Density hearing well attended, more comments sought
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner/Valley Journal Lake County Commissioner Ann Smith Brower listens as community members share their views on the density map and regulations.
Nicole Tavenner
Concerned citizens packed the room during the Jan. 20 meeting to gather public input on the density map and regulations.
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner
Nicole Tavenner
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
A Lake County courthouse room was packed with residents eager to voice their opinion on land rights and future development on Jan. 20. A public hearing was held that sought input from land and business owners, natural resource conservationists, and every day residents, as the Lake County Commissioners look to possibly reverse and repeal the County’s density map and regulations.
Some residents believe the density map infringes on personal property rights, while others believe that repealing the map will cause excessive growth, with more land subdivided and possibly developed.
The Commissioners had considered making a decision the day of the hearing, but ultimately chose to delay until more community input was collected.
The map, which originally took years to prepare and required much community negotiation and compromise between the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Lake County officials, and the public, was adopted in 2005. It followed the guiding tenets of the Lake County Growth Policy, which looked to promote smart growth and to prevent urban sprawl. It aims to protect the natural beauty and appeal of a place that many have called home for generations and has drawn others here for its rural character. An overarching theme of the document is to concentrate growth in already established towns, so as not to strain public services like water and sewer resources, ultimately saving taxpayer dollars.
The hearing began with a 5-minute presentation by the County’s Civil Attorney, Wally Congdon. He said he hadn’t seen as many people at a public hearing in 30 years.
“Democracy is not a spectator sport in Lake County,” Congdon said.
Congdon explained that the Density Map was supposed to have been reviewed after the first and 10th year of implementation and that the County had not reviewed it at either of those times to see how it was going for the County and its residents.
When the floor was opened for public comment, 31 concerned citizens publicly stated what they’d like to see happen; 22 residents testified in support of keeping the density map in some variation, while five voiced opinions to repeal the map and four never directly stated whether they supported or opposed the potential repeal.
Those in favor of keeping the map questioned whether the County had been approached by developers or whether they were just trying to “sprawl” their way out of a tax deficit, as a resident of Charlo suggested.
“Has there been a proposal brought forward by a developer?” Peter Daniels of Polson asked.
The County Commissioners denied being approached by a developer and said it was not why the repeal was being considered.
Many stated that they were concerned that a beautiful, rural area and the important habitats and livelihoods it supported would be significantly impacted by development if the map were to be repealed.
“It’s a postcard everywhere you look,” said Jordan Thompson of Pablo. Thompson also stated that he thought that the map could be defensible as a legal document.
Donna Mollica, owner of the Hangin Art Gallery in Arlee, said she thought it would be best for economic development if growth was concentrated near the highway.
Trudy Samuelson, a real estate agent for Mission Valley Properties, supported the density map because she thought that it was better for business. Those looking to purchase properties were reassured that the land next to theirs could not be extensively developed.
Others even thought that repealing the map was premature, or that the Lake County Growth Policy should be amended before the map was to be repealed.
“Let the citizens amend it and move forward,” said Rollins resident Steve Rosso of the map. Rosso also serves on the Lake County Planning Board.
Those who thought that the Density Map should be repealed believe that personal property rights should avail above County regulation. The current map also makes it challenging for family members to gift small parcels of land because of the zoning ordinances in the map. Others questioned the legality of the entire document because it was not a law. Most who wanted to repeal the map agreed that the regulations were not followed fairly throughout Lake County.
“I feel there are already enough subdivision regulations to inhibit if not prohibit people from exercising their rights. Any time some of those barriers can be removed or prevented, it is a citizen win,” said John Schnase, a landowner in Lake County. “Anyone in this room that lives on a small acreage has taken advantage of a great freedom and every other citizen should have the ability to pursue the same. The Density Map doesn’t apply to everyone … Frankly I believe that the ‘majority rules’ only until it violates the rights of the individual.”
The public meeting ran significantly over time, as residents continued to express whether they supported the repeal of the map or not.
Commissioner Gale Decker said he thought growth in Lake County was not significant enough to warrant such tight regulation and that growth in the County had slowed since the Growth Policy had been written. He suggested that the map be repealed, and that the growth policy be re-written to reflect current Census data and to create a new map if it seemed regulations were needed. He said that if there truly were developers waiting to build that they would have found a way around the current regulations.
“(There are) no buyers out there, folks,” Decker said.
Decker suggested revision of the current map would be bogged down by bureaucracy, and that he had tried it before, which had taken two years and a lot of money. He thought something better could be implemented that held all residents of Lake County accountable, rather than just some.
“Amending it sounds like a good idea until you bump up against it,” Decker said.
Commissioner Ann Smith Brower said when attending citizens hinted that the County was looking for a bigger tax base, that this would not be the way they would choose to go about it.
“It is not good for political reasons,” said Brower.
Brower did think that the market was indeed moving forward, but she was not sure about actual growth statistics. She thought the whole process of development within the County needed to be simplified to “take out the duplications and layers.”
Commissioner Bill Barron stated that a policy was either used or it wasn’t, and in this case it seemed like it wasn’t being used adequately. If growth has indeed slowed like Decker suggested, now would be the time to act and make something work for the County.
No decision was made until further public input is collected and analyzed. The next hearing will be scheduled within 30 days.
