City Council - Regular Meeting

We'll get started here shortly. Just waiting for some IT issues to get flushed out, so please keep talking. It's quiet.

Hello, hello, hello. I would like to give public comment.

We can hear you. Great. Mhm.

Thanks for your patience. We're just running a minute behind schedule, which isn't bad, but I'm gonna go ahead and call this June 1st, 2026 meeting of the Whitefish City Council to order. Thanks everyone for attending in person. We also have folks joining us remotely hybrid via Zoom. And our first item on the agenda is our Pledge of Allegiance. Will, I hate to ask you to get up and you don't have to, but would you? Okay, fair enough.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thanks, Will. Our first or third item on the agenda is a city council proclamation recognizing June as Pride Month. This was brought to the council at the recommendation of Councillor Norton, and it's unanimously excuse me, it's not unanimously supported. Councilor Kaltabiana with all due respect has dissented to the reading of this ordinance, but it's my duty to continue given the support of the council. So again, this is a proclamation declaring June, 2026 LGBTQ and Pride Month. And I'll read that now. I will not take comment from the council until council comments at the end of the meeting under item 11. Whereas while our country was founded on the principle of equal rights for all people, the fulfillment of that promise has been too long coming for many Americans, including those within the LGBTQ community. And whereas the city of Whitefish has a self-governing municipal government operating pursuant to its charter and the laws of Montana recognizes and embraces its responsibility to promote diversity and equality, to create a community in which all people ARE AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE LIFE, LIBERTY, AND HAPPINESS. WHEREAS THE CITY OF WHITEFISH HAS A LONG HISTORY OF BEING STRONGLY COMMITTED TO THE IDEALS OF EQUALITY, DIVERSITY, INCLUSION, AS EVIDENCED BY NUMEROUS PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND ORDINANCES INCLUDING OUR NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL OVER THE YEARS. And whereas the city of Whitefish must continue to be vigilant in deterring oppression and discrimination, against our citizens and visitors on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity and expression. And whereas LGBTQ and individuals in the city of Whitefish continue to enrich our cultural, civic, and economic life, and their visibility and advocacy have strengthened the very fabric of our city. And whereas we must reaffirm our commitment to supporting LGBTQ and individuals, particularly our youth, who compared to their peers are far more likely to experience violence and bullying at school, suffer from depression, struggle with substance abuse and attempt suicide. And whereas by protecting the rights of every individual, we enhance and strengthen the value of our society as a whole. And whereas celebrating Pride Month raises awareness and provides support and advocacy for LGBTQ and society is an important opportunity to become educated, engage in dialogue, strengthen alliances, and foster understanding. Therefore, the City Council of the Whitefish Montana does hereby proclaim June 2026 as Pride Month in the City of Whitefish and encourages all residents to seek to eliminate injustices wherever it shall exist, to celebrate the lives of our LGBTQ plus neighbors and friends, and to work together to create a more inclusive society, extending the promise of our country to all people. Thank you very much for listening. With that said, I'll move on to item four, which is communications from the public. We do have one public hearing advertised for this evening, but if you're here to bring any comments to the council, please do so now at the podium and your name and address for the record, please. Rachel.

Happy Monday, everybody. Rachel Schmidt, 675 Woodside Lane. Thanks for having me here. I wanted to give you an update from your fellow residents at Safe Trails Whitefish and our efforts working at the River Lake City Park next to the springs. So I just wanted to give you an update on our progress. done a fabulous job fundraising. We raised funds to do a LIDAR flyover of the entire river corridor that the city can use in correspondence with the work we're doing. So we received two grants and a lot of private funding to fund our work. So we're really excited about that. And we're working with all the stakeholders and landowners out there. We've had some great open houses, great feedback. But the best and most exciting information is the Springs is so excited about our work and they're very excited to work with us. They flew out from Portland to meet with our group and a bunch of other people that were invited too. They actually did take a bunch of our requests and suggestions that we asked them to take into account in their design process. And they're super excited to work with SafeTrails and all of us through the whole concept design process. And they're really excited to be partners for finding future funding to actually implement what we all come up together. So just wanted to let you know that the Springs is super pumped about it. And they're excited to be a partner. And yeah, so just wanted to share the good news with you guys. So thanks for everything.

Great to hear. Thanks, Rachel. Who's next? Mr. Mayor.

I'm Ray Box. This is 223 Columbia Avenue. And is this the appropriate time to talk about the railroad crossing?

Yes, sir.

I just have some concerns about the plans that I've looked at and what you're about to proceed doing. Number one, I have no objections, of course, we all know we need another crossing and we need it desperately. I'm just a little concerned about what these plans entail. Looking at the second street potential viaduct, It really, to me, does not seem like we're addressing the future. This plan simply puts a bridge across the railroad tracks and diverts all the traffic right back onto Second Street and right to downtown Whitefish. I think we need to be looking at avenues that don't do that, that look in ways if perhaps that bridge ran straight with potential connection to Armory Road and then possibly to Vorman Road and providing some type of bypass to around the city rather than directing traffic into an already very busy neighborhood. That has some concerns. I wasn't quite sure and the plans also saw different drawings. One drawing showed a realignment of the road out there which is the access road to the dog park and the airport with the new road being cut in that ran through the middle of the dog park and which of course in my mind is not acceptable at all but I understand progress and things may be done but we've got an open stretch of land from the railroad tracks down to Armory Road and possibly beyond. There is a park being planned and some work being done, but it is open land at this time. It seems like it would be much more cost-effective to run a road straight through rather than what's looking at is a curved approach to that bypass. I don't know if you're working under a time crunch because of being grant money, and if you don't apply for it now, it's not going to happen. But I think you need to slow down and look at the future and not just the present needs. Thank you.

Thank you, Ray. Who's next?

Good evening, I'm Terry Balaska. I live at 515 West 9th Street and I was inspired to come down here after reading the editorial that the one dissenting congressman made about the proclamation you have for the June Pride declaration, whatever. I just want to let you know that I personally feel like Whitefish is, for me, I'm very fortunate when I raise my kids here that it's always been a very embracing city. Again, I'm a white woman with a white family and all this and everything's copacetic. So I totally understand when people are on the fringes of how they can feel excluded. I just want to let you know that often when I hear of events and days that are inclusive for certain communities, be it whatever, I feel like I'm on the outside because I'm not a member of that community. That's a personal thing, but for a government, I feel like we should be really diligent. I want my government to be really diligent of avoiding separation. I feel like even on, look at the national level, it's just ballistic how much we are us and them. I'd like to see more proclamations, or not even anything, but just the government here in Whitefish working more for embracing everybody every day. And I feel like you do, but part of me just had a gut feeling then we start making certain days for certain people, we decrease the value of other people. And I don't think that's your intention, but I just want to let you know, as a voting member of this community, that's how I feel. So I appreciate the heart. I think you're all doing wonderful. But I feel like the big picture is let's let Whitefish be a place where anybody of any belief system can feel safe and secure in being here. Thank you.

Thank you, Terry.

