A deal to sell 4.5 acres of Stevensville School District land to the Stevensville Community Center Complex for $279,000, a deal that was already approved once, on a 5 to 3 vote, at a previous meeting, fell apart last week when the school board split 4 to 4 on a motion to give final approval to an amended version of the sale. Following that, at a subsequent meeting of its own board, the Stevensville Community Center Complex has decided that it is not only through trying to deal with the school district over the potential purchase of the land, but will also seek to terminate the existing 99-year lease that it currently holds on the property.

According to School Board Chairman Jim Cloud, the board's previous decision to approve the sale on a 5 to 3 vote was determined to be invalid because it was not properly advertised. As a result, he told the board, the matter was being considered again for final approval.

Board member Bill Goslin kicked off the debate by stating that although he voted in favor of the sale last time, upon reconsideration he could not approve it again as written. He made some proposals for revising the deal. One was to make the note payable in 5 years, instead of the 10 years originally proposed. Another was to add a provision terminating the 99-year lease upon closing of the sale.

One member of the audience, Helen Rude, expressed strong opposition to the sale as well as to the existing lease. She said that it did not seem to benefit the school district. At first, she said, it seemed like a win/win situation, but now it seems more like some kind of shell game.

The existing lease, renegotiated about nine months ago when the original lease expired, gives the SCCC the use of the land for 99 years for the sum of $1. It also allows the SCCC to collect the rental payment from the ongoing rental of a house on the property.

In the face of continuing dissension over the legality of the lease and relative benefits to the school, it was decided to sell the land outright to the SCCC. The attempt to sell the property became as contentious as the lease, however.

School Board members Ed Cummings and Kirk Thompson, who voted against the sale at the first meeting along with Roger Bardsley, were the most outspoken opponents of the sale. They criticized the board for trying to sell the land without putting it before the electorate for a vote. They were adamant in their view that the law requires a public vote before a school district can sell any land.

Besides the legal requirement for a public vote, Thompson also complained about the language in the contract giving the school the right of first refusal should the SCCC, in the future, decide to sell the land to another party for some other purpose. He said that a right of first refusal must be exercised within 30 to 60 days, making such a right potentially useless for the school district because it cannot act that quickly.

"Instead of the land reverting to the school," said Thompson, "we are being given a right of first refusal that we cannot exercise." He was also critical of the price and payment agreement. The agreement required only $1,000 down with no payment structure, at a very low interest rate, while the SCCC possibly continued collecting the rental income from the property in the meantime.

Following some discussion, it was agreed to change the resolution of sale to reduce the payment time to 5 years and adding a provision terminating the lease upon closing. SCCC chairman Fred Thomas, who was present, said that his board would agree to the new terms, but would insist on leaving the language about the right of first refusal, although that wording would be abandoned once the building was constructed, he said.

Thompson was still critical of the deal, saying, "Nobody in their right mind would do this kind of deal on their own property."

Cummings agreed with Thompson, adding, "We are not deciding who has good hearts or not, our obligation is set out by statute. We have a fiduciary responsibility to look out for the interests of the school children." He criticized the board's process and suggested that a draft of the resolution be circulated and the final form hammered out in writing instead of having to reconstruct it later from audio tapes.

At this point SCCC Chairman Fred Thomas rose and said, "Sorry we bothered you with this. We're done. Officially. Absolutely. We are not going to talk to you again," whereupon he left the meeting. Thomas clarified after the meeting that it was not a rash decision made in anger on his part or some sort of knee jerk reaction. He said that the decision had been made by his board in advance that if one more road block was placed in the way of this sale, they were finished trying to work with the school.

Board members Cloud and trustee Marcia Babowicz expressed disappointment and embarrassment at the failure of the board to support the sale. Cloud said that nothing was being sprung on the board and that there had been plenty of time to review the changes proposed by Goslin.

"We've screwed them around for six years," said Babowicz. "We have been given a great opportunity, and done nothing but stand in their way."

SCCC board member Jan Perrin said that the only reason that the community complex was not any further along after eight years was that the school board could not make a decision.

"We accepted every change you requested," said Perrin. "We had a deal that would help you." But she, too, said that it was over.

Thompson said that there was no agenda on the part of the board members who voted no, other than to look out for the students and the taxpayers. He also said that it was not over because there was still the question of the 99-year lease. He said that the board had tried to skirt the law.

"When you want to sell land, you put it up to a vote," said Thompson.

Voting against the resolution of sale at the meeting were Thompson, Cummings, Bardsley and Cathi Cook. Voting for it were Wayne Stanford, Bill Goslin, Marcia Babowicz and Jim Cloud.

The next day, following a meeting of the SCCC board, SCCC Chairman Fred Thomas announced that the board had decided to seek termination of its 99-year lease with the school. The board also voted to return all funds to the school district that came to it through rental of the property while the lease was in effect.

"Not because it is legally required," said SCCC board member Tom Coston, "but because it's a good way to end things."

The SCCC board was unanimous in voting to make a clean sweep of things with the school district. The board members were in agreement that the continuing controversy in their dealings with the school has had a chilling effect on their fundraising efforts. One spoke of the group being "handcuffed" for years by the continuing criticism and controversy. All expressed relief at the prospect of terminating the lease and dropping what has become an exhaustive, depressing, and counterproductive attempt at partnership.

Board member Jan Perrin said it was too bad that things didn't work out with the school.

"But we need to be in a position to make some progress," said Perrin. "If we believed that things might be worked out in another month, it would be different. But we can only anticipate more problems."

She said that in the beginning the school board was totally behind the project. The school was going to share use of the music room, the theater and classrooms. Then it was decided not to, and things began to fall apart.

"But that was their decision, not ours," said Perrin. "Now the board is not behind us. At this point, it's better that we move on."

Moving on means, for the moment, taking stock of what they've got and reconsidering all their options.

The SCCC still owns the property on the corner of Park Street and Middle Burnt Fork Road. A scaled down project on that land would not necessarily require lease or ownership of the 4.5-acre adjoining tract owned by the school. It would require a new design and a rethinking of the plan. Or, the SCCC can consider relocating the project downtown, since there is no longer any compelling reason to be located next to the school.

Even if it is not with the school or next to the school, according to Perrin, it will still be designed to benefit the children in the community.

Stevi School Board votes to place two levies on the ballot

By Michael Howell

Trustees of the Stevensville School District, at their meeting of April 10, 2007, voted to place two maintenance/operational levies before the electorate on the May 8, 2007 ballot. That may change, however. Especially since the Governor subsequently signed Senate Bill 225 into law and it takes effect upon signing. That law, according to a letter to the school from Superintendent of Public Instruction Linda McCulloch, would extend the time frame that the school has for setting a levy.

The law gives school districts the flexibility to conduct separate 2007 school levy elections after the May 8, school trustee elections. A single general fund operating levy election may be scheduled prior to the adoption of the district's final budget.

According to Stevensville Superintendent Dennis Kimzey, this would give the trustees until Tuesday, July 3, to finally set the date and amount of its levy so that it could be adopted by Wednesday, August 15, the date of final budget adoption. Kimzey said that this new law will give the trustees the chance to know what the legislature is offering in terms of funding before finally setting the levy request. He said that, depending on the amount of state funding, the trustees may reconsider whether they need to set a levy at all.

"If there is a windfall increase in state funding," said Kimzey, "the board may reconsider whether to run a levy this year."

The levy amounts decided upon at the last meeting were $110,000 for the Elementary School (K-8), and $124,400 for the High School (9-12).

The Elementary School levy of $110,000 would be used to cover an additional sixth grade teacher at $35,000; textbooks for the elementary and junior high at $50,000, a half-time P.E. instructor for seventh and eighth grade at $17,500; and a Gifted and Talented instructor for $7,500.

The High School levy of $124,400 would fund an additional science/math teacher for $35,000; an English/reading teacher at $35,000; a half-time P.E. teacher at $17,500; and textbooks and microscopes at a cost of $36,900.

What will it cost?

An owner of a home with a taxable value of $150,000 would pay an increase in property taxes of $26.69 per year. Owner of a home of $200,000 in taxable value would see an increase of $35.59 per year. Owner of a home valued at $250,000 for tax purposes would see an increase of $44.48 in annual taxes.

St. Mary's Mission Opening Day celebration scheduled

By Michael Howell

Historic St. Mary's Mission will hold an Opening Day Celebration of Historic St. Mary's Mission on Friday, April 20. At 10 a.m., Mass will be celebrated in the Historic Chapel followed by a Flag Raising Ceremony by Stevensville FFA members, and dedication of the Father Anthony Ravalli Research Library in memory of Lucylle H. Evans. Following the ceremonies, brunch will be served by Mission Volunteers.

The opening is special this year because the dedication ceremony for the Fr. Ravalli Research Library will honor the memory of Lucylle H. Evans. A major portion of her life was devoted to the preservation, restoration, maintenance, and operation of the Historic Mission Complex. Many of the books in the library are from her private collection. As an author and historian, Evans was awarded membership in the International History Honorary Society. She was the recipient of an Honorary Doctorate from Carroll College in Helena.

Mrs. Evans was a life member of the Bitterroot Valley Historical Society and a Charter Member of the Stevensville Museum. Her academic background of journalism with particular interests in the fields of history and anthropology was the basis for the meticulous and outstanding research found in her published books. She spent ten years in the study, research, travel, and writing of the companion volumes, St. Mary's in the Rocky Mountains and Good Samaritan of the Northwest. Her research included a visit to Ferrara, Italy, the birthplace of Anthony Ravalli. Mrs. Evans also authored "The History of St. Mary's Mission in Stained Glass" and "The Indians Called Him Lolo."

The library houses an extensive number of historical books that contain interesting and valuable information about the late 1700's-1900's in the Rocky Mountains, Montana, Idaho, and Oregon. There is also a large collection of books about the Indians of the Northwest, ranging from novels, edited oral transcriptions, and historical texts to pictorial depictions. Another interesting group of books contain information about the history of medicine, doctors, medical remedies used by the Indians, and Fr. Ravalli's medical treatment of the Indians, miners, trappers, and local pioneers. Also, a number of somewhat rare and out-of-print books have been donated to the library.

County sued by condo developer

By Michael Howell

A condominium development company, called Big Sky Development Group, LLC, has filed two separate lawsuits over three different condominium developments recently proposed in the Eight-Mile area. Declarations of the three developments, which attorneys for the developer claim are exempt from subdivision review, were submitted for recording to Ravalli County Clerk and Recorder Regina Plettenberg in the middle of March. But they were returned to the developer on March 29 unrecorded, along with a memo from County Attorney George Corn explaining why. Corn said that the declarations were not recorded because they needed to be reviewed by the Planning Department to determine if they meet the statutory requirements for exemption from subdivision regulations.

The developer disagrees and has filed suit in Ravalli County District Court. The company is asking the judge to order the Clerk and Recorder to record the documents without Planning Department review. The developer claims that Plettenberg acknowledged that the condominium declarations were in compliance with the Unit Ownership Act but still refused to record them. This, they claim, is a violation of Montana law which states, "when a declaration is made and approved as required, it must, upon payment of the fees provided by law, be recorded by the recording officer." They claim that Plettenberg is trying to create additional barriers to recording condominium declarations than are justified in the law.

One of the lawsuits is over the filing of the Stonebridge and Sand Hill Ridge Condominiums in the Eight-Mile area. The Stonebridge proposal involves placing 234 units on 180 acres. The Sand Hill Ridge proposal would create 35 living units. The Fields Condominiums proposal, subject of a separate lawsuit by the same company, would create 68 condo units near Florence.

County establishes Streamside Setback Committee

By Michael Howell

Following a public hearing on April 12, the Ravalli County Commissioners voted unanimously to establish a Streamside Setback Committee to study the issue of setback regulations along the county's streams and river, compile the information, and make any some recommendation to the commissioners.

Public testimony at the hearing was overwhelmingly in favor of establishing the committee. There were a few objectors.

Most of the speakers endorsing establishment of the committee claimed that some regulations were needed to protect public assets such as clean water, fish and wildlife from the negative effects of private development. They also argued that a setback regulation would serve to protect unwitting property owners from building in unsafe places along streams and jeopardizing both their own property and the lives of emergency response personnel.

Objectors questioned the need for such a committee and any such regulations when other state laws and regulations addressing those issues are already in effect. Some, including County Commissioner Howard Lyons, considered any such regulations a potential threat to private property rights that should not even be considered on those grounds alone.

Speaking in favor of establishing a committee were several individuals and representatives of many valley organizations including the Bitterroot Chapter of Trout Unlimited, the Bitterroot River Protection Association, Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association, and Friends of the Bitterroot. Most emphasized that fish and wildlife interests seemed to be underrepresented on the committee as proposed. They urged the commissioners to place some representatives of those interests on the committee.

Ray Karr, President of the North Valley Pacaderm Club and an executive member of the board of the Bitterroot River Protection Association, said that he was speaking as an individual and questioned the need for the committee.

"I don't see the need very clearly for streamside setbacks," said Karr. He said that the Bitterroot Conservation District enforcing 310 Law and the Army Corps of Engineers enforcing federal regulations provided protection along the streams and river. He also questioned the cost of implementing any kind of streamside setback regulation.

Carl Fox, a property owner from the Lick Creek area near Darby, suggested that going to individual property owners and getting easements would be cheaper, in the long run, than litigating any new regulations.

Eddie Olwell, a fishing outfitter and president of the Bitterroot Chapter of Trout Unlimited (BTU), told the commissioners that the future of his business and many others in the valley was at stake in these considerations. He said that preserving the natural values of clean water, good fisheries and healthy wildlife would preserve the real estate values as well. He said that 3 out of 4 newcomers to the valley list outdoor values as one of their prime reasons for moving here. He said that besides the economic considerations there were cultural and historical issues at stake as well. BTU member Doug Nation pointed out that the 310 Law only covers work in the streambed up to the high water mark, it does not control where a building is placed in proximity to the stream. Flood Plain regulations, he said, apply along the river but not on any streams in the valley. He said that a streamside setback regulation was needed.

Many of the people speaking in favor of establishing the committee spoke in favor of including a member from Trout Unlimited and Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife. Several also endorsed placing Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks fisheries biologist Chris Clancy on the committee.

Commissioner Alan Thompson stated that he was in support of establishing the committee.

"I don't think anybody would want houses right on the river that could harm citizens if flooded," said Thompson. He alluded to an actual incident he was aware of in which the river changed course and flowed right through someone's living room. "This committee will give us reasonable information that we can discuss, develop, reject, or accept, but we need that information. Without a committee set up, how do we get that information?" he said.

Commissioner Howard Lyons steadfastly reiterated throughout the proceedings that he could not sign off on establishing a committee. Upon questioning by other commissioners he could offer no amendments to the proposition that would make it palatable.

"It sounds like people can walk up and down on private property," said Lyons. "There are other ways we can go about these things without just taking their property away. I can't sign this."

"I'd like to understand your reasons," said Commission Chairman Greg Chilcott. He stated that at this meeting they were just considering setting up an advisory committee to study the matter, not approving any regulations. "How would you amend it?" he asked Lyons.

"I'm not even going there," said Lyons. He insisted that he was not going along with it because it was "changing private property rights into community rights."

Chilcott insisted that it wasn't changing anybody's rights, but just setting up a committee.

"Is there some way we can take the objectionable part out of this resolution and amend it so you are comfortable with it, or is that out of the question," asked Chilcott.

