The way seems clear, as of last Wednesday, March 1, for ousted Hamilton's Bob Scott to be reinstated as Councilor for Ward 2. Scott and the Bitterroot Human Rights Alliance (BHRA) filed a lawsuit contesting the legality of Scott's expulsion from the council December, 20, 2005. Mayor Jessica Randazzo, City Attorney Ken Bell, and Missoula Attorney Jack Jenks negotiated a 10-point settlement agreement on behalf of the City and presented it to the Council at a special meeting last Wednesday. The Council considered the settlement proposal behind closed doors and then emerged to vote in favor of adopting it by a 4 to 1 vote. Councilor Laurel Frankenfield, who was appointed to the Council as Scott's replacement, did not vote. Councilor Michael LaSalle, who spearheaded the effort to oust Scott, lodged the sole vote against the settlement agreement. The very first item in the settlement agreement calls for Scott's full reinstatement, with back pay. To become effective, it now only requires Missoula District Court Judge Douglas Harkin, who is trying the case, to sign an order to that effect.

"I don't anticipate there will be any objections," said Mayor Randazzo in a telephone interview on Monday. "I expect the Judge will sign off on it. I'm glad that the Council voted to approve the settlement agreement. We needed to get the City out of this lawsuit."

Randazzo said that she knew some people would be happy with the agreement and some people would be unhappy, but that she and the attorneys tried hard to keep the best interests of the city and the citizens in mind.

BRHA Coordinator John Schneeberger said in a press release following the Council's approval, "The Alliance believes this is truly a victory for democracy and reconciliation, and we sincerely hope that the City Council can now devote its time to the business of a better Hamilton." Schneeberger also called the settlement a victory for the taxpayers who were spared the expense of extended litigation.

"This litigation was an unusual step for BHRA," wrote Schneeberger. "We have the utmost respect for the Hamilton City Council as the duly elected representatives of the people, and would never unnecessarily provoke contention or disrupt its vital activities." But in this case the legal action was deemed necessary to ensure due process and protect the electoral process.

Besides awarding Scott back pay, the settlement agreement also calls upon the City to reimburse Scott and BRHA $8,000 in attorney's fees and costs. It also prohibits the City Council from taking any additional disciplinary action against Scott for any events occurring prior to December 20, 2005.

Scott is still facing criminal charges over one incident occurring before that date, in which he is accused of assaulting City employee Chris Cobb Taggart by pressing a book into her legs following a city committee meeting which Scott had attended. Scott attended as an individual in order to comment upon a subdivision proposed in his neighborhood. He recently pleaded innocent to the assault charges in Hamilton City Court. An omnibus hearing in the case is scheduled for April.

Scott and BHRA agreed that nothing in the settlement agreement would invalidate any of the City Council's decisions prior to the date of Scott's reinstatement and agreed to dismiss their lawsuit with prejudice. Scott and BHRA also additionally agreed to waive any rights they might have to instigate or participate as a party in any lawsuit, or to encourage any person or entity to institute a lawsuit to void or set aside any actions taken by the City Council during Scott's expulsion. Scott also agreed to release Laurel Frankenfield, who served on his council seat in his absence, from any claims he may have for costs and damages against her.

The settlement agreement also included a proposed resolution to be adopted by the City Council that would add a chapter to the Council's Rules of Procedure entitled "Council Discipline." Included in the chapter are proposed definitions for improper conduct as well as proposed punishments, with specific guidelines to be followed if the Council is considering a temporary suspension or expulsion of a Councilor for improper conduct. Those guidelines include such requirements as written notification of charges and documentary evidence and the possibility of legal representation.

A hearings procedure is outlined, following which, if a Councilor is found guilty of improper conduct as defined, that Councilor may then be temporarily suspended or permanently expelled by a two-thirds vote of the Council. Other forms of punishment may be imposed by a simple majority vote. If the punishment being considered does not include suspension or expulsion, the Council may skip the procedure previously described but the vote then needed to impose any punishment would be a two-thirds vote of the Council.

Both parties confirmed in the settlement agreement that City employees have the right to pursue complaints and seek redress, and that Councilors have the right to debate policy matters, ask questions, and receive information regarding the operation of city government.

Both parties also agree to promote a more positive environment by committing to attend a set of workshops and meetings designed to improve Council decorum and facilitate implementation of parliamentary procedures, and improve communication between the Council, administration, department heads, and employees as well as delineating clear lines of authority.

Petitions filed for moratorium on subdivision approval, enactment of impact fees

By Michael Howell

Two citizen petitions have recently been filed at the Ravalli County Clerk and Recorder's office that, if approved as to form and content and enough signatures are gathered, would place two ordinances before the voters. One provides for a temporary moratorium on preliminary plat approvals of subdivisions. The other requires the County Commissioners to adopt an impact fee ordinance to pay for the cost of new growth.

The petition proposing an ordinance for a temporary moratorium on approval of subdivision preliminary plats limits the time frame to either 24 months or until impact fees are adopted, whichever occurs first.

"If an impact fee ordinance is adopted prior to the passage of twenty-four months from the effective date of this ordinance, then this moratorium will expire when the impact fee ordinance is effective," the proposed ballot statement reads.

The second proposed ordinance would require the Ravalli County Commissioners to adopt an impact fee ordinance within 18 months of the measure's effective date, that will fund all additional costs to Ravalli County caused by new construction on subdivisions in the county.

Ravalli County Clerk and Recorder Nedra Taylor confirmed that the two petitions had been filed on February 24, by Phillip Taylor, of Victor. She said that they were currently under review in the County Attorney's office. She said that the County, by statute, has 21 days in which to complete a review and possible revision process to certify the petition for circulation. The petition proponents then have 90 days from the date of certification to gather the required number of signatures to place the matter on the ballot.

The minimum number of signatures required to place the measures on the next general election ballot is 15 percent of the registered voters as tallied in the last election, according to Nedra Taylor. In this case that amounts to 4,327 valid signatures. If 25 percent of the registered voters sign the petition, or in this case if over 7,212 valid signatures are gathered, then the measure would be placed on a special ballot.

Once on the ballot, if the measure gathers a majority of votes in its favor in the election, it becomes law.

Phillip Taylor, interviewed by telephone on Monday, said that he filed the two petitions on behalf of everyone in the county who is being negatively impacted by rapid and unregulated development. He said that it was in response to the outcry that he has heard lately from groups of people being affected by super development proposals in their neighborhood such as Aspen Springs in the Eight Mile area and the Legacy Ranch proposal north of Stevensville. He said that he expects people from those organizations and others such as Bitterrooters for Planning to help gather signatures.

Taylor said that he also expected those groups and other concerned or affected individuals to back him up when he presents the petitions to the County Commissioners for immediate approval.

"Measures can be placed on the ballot either by petition or directly by a vote of the County Commissioners," said Taylor. He said that these measures made sense given the large backlog of subdivision proposals currently bogged down in an overwhelmed review process.

"The County Commissioners could save us all a lot of time and trouble if they would simply place these measures on the ballot and let the voters decide," said Taylor.

The Commissioners have all recently expressed deep reluctance at enacting any Interim Zoning, which, in effect, can amount to a temporary moratorium on subdivision approval while setting a deadline for a permanent zoning solution.

The Commissioners have been advised by County Attorney George Corn in a memorandum that Interim Zoning was a legal possibility and that, in his opinion, the grounds existed in the county to invoke such emergency measures.

Anyone interested in helping with the petitions can contact Phil Taylor at 642-3289.

Hamilton considers impact fees and a neighborhood plan

By Michael Howell

The City of Hamilton is working with a Citizens Advisory Board and consultants to examine the need for enacting impact fees and to determine a realistic estimate of what those fees would have to be to offset costs of growth due to new construction.

According to Hamilton Mayor Jessica Randazzo, five areas of costs are being examined including water, sewer, streets, police and fire. She said that some areas already addressed costs to the system of new construction in some fashion, such as water and sewer hook-up charges. But other areas, such as police and fire and streets, have no traditional fee structure attached to them. She said that a formula was being considered in relation to streets that was based upon increased trips and the impacts of increased car traffic on the existing road system.

Randazzo said that the City is also working on its waste water facility plan which will yield an itemized inventory of the system and a needs analysis that would help in establishing appropriate impact fees in that area.

The City of Hamilton is also sponsoring a joint meeting of both the City and the Ravalli County Planning Boards to consider what is being called the Area 3 Neighborhood Plan. It is a proposal designed by urban planner John Horwich, to regulate development in an area stretching from Old Corvallis Road east along Fairgrounds Road to the Eastside Highway and stretching north to the Daly Mansion.

Horwich told the County Commissioners a few weeks ago that his proposed design plan was meant to be a guide to development in the area over the next 15 years. He said it includes a street design that supports an integrated, coordinated community, one without a lot of dead end cul-de-sacs but also without a large straight connecting corridor that might become a "highway" through the neighborhood.

Horwich promotes concentrating the parkland into an area near the Daly Mansion and surrounding the adjacent lake rather than many small parks in each subdivision in the area. He said that through design standards the commercial development envisioned along Old Corvallis Road in the plan could be made attractive to "knowledge based businesses" perhaps related to Corixa or the Rocky Mountain Laboratory, rather than retail-oriented businesses.

Forty-eight acres west of the Daly Mansion and north of the proposed park area would be designated residential housing, according to Horwich, and another 115 acres in the southeast of the area bordered by the Fairgrounds Road and the Eastside Highway. This would total about 840 units at build-out and average about three dwellings per acre. He said that developers could be encouraged to preserve open space by allowing 10 units per acre where the remaining acreage provides open space. He said that it was also worth exploring the placement of a mass transit hub at the Fairgrounds.

The area is currently outside the city limits, but the long range plan calls for annexation into the City. For this reason the plan calls for amendments to both the Hamilton City and the Ravalli County Growth Policies, passage of City and County Zoning, as well as amendments to the City and County subdivision regulations.

The planning boards from the county and the city will hold a joint discussion concerning the proposal at the Bedford Building tonight, Wednesday, March 8, at 5:30 p.m. The City Planning Board will then meet immediately following that public hearing, according to Randazzo, but the County Planning Board will not meet until March 15, to deliberate about the matter.

"To my knowledge it's the first time in history that the city and the county are working together on land use planning," said Randazzo.

Stevi School Board discusses state of the district regarding female athletics

By Michael Howell

The Stevensville School Board held a special work/informational session on Tuesday, February 28, to "Discuss the State of the District, regarding Female Athletics."

Athletic Director Keith Chambers gave the group a general overview of the Athletic Department's sports programs "available for both male and female athletes." It includes open gym in summer and at noon hours during school. A girls only or boys only open gym is provided upon request, according to Chambers. The department also offers an open weight room in summer and after school.

Chambers said that an effort is made to inform all athletes about various training camps that are available. Coaches are sent to training clinics as well and efforts are made to hire qualified coaches and keep them certified by the Montana High School Association. He said that the coaches hold meetings to internally address concerns about the athletic program and that the department's coaches are evaluated.

Sensitive to the fact that his girls' basketball team is suffering another losing season, head coach Cody Omlid emphasized the need to start training for basketball in elementary school.

"You can't make a winning team in three months," said Omlid.

Junior varsity coach Jon Vercruyssen agreed.

"I don't like getting my butt whipped every night," said Vercruyssen "But we've got to start teaching at a younger age. Not much can be done in seven weeks with 10 games to play in that same period."

He said that Anaconda starts in the third grade.

Both coaches agreed that it takes parent cooperation to make a good athletic program.

Several parents in the audience expressed agreement but also expressed disappointment in the current program, not simply based on the win/loss record but on other problems related to students dropping out of the program.

Stuart Bradshaw suggested that the department institute a formal way for the parents to evaluate the coaches at the end of the season, such as a written evaluation form that could be submitted.

Pat Groninger said, "the system needs help. The system is broke. We need to fix something. Does it mean replacing Cody? I don't know, that's up to you. But something's not right."

Omlid responded that he did not know why he was being made the bad guy.

"I don't want this to turn into crucifying me because we are losing," said Omlid.

School board trustee Ed Cummings responded aggressively that Omlid had a record of bad behavior and had been thrown out of a game by the referee.

Omlid responded that if his job performance was going to be the topic of discussion he would prefer to have a closed door meeting as was his right.

Chairman Jim Cloud agreed that Omlid had a right to privacy in that regard. He went on to say, "I'm not convinced a win/loss record is the way to judge a sports program. But losses year in and year out indicates there is some sort of problem. But our job is to hire coaches, not to make game plan decisions."

The meeting, which was limited from the beginning to one hour, ended on that note.

Ordinary citizen has no standing in case against school board

By Michael Howell

The Montana Supreme Court recently upheld the decision by Ravalli County District Court Judge Jeffrey Langton to throw out a case filed against the Darby School District because the woman filing the lawsuit, Bruceen "Peanut" Fleenor, of Darby, did not have legal standing to file the suit in the first place.

The lawsuit concerned a 2004 decision by the Darby School Board to hire a District Superintendent. Fleenor argued that the decision was flawed because it was not properly noticed and denied her right as a citizen and taxpayer to participate in the Board's deliberations.

Montana School Board Association attorney Debra Silk argued that Montana law requires the plaintiff in the case to show how her situation is unique with respect to the general public and how she was harmed. Silk argued that Fleenor's status as a citizen and taxpayer alone was not sufficient to provide a basis for suing the District over the constitutional right to know.

Langton agreed and threw the case out due to Fleenor's lack of standing to bring the suit. Fleenor appealed that decision but the Supreme Court sided with Langton and Silk.

Fleenor disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision and so does the Montana Newspaper Association which characterized it as a severe setback for the freedom of information laws in Montana. The newspaper association does not believe that the average citizen needs to articulate a special reason for access to meetings or public records. It is encouraging newspaper reporters across the state to refuse to give any particular reasons, if asked for them, when requesting information from public agencies and government bodies.

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2004 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney