At the top of the list of news events in the last year related to growth and development would be the passage by voters of the Interim Zoning Initiative in the November elections. The emergency measure limits development in the county for a one year period to one dwelling per two acres and requires the County Commissioners to enact county-wide zoning regulations within the year. That timeline may be extended for a second year by the Commissioners if they fail to enact the zoning regulations in the first year.

The Interim Zoning Initiative was designed by Phil Taylor of Victor and supported by the local organization Bitterrooters for Planning in response to what they perceived as rampant, uncontrolled development in the state's fastest growing county. It was billed as an emergency measure designed to protect public health, safety, and welfare by forcing officials to address the impacts of development on police protection, ground water and surface water quality and quantity, and infrastructure demands beyond the capability of the county government, school and fire districts.

Efforts towards placing the petition on the ballot were bolstered by an earlier memorandum from County Attorney George Corn advising the Commissioners that, in his opinion, an emergency situation did exist related to public health and safety that could justify the enactment of emergency zoning measures.

At first, the initiative petition called for a temporary limit on subdivisions of one dwelling per 40 acres. This limit was then quickly amended to the one dwelling per two acres that gave the initiative its nickname of the "one for two" ballot measure. Petitioners were required to gather at least 4,327 signatures of registered voters, or 15 percent of the voters in the previous election. They were successful in gathering over 5,300 signatures by mid-August.

In September the Bitterroot Valley Board of Realtors filed a lawsuit in District Court aimed at stopping the measure from being placed on the November 7 ballot. The Board of Realtors claimed in the lawsuit that there was a technical violation of the legal timelines involved in the petitioning process and that signatures were illegally gathered, among other things. Although Ravalli County District Court Judge Jeffrey Langton did issue a temporary restraining order while he reviewed the case, following oral arguments he quickly rendered a decision in favor of the petitioners and denied the Realtors' request for a permanent injunction, clearing the way for the measure to be placed on the ballot.

Voters approved the measure at the polls by a vote of 8,072 to 7,029.

Controversy over how it would affect subdivisions already in the application process followed immediately. But County Attorney George Corn subsequently clarified the matter in December when he advised that any subdivision not already conditionally approved by the Commissioners must now comply with the one dwelling per 2 acre density restrictions of the newly passed emergency zoning measure.

Bitterrooters for Planning Action Committee has filed complaints with the Commissioner of Political Practices against the Bitterroot Builders Association, the Residents for Responsible Land Use, and the Bitterroot Valley Board of Realtors for violating state campaign finance laws in their failed attempts to defeat the ballot at the polls. They charge the groups with not properly naming or representing themselves when registering with the state. The Commissioner of Political Practices will be investigating the charges.

Aspen Springs Subdivision denied

Also near the top of our list of significant news events associated with growth and development would have to be the long, drawn out review of the largest subdivision ever proposed in Ravalli County and its ultimate denial by the County Commissioners.

The Aspen Springs Subdivision, proposed by Perry Ashby of Wesmont Builders and WGM Group, would have involved the construction of 671 dwelling units and seven commercial units on 393 acres at the top of Lower Woodchuck Lane in the Eight Mile area east of Florence. The plan called for the subdivision to be constructed in 33 phases over a 10- to 20-year period and would have added an estimated 5,200 vehicle trips to the access road. The developer asked for eight variances from the subdivision regulations to accommodate the project. The developers billed the project as a "Smart Growth Community" with clustered housing at affordable prices.

Opposition to the subdivision proposal was intense and well organized. Neighbors to the project area quickly organized the Coalition of Citizens Against Aspen Springs and were aided in their efforts by the valley wide organization Bitterrooters for Planning. They expressed concerns about potential pollution, lack of water, density, and the drain on already overstressed public services. Ravalli County Sheriff Chris Hoffman and Florence-Carlton School District Superintendent John McGee expressed deep concern about the potential negative impact of the subdivision on the sheriff's department and the school. A petition containing the signatures of over 600 residents opposed to the development was also submitted.

Public attendance at the subdivision hearings was overwhelming and resulted in a series of meetings to accommodate all who wanted to comment. The first was held in Hamilton on July 5 and continued in Florence on July 12. A third was held on July 17 at the Fairgrounds in Hamilton and a fourth meeting was held on July 24. The Planning Board finally voted 7 to 1 to recommend denial of the subdivision based upon its unmitigated effects on local services and public health and safety.

When the County Commissioners considered the proposal in August, however, it was determined that new and relevant information had been received and the matter was sent back to the Planning Board for further review. As a result the Planning Board considered the proposal again on September 27 but did not change the recommendation. Finally, after a grueling seven-hour-long meeting on October 16, a last minute plea by the developer for an extension was denied and the Commissioners denied the subdivision on a 2 to 1 vote with Commissioner Betty Lund casting the dissenting vote. In November, Wesmont Developers filed a lawsuit in District Court contesting the Commissioners' decision.

Voters opt to change county government

Another result of the November elections to make our list of top stories was the voters' decision to increase the number of county commissioners from three to five and reduce the term lengths served from six years to four years. Placed on the ballot by the Local Government Review Study Commission, the measures, since being adopted, have created quite a stir.

The vote to increase the number of commissioners from 3 to 5 passed by a wide margin with 10,848 voters approving the measure while 6,670 voted against it. The voters overwhelming approved the reduction in term lengths from six to four years by a vote of 13,832 approving the shorter terms and only 3,823 voting against.

Primary elections are scheduled for April with the final election to be held in June.

Generating the most discussion following passage of the measures is the interpretation by the Local Government Review Study Commission, backed by the County Attorney's office, that it would require the two sitting commissioners with unfinished terms (Greg Chilcott and Alan Thompson) as well as the newly elected commissioner (Howard Lyons) to run for office again if they wish to serve on the newly mandated five-member board.

All three of the aforementioned have expressed disagreement with the notion that they should have to run for office again. They all claimed to be ignorant of the fact that the Local Government Review Study Commission failed to allow for sitting commissioners to be transferred to the new five-member board. They argue that the public was not fully or properly informed about that aspect of the transition. A group of 10 citizens has filed for a judicial review of the matter in Ravalli County District Court. They claim that Ravalli County voters never adopted the Commission Government form which would allow for the option of more than three commissioners and terms less than six years.

'Big Box' ordinance repealed

Another significant result of the last elections is the repeal of the so-called "Big Box" Ordinance. That ordinance, which limited the size of large retail stores to 60,000 square feet and sets design standards for establishments between 25,000 and 60,000 square feet, was passed by the County Commissioners last April following a jam-packed meeting with over 1,000 people in attendance. A group led by Dallas Erickson, called Citizens for Economic Opportunity, and funded almost entirely by Wal-Mart, then sponsored a petition campaign to place repeal of the ordinance on the November ballot. Wal-Mart funded the petition effort to the tune of $40,000 and before the election was over had funneled over $100,000 into efforts to repeal the ordinance.

Their efforts were successful, with 7,832 voting to repeal the measure and 7,324 voting to keep the ordinance.

The Bitterroot Good Neighbors Coalition, which helped campaign for the ordinance, filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Political Practices accusing CEO of violating campaign laws by not identifying Wal-Mart as its primary contributor.

Open Lands Bond passed

Also worth mentioning in the election results is the passage of a $10 million open lands bond designed to protect open space and agricultural land in the valley. The money will be used for purchase of development rights on agricultural land, to finance the placement of conservation easements on some lands, and, in certain circumstances, allow outright purchase of the lands by the county.

The Right to Farm and Ranch Committee and the Bitterroot Land Trust were instrumental in getting the county commissioners to place the issue on the November ballot. They used information from a study that showed since 1980, 40,000 acres of agricultural land has been lost to development and another 40,000 was projected to be lost by the year 2020. It also showed the average parcel of land in the valley is 16.74 acres.

The $10 million bond issue was passed by a vote of 10,032 to 7321.

Middle East Fork Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project gets federal court approval

The first project in Montana to be implemented under the Healthy Forest Resoration Act, the Middle East Fork Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project, was approved by Bitterroot National Forest Supervisor Dave Bull on the last day of March. However, that decision was immediately appealed to federal court by Friends of the Bitterroot and the WildWest Institute, two local conservation groups. That court battle, though not completely over, reached a milestone in December when U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy finally approved the project, rejecting every claim made by the environmental groups.

The project, which covers about 5,000 acres in the Sula area, was designed to reduce wildland fire threats to the Middle East Fork community and to treat the effects of a massive Douglas fir bark beetle infestation in the area.

Although Molloy originally granted a temporary restraining order in the case, he declined to extend that order once it expired, based upon his determination that the groups did not have a fair chance of succeeding on the merits of the case. As a result, work on the Spring Mink Stewardship Project began before any final decision was made.

The groups filed their lawsuit in May, alleging both procedural and substantive violations of the law. They claimed that the public was thwarted in participating in the decision making process, that implementation was begun and money spent on marking trees even before a decision was made to approve the project, and that environmental laws including NEPA, NIFMA, and the Clean Water Act were violated by the decision.

Ravalli County joined the case as an intervenor on the side of the U.S. Forest Service. County Attorney George Corn argued that failure to go through with the project would endanger the lives of Ravalli County residents who live along the Middle East Fork with only a single road in and out of the area.

In his final order, issued in December, Molloy sided with the Forest Service. He rejected every claim made by the environmental groups and castigated them for ignoring the record and and providing little or no citation to the record or to legal authority in their lawsuit.

The environmental groups are considering an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Judge finds Mitchell Slough not a natural stream

In a case that could revamp our understanding of the state's Stream Access Law and the Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act (310 Law), District Court Judge Ted Mizner ruled last January that Mitchell Slough, a 13-mile-long historic side channel the Bitterroot River winding from Corvallis to Stevensville, was "no longer natural" and thus not subject to either the 310 Law or the Stream Access Law.

The case began back in October of 2003 when the Bitterroot Conservation District ruled that Mitchell Slough was not subject to the 310 Law. That law was designed to protect "natural perennial flowing" streams from degradation by regulating and permitting private activity on the bed and banks.

The Bitterroot River Protection Association filed a lawsuit challenging that decision and also asked the County Commissioners to grant a "portage route" into the slough for fishermen to use.

Landowners along the slough soon joined the lawsuit on the side of the Conservation District and also argued that the waterway, being a ditch, was not subject to the Stream Access Law either. The state Farm Bureau also joined the lawsuit arguing that it would allow access to ditches across the state if fishermen were allowed into the slough.

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, which consistently over the years has considered Mitchell Slough a part of the river and accessible under the law, has also joined the lawsuit on the side of BRPA.

Although Judge Mizner agreed in his ruling that Mitchell Slough was historically a side channel of the river, and thus not a manmade ditch, he reasoned that enough changes had been made to the waterway that it could no longer be considered "natural."

BRPA and FWP have appealed Mizner's ruling to the Montana Supreme Court. They argue that no amount of work in or upon a streambed can change it from being a natural stream and remove it from protection under the act. Montana Trout Unlimited and a separate coalition of 13 sportsmen's groups from around the state have filed 'friend of the court' briefs in the case defending the position of BRPA and MFWP.

The case is ongoing.

Fires of 2006

The 2006 fire season was nothing like the Fires of 2000. But it could have been! Except for the watchful eyes and quick responses of Bitterroot Valley citizens and fire officials. While most forest fires are set by lightning, and some are set by accident, they are usually not set on purpose. But in this case, many of the fires started in the Bitterroot and elsewhere in the region, were not only human caused, but caused by the same man: Jonah Warr.

It was Warr who started the Gash Creek fire, one of the largest fires of the summer. It burned close to 8,500 acres in the forest west of Victor and resisted firefighting efforts until end of the season weather events conspired to put it out.

Warr was also responsible for starting other fires in the north valley and, following an investigation that led special agents from the U.S. Forest Service to his door, eventually confessed to starting 19 fires during the months of July and August.

Agents were able to connect Warr to the fires by following up leads given by citizens that placed the man's vehicle, as well as one owned by his father, in the area of some local fires, about the time that they were reported. Tire tracks left at the scene of one of the fire starts matched those from the tires on Warr's Dodge.

Warr eventually confessed to setting 19 of the fires and led investigators to the site of each fire he had started and explained how he set them. He faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each offense. His sentencing is scheduled for March 22.

Hamilton City Councilor Bob Scott a survivor

Hamilton City Councilor Bob Scott survived being expelled from the City Council by suing the city over it and getting reinstated. He survived misdemeanor assault charges by proving his innocence in court. And he survived a subsequent recall election by two votes.

Scott was expelled from his seat as a councilor from Ward 2 at the last scheduled meeting of 2005, when three other councilors voted him off the Council, charging him with official misconduct. Scott and the Bitterroot Human Rights Alliance sued the city over the action, claiming that Scott's right to due process was violated. By March of 2006, however, Scott was reinstated as the result of a settlement agreement that included reimbursement for his legal expenses.

On January 30, 2006, charges were filed in Hamilton City Court accusing Scott of misdemeanor assault. Scott was accused of assaulting Public Works employee Chris Taggert-Cobb at a committee meeting by pushing down on a book in her lap and causing pain in her leg. Scott denied the accusation and argued that the incident was being distorted and magnified to aid efforts at expelling him and were politically motivated. Following a two-day trial, a jury acquitted Scott of the charges.

Then, in June, an effort was begun to recall Scott. A petition was circulated to place the matter on the ballot and the recall drive was spearheaded by Carol Schwan. The basis of the recall was an alleged false claim submitted by Scott for reimbursement of funds used for traveling to a seminar sponsored by the Local Government Center in Billings. The petition claimed that Scott's request for reimbursement of $152.25 for gas was illegal since he traveled there with another councilor in the other councilor's vehicle. Scott withdrew his request following objections from a councilor and never received any money.

Scott survived the recall election by a vote of 152 to 150.

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2006 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney