Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Opinion & Editorial

Judge Ted Mizner's decision in the Mitchell Slough case is a bad decision no matter how you look at it.

Without getting into the details of the legal and constitutional issues involved and why the decision is wrong, we just have to project the ramifications of the decision to see that, if he is right, something is still very wrong here.

For instance, if he is right, then any old river channel, stream or spring creek in Montana that has had a dam and headgate placed on it to divert water and control flows and has had some work done on it altering the bed and banks, is now a candidate to be removed from protection under the Natural Stream Bed and Land Preservation Act of 1975 (commonly referred to as 310 Law), and subsequently removed from jurisdiction under the state's Stream Access Law.

This is certainly not what the fishermen and recreationists had in mind when the Stream Access Law was being hammered out. We believe the recreationists and the farmers and ranchers understood the law at the time to apply to all historical streams and river channels. What it did not apply to was man-made constructions, called ditches.

Now Judge Mizner is telling us that natural river channels and spring creeks can be removed from coverage under those laws once they have been altered and manipulated enough.

But how many streams or rivers in Montana do you know of that have not been dammed or altered in some fashion?

Despite Judge Mizner's insinuation of the opposite, evidence in the case clearly establishes that almost all of the ten miles of Mitchell Slough that exist today flow in the same old channel that existed when the river was first surveyed in 1879, except for a short stretch on two properties.

In fact, Mizner's decision as a whole acknowledges that what we call Mitchell Slough today was a channel of the Bitterroot River in 1879 when it was first surveyed. It had water rights granted out of it as though it was a natural water body for over 100 years. It is depicted as a natural water body in the state's Water Resources Survey of 1957. It is depicted as a natural water body in a recent survey of Montana Spring Creeks. It appears as a channel of the river in current property plats and on local conservation easements. It appears as a natural water body on every USGS map including the most recent. Some people have fished in it all their lives believing it was public.

But all this evidence about what Mitchell Slough once was is not that relevant to Mizner in the end. He wants to know what it is TODAY. And the only ones who can tell him this, apparently, are a few consultants from Florida and California, paid for by the landowners, who argue that despite all the history, today it's a ditch because it has a headgate on it and its bed and banks have been altered from their "natural state."

Once again, what stream or river does this not apply to?

The decision represents a significant departure from the way in which FWP has interpreted the Stream Access Law in the past.

If left unchallenged it will present significant hardships for anglers trying to exercise their right to access streams for fishing. It used to be that you could look at a USGS map. Or, if you were still unsure, you could check the many other historical records, from water rights to spring creek surveys, to state water resource surveys. You could even ask some locals. But even then, even if they said it was always considered public and that they had fished it all their lives, following Mizner's ruling, you could still not be sure.

If the adjacent landowner has put up a no fishing sign, all this evidence will mean nothing. You will have to ask him if he ever had a consultant study the thing to see if it is still a natural stream or if it's now a ditch. Or, hire your own consultant.

Mizner's decision turns the Stream Bed Preservation Act into a self-destructing act and at the same time guts the Stream Access Law. He has invented a recipe for removing streams from coverage under both laws simply because they have been used and worked on over the years.

All anyone needs to do to remove a stream from 310 Law protection and public access is to:

• Get a water right from the stream which ALLOWS the installation of a dam, a headgate, and the control of water flows.
• Get some 310 Permits under the Natural Stream Bed and Land Preservation Act, which ALLOWS for the alteration of the bed and banks of natural perennially flowing streams.
• Then complain that fishermen should not be allowed access because the stream is no longer "natural" because it is controlled by a headgate and its bed and banks have been altered.

If Mizner is right, what we thought was one of Montana's bedrock conservation laws is nothing but a prescription for privatization and the Stream Access Law will be rendered unenforceable except by battling, on a case by case basis, based on the evidence of private consultants, as to whether a stream or river channel is still "natural" or not.

If Mizner's right, both the Stream Bed Preservation Act and Montana's Stream Access Law will have to be rewritten to provide anything close to what they were originally designed to provide.

Let's hope he's wrong and that the Montana Supreme Court will get a chance to review this very questionable decision and, maybe, correct it.

Cary Kutter, owner of Bitterroot Community Market, deserves our praise for providing Stevensville's youth a space on the front of his leased building on which to express their feelings about methamphetamine use. The painting, entitled "Don't Fall Into Meth," created by Coleman Pape, Brenna Lenander, and Marcas Perez, is part of an anti-meth project called "Paint the State." These young people have a chance to win cash prizes while increasing the public's awareness of the meth epidemic in Montana. For maximum effect, the project is a partnership between private businesses, the public, the media, and local teens.

The effects of meth on Montana's population, and on the environment, are never pretty. There is no way to portray this epidemic in a way that's pleasing to the eye. And yet, Kutter agreed to let these young people paint the front of his business with these nightmarish and thought-provoking images.

This was a progressive and courageous decision on Kutter's part. Let's let him know he's done the right thing!

City Treasurer should be elected

The countdown has started and will end August 24, seventy-five days prior to the November General Election. Why is this important? It is important to the voters of Hamilton. It is the last day for candidates to file to be on the November ballot. Our Plan of Government requires a vote for an elected Treasurer.

Nedra Taylor is the Election Administrator and is responsible to conduct elections for the cities. It is her duty to determine ballot procedures that are under the Plan of Government for each city. A simple solution to determine whether Hamilton has an elected Treasurer, or an appointed one, is to obtain a certified copy of the city's Plan of Government. This can be done with a phone call or fax to the Election Administration office in Helena. No legal opinion is necessary, as the certified copy is the Plan chosen by the voters.

Mayor Randazzo as well as all council members and the city attorney took an oath of office to uphold the State Constitution as well as the state laws. If they violate their oath of office, they can be subject to a Recall Election. Violation of their oath of office is one of the five reasons for Recall under 2-16-603 MCA. Many times councilors have violated statutes if they don't like the law. This is a favorite practice of a few of our council members.

The purpose of an appointed Treasurer is to allow the politicians to control the money. The people control an elected Treasurer, and their money, through the ballot box. The people have no control over their money when we have an appointed treasurer.

Our Plan of Government requires the mayor to uphold State laws. She is required to follow the people's Plan Of Government. The statute 7-2-217 MCA is part of our Plan and states, "the Treasurer shall be elected." Only the people can change this law. If the mayor does not set in motion the requirement for a ballot issue so that the people may vote, she will be responsible for the consequences.

What has happened to the people's government? It is time the citizens took back their government and selected people who represent them, instead of a personal agenda or special interest. Enough said!

Bob Frost
Hamilton

Real ways to support agriculture in Montana

Dear Editor,

As summer slowly flows around us I wanted to take a moment to give some tips to how non agriculture residents and visitors might help support those of us who are.

Please do not pull out of a driveway or intersection, or race to pass a truck and horse trailer only to slow down right in front of said truck and trailer. A great way to cause horrible injury to an animal (horses, cattle, llamas, etc.) in a horse trailer is to have the driver be forced to slam on the brakes to avoid rear-ending a driver with no common sense or courtesy on the road. These animals are bullets being shot into unforgiving steel when their vehicle is forced to come to a quick stop. The sheer weight of the trailer greatly reduces the truck's ability to stop quickly as well. Consider that most rigs pulling a trailer are also carrying small children and one to four stock dogs.

If you run through some rancher's fence it would be very courteous as well as perhaps life saving if you would notify the owner of the damaged fence as soon as it happens. Livestock on the roads, especially at night, are a hazard that can lead to the death of human and animal when they meet head on at 65 miles per hour.

Paying for damages while not fun for the one creating them is certainly the honorable way to handle things versus leaving the farmer or rancher to have another 1Ž2 mile of fence to repair after he just finished fixing the same dang fence last week from some other person's accident. For some reason local law enforcement seem to know who owns what land when livestock is out on the roads but not when their same property has had damage inflicted upon it by a vehicle mishap.

