By Michael Howell
The Ravalli County Commissioners decided last Tuesday, November 10, not to file an appeal in the case of the Legacy Ranch Subdivision. The developer, Sunnyside Orchards LLC, proposed a 659-unit subdivision consisting of 504 single-lot family homes, as well as 135 residential condominium units, and 20 commercial condominium units to be built on 368 acres along the Eastside Highway north of Stevensville over a 30-year, 15-phase plan. The 368-acre subdivision was approved by the commissioners on August 14, 2014.
On July 31, 2015, District Court Judge James Haynes ruled in favor of Bitterrooters for Planning (BfP), a local non-profit organization that contested the decision, on at least three counts, any one of which was sufficient grounds to void the commissioners’ approval. Haynes found in his ruling that the Commission violated the public’s right to meaningfully participate by basing its decision on information not presented to the public; for basing its decision on an inadequate Environmental Assessment (EA); for its failure to collect and analyze with a “hard look” the primary subdivision review criteria described in state law and for its initial authorization of a greater than three year period of preliminary plat decision validity. He also found the Commission had violated the right of the public to participate by failing to provide meaningful review of water quality and traffic information. Haynes’ opinion voided the Commissioners’ approval and ordered that the subdivision application be denied.
At the Tuesday meeting, Alan McCormick, attorney for the county, told the Commissioners that there was some question as to whether the 60-day deadline for filing an appeal in the case should be figured from the time judgment was provided or if it should be figured from the time the last issue of attorney fees was settled. He said a meeting date of November 30 was set for hearing the issue of attorney fees. McCormick said he was proceeding as though the timeline starts with the receipt of a judgment and based on that the deadline would be Friday, November 13. He also clarified that the agenda item, which mentioned the possibility of “joining” an appeal, may have given the incorrect impression that an appeal had already been filed. He said no appeal had been filed and that the meeting being held was simply to decide if the Commissioners wanted to file an appeal in the case or not.
The meeting was then closed to the public for litigation strategy discussion. Upon emerging from the closed door session, without any further discussion, Commissioner Greg Chilcott moved to not file an appeal in the case and the board of commissioners then voted unanimously not to file an appeal.
As of Monday, November 16, no appeals had been filed in the case, according to a District Court Clerk official. But, she said, the case is still open.