to design and develop the new airport in conjunction with the private contractor hired by the Federal Aviation Administration. Over the last decade the Airport Advisory Board has evolved into a collection of expansion proponents including pilots, aircraft owners, airport business owners and persons who own building on property leased from the County.

Over time the general public realized the Commission was intentionally being dishonest.  A very strong public outcry against airport expansion developed. The commission reacted by pulling a sleight of hand trick to mollify the voters. A resolution was passed avowing to obtain public approval prior to agreeing with the FAA to extend the existing airport runway. At the same time the commissioners and the airport community masked as the Airport Advisory Board were working with the Federal people to build a new runway and vastly expand the airport property, thereby complying with the commission resolution but at the same time double dealing the public without a single word  about their double cross of the taxpayer.

There is no defense for this chicanery. The cost of this trickery is tens of millions of tax dollars for the life of the very large and more expensive airport which cannot be justified. Tax money is still money whether it comes from the National Treasury or from the pockets of the residents of the State of Montana, or the residents of Ravalli County.

Technically several events had to take place. First the Airport Layout Plan had to be prepared and approved by the FAA contractor and the Airport Advisory Board and Commissioners. Second the Environmental Impact Review had to be prepared. Both of these events have transpired. All that remains is the release of millions of Federal and State dollars in the form of a grant to Ravalli County.

With the sealed deal in their pocket the Commissioners have scheduled a public meeting to officially notify the taxpayers of what has happened! If this scheme continues to the intended conclusion, here is an example of taxation without representation that is unparalleled.

Earl Pollard
Hamilton

What’s the real motivation?

Dear Editor,

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like every time some out of area money interest comes to the valley they seem to hire Dallas Erickson to carry their flag for them under some clever acronym. First it was Wal-mart and their battle against local opposition to a mega store.

Now he's fronting for developers under the guise of some sort of vague property rights group that is going to protect us by not allowing any local control or even say over growth and fighting against impact fees for these developments. Don't be fooled by the rhetoric; the story is always the same. Impact fees hurt growth, they only raise the price of houses or it's money that will just be wasted by the government.

What impact fees actually do is defray the real cost of development on the developers instead of letting the taxpayers pick of the cost of having to hire more police to deal with the increases in crime, building more or enlarging schools to handle the increased enrollments, building new water treatment facilities and increasing water pumping capacity, improving roads to handle the enormous volumes of traffic that will clog our valley (every house is a minimum of two cars on average).

This stuff, not to mention the degradation of the quality of life that will follow, will need to be paid for by someone, whether it be the people who profit from development or the taxpayers. I for one am getting tired of the privatization of profits and the socialization of costs that are so slickly hidden under clever names like Citizens for Property Rights.

Look carefully at who is running these groups and what their real motives are.

Mike Lulay
Hamilton

Voting on local issues IS local control

Dear Editor,

Mike Lulay seems to believe that to give the people a right to vote on an issue means one is "against" the issue.  He apparently thinks giving people the right to vote on whether businesses of any size can move into our valley or the right to vote on any zoning proposed is evil and underhanded.

The Ravalli Republic's headline on Monday indicated the paper's bias; that the petition to require a VOTE on any zoning was "anti-zoning".  I am sure many of my pro-zoning friends that signed the petition were surprised by that claim.

Our Founding Fathers must have been anti-something when they set up our national system of voting? How evil the right to vote is! I must repent for Lulay's sake. He says I am going to "prevent local control" by allowing the people to vote. The right to vote must really be evil, it takes away "local control or even say… " according to him. Lulay must have attended a prestigious school to come up with that logic.

Sorry, but the school I went to in Corvallis taught me that the right to vote WAS local control and even "say." It appears that a warning to Lulay "not to be fooled" is a little late.

He even thinks that developers pay impact fees. I don't imagine those fees are ever passed on to the home buyer! It sounds like he comes from the same school that really believes that corporations pay taxes. The facts are that people pay taxes and any tax on corporations is passed on in higher prices. At least that is what they taught us in Corvallis back in the 50s and early 60s. I would imagine (and hope) they are still teaching that.

In his last confusing statement he warns us to look out for the evil ones who want to give us the right to vote. The way he portrays those who want that right makes us sound much worse than Communists. Wasn't it the Communists and others who did NOT want the people to have the right to vote? I thought that is what they taught us in Corvallis (except for one teacher who taught that Communism was great).

In all his writings I would appreciate it if he would be honest, however. I have never been paid by Wal-Mart or CEO and the work to give the people the right to vote on zoning issues has basically been a donation of my time. I have actually spent my own money on these issues and I have done so with great pleasure in knowing that the people had and have the right to vote on them.  If that is evil I would suggest that either Lulay or I live in the wrong country.

Dallas D. Erickson
Stevensville

Thanks for assistance

Dear Editor,

Just a thank you to all the people that so graciously assisted me recently when my Mom got ill at Super 1. I really appreciated all the help and support from persons that I didn't know. To the lady that called 911, thank you. To the lady that took off her coat for Mom to lay on, thank you. To my friend Shanna Anderson for calling and setting up arrangements at the hospital and all the other people that helped, thank you. Most of all, thanks to Brad and Chrissy Lord and Terri Welch and her partner. People like these make Stevensville a wonderful place to live.

Nancy Lowell
Stevensville

Winners, thanks from Main Street

Dear Editor,

First Friday evening of  “A Montana Country Christmas” Gift Fair was great!  The lights, the buildings so beautifully decorated inside and out gave a special gift to all of the visitors that evening. Thank you to all of the participants in the Christmas Decorating Contest. The Design Committee of the Stevensville Main Street Association judged all of the entries and the winners of the 2008 Decorating Contest are: First Place Exterior Decoration – the Historic Stevensville Hotel, 2nd Place Exterior Decoration – Longhorn Trading Company and honorable mention for Exterior Decoration goes to the Stevensville Civic Club for the decoration of the Main Street of Stevensville with the new LED lights. For the Indoor Decorating Contest the winners are:  First Place Interior Decoration – Rocky Mountain Bank, 2nd Place – Olde Coffee Mill, Honorable Mention – Stevensville Driver’s License Bureau. Congratulations to everyone you all did such a wonderful job and the town looks great!  

Thank you to our panel of judges: Cinda Holt, Cindy Tharinger and Catherine Taylor.

Joan Prather, Director
Stevensville Main Street Association

©2008 Bitterroot Star
This site was Done By Dooney