If you see livestock, wildlife or pets on the road, especially babies and youngsters, please do not assume, as one of our neighbors did, that the little ones will know to get out of the way of a speeding car. If you should accidentally hit an animal, calling 911 and reporting it so humane efforts to help can be provided would really be cool. Leaving an animal be it livestock, pet or worse yet someone's small child to suffer so you won't get in trouble is perhaps wrong thinking. Slow down and think when driving country roads! Please!

If you live near a ranch or farm and think that the pretty water flowing by your property is yours for the taking, and how could a little bit of water you take hurt anyone, please stop to consider that every new neighbor thinks the same way and eventually the farmer or rancher has no water when it is most needed to provide crops and feed for their livelihood and livestock. Note the word livestock. They need to eat the hay growing in the summer during the winter and the grass growing during the summer so every bit of water is essential to keeping agriculture alive. Crops do not grow without water. If you don't have water rights or are not sure what they allow you, call and find out. It is cheaper than a lawsuit.

Should you encounter people riding horses along the roadside, please slow down and give the rider as much room as possible. Most horses are fine with vehicles but you never know when something beyond the rider's control frightens the horse at just the wrong moment causing it to jump into the path of a vehicle.

When you are eating a great meal you might give a heartfelt thanks and salute to the hardworking farmers and ranchers all across this country who are out in 90 degree heat, working for often less than minimum wage because it is something they love to do.

When you see a farm or ranch with a for sale sign on it you might consider that what the landowner is selling is their family's history, their lifestyle and often their hearts. When you want to vote to make sure they can't subdivide their property so they can retire, due to illness or are going broke perhaps think of all they have sacrificed over the years so you and your family could have the essential products you require in your everyday living and then consider that with no money in agriculture for the small family business, if they are selling out it is not by choice but because they have no option. If new citizens to this state want open space I suggest you open your pocketbooks and buy it at fair market value instead of trying to force no growth zoning on the backs of the families who founded this valley.

Oh, if you open a gate, close it. If the gate is open then leave it open. Thanks.

If you would like to learn more about agriculture in the valley, about safe and supportive ways to live side by side with farmers and ranchers, then stop by any of them, ask when would be a good time to visit and you will meet people who would love to share their knowledge and history with you. Have a safe and happy summer and please support agriculture with real efforts instead of giving lip service to it like we see written about in the paper all of the time.

Suzy Foss
Hamilton

Republic editorial was disservice

Dear Editor,

On June 1, 2006, the Ravalli Republic editorial "Hamilton City's sinking ship" was a disservice to the citizens of Hamilton. Before I address several points, it is important to differentiate between the public's interest and the interest of select individuals. The government of the City of Hamilton is required by Montana law to provide a government receptive to its people. Select groups and individuals are not to be afforded any advantage over all the people as has been the case for several years.

Suggesting that the "Bobs" are responsible for the disorder in Hamilton is simply wrong. There is more to the story than meets the eye if a person just lifts up the rocks a little. First, the editorial stated that Colleen Miller was the fourth administrator to resign in a little more than two years, attributable to "council actions and city hall turmoil." Miller was the second administrator to resign. Mark Shrives was the other one. Dale Huhtanen was a finance officer, but perhaps the Republic thought he was an administrator. Yet what is interesting here is that while employed by the city, Dale Huhtanen and Mark Shrives formed a company, Community Development and Consulting, LLP in the year 2000. The LLP organization was not renewed in 2005 as required, but Dale Huhtanen continues the business as an individual to this day. Shrives left the city in February, 2004 and Huhtanen resigned about a month later. Now why would city employees form a consulting company especially if they were in the positions of administrative assistant and finance officer? Both of these individuals resigned citing turmoil at city hall by Robert Sutherland, Bob Scott and Tom Peterson. Tom Peterson was a temporary councilman who served for one month in 2004, not enough time to cause any turmoil. As for the exodus of Community Development Director Chris Cobb, she was offered a job with PCI, an engineering firm which does business with the city. After taking that job she is now back working for the city as a consultant. Cobb is still working for PCI and her consulting services could well help PCI get additional contracts with the city. As for Loren Lowry, he resigned on April 18, 2005. In his resignation letter he asked for $51,449.96 in comp time which the city refused to pay. He took issue with "the lack of trust" Mayor Joe showed in him in a follow up memo on the same day. But lo and behold, he reapplied for his job in January, 2006. Now why would he reapply for a job he had left citing "the terrible condition the Hamilton local government has evolved into" as the cause for leaving? Perhaps he felt that "Mayor Joe" was the cause of "the terrible condition!"

