Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Obama, gave a rousing speech to an enthusiastic crowd of approximately 8000 at the University of Montana Adams Center on Saturday morning April 5.

Missoula Mayor John Engen opened the Obama rally with his personal endorsement. He told the crowd, “I’m supporting [him] because he’s “smart, honest, decent, compassionate, thoughtful... tough, wise humble and human. Why, folks, he could be a Missoulian.”

Obama took the stage, and shouted, ‘Hello, Missoula,’ followed by, “You guys got it good here. I’ve gotta get me some flyfishin’ gear, waders--you know--and clear my head.”

In distinguishing himself from the other two candidates still in the race, Obama said that his White House would not be beholden to special interests. “I am the only candidate that has not taken money from PACs (political action committees) or paid lobbyists.” He indicated that his campaign revenues were raised largely by “$10, $20, $30 and $50 contributions from over 1 million people.”

His main theme of ‘hope’ and ‘change’ is premised on the concept that when there is great need, “ordinary people are capable of doing extraordinary things.”

“There is a moment in every generation where we push aside the things that divide us. We decide to roll up our sleeves and make change.” He stressed, “This is our moment-- our time. If you are willing to help, we won’t just win Montana, we’ll win this nomination and the general election - we’ll transform this country and the world.”

Obama brought the house to its feet when he proclaimed that the great changes in this country–the American Revolution declared against the mighty British Empire, the end of slavery, the pioneer movement west, the civil rights movement, the women’s right to vote, the worker’s rights to organize—“all came about because people dared to imagine, and to strive for change from what did not seem possible before.”

He said the war in Iraq was “unwise,” and he would “bring it to an end.”

As to who should be elected to “answer the call[s] at three o’clock in the morning,” he said it should be someone with good judgment. He opposed the war from the beginning. Unlike his opponents, he said, “I’ll stack my good judgment against the other two candidates’ judgment, and they made the wrong choice.”

His foreign policy changes would include ending “the mindset that got us into war. I want to break the fever of fear that has dominated our politics. I’m tired of seeing 9-11 used as a way to scare up votes instead of bringing people together.”

Obama promised, “to meet not with just our friends but also with our enemies.” He reminded the audience that John F. Kennedy said that, “we should never negotiate out of fear; but, we should never be afraid to negotiate.”

He said his presidency would restore a respect for civil rights. He proclaimed, “You’ll have a president who has taught the Constitution, who believes in the Constitution and who will obey the Constitution of America.” He promised to “close Guantanamo and restore habeas corpus.”

The main problems that he believes America faces include the war in Iraq, broken health care and education systems, an economy in shambles and a planet in trouble from global warming.

“In such circumstances, we can’t wait,” he thundered. “We can’t afford to wait to fix our schools, to fix our health care system, to fix this economy and provide good jobs and wages, to roll back global warming, and to end this war in Iraq.”

He went on to say that is what Doctor King called, “The fierce urgency of now.”

The health care system he said was “broken,” because 47 million people remain uncovered by any health insurance.

Obama placed responsibility for this situation on both Democratic and Republican administrations, squarely as a result of the multi-billion dollar heath care and pharmaceutical industries.

He emphasized that over the last 10 years these giant corporations have spent $1 billion dollars lobbying to prevent major changes that would benefit ordinary Americans.

As to US energy policy, he said, “We spend $1 billion a day because of our addiction to foreign oil.” And, the problem drags on without a viable strategy for change.

He added that President Bush tried to solve the problem by putting Vice President Cheney in charge. “Cheney met with environmental groups one time, with renewable energy groups one time and with oil and gas folks—40 times. Is it any wonder then that energy policy is good for Exxon-Mobile and not so good for you?”

“Our economy is in shambles,” as evidenced by 80,000 lost jobs lost in 2008. He said that while incomes and wages have not gone up over the last seven years, the average real income of average working Americans was actually down.

Regarding the US education system, he said that if “we can spend $10 billion dollars a month for the war in Iraq,” we can spend money here in Missoula, Montana for our schools, students and teacher pay raises.

He received loud cheers when he said, “I want to make college affordable for every student.” He said his plan would provide $4000 tuition each year and in return, students will be required to provide public service, such as working at homeless shelters.

As to the environment, he said there does not have to be “a contradiction between good environmental policy and good economic policy. If we cap greenhouse gasses, we can reinvest the savings in developing clean energy and thereby generate millions of jobs in the ‘green energy’ sector.”

He admitted that change would require a present sacrifice. But, he added, “That’s what Americans do, we sacrifice for the next generation. That’s how we built this country.”

Flood insurance, anyone?

By Greg Lemon

The Ravalli County Floodplain Administrator wants people to start thinking about flood insurance.

“Anyone that’s living in an area that’s near surface water or perennially flowing (streams) or even intermittent streams, I recommend getting flood insurance,” Laura Hendrix said.

As floodplain administrator, Hendrix is familiar with how water can affect the landscape and private property, but she’s concerned too many people are living without the proper insurance.

“Your typical homeowner insurance policy does not include flood insurance,” she said.

This year, her concern is highlighted by a healthy mountain snowpack.

The Bitterroot River basin continues to have above normal snowpack and though this could mean healthy river flows throughout the summer, it also means people should be aware of stream levels and potential flooding this spring.

Most people don’t think about buying flood insurance until the water is rising, but then it’s too late, said Hendrix.

About 110 homes in the Ravalli County have flood insurance policies, she said, though the number fluctuates during the year.

The snowpack in the Bitterroot River Basin is currently about 120 percent of normal and nearly 170 percent of last year’s snowpack, said Roy Kaiser, Natural Resources Conservation Service water supply specialist.

The snowpack in the basin increased by 4 percent during March, and the snow is continuing to fall, Kaiser said.

“We’re going into (spring) in good shape right now,” he said.

But the crucial question is how quickly will the snow melt once temperatures warm over the next several weeks.

In 2006, the Bitterroot River basin had above normal snowpack, but hot temperatures in May quickly melted the mountain snow and the left very little water to carry through the summer, he said.

The snowpack will remain stable as long as nighttime temperatures are below freezing. Runoff typically starts slowly in mid-April and peaks by mid-May, said Peter Felsch, warning coordination meteorologist at the National Weather Service in Missoula.

Flooding becomes a concern when warm nighttime temperatures in the high elevations are accompanied by spring rain, Felsch said. This is the recipe for rapidly rising stream and river levels and potential flooding.

Floods are often a misunderstood topic, Hendrix said.

The special flood hazard area, or what is commonly known as the floodplain, is only mapped on the mainstem of the Bitterroot River and its east and west forks. The area is generally considered the 100-year floodplain, she said.

A 100-year flood is a flood that has a 1 percent chance of occurring on any given year. In contrast, a five-year flood has a 20 percent chance of occurring each year, Hendrix said.

The Bitterroot River in Ravalli County has never recorded a 100-year flood event, she said. The river gauge she relies most on is in the Bitterroot River near Darby and has been recording river levels since the late 1930s.

The largest volume of water ever recorded at the Darby gauge was 11,100 cubic feet per second in 1974, Hendrix said.

For reference, during high water in 2006, the Darby gauge reported 8,200 cfs. That year, flooding was reported at a few places throughout the valley.

“You could be at flood levels, but still only have a five-year event,” Hendrix said.

A 100-year flood event would raise Bitterroot River levels to 20,000 to 21,000 cfs at Hamilton, she said. Currently, the river level at Hamilton is about 400 cfs.

Flooding is not only a concern on the Bitterroot River, but also the smaller streams in the county. None of these smaller streams have their floodplains mapped, so people may be living in a flood-prone area and not know it, she said.

That’s why Hendrix recommends people look into flood insurance.

Any home insurance provider can write a flood insurance policy, which is a policy backed by the federal government, said Bob Tvedt of Farmers Insurance in Hamilton.

Flood insurance policies aren’t that common in the Bitterroot, unless someone is building or buying a home in the floodplain, he said. If people buy or build in these areas and have a federally backed mortgage, then they’re typically required to have flood insurance.

Flood insurance premiums depend on the location of the home and the limits of the insurance. People can buy flood insurance for structural damage to the home and to cover the home’s contents, Tvedt said.

If you’re thinking about flood insurance, Hendrix recommends doing it soon. Flood insurance policies won’t go into effect for 30 days after they’re purchased, she said.

“I don’t think people understand just how great the risk is,” she said.

For instance, a home built within the floodplain has a 26 percent chance of flooding during the life of a 30-year mortgage. It has only a 4 percent chance of being destroyed by a fire, Hendrix said.

If you’re concerned about the snowpack, summer stream flows and flooding, May will be the month to be a weather watcher, Felsch said.

Snowpack typically peaks in the second week of April, he said. After that runoff begins to pick up. On a normal year, the Bitterroot River hits peak flow in mid-May.

Peak flow essentially means that all the low-elevation and exposed mountain snow has melted, Felsch said. The remaining snow generally melts by the end of June.

The Bitterroot Mountains can attribute this year’s snowpack to a La Niña weather pattern, which has focused the winter jet stream over the Northern Rockies, he said. However, the La Niña appears to be weakening, which is typical.

“Once you work your way into spring the La Niña signal tends to weaken,” Felsch said.

But the outlook for the next two weeks is more unstable and cool weather, he said. The only deviation in that prediction is warmer weather this coming weekend. The coming high-pressure system could push temperatures up to 60 degrees in the valley, but with little cloud cover, temperatures should drop below freezing each night, Felsch said.

Next week, temperatures should drop again as another trough of low-pressure moves into the region.

But for all the prediction and speculation, no one knows how May will affect snowpack and stream levels, he said. May and June are the rainy months in western Montana, but how the snowpack will respond is anyone’s guess.

For information about flood insurance, Hendrix points people to the Web site: floodsmart.gov.

St. Mary’s Mission to open for season

By Greg Lemon

The winds blow off the snow-crested peaks of the Bitterroot Mountains, much like they did in the spring of 1841, but many other things have changed since Montana’s first white settlement was established near Stevensville.

But through the changes, historic St. Mary’s Mission as stayed much the same.

The mission is opening its doors to another season on April 15, with a day of activities celebrating its history and tradition.

It was 1841 when a Jesuit priest, the Rev. Pierre-Jean DeSmet, established the mission to minister to the Salish Indians who called the Bitterroot Valley home.

DeSmet came to the Bitterroot after members of the Salish tribe traveled to St. Louis to ask the Jesuits to come and share with them the Christian faith, said Colleen Meyer, director of St. Mary’s Mission. The Salish had learned about Christianity from Iroquois Indians, who worked as trappers in the area.

St. Mary’s was the first Christian mission in the Northwest and the birthplace of Montana, said Meyer.

In 1846, the Rev. Anthony Ravalli came to St. Mary’s Mission and he became not only the namesake of the county, but one of the most revered figures to live at the mission.

Ravalli was a skilled carpenter, physician and apothecary, Meyer said. Many articles of furniture he created are still at the mission and visitors can see his original cabin and medical shop.

The opening day celebration will begin at 10 a.m. with Mass in the mission’s historic chapel.

Mass in the chapel, which was built in 1866, is a special occasion, said the Rev. Mike Smith.

“It is always a great honor to say Mass there,” Smith said.

The Catholic Church stopped celebrating regular Mass at the chapel in the 1950s, he said. But the history of the holy building is still felt and revered.

The men who served at the mission and celebrated Mass in the tiny chapel championed the Christian faith in the Bitterroot Valley and the Northwest.

“To be part of that and keep that history alive is always a great honor,” Smith said.

It is also special to celebrate what the mission meant to the settlement of Montana, the Bitterroot Valley and Stevensville.

“It’s from the mission that the town grew,” he said.

The Mass is open to the public, Meyer said.

Following Mass, the Stevensville Future Farmers of America chapter will have a flag raising ceremony, which will be followed by brunch and tours of the mission, she said.

Visitors can walk the grounds, tour the historic buildings and see the cemetery, where Ravalli was buried in 1884.

The mission also has a museum celebrating the Salish Indians and the history of the mission complex. New to the museum this year is a Bible discovered in Missoula and donated to the mission.

The Bible was published in 1843 and was used at the mission, Meyer said.

“It’s a real thrill when people bring things to us that belong here,” she said.

More than anything, the opening of the mission is a spiritual event every year. It’s a way to honor the history of the valley – the people who lived here long ago and brought with them the traditions that last today.

“I think we can never, ever lose sight of those roots of our Christian faith in the Bitterroot Valley and the whole Northwest,” Smith said.

City inventories water rights

By Michael Howell

Following a ten-month long investigation, Missoula attorney Ross Miller has submitted an inventory of the City of Hamilton’s water rights, including an analysis of the total of the rights currently in use and the unused portions of these rights available for future growth. He also cautions the city about potential legal problems involved in protecting those rights, especially the portions of those rights which are currently unused, but which the City desires to be held in reserve for future growth.

Complicating the status of the City’s water rights is the fact that over time the city has used more water from some of its wells than is actually claimed in the water rights associated with them. As the Montana Water Court’s adjudication process moves forward, the City may find its use of that water trimmed back to what was actually claimed in the rights.

On the other hand, some of the wells have recorded rights to more water than has historically been used. Although Montana’s abandonment statute has been amended to provide some measure of protection for municipal water rights against abandonment of unused portions of existing claimed rights, this protection may possibly be lost if the water right were to be changed, such as a change in point of diversion from one well to another. The risk of loss of the unused portion of a water right is due to the wording of a Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) administrative rule.

As an example, Miller points to a case involving the recent denial of a request by Mountain Water Company of Missoula to retain the unused portion of existing water rights for the city of Missoula. The company was seeking a change in water rights in order to add some new wells. As a result, Miller recommends that the City of Hamilton thoroughly evaluate the implications any change may have on its underlying water rights prior to initiating any change. These changes may be contemplated with respect to prospective annexations into the city.

According to Miller’s report, the City has a total claimed or permitted flow rate from its existing well field of 4,375 gallons per minute. It has a total claimed or permitted volume of 3,594 acre feet per year. The volume potentially at risk, according to the report, is 350.1 acre feet per year. Miller told the City Council that out of the total of about 3,600 acre feet per year the City is currently using only about 1,300 to 1,800 acre feet per year. He said the remaining unused portion is what remains to fill the needs for future growth. He said that in the worst case scenario the unused portion could support the city’s growth for 8 to 10 years. In the best case scenario it would support growth for 20 to 25 years.

“There appears to be very little risk that the City could lose any of its water rights that the City has actually put to beneficial use,” wrote Miller, “However, the city is no doubt also very concerned about maintaining water rights for future growth. The most economical water rights for future growth are currently un-used or under-utilized portions of its existing water rights. Therefore, it is recommended that the City consider a number of options to protect its potentially at risk portions of its water rights from future loss, and to potentially augment its currently recognized rights.”

Miller makes a number of recommendations to achieve those goals.

One recommendation was to alter the pumping schedules for the municipal wells to assure that each well is pumped at its maximum claimed or permitted annual volume. He urges the City to get written assurances from DNRC before applying for any changes that there will be no risk to any portion of their existing flow rate and volumes. He also urges the City to propose and support changes in legislation that might assure that rights can be changed without risking any loss. If these assurances can be achieved, he recommends seeking changes so that any well can serve as a source for any of the City’s existing water rights.

Miller also recommends that the City participate as fully as possible in the Water Court’s adjudication process and the DNRC’s Claims Examination process to assure that its rights are protected.

He recommends that the City maintains accurate use records and consider developing a hydrogeologic assessment of all its ground water uses to use in defense of its rights if challenged in the future. He also recommends certain specific changes in water rights related to certain wells.

Miller also recommended that, in terms of future growth, the City needs to examine all new annexations with regard to water use. He recommended the City look at requiring that new subdivisions that would be annexed provide their own water rights.

City Councilor Mike La Salle commented that, based on the DNRC rule, it would not pay for the City to fix any leaks in the city water system. He noted that the rule works as a disincentive to stemming any current water use even if the use comes from leaks in the system. Miller agreed.

Hamilton hikes water and sewer rates

By Michael Howell

At its April 1 meeting (no fooling), the Hamilton City Council passed two resolutions of intent to raise water and sewer rates over a period of four years. Rates would rise 4 percent annually over that time span, yielding an overall 16 percent hike by the year 2011.

The rate hikes are being adopted following the recommendations of HDR Engineering. The firm conducted a rate study on the city’s water and sewer systems in 2006.

The Resolution of Intent to raise water rates actually did not include any raise in rates for the 2007-2008 fiscal year, but would raise the rates 4 percent annually in the following three years. The rates would be raised, according to Public Works Director Keith Smith, to address inflation, rising cost of materials, pay raises and field costs. The increased rates would go into effect on June 1 each year in 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Councilors Joe Petrusaitis and Mike LaSalle questioned the source of the estimated 3.2 percent inflation rate. Petrusaitis said the rate increases should be tied to actual increases in the inflation rate, not estimated ones over four years. He moved to table the resolution of intent and LaSalle seconded.

Councilor Al Mitchell said that the 3.2 percent estimate was a best guess and the council should move forward.

Councilor Jerry Steele said, “I really get irritated when we question people we hired to give us information.”

Petrusaitis said that he was not questioning the estimates of HDR but thought that any raise in water rates to address inflation should be tied to actual changes in the rate of inflation, not predicted rates.

The motion to table was defeated on a 4 to 2 vote with Petrusaitis and LaSalle casting the only supporting votes.

A subsequent vote on the original resolution of intent to raise the rates passed on a similar 4 to 2 split with Petrusaitis and LaSalle casting the dissenting votes.

The resolution of intent to increase sewer rates was slightly different. It does include a raise in rates of 4 percent for commercial uses in 2007-08 but not for residential. Then, in subsequent years 2009-2011 it would increase 4 percent annually for both commercial and residential.

Councilor Petrusaitis asked the council to consider that if inflation rates actually decreased that the rate increase would also be reduced.

Mayor Randazzo asked if he was asking to modify the resolution of intent and Petrusaitis said, “No, I’m trying to defeat it.” He said that commercial rates were already too high and a 16 percent hike was too much.

“We are discouraging growth in the City of Hamilton,” he said.

Councilor Steele said, “We can modify the rates any time we so choose. If we see the inflation rate has gone down we can reduce the rate hike.” He said it was not a 16 percent raise, it was a 4 percent annual raise.

Petrusaitis countered that a 4 percent raise annually over four years is a 16 percent raise.

The resolution of intent to make the multi-year hikes was approved on a 4 to 2 vote with Councilors Petrusaitis and LaSalle voting against it.

Former council member Robert Sutherland commented before the meeting in the public comment period that if the council had not let Rocky Mountain Laboratory off the hook for past water fees and changed the rules to allow a lower rate for the lab in the future that these rate hikes would not be necessary. He said the citizens were being saddled with a rate hike to cover costs that the Lab’s past bills would have covered if they were made to pay as the law required.

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2008 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney