City Council - Regular Meeting

folks. We're going to hope go ahead and get started. If everyone could take their seats, please. Thanks very much. And for those that attended the work session, appreciate that as well. I'm going to go ahead and call this meeting of the White Fish City Council to order for January 20th, 2026. And just for the record, uh, Councelor Kalabiano is joining us this evening, albeit he's not okay. Well, I apologize. He he is excused from the meeting this evening. We will start with our pledge of allegiance. And Chris, do you want to lead us tonight?

To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nation indivisible with liberty and justice for us all.

Thank you, Chris. We'll move on to our communications from the public. Just as an FYI, we do not have any public hearings scheduled for this evening. So, anything you would like to bring to the attention of the council, please approach the podium and your name and address for the record. Please, as chairman, and pursuant to state law, and the spirit of efficiency, I am going to limit public comment to three minutes per individual this evening just to allow everyone the opportunity to speak tonight. So, Who would like to begin? Daniel.

Hello there, mayor and council. Uh Daniel Sitter with Housing Whitefish. I'll hand out this uh just bridging the gap report here. Uh but just wanted to give you a little bit of an update on the workforce rental assistance program. Um so recently our organization just served our hundth household through the workforce rental assistance program. Uh that is close to 200 individuals served in households living here in Whitefish. Um a lot of those folks have kids. Um a lot of them are single parents. Um in total we've uh distributed right around $320,000 in funds towards rental assistance. Um I I've heard the argument, hey, are you just making landlords money by doing this? Um I think the counter to that is we're not going above and beyond what their current rent is. Um, most of the time when landlords are setting rent, they're looking across the market. Um, and by and large, most are responding to the needs and where the market is at. Um, and also just the other side is on average $277 that people now back have back in their pocket are able to be spent locally. Um, we also have 72 different employers, 55 different landlords. Um, and so a lot of people are starting to be served uh through this program. Um, so just want to say thank you to council. Um, we're also near nearing our matching goal for this first year for the fiscal year. Uh, so just wanted to give you an update on that. Uh, and then just very briefly, um, I just wanted to speak towards the depot park project. Uh, I know that there have been, um, some renewed and some, uh, new proposals for that project. And I just wanted to give from our perspective at Housing Whitefish, just real briefly where we're at. Um for us the main barrier for uh moving forward with that project has been the the lean that's been on the property. Um, and I know that there are um, you know, yes, there's the lean on the property and the the first condition that we had for taking over the project

was a clean title and ability to transfer that project and um, my organization, board, a lot of the partners we've worked with just didn't feel comfortable taking on the risk of moving forward with engaging with uh, builders and the whole other process that goes into getting that done um, without a clear and definite timeline. Uh, and so I think just moving forward with that process, especially around an RFP, I'd really hope that you consider just making sure that before that RFP goes out, having a very clear process for when that lean is removed or a timeline for that. Uh, just so that you can really compare and um, have the best projects um, best project possible. Um, and just quickly remind you, Housing Whitefish um, supported an RFP from the beginning and asked the city um, if that was going to be part of it. So, just wanted to give you a little brief perspective on our position um for that. Uh thank you for your time and I'll just hand you these reports real quick so you can peruse.

Thanks Daniel. Appreciate it.

Julio Julio Delgado, 630 Caro Avenue. I'm here about the usage of Memorial Field or the lack of thereof. Uh, I think you received a letter from uh our lawyer uh Lucas Foust uh about three weeks ago about our concerns and it was dismissed the letter as not factual. Um but it's kind of kind of funny because everything that was in that letter came from the annual Glacier Twins report. Every bit of information. Uh, I think that we could have pointed you in the right direction where the red flags would be when you look at at the agreement. The agreement that the Glacier Twins have is is just unbelievable. 55 years. The general public was not aware of this. 55 years at $1 a year with the ability to subleasase to anybody they want for as much money as they want to charge. And on top of that, they get 80%, you know, of of a cell tower that sits on city property. That money could be used for a lot of different programs. And by the way, we've gone through the chain of command. We've gone to the Twins, we've gone to the city, we've gone to the park board, and now we're coming here for a remedy. Um, we want them to open their books, but they won't. So this was this was the the only thing we had to go by and the city was good enough to give us this information. They're a taxexempt entity and those books should be open to the public. Taxpayers should know where that money is being spent. I ask you, do you paint your house every year? Do you stain your your deck every

year? I I don't think so, but that's what they're listing every year. They're they're $9,000 for staining the bleachers every year. Plumbing, same thing. Concession stand, uh, bathrooms, new fixtures, tune of as much as $25,000. Okay. Uh, you have uh I don't know when it started, but the city allowed them to start listing maintenance costs. $65,000 to Mole Memorial Field. Listen, I coached for 20 years. I know what it takes. $65,000. They list on these annual reports as expenditures. $13,000 for for plowing Memorial Field. When's the last time you saw anybody plowing Memorial Field? I mean, 13 grand. We were told by the city the only way that you could break this disagreement with them is that if they broke the agreement themselves. We're trying to provide you that information. We think that we have the goods that they have not acted in good faith and they've misused that money that is coming out of that cell tower that's supposed to be for improvements on Memorial Field. They're using it for their general fund. But we have no way of proving it. And that's why we came to the park board. They told us that the park board and the city are the only ones that they're going to give their books to. They have nothing to hide, I guess. Huh. I I I think that by us proving that they have broken broken the the agreement, the city should hold the cards, not the Glacier twins. When you go into negotiations

like Maria Buts is doing now, the city should have the upper hand, not the Glacier Twins. You realize, one last comment, you realize that their program is dying. They had 13 players last or two years ago, 11 players last year, one kid from Whitefish, one. It takes 18 to fill a roster. But you know what that agreement reads, how it reads, if they don't have a team, it doesn't matter. They could have concerts. They could still charge the school for the use of that facility. Okay? They still get the money from the tower. Who's making money there? I mean, it's not you're not looking. You know, we've been accused that we're trying to ruin their program. That's absolutely the contrary is true. They don't realize that their players are coming from the high school in Columbia Falls and Whitefish and they're not allowing those kids to play on that memorial field. Those kids should be able to walk out the back door of that high school and walk on that field that belongs to the city of Whitefish, not the Glacier Twins. You've allowed them to privatize that field and we're totally against it and we're not going away. There's a quick remedy, and I'm sorry I'm taking too long. There's a quick remedy. All that has to happen is that the city, the twins, and the school walk the grounds before the season, look at any damages and then walk the grounds afterwards. Whoever is using that field, if there's any damage, they're responsible to fix. The meters for lights and and for water gets turned on for the high school when they're using the facility. It goes to

the Glacier Twins when they're using the facility. Real simple. But there's no way they should be getting $6,000 for baseball and $7,000 for football. They've made over $200,000 off that cell tower and 80 to 90,000 from the high school. Where's that money going? Has anybody even went down there to see what kind of improvements they've made? I think not. And so these funds are being misused and we can prove it. We don't want to go to litigation, but we're not going away. Thank you. Thanks, Julio. Ryan.

Hello. Ryan Kefir, 630 Baker Avenue. I know item number seven is not a public hearing. Um, and I know you have a staff report, but I've been speaking to quite a few people in the community that share similar uh sentiments. So, I wanted to share a couple of statements um regarding ordinance number 26. Um, I would like to ask council not to pass ordinance uh number 26. The architecture review committee is an essential tool to ensure the quality of architecture and the built environment which Whitefish values and enjoys. Um, and it's important that it meets a certain minimum. This council spent the work session before this meeting going over the growth policy, one of the most important planning instruments for envisioning the future of this city. Ordinance number 26 strips the city of its ability to implement key goals of the growth policy with unchecked building designs that have great potential to degrade the aesthetic quality of Whitefish. In my three years on the review committee, we have seen submitted careful and thoughtful designs which complement the character and style of Whitefish. We've also seen designs submitted that blatantly go against the architectural review standards. For example, in the past few months, we have reviewed designs for an O'Reillys auto parts and a Rocky Mountain car wash, both in extremely prominent locations on Highway 93 and both intending to import their corporate branding as storefronts. something that is explicitly against the vision of Whitefish as determined by the community. In both of these cases, the committee worked with the applicants to explain the concerns with the design and we ended up with building solutions which benefited both Whitefish and the applicants. The committees worked hard to work with everybody and the result for years has been a better built environment for everyone to enjoy. Um, I don't think that the city or council should be threatened by outside interests forcing us to allow any lowquality, loweffort, and characterless building to blight our streets.

Whitefish has stood up to stronger threats in the past. The way our community works and looks and feels is our prerogative, not the states. Outside legislation should have no jurisdiction here in this regard. Rather than recklessly submit and take power away from the community members that voted to implement these tools that positively shape our city, Whitefish should fight back against this. It is our right to have a vision for this community and protecting our built environment is an integral part of that vision. With this ordinance, there will be effectively no protection. Removing the committee removes enforcement and while the door is open for unregulated building, irreversible damage to the fabric of our town will occur. Uh so please stand up for Whitefish and do not pass ordinance 26. Um I do have another statement from somebody who intended to be here this evening but was unfortunately unable to and he asked me to pass this along. It's shorter than mine. Dear city council members, oh I'm sorry. Uh this is from uh Eric Payne, a Whitefish business owner and resident. Uh dear city council members, I've asked Ryan Kefir to relay my thoughts on tonight's discussion regarding the future of the Whitefish Architectural Review Committee. I have enjoyed immensely the opportunity to work with the various committees over the past two decades. I took a turn myself for a few years back as a committee member 2010 to 2012. That time spent as a member gave me a better insight into the dedication, passion, and goals of the committee as it helps guide developers and residents to not just adhere to the city's guideline, but to embrace its value to maintain the core character of Whitefish in their design strategy for each project. Of the many projects that I've had the pleasure of working with the ARC on, I've always felt each of the members goal has been to work with my team to find solutions. Never to stand in the way of a project, but instead to help a project simply

stand for what Whitefish represents. Yes, there were times where I did not agree with the ARC, but never because they were attempting to stop a project only to find a solution that better fit the spirit of the guideline. Uh, as the founder of both a contracting firm and an architecture firm, both based in downtown Whitefish, we enjoy our interactions with the Whitefish ARC on every Whitefish project. As an architecture firm, we work across the Mountain West and many other resort regions, including Park City, Jackson, Sun Valley, and others. We work with a similar ARC groups in each of those and enjoy engaging with and learning from them. I would urge the council to continue to embrace the role of the Whitefish Architecture Review Committee and its important role for the entire community. The important fact that the ARC is made up of volunteer residents of Whitefish is critical. This will always ensure that it stays grounded to its core mission and its ability to connect with the community development projects. Thank you, Eric Payne.

Thanks, Ryan. Appreciate it.

Mayor and City Council, my name is Mary Beth Morand. I live at 604 Gettys Avenue and I'm the executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Flathead Valley. I would like to support and amplify housing whitefish's request for an RFP for the de development of depot park. Um we are all aware that there's a lean and I would urge you to circulate the RFP even while the lean is there. We understand that the lean is a hindrance but we could get started on that RFP now. And the reason that I'm asking for this is that should Habitat for Humanity of Flathead Valley be awarded the RFP, we need sufficient time to do homeowner selection and then also for the whole construction process. So, I know it's cold and icy now, but April and the thaw is around the corner for us. Um, but we really usually put our applications for homes out at least for two months and then we have a very rigorous process for selecting homeowners and we we would like to embark upon that process. Um, but anyhow in RFP you're going to need a month turnaround. So having full confidence that the lean will be resolved, I'd love to see that RFP circulated um in the near future. And I just want to thank you very much for being transparent and um having processes like RFPs. Thank you.

Thanks, Marth.

Hi everyone. Leonette Gal 121 Mil Avenue, apartment B. Um so I'm going to bring it out really quick and then I'm going to bring it back in. Uh as a leader with Flathead Democracy, part of our work is looking at national politics and how it applies locally to us here. Um, so one of the things we've been discussing lately, as I'm sure everyone in our community has been discussing lately, is the atrocities, civil rights and human rights violations that we've seen coming out of Minneapolis at the hands of ICE. That's Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, CP, CBP, Customs and Border Patrol, all under the umbrella of DHS, which is the Department of Homeland Security. Um, we're seeing people being drugged out of their homes without warrants, procedures not typical, very accepted law enforcement procedures not being followed. Um, whole communities terrorized. American citizens arrested and brutalized for standing up for their neighbors in the face of injustice. And I know that every single person in this room has heard about this. You may not agree, but you've heard about it. So why does that matter to us here? because we have CPB in our community. Customs and Border Patrol is right down the road. They try to run me over with a truck in September. So, I'm here tonight to ask you because I live here and this is my community and this is where I have a small modicum of power and influence, right? I can't control anything right now that's happening at the national level with the current administration, but I can talk to you all and talk to my community here about what our relationship is with DHS. And right now, it's a little too close for comfort. I'm asking for the community and the city councilors to support um a stand of non-ooperation or non- collaboration with DHS ICE and CPB

CPP. So no data sharing, no phone calls, no use of any of our counties and or sorry of our city's resources that we pay for with our taxpayer funds. They do not deserve to be used by a rogue, overreaching federal government agency that has no business policing or doing any work in our community. We have law enforcement agency here. They are not needed in the capacity that they are currently operating right now. Thank you. Thanks, Lena.

My name is Reverend Johntock, 534 Summers Avenue. I'm basically here to just second the same proposal she said. I urge non-compliance. Thank you. Thanks, Reverend. Who's next?

Uh, good evening. My name is Ray Queen and um I live on Paragan Lane. I grew up in Whitefish and um just want to tell you I grew up on Fur Avenue right behind Memorial Field and I can't tell you how many childhood dreams were made for me as a kid hanging out at Memorial Field being a bat boy being a ball boy hanging out watching Julio coach as a young kid and uh being a part of a program that really had a community that backed it. Uh, I was fortunate enough to grow up and continue to play baseball and and play through the Glacier Twins and every memory still sticks with me playing little league baseball at Jack Zurfield. Just being a part of this community, knowing that this community really backed the kids because it just you could feel it as a small community uh back in the 70s and I can't tell you how important that is to me. I know Chris Schuststrom grew up in this town playing little league baseball and it was a childhood dream. What really gets me is is we have three classes if we don't get Memorial Field opened back up. This will be three years in a row that our Whitefish Bulldogs do not get to use Memorial Park. And that's what breaks my heart. I don't think there's anything more important as adults, as us looking out for kids in this community because what happens is when when they recognize that this city council took brief action and and serious action on getting this thing resolved this year. They know their community is behind them and they play better. They create a chemistry immediately because they know the community fought for them. And when you mention Memorial Field to these young kids, I ran Babe Ruth for 14 years. I know these kids and I can see the spark

in their eyes. When you mention Memorial Park May open, you can see that that spark. And I just beg you as a community member, let's put everything else aside because there's no better feeling as a kid growing up in this town knowing this community stands behind you as a as a bulldog or as a Glacier twin than when because when I played here, that's what it was. And for some reason, it's been lost and and gone into a dark alley. And now we have kids paying $3,500 a summer to play somewhere else to play on a travel team. That speaks volumes. You don't have to pay that much to play for the Glacier Twins, but they're paying it from going somewhere else. So, there's a lot going on here, but besides all of that, these kids are really being robbed of our memorial field because there's plenty of parents that are parents of today's kids that help build that facility and I'm one of them. That field used to not have grass on the infield. In 1984, we put it in and I take pride in that. it and because the community helped us and we played hard for the community and when we took state I just felt like Whitefish was my place forever because of the bonding I was able to to make with the community. You may not know everybody but you you played for them. And that's really what I'm here to do today is let's do this for the kids. Let's stop everything else. Let's stop the political games or who owes what and this and that. Let's look at the kids first and then move forward because I think great things will happen after that. If we get it back to you guys in charge of the of Memorial Field and let the schools and the and the twins or whoever it's a it's a public facility.

Let's let's treat it that way. And I appreciate the time up here and I know you guys have kids at heart too and most people do out here too as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Ray. Appreciate the comments. Hi, Bella Brown. I live in Col on Colorado. Um, I was gonna be talking about three things um today. One, just um well, I guess two are connected. Um, but I wanted to um I guess ask y'all to whenever you have the growth plan happening to um look at climate action and make sure that you have a like fiscal responsibility to also like actually have growth in the plan. So, like I hope y'all are aiming high and um y'all look at mixed use and and um and put it back in some of these chapters that they were taken out of, but also um transportation um having less cars on the road is only going to help in regards to climate change and other stuff. So, um just kind of using a climate action lens um when you're looking at the growth plan and doing that. Um but also yeah um in regards to the Border Patrol, I just feel like um the level of incompetence shown um in that organization, we don't want anything to do with it. We already got sued as a city. Like we want our money to actually be used for stuff that like climate action and stuff. So, I just encourage you all to um not comply and um try to avoid when possible if not take them out of the city. Um that's all I got.

Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Avery. Uh 215 7th Street West. Uh I'm here speaking for Whiteish students for city government and I've been here at a lot of growth meetings. I'm sure you've seen all the group of Wish students here today. That may be outside the normal age range of participants here, but all of us are here today to second Lynette's statement for non-compliance with ICE Border Patrol and DHS. If the police's purpose is to protect and serve, it starts with non-compliance here. Uh there's no better way to protect the citizens of Whitefish than not participating with an organization such as that. uh and speaking with students at Whitefish High School as I've had many discussions with them. This is a general this is a general condition and a general opinion of the students of Whitefish High School. And so as I've been at the growth planning meetings uh to look for the growth of Whitefish and the future of Whitefish, it starts with non-compliance. Thank you.

Thanks Avery Keegan.

Hello Keegan Seboler 306 Lur Avenue executive director of shelterf. Two quick issues or two quick just things I wanted to bring up. Uh couldn't get to in a minute. Now I have three minutes so all the time in the world. Um first is I just wanted to you know sitting there listening to that presentation at the work session and I was just struck by how much work city staff and in particular Allen has done throughout this process and I just think more people need to give him the credit. Um even when I disagree with him even when I make him do a ton of extra work on like population projections and stuff like that. Um he engages in good faith and I think all of city staff does. I just wanted to put that on the record. Um, the second thing is I just wanted to mention that ordinance to repeal the architectural review committee. Um, I'm not urging you one way or another because it's not a public comment period and it's legally required um by state mandate. I guess I just wanted to use it as a little reflection period for the city to think about the way in which our aesthetic restrictions have impacted the city. Um, I think shelter WF is very excited to see the architectural review committee end its tenure. Um, aesthetic aesthetics restrictions through the architectural review committee increase the cost of housing, hamper local businesses, and negatively impact the natural creativity that develops in a city. Um, furthermore, I think it was a symbol, it was a symbol of a city that was more concerned about aesthetic and character of a physically built environment than it was about the people that can live in those buildings. Um, I think it's more important whether someone wants to build a light life in white fish as to whether that the life they build has a particular color of final sighting. Um, so I think just moving forward, um, I know there have been suggestions of trying to incorporate parts of the architectural review documents into zoning. Um, I think that would be a mistake. I think we need to um kind of move forward and think about other ways in which we can build the type of city we want without relying on narrow aesthetic preferences.

Thank you for your time. Thanks, Ke. And then Mary,

good evening. Oh, this is taller tonight. I like it. Cool. My name is Chris Shustrom, 504 Spokane Avenue. Uh I'm the chair of the heart of Whitefish and a founding board member of the heart of Whitefish. Um for as a quick review, we were founded in 2003 to work with the city and the very successful downtown business district master plan and many other projects over the last 23 years. Um regarding the growth policy, um it's been described as a 10,000 foot document. um vision, you know, very general, but if you read the goals and objectives specifically in the economic development plan, um economic development element, those are street level proposals. Uh the proposal to expand commercial uses in neighborhoods, the proposal to uh pursue paid parking in downtown, those are not 10,000 foot approaches. Um so as you go through that element I encourage you to consider that uh also um please remember that the growth that the economic development chapter lays the foundation for all of the subsequent chapters. Um mixed use is has been proposed in every single element of the growth policy so far with the exception of n uh environmental hazards and public facilities except uh our request is that except in the downtown business district or other areas of town where retail is currently permitted by writer conditionally um we respectfully request that the growth policy does not include mixed use or policies promoting ing retail use. This includes coffee shops and bike shops and sandwich shops. And the reason is no market analysis and data has been provided to support the need for more retail uses outside of the business district. Um desires have been expressed for a specific use such as a coffee

shop, but a desire is not a demonstrated demand that it's that is supported by market analysis and data. For our successful business district master plan, an economic analysis was undertaken that resulted in data that supported recommendations in the plan. A capacity diagram showing the supply of retail and the potential expansion and the demand for retail um and made implementation of the plan successful. Uh we had a housing analysis done professionally and formally that resulted in data that supported the housing needs assessment that's you know providing guidance for us. We have invested tens of millions of dollars in our downtown. We need to protect that investment especially since downtown is once again fragile. We have uh over 89,000 square feet. At the planning commission meeting, I said 89,000 um vacant retail parcels, but we have 80 over 89,000 square feet of vacant retail parcels and retail space in our downtown right now. Uh we need a strategy to fill vacant storefronts and parcels. Uh if and when these are filled, we can look to other areas to expand. Uh we also need to build out a robust townwide active transportation network. uh make the bike and pedestrian connections in the downtown area identified to the downtown area identified in our adopted plans to ensure that all neighborhoods are equ have equitable, safe, and convenient access to the downtown business district goods and services. We ask that you don't damage our downtown, which is the economic engine of our community, with unsupported proposals. They should be backed by data uh in this plan. Also, I I hope that you

received the note that I sent you, hopefully clearing up um what I hope um or would like to be positive about and believe is a misunderstanding about the uh suggested edit edits um s submitted by the heart of whitefish. Um those were compiled by the heart of whitefish um from community comments from other organizations input and that's all supported in the public record. um to say otherwise is false. And I hope that you can you know separate the wheat from the chaff when you're when you're discussing that and evaluating um different um comments or approaches of uh from different parts of the community. So thanks so much for the opportunity to comment and be a part of the process. Thanks, Chris. Mary. Good evening, Mary Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead, 137 South Main in Callispel. Um, I want to You have a letter in your packet tonight regarding the uh growth policy. I'm not going to speak to that because you have that. I would say that um for those of us who are challenged a little bit visually, it would be really nice to have some additional monitors so for a work session like that we could actually read along and follow or to have that text available um so that we could look at it on our laptops or phones as the presentation's being made. Um, I know I'm not alone in that and that it would be really help us to follow and to um understand those presentations better. Uh, I do want to talk about the lakes shore protection meeting that the county held on January

14th. That was a workshop on changes to the county regulations. It was a packed room. There was over an hour and a half of uh presentations from a diverse section. Not only was your planner there um but we had representatives from Ashley Lake, Flathead Lake, Bitterroot Lake um in the Big Fork community. Uh so it was a diverse group of folks and the overwhelming message was uh there are changes that are needed and uh to their credit and uh and to compliment them. The planning board was very receptive and they have said that they would like to hold at least two more workshops uh to consider changes. Um, I included in your uh our comments in your packet uh the article that came out in today's beacon talking about that hearing. I also included a list of 19 recommendations that we made as part of our comments uh during that hearing. Um and we preface that by saying we really want feedback. We're coming to this with ideas. And so I shared that with you because I hope that from your Lakeshore Protection Committee staff and individuals of you who I know are uh deeply connected to the lake. Um I appreciate feedback. Um, if you think we're headed the wrong direction, I will say that there we're hearing mixed concerns about the equilibrium dynamic beaches as to whether or not they're appropriate for White Fish Lake. Uh there's a lot of support for them on some of the other lakes, but we're hearing push back from some lake owners um as to that and would like to uh have

an opportunity to visit with you on a separate item. Uh, I just learned today that the Flatty County Health Department is going to be holding a hearing at 1:00 on January 26. They are looking to update their septic regulations. Um, one of the proposals that we think is important for that board to consider is to require that um, in an appropriate manner. And I know these things always have to be conditioned, but we think it should be the standard practice to require on all lakes in Flathead County that advanced septic systems be required. Um, we also think and they're looking at changing uh some of the regulations regarding when a uh septic tank is in a 100red-year flood plane and it needs to be replaced. We want to see that that um replacement requires an advanced system. Um but first that if there's area on the lot outside the flood plane that it be required to move there. I know that you have a representative um Grant Hughes on the health department. I don't know Grant if you can provide me some contact information. I'd like to uh visit with him about these upcoming changes. One of the other changes that's being proposed that I think you need to look at is I think it was in 201 14 or I can't it's at least 10 years ago the county moved to advanced or level two systems and moved away from gravityfed uh septic systems or drain fields. Um there's a proposal to bring those back which I think would threaten water quality throughout the county. Um, and so I hope that your representative can

be made aware of this. Um, and I'm glad I did not forward the notice about the meeting, but I'll do that to Michelle. I'm sure your representative is aware of it, but we encourage that. And then finally, um I would strongly support uh the comments earlier that you do not disband your architectural review committee and at the very least you postpone that tonight and consider alternatives. I think we need to be able to go back to the legislature and talk about the importance that a committee like that can be. And even if it can't be fully um uh regulatory going forward, I think it needs to be advisor advisory. And so I'd like you to look at other alternatives before moving forward with adopting that resolution tonight. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. Who's next? If you know, you know. Okay. [clears throat] For the record, [sighs and gasps] for the safety of myself and my family, my name is Z and my address is 418 East 2nd Street. I repeat that is Z. That's spelled Z E. So if and when you feel compelled to comment on my behavior, I expect you to refer to me accordingly. I dedicate my remarks this evening to the memory of Renee Nicole Good. In my 50 plus years of social justice activism while exercising my first amendment right to petition the government. I had never experienced an elected officials attempt to censor my speech, my protected speech until the January 5th council meeting. Steve, here is a quote for you. Quote, "What's happening across the country with respect to the First Amendment? Of course, it's terrible. We are no longer a free country when the government starts censoring things." Who said that? none other than Steve Quinnell on a local podcast. Steve, as a teacher of government, you need to know that offensive speech

is as protected in council chambers as it is on the street corner. The next time you quote, "Try to lead with your heart," keep that in mind. John, the principles for civil discourse, excuse me, the principles for civil dialogue resolution 0709 is not a law. As mayor of the Whitefish city in the county in the land of Flathead, you can limit speaking time, but you cannot censor the content or modality of public comment. council, I will remind you that it was your choice to circle the wagons instead of publicly acknowledging the racial profiling and unlawful detention of Beckair El Rehifo del Castillo. The chickens have come home to roost. The wheels of justice turn slowly but grind exceedingly fine. To quote Malcolm X, truth is on the side of the oppressed. Thank you. Who's next?

Paul. Good evening. Uh Paul McCann, 340 Summers Avenue. Um well, before I get started, I just wanted to comment that I've been going to quite a few of the uh vision sessions and the planning board meetings and and u I've been very impressed by those meetings. There's been a lot just an extraordinary amount of public comment has been allowed. It's almost a cru. It's just amazing to me. And uh you know the and the planning board seems to work well together. They don't always vote together, but generally speaking, they they come up with a discussion, debate it, they vote, and it it seems to flow really well. And and I've gone to the open houses and the staff has been really helpful in answering my questions. And then then the last thing I've seen is the consultants they brought in. They seem to they tailor their analysis their report to our community. I was really quite impressed by it. I thought well it's just not a canned presentation but it's actually they were listening to us and they presented I thought a good product. So I wanted to comment about that. But the on the economic aspect of things, um I'm a I'm I'm concerned about our downtown and I it's something that I truly love and uh and I see the vacancies and I I just thought to myself when Allan had his presentation tonight, one of the things people wanted to see is local restaurants for locals that could afford. And I just thought about it and I thought, well, geez, in the last year or so, Jersey Boys left town to South uh Rap and Roll, they left uh or closed, whatever. Central Avenue Bakery, another favorite of mine, it's gone. And uh and and of course the liquor store, it left, but the uh so I

they're all going south or or they're closing their doors. And and it kind of leaves me believe is the downtown is becoming a a real tourist downtown, which is fine. I love going down there and there's some fan, you know, there's still very good restaurants and such and got city hall here, but uh the it seems like the town the downtown is actually moving south. I mean, it's going like south of 13th Street. If you just look down there, you know, what do we have? The grocery stores are down there. All the liquor stores down there, Walgreens down there. Um, you know, the mall's down there and, uh, Melson's is down there now. It's it's really if you're looking for at workforce housing, that's where the the workers, you know, are going to find their, you know, their services. I mean, everybody talks about uh, you know, want to do recreational so forth, but on a day-to-day basis, what do you want to do? You want to go to the grocery store, the hardware store, such? that's kind of where you want to go. And so I I think when you look at the zoning and the economic aspect of it, I think it's going to be south. I think it's really south of 13th Street is where where the uh where you get your services. And of course, south southern part of Whitefish is closer to Callispel in the north end where they provide all the big box stores. And that's what you know, my son's he he always goes to, you know, Walmart or so forth to get his things. They could afford it there. So that's that's something to consider. Thank you for your time.

Thanks, Paul.

My name is Jill Davis. I work on Central Avenue. I've worked in Whitefish for four years in the tourism industry. I live in Callispel because it's expensive to live in Whitefish. Lived in the valley since 2014. Even though I'm in tourism, I think that we should encourage economic diversity. Um, so when one industry goes down, um, there are other options. Um, it's getting harder for locals to just get a bite to eat that's affordable and and quickly. Um, like the gentleman before me, he mentioned some like Rap and Roll and some other restaurants that have moved and Jersey Boys have moved um out of the downtown area. Um, I do feel like Central Avenue is not for us anymore really. It's just for visitors. And I know we make a living off of visitors, but we shouldn't forget about those of us who make this place run. There would be no tourism industry if it weren't for the people that work in it. Um, also I feel like we're taking our life in our hands sometimes on 93 trying to get here to work in the winter. Yesterday there were like three people that ended up in the ditch within 30 seconds of me going by. Um, or maybe two days ago. Um I would like to see mixed use put back in the chapters economic I mean sorry the growth chapters has been taken out of um I would like to know that if I go to visioning session or whatever other kind of meeting uh that what I have to say is just going to is going to be just as important and carry just as much weight as someone who uh owns a business someone who just wants to stick to

tourism. We we need to make this work for all of us, not just some of us. Sounds like something Bernie Sanders would say. Um, it's probably where I got it. Um, also I would second or third or whatever, you know, what everybody else has said about not working with ICE or Border Patrol. It's um, [sighs] yeah, it's just it's really wrong what's happening. and we don't want to give them an opportunity to ruin anybody else's life if we can just avoid working with them or making things easier for them in any way. Um, Becker lost six days of his life. He he was probably terrified. He wasn't given food and water regularly as he should be. People are mistreated in ICE and Border Patrol custody. It's just not right. Um, so yeah, I'm not much of a public speaker, but thank you for listening and um, I really care about these issues. Thanks.

Thanks, Joel. Richard,

Mr. Mayor, counselors, Richard Hiller here in Whitefish. And uh, just to let you know that tomorrow uh, Dr. Erica Fischer is going, associate professor of uh civil and construction engineering at Oregon State University is doing a presentation at FVCC in the arts and technology uh room 139. Uh she's going to be speaking on improving structure resilience and structural systems affected by wildfire and man-made hazards. And uh if anybody's interested in a free lunch and if they're not already taken, the first 75 get a free lunch. Uh but again, that's for tomorrow. But I think it's worth attending. She's come to the valley before and spoken on fire issues. Uh to be followed uh by uh a second lecture on February 3rd by Dr. Paul uh Paul Hesburg uh who's got 48 years of fire wildland fire experience and he's going to be um discussing as well and this is all presented by fire safe flathead and I encourage uh your attendance or anybody else in um on the staff uh if they have the time uh and the inclination uh it'll be I'm sure worthwhile. Thank you.

Thanks Richard. Further public comment this evening? Not Rhonda don't have my glasses. Good evening. Uh Rhonda Fitzgerald, Love Avenue. One thing that I think is really important to think about in the growth policy is the population projection because that lays the groundwork for how many housing units you have to plan for. And that inflated housing projection is problematic. Currently on the Department of Commerce website, the CEIC produced a whole dashboard for using for communities to use for MLOPA. And on that dashboard right now, it's been updated with 2024 figures and it shows the population projection for whitefish for 2045 at under 11,000 people. And after this last year is also added in which was below 1%. It's going to come down again to be you know 10,500 or something like that. It's they're projecting 1% and as you get past 2030 or 2035 they're projecting you know half a percent down to 2% or something. I mean that's the department of commerce's projection. My understanding from the chief economist is that a community can pick which projection to use and um they're not mandating which one you guys pick. So to have a population projection that's radically inflated and also inflates the number of short-term rentals and second homes as something you need to address when those are only a few weeks in the

high season. We have a 52- week community and if we have to plan for, you know, mid July, that's just changing completely the complexion of the community for all of us who live here 52 weeks of the year. And so we kind of have to decide, are we a year-round community or are we a tourist community? And all evidence says we're a year-round community because the tourism season is very, very short. And to abandon downtown to the tourists is counter to what all the people who live in Whitefish value. And I know that this document is incredibly long and will be longer, but I really urge you to read the visioning um which is all posted on there. There were many different sessions. There were neighborhood sessions. There was an online there was a flip chart group which I understand was kind of dominated by the person with the magic marker. But um if you read through that which I have done twice I just think you're going to get some information that you need because what people said is they value their downtown and their neighborhoods and their small town character. And what they said they don't like is growth, sprawl, and short-term rentals. And I think you just really need to grapple with that. Go through, see how many people said mixed use. It's like a handful and probably the same person in every opportunity. So go through and read it for yourself and see what the community actually said they cared about. And these were open-ended comments. There was no steering. So, if someone said diversity, that could mean a lot of different things. Um, and I just think that if you're going to make these very, very critical decisions, you should really

not take my word for it. Read what people said. Um, and then the thing about mixed use, you know, mixed use is a technical term. It means a certain thing. It means multi-story buildings with groundf flooror commercial and apartments or condominiums above big buildings. That's what mixeduse means. It doesn't mean uh onestory coffee shop in your neighborhood. That's not what mixed use means to the development community. So, so this is kind of a loaded term. Um and I think that you need to understand that. The other thing is people just don't shop like they used to. Um, nationally 72% of discretionary shopping is in big box stores, Costco, Target, Walmart. 16% is online and only 12% is the kind of shopping that we think of on our main street and that's called experiential shopping now. And so, you know, think about yourself, think about how you shop, and then think about what is going to sustain our downtown going forward for the 45 weeks of the year that there aren't any visitors in town. And, you know, I could draw you a graph. You have resort tax. You can look at the lodging collections and you can see that this is not a year-round tourist town. This is a year-round town of residents who work here or possibly they work in Callispel or Columbia Falls or in Glacier Park and some people live in those towns and work in Whitefish and it's not always because they can't afford to live here. Some people cannot live here and I am committed myself and have spent I think eight years on the housing committee to

come up with real ways to create more housing for people who live here and you know the answer is market won't do it. So we're going to have to grapple with the fact that there needs to be deed restriction and partnerships with volunteerism, philanthropy, the city. That's how we can solve it so people can live here. But we're just going to have to do it that way because market isn't going to do it. Thank you. Thanks, Rhonda.

Uh my name is Anna Aster Pulsifer. My address is 747 North Valley Drive. And I haven't shown my face at many of these meetings in the past, but I can tell you here today I have heard interests that speak to myself and my intentions to come back here as an adult and live in Whitefish as an adult. Um, and I would like to stand here today to second the presentation from Miss Z. Um, I can tell you I have never heard violence or disrespect from her or the beliefs of myself and my family. uh no matter what the city government uh should never censor or discredit the speech of those who look out for the future of the white fish I have lived here lived in for 18 years now I can speak to the wonderful nature of our citizens and the progressive minds that exist within our community and I implore you today to think of myself and the students of whitefish standing firm to reject the discrediting of our local activists and to reject the compliance with ICE as a whole. Um, the atrocities are disgusting for me to see and I want the future of White Fish to be one that is inclusive to all, understanding of all, and something that I am proud to return home to. Thank you.

Thanks, Anna.

Hi, my name is Unity Loveless of Columbia Avenue, and today I'm here to second a lot of the comments about ICE, especially Avery's about high school students. And I would like to remind all of you that us here, we're all educated on what's happening in Minneapolis and in the world and that none of us are blind to that. And so when we see it a help um affecting us on a local level, as Miss C said and many others have said, we know who to look to um whether that be the city of Whitefish or the city of Callispel and that we ultimately know who to hold accountable. Um, and that all of us can recognize that this does not align with the values of Whitefish and what we're built on and what we continue to want to to be be. And I think it's really important as this continues to be an issue that we think about the Whitefish that we are and recognize that we do not want to be a part of any of the atrocities being committed by the DHS as a whole and that Whitefish ultimately should not be compliant with ICE in any capacity. Thank you.

Thank you, Unity. Further public comment from those present tonight. Michelle, anyone online? Uh, yes, Nathan, go ahead and unmute your mic, please. Oh, we're not able to hear you. Hold on. Our it will do something.

We're waiting. Sorry, Nathan. We're working on it. Brand, do you want to speak, please? Sure.

Um, I'm Marty Brandt. I'm at 575 Armory Road. Uh, please note that I'm making my comment tonight as a member of the public, not representing any board or organization. The whole economic chapter even happened before I was on the planning commission. So, just a note. I had planned to just submit my economic comment and that contains important ideas on equal treatment. So, please read it. I'd planned to comment on the economic chapter specifically. So, I didn't have a ton of time to prepare this statement. But because of recent developments with Heart of Whitefish submitting their consultant report on mixed use, I bumped up the timeline on some research I'd planned to send. I plan to also send a report on mixed use. So, great minds think alike, I guess. But during a future session so you guys would have more time to space out my various ideas. Um anyway, uh because of timing, I sent this mixeduse research for this meeting. There was probably a better way to send the info, but I can hopefully circle back and find a better process for next time. Um hopefully no one minds any formatting issues that happened because of that condensed timing. Uh I wrote a report on mixed use over a few weeks. Um, I wrote it at 5 in the morning before my kids woke up. Uh, I wrote this because there's so much information supporting mixed use for communities. And I know we're all sick of probably hearing about this topic, but anyway, I wanted to share the information with you guys so you can make an informed decision. Whatever your decision might be, at least you could say we had good info. I also sent this mixed well I sent the mixed use report for the info but also I sent it now to show you this process. This is the level at which I'm able to participate. I can find good source materials. I can comment. I can write things in my limited free time but I don't have the

connections or the money to hire a firm. And if that's required so that my comments received preferred treatment then please tell me to stop coming. I will never be able to participate at that level. The heart of Whitefish economic draft and consultant report present the same questions regarding the nature of this growth policy process. Questions about equal opportunity. Expertise in a subject should be valued and considered, but everyone should be given the same treatment. We won't all get what we want, but I believe that everyone deserves the same system. We shouldn't have to pay to elevate our voices. We shouldn't privilege one set of public comments as the only set of comments discussed for the economic chapter. I don't want anyone with any perspective to be excluded, including those with whom I disagree. But I also don't want a two-tier system in which there are some preferred voices and then everybody else. So, thank you.

Thanks, Marty. Michelle, let's try again. Uh Nathan, if you want to go ahead and unmute your mic. All right. Can you hear me now? Yeah. Still can't hear you. I'm sorry. Hold on.

I'm gonna keep the um Can you try one more time? Uh go ahead and try one more time, Nathan. Last thing. Last thing. I'm going to go ahead and keep the public communications open for those that are joining us remotely, but we are going to move on until the IT situation's figured out. Any volunteer board reports from the audience? How about the council? Not seeing any, we'll move on to our consent agenda. You do have the minutes and closed from the special and regular meetings from January 5th. Can I have a motion, please? Move to approve the consent agenda as presented. Is there a second to the motion?

Seconded by councelor Fury. I believe he got you, Steve. Um, all those in favor, please raise your hand. Those opposed like sign. And that motion does carry unanimously. We have no public hearing scheduled for this evening. So, we'll skip on to item seven, communications from our city attorney regarding ordinance 26-1 to repeal title two, chapter 10 of the architectural review committee of the city of Whitefish city code. And this will be on a first reading. Angie, thanks.

Good evening, mayor and council members. Um, so my staff report I think starts at 600 page 630 of your 635 page um, packet. I'm not going to make anyone happy with this. Um, so I'll be quick about it. Title two, chapter 10 of the Whitefish City Code establishes an architectural review committee um, which is to review and at this point to make a recommendation to staff on applications submitted to the individuals. by to the city by individuals or entities proposing to construct commercial industrial public or municipal buildings or two unit town houses or multifamily residential. Um I would like to acknowledge I completely agree with Brian that did public comment earlier the ARC has been instrumental in creating a well-designed community that is aesthetically pleasing for citizens and visitors in 2023. As you all know, the legislature passed Senate Bill 407, which prohibits municipalities from requiring review from an external board with um respect to compliance with local design review criteria. We did change our code at that point and made the ARC simply a recommendation. They were, I think, an incredible resource to staff and I will say I think they were actually a resource to developers because they're getting free advice on the design of their buildings. Um, we did receive a letter from the Frontier Institute challenging the fact that we still require ARC review, which we don't. Again, it's a recommendation and um in the speaking with the League of Cities and Towns, they did recommend that we no longer require it. So, um,

sadly, again, because I think they've been a huge asset to the city and really appreciate their time and the effort that they've put in, we do respectfully recommend that the council adopt the ordinance and repeal SE title 2 section 10 of the city code. And again, thank all the members of the ARC for their efforts. They put in a lot of time and have done a lot of good things for the city. Thanks, Angie. Questions? Frank.

Yeah, I do. I uh Angie, I'm u as you know, I'm a big fan of this. I understand what the legislature did. We've used them simply as a not a required board or approval. We've offered them as a consultant essentially for staff and for any developer that might want to participate. we can't keep it in that form and still comply with uh what the legislature did to us.

I don't think we can, Frank. Truthfully, um so we have always required that um individuals go through it, but when we changed our ordinance after the 2023 legislature, we basically made the staff the final, you know, like they made the decision, but we required them to go through architectural review. I really I don't think we I don't think I don't think that we are compliant and I am very very worried if we continue not to be compliant. And again, it's very strange because other cities do it the same way that we've been doing it by using it as a resource and they're just not being targeted like Whitefish is. Um so it's kind of where we are.

I understand what you just said. My um my follow-up question really is is there any form I mean we have architectural rules we have architectural uh requirements um we've asked that board to be

essentially the clearing house to ensure that our architectural review or architectural requirements from the building code are in are being complied with. Are we now in a position where we still have those architectural rules or requirements, but the staff has to make those decisions?

Um, yes, to a certain degree. Although I will tell you that Senate bill which is now uh uh state law 763 or 2302 says that [clears throat] local design review standards imposed by local government must be clear, objective, and necessary to protect public health or safety or to comply with federal law. So that's a bit where we're hamstrung right now, right? we'd always justified our architectural review sty you know standards as you know um not public health or safety basically I mean that's building code so I think what the state legislature really did is we're going to have to really evaluate those architecture review statutes probably take them ordinances and probably take them out of their own chapter and find a way to make them comply with public health or safety so

okay so We're in a process perspect. Yes. And I think we're going to do that as part of our new zoning rewrite as part of Malupa. Okay. Thank you. Further questions, Steve? And then Rebecca? So, if I understand correctly, there could potentially be a problem with our the way our zoning code reads, too, because it's it has elements of those architectural standards in them. Is that what you're also saying?

No, not necessarily zoning code, but we have our own separate chapter for architectural review standards. And to be fair, most of them are should like you should consider this, not you must consider this. And I think um I heard an idea I think it was from Jamie actually that like we should do like a playbook.

Okay. Exactly. I think we can still do that. I think we can still have suggestions for people because I mean I think that the only good part about this bill is I think people are going to want to come. They're going to want to make look pretty. It's white fish. And I think if we have suggestions like Jamie suggested that they're going to maybe take a hard look at those. I think we can also build some of our standards directly into the zoning. We just need to tie them to health or public welfare. I see. Safety, safety, not welfare. We have no We have no welfare anymore.

Uh my my bigger question is why couldn't we make this as a just so if somebody comes in with a project that's it doesn't apply to single family homes that was misstated tonight. Um, but if it applies to bigger projects, why couldn't it just be it comes a big project comes in and Dave says, "Well, here's an opportunity for you to to talk to our architectural review board." And then it's just a checkbox. Did you or didn't you? doesn't make any doesn't have any bearing on whether they get approved or not. But it it does keep that board in place who has a lot of not only historical knowledge about the way things go here, but also a lot of technical knowledge that can, you know, we're getting ready to pass a growth policy that's going to say something that we want to protect the small town feel,

the character of our community, and we're also sitting here right now talking about getting rid of the architectural review committee, which those two things don't add up to me. I agree with you. Um, you know, and we talked about that is staff is having it be, you know, not mandatory. Somebody can come in and say, "Yeah, I want to do it." I don't know how much traction we're going to have with a committee that people can either use or not use. So, I mean, again, kind of up to you guys, but I think making it mandatory is against state law. I understand that part for sure. I just I hate to lose the knowledge.

Well, I mean like how much and the ability for developers to to learn something. Well, and I think it again it comes down to how much do people want to volunteer if they're not required to go to architectural review. They're, you know, they can use it or not use it. I I again up to you folks, but definitely it cannot be mandatory. It cannot be a precondition of submitting a development. We can't have any design standards in the town anymore.

Oh, well, we can if they're related to health or safety, but that's basically not very much. You're not going to have the opportunity to dictate colors. You're not going to have the ability to dictate sighting. Yeah. I mean, I understand that. I just And it sucks. I'm sorry. Like, I'm I'm the bearer of bad news. I know. But the fact that we're kind of in the crosshairs of it and to be fair, when this bill was passed, we did talk I I talked to Kelly Lynch and she's like, "You guys are going to get in trouble." I'm like, "Well, what if we just make it a recommending body?" She's like, "You guys are still going to get in trouble." So,

and so what's our exposure then? If if we say, "No, we're just going to keep it as a you're going to do it." Is the league not going to represent us if we get sued or

No. That'll be me. The league had um looked at this bill. It was one of the bills that went through conference committee and actually had amendments to it um that didn't have an opportunity for the public to comment on. However, at the state level, the amount of public sorry amount of public um participation is uh lot less than at your local government. And so they had looked at it to see if they wanted to proceed with any type of litigation over it and they decided the league decided not to. So I don't think they would get involved to stand behind us either.

Okay. Well, I'm probably not going to support this, but Well, the other option the council has if you'd like to give this some further thought, you could, you know, definitely just postpone it to the February 2nd meeting. I don't think there's any time urgency on this, is there, Angie? No, not necessarily. Yeah, we're not requiring people to go to it right now,

Rebecca. I'm sorry. So you know we are a government entity ourselves. So we are mandated to follow the laws that are given to us passed by legislators. Right Dave? and um even if we don't agree with them. Um but um but um if we delayed it, I mean it doesn't mean that we couldn't come up with standards that we've seen work around town that we give to people as an idea for what we have branded as Whitefish. you know, I mean, in the in our process, we could just say this is kind of a lot of successful buildouts that we've seen. And if you would like to um follow this, you can. You don't have to, but this is um kind of how we contribute to the branding of our town. And I kind of think that's how we thought it would work, Rebecca, is getting rid of it as a mandatory requirement to submitting a development idea. Um, but having some like this is maybe how it should look. This is, you know, I again I think like the the what we thought about retaining the committee itself is who really wants to be on a committee if like it's completely optional and no one really is listening to what you're saying. But I think like retaining standards and being helpful and thoughtful and offering them that as part of their design process is a great idea. And again, thanks Jamie, that was a good idea.

So just to piggyback off of some of this, I know

from my own experiences, I have found the architectural board to be very constructive. And I draw an analogy. We have uh in the in the different part of the development process, we have the thing called the site review meeting which is um you have to go but it's there's no decisions made. It's literally an informal informative conversation. And I'm wondering if um maybe we can model this board after that to give folks the option to go in there and help them um accept any feedback they're willing to accept on their design. um which is uh the best free advice you'll ever get. Um and uh and maybe that also involves a conversation with the architectural review board themselves to see um if they're willing to do that in such a structure. What do you think?

I guess it could be an option. I mean, again, I think it would be a conversation we'd have to have with the committee like, do you want to be on this board that people may or may not use you? you don't know like when you're meeting like you're giving free advice to people but I will read you just the statutory law as the determination of compliance with the local design review standards um m must be conducted by the employees of the municipality and the municipality may not require review by an external board. So can you make it an can you make it an option? And I guess you could I my suggestion if that's where council wants to go is having this be an optional board. Do it for a one-year period to see if it's utilized. Um and that way we can see if the time it takes to interview get interest in this committee is is worth the time. Um because if it's once a year that we have somebody coming to this committee that's not that's not really effective. And remember, staff is reviewing and can also provide suggestions if we do end up with a pattern book or some type of document that we can give as these are shoulds. They aren't musts, but they're shoulds. Here's here here this is for you. Um staff is going to be having those interactions. They aren't just going to get a not whatever um requirements we have, but also we have that opportunity to provide them suggestions at that time. So, if you do want to move toward a uh a voluntary, if the individual builder developer wants to go forward, they can, but let's do it for a test year. So, we would repeal the current ordinance because it actually requires them going um it sets up the whole board. We would probably set it up um more as a interim kind of committee, not a board, but where they can provide suggestions to those individuals. They aren't providing any approval though of the project.

And again, like I guess what I would reiterate too is the local design review standards are related to public health or safety. So it's not going to be them suggesting a kind of sighting, a color, rock work. That's just not going to fly. Andy,

I think Ben's got the right idea, but I would suggest is the way we would do it is we provide it as a service, free design consultation service, and we build it that way. And if they show up, great. If I'm guessing we'd probably find a fair number of people that would probably take us up on it. They can get a room full of architects and designers sitting there giving them some feedback on their project, not regulation. I mean, who wouldn't take that opportunity? I mean, we may still be able to have some influence well without having any regulation.

And like I said, this this committee is fantastic. I mean, they are professionals. They have great input and it is it's like a free design service. So, I agree with that. I would entertain a motion. I got one, Steve. Uh, I would I would say that we postpone this um until we have a more concrete idea of what we want to replace it with because if we repeal it tonight, then we're in limbo for however long it takes us to get to replace it. So anyway, I guess I just spoke on my motion, but I would say postpone it. Is there a second to the motion? Second.

Seconded by councelor Davis. Further discussion? Ben. Ben Andy. U the first thing I I would say is I I'd be interested to know what the architectural committees themselves thinks about this proposal because I I like what Andy's saying. I recognize the fact that not everybody else not everybody will use it. But um maybe we do that for a year, see how it goes, and then try to work on the legislature to pass something that is better and makes more sense for um for us as smiling like that will never happen, but we should try. [laughter] Um but I just want to make a broader comment to anybody in the room who may have any influence over the legislature. Um, I uh, you know, this my understanding is this this particular bill was passed in an effort to reduce housing prices. I mean, I I build houses for a living. Um, I've been through this committee numerous times. Um, I I do not understand how this has any material impact on the price of a house. First of all, the vast majority of houses do not run through the committee because it exempts single family duplexes and stuff like that. Personally, I think it should also exempt triplexes and quads, but it's a different conversation. Um, it it does in encompass multif family, but everybody that builds multif family already has architects and and paid expensive designers on board anyway. They generally know how to do nice buildings. They know how to have the conversations. Um and and it has this whole side effect, which is what it is, of exempting all commercial structures in our town from review. And that's actually more important than the residential component. And it it this is an example and I can list other examples

of legislation that is very poorly thought through. Um, it is I understand the goal. I understand what it's targeting, but it has a lot of collateral impact because zoning and all of these regulations are complicated and when you do a one-sizefits-all something at the legislature, it simply often does not work at the local level. This is a great example of this. I think this is very poorly thought out and I'm very disappointed that this was passed. Um, so if anybody uh is able to take that feedback back to the legislature at some point, I would greatly appreciate it. Um, and I know we'd be happy to work on um more constructive solutions that achieves the goal of um lowerc cost housing because I firmly support that. Um, but this particular reg uh piece of legislation does not do that. Thank you.

Thanks, Ben. Andy,

I just with regard to the motion, I mean, I think we can go ahead and punt for a couple of weeks, but the reality is it's ineffectual as it is anyway because we can't require anything and we're going to have to come up with something to replace it hopefully that can at least provide us with a little bit of protection and a little bit of input to what happens in our community in terms of the built environment. But what we have now we can't use anyway. So I mean I don't see really any point in not just killing it now and then move on and figure out what we can do in the future. So I don't really I don't see I don't see what we buy by waiting a few weeks with something that we can't use anyway. I mean it's it's dead on the hook at this point. I mean, Frank,

I I I agree 100% with uh my fellow counselor Fury's analysis of the thing. We're not using it now. We won't enforce it now. What we're looking for is something that we can replace it with. I and I think that there is some benefit um at least maybe moving a target off our back um by just killing what is clearly unlawful now and let's replace it with something we can make work. I mean I think that's the that's the right answer. Um but again whether we wait two weeks to do that or not I just we got to kill it. I mean, there's no way and we're not using it now, so it's ineffectual. So, that's at least that's my feeling on it.

Steve, do you want me to call the question or do you want to repeal your motion? I'll withdraw my motion if it's okay with the second. Is that okay with the second? Yep. And I'll entertain us another motion. [sighs] I reluctantly but feel compelled to move to approve ordinance 2601 an ordinance to repeal chap title 2 chapter 10 architecture review committee of the white fish city cult. Is there a second to the motion? I'll second.

Seconded by councelor Fury. Further discussion. All those in favor please raise your hand. Those opposed like sign. And that motion does carry on a 4 to one vote with councelor Cornell voting in opposition. Before we go to communications from the city manager, just since we do have some folks still online, have we figured out the audio? Yeah, I believe we do want to give Nathan another chance. So, Nathan, if you're still there, um, do you mind unmuting your mic and addressing the council,

please? Oh, Nathan, he's

Yeah, we can't understand you. I apologize. It's on our end, Nathan. Are you on a plane? [laughter] Try one more time, Nathan.

No, he's frozen. John, do you want me to just do we just want him to send his comments in and then I can forward that on to you guys? Yes, please. Sorry, Nathan. Yeah. Anyone else wishing to provide comment or we just going to run into the same issue? I don't see anybody else.

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment period. Nathan, please submit your comments and writing to Michelle and she'll distribute to the council. We'll go ahead and move on to item eight, communications from our city manager. You have Dana's report and close with the packet. Any questions for Dana? Not seeing any. Dana, anything additional to report on? I do not this evening, but um I do suggest that maybe later we could um during counselor comments discuss direction on what you'd like to see us bring back for the next meeting for a architectural review um service. So that's it. You bet.

Thanks, Dana. We'll move on to item nine, our communications. You do have a letter. Um I'll go to item B first from citizens regarding um the population projection per M loopa requirements. Any comments on that? Or I would just suggest that maybe this is a broader discussion that we perhaps take up at our work session on February 17th. Is everyone in agreement with that? I don't see Mary's still here anyway, so she'll likely be at our

Can I just say one thing about it? I mean, you know, there's a reason why the population estimate came very first in this whole process, and that was so that they could build the rest of the um to build basically the entire growth policy on what the what the population growth was expected to be. So tinkering with it at this point, I I don't know. We'd have to get a a more professional opinion about that. But I just want you to understand that the whole what we have as a product is built based on this estimate, the population estimate. So it informs every piece of the puzzle that came after it. It was the very first thing we took up. We had to settle on what should we are what should we base our population growth on. And from my recollection, we wanted to shoot a little higher than maybe um what we wanted to make sure we could accommodate more growth than maybe we would see because you can't it's much harder to to expand if you don't plan for it than it is if you do.

Um and we saw that clearly in 2021 through 2023. So anyway, I the the point is taken that, you know, growth has slowed down completely, but I'm not sure that it's something we can go back. I I'm not sure what the consequences would be if we if we go backwards at this point. Yep. I agree.

Thanks, Steve. I will move on to item 9A. Michelle, remind me. We have Ryan's letter submitted in the packet for the climate action plan committee term ending December 31, 2026. Did we have other candidates that we

So we had Karen who had also applied and she with her being a staff member we shared his letter with her and she felt he could provide more um guidance on that committee that she that she didn't want to miss the opportunity to have him be a member of that committee. So she will attend as a citizen rather than a member of the committee. I hope so because we certainly value her input and that is that's her. Okay. Yep. She definitely she said yes, please. Um have him be a member.

Okay. With that said, this is my appointment. Just needs to get ratified by the council, but I would motion to appoint Ryan Walther to the climate action plan committee. And just a showing of hands to ratify that appointment. And that's unanimous. Thank you, Michelle and councel. And we'll move on to comments. And why don't we start to the left this evening? Andy, any comments? Uh, no comment. Thanks, Andy. Rebecca,

yep, I have a a few things. One, a few years ago, Angie probably remembers the date and then but it went to the Supreme Court that we are unable to um uh regulate the content of a sign. And so um that is protected free speech even if we find it offensive and we don't want to look at it ourselves or whatever it it is the law of the land to allow people to put whatever they believe is significant to them in the middle of a sign. And the second thing is we can't legally restrict people speaking amount of time either. We try to.

Yes, we can. No, I don't think we can to three minutes. Yes. But how? By legally by what? It's provided in state law. And Angie could quote the MCA. Yeah, it's actually not the MCA. It's a Montana Supreme Court decision, but we can restrict people's ability to speak as long as we're, you know, being consistent with it. and it's to you know establish a orderly meeting. So no we do have the ability to limit how long people speak.

I mean we have to move this these forward you know and I and I understand we've definitely aired on the side of caution. I love it. I think that's being transparent government but when we have you know 400 people like as you guys probably remember with Mountain Gateway like here to speak we definitely can. So, but we don't have the right to tell them what they can or cannot say. No.

Okay. I just wanted to bring that up because um I we had a police chief that was um really strong on civil rights because of previous a previous town that he was in. And I I thought governments could restrict a lot of civil rights activities, but we can't. And um but we can restrict crime. So when people go into criminal behaviors then we we control that.

Under state law if somebody is actively disrupting a meeting yes we can have them ejected by bridger. We also have a city ordinance as well. And what is that called when people do that? Disrupting the peace. Disrupting the peace. Okay. So, there's and I'm just bringing this up because we are in a very contentious time in our country. And and the other thing I wanted to ask staff was um is it possible for us to be non cooperative with ICE like people are asking us to do?

No. Under under federal law, we have to we don't we don't have to police immigration under federal law. In fact, we're not allowed to police immigration under federal law. But if they require cooperation, yes, we are required to cooperate. It doesn't mean that we have to police immigration that we have to check immigration. And I think we're doing things much differently than we did a year ago. Is that fair? Yes. And state law also was passed for cooperation or officers may request status.

So another legal term that I've been hearing is the presumption of regularity where in the past I don't I've never seen any of anything like what we've seen recently in Minneapolis. And so um some of it's training. I know Bridger has talked to me about like different parts of law enforcement have have different um styles because their jobs are different like more high-risk things might be more aggressive. But um is is there anything that you want to say to the public since it's been brought up four or five times tonight about how to how to stay safe in our town or anything that we should be doing?

Well, I always encourage people to obey the law and and do what's appropriate. Um you know, our police department is very works with every individual we come across. We treat them with respect and dignity and we police very well. Um we don't have any past practice of excessive force or lawsuits for those reasons. Um I think our our record stands. Um we've worked with with Border Patrol DHS uh uh for the 25 years I've been a police officer here. We've had no adverse interaction with them or or issues. What happens elsewhere in the country um doesn't necessarily reflect what's happening in our community and and my job is to please our community and I believe we're doing an outstanding job with that. and we'll continue to work with our partners and communication is key and being able to um talk to our federal partners as they have the legal legally can come into our community and police as well that we work with them that we stay connected um as we do with everybody in our community. That's part of community policing. And um I hope people heard Bridgetger that they have long-standing relationships, but if something did happen that people were worried about, how do we communicate with the city? Then

talk to you Bridger or to the city manager like if they if they felt uncomfortable that something was unusually dangerous or anything like that. We all have open doors. I mean, you can call Bridger, you can call me, you can call

Deputy Chief Conway, you can call Dana. Um, I I guess I'll just echo e echo what Bridger said is we community police, right? I've been here for 10 and a half years. I've never had a complaint about our police officers. I represented the police officers separately in my old firm for probably another 10 years. So what is happening I totally agree like I I heard what's being said um in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It's horrifying but it's not spilling over here. If anybody has any questions, any like any complaints, wants to talk like we're all available. We're open ears. And the last thing I want to say on this is our police officers are here to keep the peace and they they keep the peace for our community. So treating them with respect is really important and not making their job worse, too. So, okay. Thank you guys. I know it's touchy, but I think the public wants us to talk about it. And so, thank you. So, I had the pleasure of actually training our police officers um like last couple weeks,

last two weeks, and I it's just hugely encouraging to see the group that they are. They're all ears. They want to learn. They they are doing their best. And I think what people don't realize is the backlash that they're getting as well, right, for doing their jobs that they're paid to do, which are really dangerous jobs. So, I mean it it was just very refreshing for me to be able to interact with them on that personal level.

Yeah. I just hope everybody stays safe through all of this. Um, and the other thing I wanted to bring up was um I I really think that our ARC review committee not only looked at individual projects, but they actually looked at the skyscape and how um things blended together in our town. And I don't know how we recreate that without someone that has that kind of eye. um just people I've talked to that have been on it, they study our whole skyscape and how everything on the block works together and um I'll be sad if we lose that because we've built a beautiful town, right? Thank you.

On that note, do you want some feedback and direction on what to bring back to the February 2nd meeting? Um thoughts from the council? I think we should talk to the ARC board and see what they think. I I like the idea of a service. Yeah. Giving it a shot and then seeing what happens at the next legislative session and maybe we could try to get at least commercial but at least get maybe perhaps they might be immunable to allowing at least commercial go through design review large scale things. Yeah. Like it's not nobody's trying to limit or raise the price of housing and I just it doesn't make sense. But I'd love to hear personally I'd love to hear with our board. Thanks.

I think what staff can do we can reach out to the members of the committee and see if they are willing to serve in a different capacity right to provide staff or applicants advice or help or ideas. I think that's exactly our first step and they might be very willing to do that and again I think it's a huge resource for developers to get free advice.

Is that sufficient direction? Okay, [laughter] thanks Rebecca. Uh we'll move on to Ben. Any comments this evening? Yeah, I just want to say this is another meeting here in city hall where democracy uh is alive and well. Um I wanted to um extend a big thank you to everybody that came out tonight. We had a lot of public comment. Um a lot of new faces in the public comment. I want everybody to know that that means a lot. I know I speak for myself and say I listen to every word and I care about it. And I think that um you know having an influence on what's going on in your town that's the best way to do it and I think that uh it's important. So I just wanted to say thanks for everybody coming out. Um I'll make a quick note about free speech. I I know that's been a hot button issue. Um and uh you know this country is founded on free speech. Um you know what's disrespectful discourse one day is majority public sentiment. you know, the next year or something. You never know. And I think our country has a long history of um citizens criticizing their government. Um I think it's unpleasant. I think I hear things I don't like or agree with or think are distasteful, but I think that the ability for the citizens to criticize their government is incredibly important. Uh so if I had my brothers um I mean obviously we need to maintain order in our meetings but I think if somebody's here to criticize us or criticize um anything having to do with us um I think we need to give him a wide birth and I think uh we should allow people to state their their their mind whether we like it or not in my opinion. Thanks.

Thanks Ben. Frank nothing really. I just I I agree with with Ben. I mean, public comment is a lot a lot of times not meant to be comfortable, but I think um um and that's the point of it, but I think that with this city in particular, we've done a better job than any other community that I'm aware of in giving wide birth to public comment

to the point of distraction, which is fine. Um, but I don't want anybody here on this board or in the audience to think that we have done anything different at any time in our past. Um, and um, so I I I agree with you, but um, and I'm I'm I agree that I'm really pleased that everybody showed up. Um, and the more the better. So, thanks. Thanks, Frank. Steve.

Yeah, thanks. because I don't want to prolong the meeting too much, but I do have some comments. Uh, my first one is regarding baseball and I know this has been a hot potato. I I need I need to get my thoughts out there about this though. it and it because it's bothered me for a long time and as somebody who's had to work with another nonprofit to get a sport to be able to be done in this town um I know what it's like to to be kind of hamstrung by lots of different things. So I'm just going to attack this come at this from a very high level. It makes no sense to me that our Whitefish High School baseball team is not playing 30 steps from the back door of the high school. And whatever we have to do to get in and facilitate that, I think we owe that to the kids that are playing for White Fish High School. I don't know the specifics of what's going on, but there's got to be a way to make this work. We can put a man on the moon with less technology than we carry around in our pockets. We can figure this out so that the baseball team does not have to go somewhere, get in their car and drive to practice, not have games at their high school. Um so whatever we got to do, I want us to get that done. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Um my other comments uh are focus on um the other things that we heard tonight. I agree that democracy um does it requires the first amendment. In fact, I've been I've often quoted and I quote it every time I teach government that Thomas Jefferson said, "Take away all my other rights, leave me the First Amendment, and I will soon get them all back." Um the First Amendment is not

uh it's not unlimited. There is a it's a it's a right. And with that comes a responsibility. And I've I say all kinds of crazy things uh in public in my other opportunities that I have to speak out against the current national government. I do it every week. You're interested, you can tune in. Um [snorts] I do not stand with what's going on with uh Immigration and Customs Enforcement uh not only in Minneapolis, but anywhere else. Uh and at the same time, we have to be careful not to eat our own on this. And the responsibility of the First Amendment is the part that people often forget. And when we have a sign that that likens our city police to the KKK, that is violating that responsibility of free speech. Criticize me all you want for the things that I say and you feel like I don't live up to, that's fine. But likening our police officers here in Whitefish, Montana to the KKK, I grew up with the KKK. I watched them march down Main Street in my hometown. I grew up looking at a capital that flew the Confederate flag until 2002 right underneath the American flag. And I can tell you that the police officers in Whitefish, Montana, have absolutely no relation to what happens with the KKK. And when I see something like that, I think it violates our rules for civil dialogue in this chamber. And the responsibility of the first amendment is to understand the context and the place in which you are speaking. It is not an unlimited right. So I think people need to understand that. And the KKK is a

domestic terrorist organization. And if you believe that our police officers in Whitefish, Montana are similar to that, then you haven't been here very long. The Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the NAACP, they all they have all named the KKK as a hate group. Our police here are not a hate group. Okay? And I I [clears throat] just want to make that unequivocal. I've taught government for 26 years. I understand the First Amendment. I understand where our rights are and and where our responsibilities lie. And coming in here with signs like that, I do believe goes too far. Come in here and criticize me all you want. That's fair. That's what we should be doing to our government. If you want to stand on the street corner with a sign that shows that nobody's going to come and arrest you and you shouldn't be arrested for that, should you bring it into a council meeting? In my opinion, no. That's over the line. And we have rules for that. And I I would like the I would like people to follow the rules that we have in this chamber just like I expect people to follow the rules in my classroom at Flathead High School. [clears throat] Thank you, Steve. Um, I have nothing further this evening. Dana, anything additional from staff? Angie,

sorry, I'm not going to talk about the First Amendment. Um, I do want to give you guys just a brief update on baseball just because I think it will be coming to you next month. So, we have met with the Glacier Twins. Um, Frank was there, Andy was there, Maria was there, Dana was there, and I think we had some really productive conversations. So, what will probably be coming before you guys is an amendment to theou, which involves the um, Verizon funds that they receive. Um, it will be in sync with our new agreement with Verizon, so a five-year term, and it will build some transparency into the funds that we give them as a city, which is about $20,000 a year. You're also hopefully going to see, we're hoping, um, we feel very optimistic that the twins are willing to open the lease agreement um, for Memorial Field, which was far beyond my time. I was one year out of law school. um tend to agree that that time frame is very very extensive. So, and to allow some built-ins for the high school to use Memorial Field for baseball for football. Um they seem to be receptive to that. I haven't heard back from them. I got those documents to them maybe two or three weeks ago. So, we are we're working on it. We understand we understand the concerns. Yeah. But there's no guarantee. I mean, that's it's all up to their goodwill at this point. So, we are we're working on it. We don't want you guys to think that we're just sitting back and not hearing the community's concerns.

Thanks, Angie. On that note, we are adjourned. Thanks.