The inference in the editorial was that Bob Scott and Robert Sutherland are the culprits in the continuing chaos of city hall. But the facts point to a different conclusion. In the "Mayor Joe" era, it was common for committee meetings to last 5 or 10 minutes. Council meetings lasted perhaps 15 minutes. Everything was done behind closed doors with little opportunity for input by others. Special interests ruled the day. The Rocky Mountain Lab negotiation was a good example of "out of sight, out of mind."

Then Sutherland and Scott were elected. They began questioning council practices, Scott perhaps more intensely. Scott's and Sutherland's questions about city finances, questionable bidding practices, hiring practices, influence peddling and the breakdown in council proceedings caused nervousness in the halls of the city building. This new approach to openness in government brought about the attacks on Scott and Sutherland. Question the good ol' boy status and things start to happen. It is a ploy of the special interests to mask their own actions by focusing attacks elsewhere such as on Bob Scott and Robert Sutherland. And, the Republic's erroneous editorial has fanned the flames of distortion. The city has not "suffered terrible blows and tarnished its reputation" as suggested. On the contrary, the city is finally opening up its governing processes to the masses that have long been excluded from participation in their government. Special interests have for years manipulated city government to their benefit. In the recent past, there has been a great deal of what the average citizen would call impropriety on the part of other council members and staff. Questioning those situations, Scott and Sutherland have felt the wrath of those involved in back room meetings and special interests. But the facts are there for editors to shed light on -- if they wish to.

As for Bob Scott and the trumped up charges recently leveled against him including his expulsion from the city council and assault on a city employee, time will prove him innocent. The expulsion from the council, already settled in Scott's favor, was ridiculous, an action that had no merit from the beginning. But it was an attempt to get rid of a conscientious councilman, one who relentlessly asked the hard questions. Manipulators don't like that. Bob Scott -1, special interests - 0. And the city had to pay the bill for the settlement to the tune of $8,000! As for the assault charge, that deserves another "Viewpoint" which I will be glad to offer. I could shed more light on those practices that are and have been questionable and, in a number of cases, illegal. I have lifted up some of those stones and it's not pretty underneath. But the tide is changing. I hope the trend to change continues because the city will be better for it.

There are no recorded minutes of council or committee meetings so if newspapers want to pursue the quest for the truth in Hamilton's government actions they may have to work at it. The "Bobs" and Councilwoman Deanne Harbaugh have been asking for recorded minutes since January. They also asked for a city planner in January specifically to help the city evaluate the Area 3 plan. Imagine, 840 homes on 487 acres! No wonder the council turned it down. Look deeply into that one and you'll find some cloudy water.

And as for the Republic's editorial statement, "the resignation of four top administrators and hard workers," it's just excitable diatribe that serves no purpose other than to belittle Bob Scott. It's a flawed statement. Honesty and openness in government is the real issue here. Honest and unbiased reporting of the happenings and issues would go a long way toward better government through informed citizenry.

Phil Taylor
Victor

You can't fool all the people all the time

Dear Editor,

We have several developers who have fooled our Planning Department into believing that they have to accept subdivision plans that are not allowed by our Subdivision Regulations. I'm sure you've heard by now that several developers are proposing "mega-developments" in Ravalli County. What you probably haven't heard is that our Subdivision Regulations only allow two phases of development and don't allow extensions beyond a four-year period for the second phase to be completed. That is what our Subdivision Regulations say - no more than two phases. So you would think we have nothing to worry about.

But, unfortunately, the developers of Aspen Springs near Florence have fooled our County Planning Department into believing that we only need a "minor deviation" from the Subdivision Regulations to allow them to change two phases to 33 and four years to 22. Just change those two numbers, that's all. The problem is that all the rest of the regulations are written with the confidence that those two words remain the same. These developers actually have our Planning Department fooled into recommending that the Planning Board and County Commissioners overlook everything else and allow them to change just those two little numbers. They have them fooled into thinking everything will be okay.

Well, everything will not be okay. Every other regulation was written with the confidence that no more than two phases would be allowed and that phasing would only be allowed if the first phase was needed to build roads and other infrastructure to support the second phase. These guys want to save the infrastructure for later - much, much later. They want to be able to make some money first and then decide whether or not they want to go ahead and build the infrastructure later. They have also fooled our Planning Department into believing that they have to follow the same time schedule that was set up to review a regular subdivision. That only gives the Planning Department 60 days to review the plan between the plat evaluation and the County Commissioner's approval. The developers don't ask for a variance from that rule and the Planning Department has been fooled into believing they have to follow it.

Now our Planning Department is trying to fool our Planning Board into believing it, too. They have actually recommended that the Planning Board approve this request (and other "variances") as if they are just "minor deviations" from the Subdivision Regulations.

Well, I don't believe it. I don't believe for one second that you can just change two phases over four years to 33 phases over 22 years and not take a good hard look at every other part of our Subdivision Regulations to see what the effect will be. The funny part is, the Subdivision Regulations say that the variance is only good for 30 months. What happens three years from now when the variance has expired?

So, the developers may have our Planning Department fooled and it looks like they, in turn, have our Planning Board fooled. But, they can't fool us. Our Subdivision Regulations don't allow 33 phases over 22 years and our Planning Department, Planning Board and County Commissioners better figure that out before they make the biggest mistake of their careers. Call them and tell them you're not fooled. Warn them not to be fooled by the Planning Department and Planning Board recommendations. Your Commissioners are Greg Chilcott, Alan Thompson and Betty Lund, 375-6500.

Marilyn Owns Medicine
Stevensville

What he was thinking

In regard to the letter in last week's Star, "What are they thinking": I am sure that the last thing Cary Kutter was worried about was Jim Edwards. First of all, Mr. Edwards is no longer owner of "IGA" as it was known to be, and second of all, that was "yesterday," this is "today."

Secondly, what better place to provide a "canvas" for their anti-meth artwork, than the face of the Bitterroot Community Market. This is a high traffic area for not only adults, but also our youth during the busy lunch period during the summer and especially during school. An opportunity is being provided to the youth of Stevensville to do something constructive, rather than doing "meth."

Thirdly, I think we will all agree that Stevensville is a "family oriented community, the place of Heritage Days, Creamery Picnic, a Farmers Market and locally owned business." You are, however, living with your head in the sand if you do not think that the area and the valley is not infiltrated with meth labs.

Perhaps the tourists who come to Montana do come here to visit the "last best place to live," however, we cannot deny ourselves our own reality.

Why there is even any mention of "customer service" and "Super One" is beyond me, other than the fact the whole issue is an underlying grudge from "markets of the past."

Dan DePauw
Stevensville

Anti-meth art important

The mural that is being painted on the Edwards building has a distinct message! Meth is very prominent in this area of Montana. Hopefully, the mural will help deter some of our young people from using it.

It is too bad Deborah Leonard sees it as a deterioration of the building. But if it saves one person from getting "hooked" on meth, it will be worth every drop of paint and every hour these three put into painting it.

I say congratulations to them for doing a great job.

Eleanor Cooley
Victor

Hamilton Council meetings haven't changed

Has anyone else noticed that nothing has changed in our City Council meetings? The arguing continues. The dissension continues. It is more divided than ever. Little gets done. It may, in fact, even be worse than before. We have made several attempts to communicate with Mayor Randazzo. We have offered to help out where positions are vacant, we have written her a long letter on areas that required her attention, and have even offered to be an "advisory committee" to her. All have gone unanswered, without so much as an acknowledgement.

Do you remember the response Jessica Randazzo gave when asked, "What makes you stand out from the other mayoral candidates?" She said, "I have the skills that it takes to get Hamilton moving in a positive direction. I have management experience, know how to run a meeting, and will represent the city in a professional manner. I offer a fresh start... I have paid close attention to the issues facing our community. I have attended council meetings regularly. I have a clear understanding of what has been accomplished and what could be done to better serve the citizens of Hamilton." (Ravalli Republic, October 28, 2005).

Well, the truth has finally surfaced. For someone who professes to be a "social work professional," Ms. Randazzo has managed to alienate several of the city councilors, and numerous members of the public in just a mere six months in office. Our most recent concern has to do with the open Administrative Assistant (AA) position, vacated by Colleen Miller in early June.

According to the ratified Hamilton Plan of Government, the mayor is the administrator of the city. The administrative assistant position is secretarial in nature - nothing more than an aide to the mayor. In years past, however, this position has slowly and illegally grown into one nearing a City Manager position, which has then been disguised as an AA due to the Plan of Government restrictions. Following Colleen Miller's departure, we informed the mayor on June 20th that she must follow the Plan of Government in filling this position. We expected her to scale back the AA position in its duties and salary. Since we never heard from the mayor, we made a simple trip to the Job Service office downtown to see the specifications for the City Administrative Assistant, dated June 23rd.

To our amazement, the specifications were not scaled back and the salary (to $46,000) and duties are still more in line with a management position than a secretarial one. Again, Hamilton does not have a city manager. The mayor took an Oath of Office to support the Constitution of Montana and to "discharge the duties of her office with fidelity." Fidelity means strict and continuing faithfulness to an obligation. The duties of her office include enforcing laws, ordinances and resolutions. The Hamilton Plan of Government is the "law" of the land here, and cannot be ignored by the Mayor simply because she does not like it.

To further complicate things, the City Council discussed the salary of the Administrative Assistant on June 6, 2006, and a vote was taken to keep the salary in the $45-$55,000 range. The vote ended in a tie, with the mayor breaking the tie in her own favor. This was clearly a conflict of interest. She cannot ethically vote on issues that she places on the city council agenda for her own benefit.

We have checked with the Ravalli County Human Resources Office who said that most AA positions start between $8.52 and $11.77 per hour, depending on duties. According to the Bitterroot Job Service office, the average AA in "private industry" in Hamilton starts in the range of $12-$15 per hour, depending on duties. Given these guidelines, the appropriate starting salary range for the City Administrative Assistant should be $17,700-$31,200, with an average of about $24,450 per year.

We, therefore, firmly insist that the AA to the Mayor make no more than $24,450 per year, full-time ($11.75 per hour). This position must also not have supervisory duties or any policy-making or budgeting responsibilities whatsoever. To ignore this requirement is to place the mayor and city councilors in violation of their oath of office, and eligible for recall, and/or criminal charges for mismanagement of public funds, a very serious offense.

Additionally, City Council procedures clearly prohibit the mayor from voting or breaking ties on any expenditures of money. (see Section 4, page 7). All financial matters require a 2/3 vote of the city council. Four (4) councilors should have passed the salary resolution, not 3-3 with the mayor tie break.

We are becoming increasingly concerned with the behavior of Mayor Randazzo, and of certain city councilors, who seem to frequently ignore the law when it suits them to do so. We have lots of examples, and a number of citizens have come forward with the same concerns, and even more examples.

What is the lesson learned here? Unfortunately, citizens of Hamilton, you elected the people who make decisions in government, and only you really have the power to guide them once they're in office. What these people do affects you, your family, and your community. Hamilton voters elected an unproven and inexperienced amateur who has short-circuited the City structure, and caused more chaos than we've ever had before. She has divided the council and then took sides, thus disenfranchising the citizens who support a different perspective. A mature, unbiased professional would never do this.

The lesson to be learned is that elections really do matter. It's too bad that voters "tune out" after election day, at their eventual peril. When things turn out wrong, the politicians may apologize and walk away, leaving their mess behind - but it's the people who wind up sorry. Wake up, citizens! Get involved. Otherwise you have no one to blame but yourself.

Bob Frost, Lorraine Crotty, Ellen Prosser, Dave Snell
Hamilton

©2006 Bitterroot Star
This site was Done By Dooney