"It's pretty much out of the question," quipped Lyons. He said that no people on the committee really had irons in the fire.

Chilcott said that there were no people on this committee yet, that they were simply considering whether to establish a committee or not and if they did people would be appointed later.

Chilcott and Thompson agreed to remove one "whereas" clause from the resolution and made one other minor changes before voting on the motion.

In the end, Lyons voted along with Chilcott and Thompson, to establish the committee.

"What you said clears up a lot of concerns I have," said Lyons.

Anyone interested in serving on the committee, which will be made up of 17 voting members with the Flood Plain Administrator serving as an 18th ex-officio member, can visit the internet site: www.ravallicounty.mt.gov/planning/documents/SSCOpenPositionAnnouncement or contact the Ravalli County Planning Department, 215 S. 4th St., Suite F, Hamilton MT 59840; phone 375-6530.

UM President promotes higher education in the Bitterroot

By Michael Howell

University of Montana President George Dennison was in Hamilton last week to talk with local civic organizations about the UM College of Technology. He spoke to the Lions Club on Tuesday and the Kiwanis Club on Wednesday.

He told members of the Lions Club that the biggest problem with higher education in Montana today was affordability. Dennison, who has been serving as UM President since 1990, said that for a long time tuition costs have been going up while state funding has been going down. He said that the College Affordability Program currently making its way through the legislature could help immensely in reducing the costs of higher education for in-state students. He said that a student who qualified for a Pell Grant could, through additional grants and documented community service in both high school and college, reduce the cost of tuition to zero.

Dennison said that Montana had one of the highest rates of high school graduation in the country, but one of the lowest when it came to going on to college. According to Dennison, only 50 percent of Montana high school graduates continue on to college. He thinks the cost has a lot to do with that statistic. He said it costs the average student about $11,300 per year for tuition, fees, room and board, and books.

"That's one third of the median income in the state," he said.

He said that one way of addressing this problem and trying to provide affordable higher education in the Bitterroot has been the UM College of Technology.

"We've been trying to extend it to the Bitterroot," said Dennison, "but we haven't been very successful."

Last summer, he said, the university developed a proposal to put a branch campus of the UM COT in Hamilton at a cost of $5 million, but the state didn't fund it. The push is still on, according to Senator Rick Laible, to come up with the required funding.

As it is, without a facility, the UM COT has already begun offering courses in the Bitterroot, according to Dennison. He noted that 25 people were participating in the lab tech training being offered here and said that other courses would be offered this summer in writing and math.

"And then, whatever is in demand," he said.

He said that after extensive discussions with the high schools, the university was offering dual credit courses in math and writing to valley high school students. He also noted that the university recently started offering lifelong learning courses along with the Osher Foundation at the Daly Mansion, which the university now owns.

As far as the possibility of establishing a Bitterroot Community College, an issue on the upcoming ballot, Dennison said, "That is an issue you all must decide for yourselves." He cautioned that if the voters chose such an option it would be "a long process from initiation to accreditation." He did say, however, that the university would be willing to help out if the thing goes forward and provide "parent accreditation" while the new institution achieves its own.

"In the meantime," he said, "work on the COT will go forward."

In response to questions from the audience, Dennison said that a COT and a community college, despite different funding mechanisms, were not totally different animals. He said that every COT, if successful, eventually begins to offer other kinds of courses besides vocational, technical training. The UM COT is a good example. It offers a variety of higher education courses with transferable credits. It is a potential entranceway for some students to a regular academic degree. It's just as sure, he said, that a community college, although academically oriented in the beginning, if successful, will eventually offer vocational, technical training as well.

Dennison noted that COTs are funded by tuition and by the state. No additional funding is required of the local taxpayers beyond the 6 mills that are already being assessed for the university system.

Community colleges, on the other hand, require local taxpayers to foot 25 percent of the cost, over and above the contribution they already make to the state university system, which foots 50 percent of the community college costs. The remaining 25 percent of the cost of a community college is raised through tuition.

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