Randy Larson. I live in the county just outside of Whitefish. Mayor and City Council, today I stand to adamantly oppose the proclamation. I believe that this proclamation, in addition to your abortion proclamation, are in clear opposition to God's natural law. Human laws are considered just and valid only when they align with the principles of natural law. We all can read the documented account of creation in Genesis from the Bible and both observe and understand that God's created order is a perfect reflection of natural law. God created man and woman. All of God's creation produced seeds after their kind. God saw that it was good and commanded all his creation to be fruitful and multiply. However, the identity of the G of this alphabet tribe is wholly based on sodomy. The type of sex they prefer, which is not fruitful, nor can it multiply. Because we all know that male sperm on its own cannot procreate, we also know that a male penis penetrating a male anus cannot procreate anything except disease and filth. But even the creation process has begun, this mayor and council desires to kill the process through abortion. So what kind of future do you even envision for whitefish? One that celebrates death and degenerate fruitless sodomite sex? Further, sodomites represent a minimal, minute amount of percentage, 1.6% of the American population. I would argue even less percentage of the white fish population. When you consider that the whole of the alphabet tribe only totals a meager 7.2% of the American population, one has to wonder why you all are making the decision to celebrate this tiny fringe group. Have you ever considered celebrating the nuclear family? These are the families that populate our schools, raise many children who work in our businesses, become business owners and profitable taxpayers. Sodomites have no access to children or marriage except through the manipulation of human laws that go against natural law. The children adopted into Sodomite mirage are indoctrinated to believe sodomy is normal. It doesn't take genius to know Sodomites left on an island would die out in one generation. and that is why because of their hopelessness they have a high highly stricken of with disease and depression you all need to repent of your continued attack on righteousness for the city as a magistrate this decision will place a curse on you but do not take this city with you each one of you will inherit an eternal reward for the position of magistrate for your decisions Are you going to choose wrath or righteousness? I would recommend to this council that you turn around the city and celebrate the author and finisher of natural law and proclaim Whitefish as a godly city, as a Christian city, and a straight city. Thank you.

Who's next? No applause, please. No applause, please.

Good evening. My name is Larry Lauderay. I was born in the valley. Not recently, as you can see. Lived here most all of my life. Have our four kids graduated from Whitefish High School. I've been a pastor for over 50 years and here in the valley for the last 40. uh... coached all kinds of white fish teams uh... of youth from various youth sports and first of all i want to thank you for your willingness to serve our wonderful community uh... and congratulate you on or perhaps offer condolences for being elected to such an august position as this uh... but i would like to address the council for a moment regarding this recent uh... proposal that has been made i believe that it is a singularly bad look in a variety of ways i would try to explain a couple of those First of all, there are a lot of things that are worth really celebrating about our community. A family pride month could be cool. A law enforcement pride month. First responders pride month. Bulldog pride month. First Responders Pride Month, Public Service Pride Month, there's a lot of things that are good things that really build the community and build unity and build encouragement for our great community. But to designate a specific month deliberately and peculiarly on the sole basis of the sexual proclivities of some folks. is a very odd dynamic. For example, we're not doing something here to advance the rights of anybody to live here. We are passing a resolution saying that we are highly supportive of this particular thing that scripture clearly refers to as sin. Now, we can choose whether or not to accept that definition, but that's a part of living in a free country. It's one thing to allow folk to live here with divergent views and perspectives. It is another thing to specifically, pointedly, peculiarly celebrate and highlight a particular segment of folks strictly on the basis of sexual activity. This proclamation is clearly and totally, not a little bit, not a gray area, not partially, it is clearly a public opposition to the Christian faith. and to the Bible, and to the under God, to whom we just pledged, you know, allegiance to one nation under God, and to the one God, our Creator, from whom all inalienable rights proceed. So to take a specific segment that is based solely on sexual expression. I don't know whether, for example, you would have an incest pride month or a bestiality pride month or an adultery pride month or any of the other sexual activities and to sort this out. And the dilemma is that when you add the plus, you add every conceivable, imaginable, and some unimaginable sexual proclivities to the list and say publicly in front of God and everybody, white fish, the magistrates in charge of white fish support every, every, every form of sexual degeneracy. And I find that really a very, very bad look. And it is a challenge, I believe, in fact, and publicly to an affront to all Christians and to all Jews, for that matter, that believe the law, to all Muslims that would believe their religious faith. So it's not just a matter of being inclusive to everybody It is expressly being a problem to many of the citizens of our community. Thanks for your attention. I know you're in a hot seat. But I would encourage and ask that you actually rescind this and let's just go. Let's let everybody live and have harmony together. Let's cheer for the Bulldogs. Let's enjoy life with one another. Let's be kind to one another. But let's not necessarily celebrate a particular segment in order to be virtue signaling somebody. Thank you.

Thank you, Larry. Who's next?

Hi, my name's Alan Taylor. I'm from 115 Whitefish Forest Loop. Though I'm not in the city, I'd like to address the council on this proclamation as a father of a gay son. I've had this journey for 20 years and have had the opportunity to speak at many national conventions with a lot of gay people there. Most of the gay people that I've talked to have told me flat out, we just want to be treated like everybody else. They don't want to be brought to attention to, they just want to live their lives. I'm curious with the proclamation, why now? Because you're late to the game. other cities have done this decades ago and coming from the state that won't be named and excuse me for that but i've been up here a few years i've seen what happens when these cities that start this next thing there's a gay parade then it gets a little bit overhand and it gets worse and if you look up folsom street parade in the bay area you'll see what i mean this has been in the 20 years in the making but it's been a door that's been opened for people to come in, not the normal gay community that just wants to be normal with everybody else, but the fringe that come out there and say, this is okay, and it leads from one thing to another to another. So I beg you, please, as a father who loves his son dearly, reconsider this, because I don't know if any of you have a gay child, but it's a journey that never ends, and I'm to a point in my life that I have a good relationship with my son, not that I did before. But we sought after each other for our relationship back together again. So please reconsider. Thank you.

Thanks very much, Alan. Further public comment this evening? Mary? Sir? Yep.

Hi, my name is Joshua Jost. I live at Elk Trail, 225 Elk Trail, Whitefish. I'm a new resident of Whitefish. I've got five young kids, and we grew up coming here every summer for vacation. We've loved it here. It's been a place where it's been very dear to our hearts. And I just want to urge the city of Whitefish to reject the proclamation of June as Pride Month. True love does not celebrate what destroys people. homosexuality brings real harm spiritually emotionally and physically and this proclamation would make our city complicit in that harm god's word is clear he created us male and female marriages between one man and one woman god's word is clear that homosexuality is a sin as in romans 1 1 corinthians 6 leviticus 18 just to name a few Sin never leads to flourishing. It leads to separation from God, inner emptiness and broken lives. Those who walk in this path face sky-high rates of depression, anxiety, drug abuse and suicide. They suffer dramatically higher rates of HIV, STDs and serious health damage. Pride Month does not liberate, it glorifies a lie and traps people in suffering. If Whitefish issues this proclamation, we are actively harming our own people. It tells struggling men, women, and especially children that confusions about their body is normal and something to be proud of. It pressures our schools and public spaces to promote those false ideas and uses taxpayer dollars to endorse a lifestyle that only brings emptiness and destruction. If we continue to reject God and his created order, this can only bring chaos and destruction. Thank you.

Thank you, Joshua. Mary. Okay.

Good evening, Mary Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead. I want to just briefly speak to four quick issues. On your consent agenda tonight you will be reconsidering the zoning and subdivision changes that you made last month and I would like to encourage you again after talking to some other folks looking at the legality of the zoning and particularly the neighborhood where Rhonda different folks live that has been since 2007 improperly zoned. That you have the legal ability under your current zoning that you're getting ready to pass by a second resolution. to make that zoning consistent with the growth policy that you've already passed. If you don't do it tonight, I really want to urge you to look at immediately turning around and putting out a 15-day notice for zone change and go ahead and zone that neighborhood. They should not have to come back and have to go themselves and get signatures. You've already changed the growth policy. Let's do the zoning consistent with the growth policy as soon as possible. Secondly, I just wanted to update you. Last Tuesday we had a kickoff meeting at the Flathead Valley Community College on our treasure hunt, which is defined a much better and environmentally sound location for a major sewage septic treatment city treatment facility in the county. And I'm going to provide as part of public comment, the handout there that has QR codes that if members that are listening tonight, they can go to our website or they can look at your minutes and look at those QR codes and figure out how they can help us with this effort, which will be beginning shortly with the first steering committee meeting. Secondly, additionally I put a notice which you may have in your packet, I don't know if I got it to you before, but there was recently an article in the Flathead Beacon that there was a legislative hearing in LUPA where the cities were invited and different stakeholders to talk about how the implementation has been going. I really want to listen to that and understand what city representatives here in the Flathead said and so I provided you the link and I hope public, if they're interested as well, can go to the public comment and listen to that and hopefully they heard some of the real concerns that we have with both the positive things about that legislation but some of the real negative things. And finally, we submitted again for your packet tonight. Tonight the city of Kalispell is moving forward with adopting a public participation plan, which again is in the comments that I submitted. It's very simple. It's straightforward. It allows greater public notice under NLUPA for the public to know when zone changes, excuse me, not zone changes, when land use changes or approvals are coming that are administrative. I urge you to look at that and Last month we provided you simple ways to integrate that into your zoning and subdivision regulations. We're also, as Kalispell is doing tonight, suggesting that you bring back your public participation plan that was part of your adoption under NLUPA and to amend your public participation plan to require robust notice to the public. It's all spelled out there. It's very clear. I know you've been super busy, but I hope that you take time to look at that as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. Sir.

Yeah, hi. My name is JD King. I live on Monaghan. I spent most of my life in Montana since I was a kid. I now have a wife and four kids of my own. My parents, brothers, sisters, nieces and nephews live here in Whitefish and I operate multiple businesses in this town. and I oppose this proclamation. First, Rebecca Norton, during your campaign interview with the Daily Interlake, you said, I have, and I quote, I have concerns about other candidates not being able to set aside their biases if elected. We serve the entire community, not special interests or philosophies. But here you are promoting Pride Month, which is by definition a special interest. And issuing this proclamation is a philosophy. And doing it unilaterally without public comment was as un-American as it was undemocratic. So somebody didn't keep their promises. Secondly, by your own proclamation, you correctly note that people in the LGBTQ plus community suffer higher rates of depression, substance abuse, and suicide. And you're correct. LGBTQ plus youth are three to four times more likely to be depressed, attempt suicide, and abuse substances. Recent surveys show nearly four in 10 seriously considered killing themselves, and over 10% actually attempted to do it in the past year. It's a total tragedy. So I ask the entire council, is it really the loving thing to do to celebrate and promote a path that you know leads to potential greater harm? Or is this proclamation simply a political charade to serve your special interests and make yourselves feel virtuous? Furthermore, we live in a culture that's obsessed with sexual labels and identity. Pride is too often a mask for deep self-worth issues. And pride is, in fact, most often a sin and not a lifestyle choice that leads to human flourishing. Many in our community have rejected these labels, and they found lasting freedom by surrendering their lives and their sexuality to Jesus Christ and anchoring their identity in him alone. To be totally fair, I believe if you will not promote a month celebrating heterosexual, monogamous, productive, and healthy marriages, that you have no business promoting one that is sexually unproductive and sinful and damaging to our grandchildren's future. I urge the council to consider the full diversity of views on this subject in our community. Thank you.

Thank you, Judy.

Good evening, council. My name is RP Rogers and I'm a former resident of Whitefish on Blanchard Lake Road and then on Reservoir Road. Currently, I pastor a church with Whitefish residents and then I also teach at a school and I have students that live here in Whitefish. I too rise to speak today in regards to the proclamation declaring June to be Pride Month. One of the classes that I teach is ninth graders and it's Epidectic Rhetoric. This is the branch of rhetoric that praises what is praiseworthy and condemns that which is blameworthy. And your proclamation is a type of this kind of rhetoric. And if I succeed at my job as a teacher, then I will train students to be good at praising what is good and also to be good at condemning that which is blameworthy. But there's an even more important question to consider as we think about what we praise and what we blame. And it is this, by what standard do we judge what is good and what is evil? And there's really only a few ways to answer this question. Your standard can be your experiences where you interpret the world through your senses, or your standard can be your own reason where you try to think your way towards clarity and truth. But as a society, we cannot agree on the philosophies of empiricism or rationalism because we all have different experiences and we all have conflicting reasoning. And there's only one objective standard, and that is the experience and the reason of our creator, which is revealed in his word, the Bible. God's word in Isaiah says, "'Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.'" Council members, your proclamation according to the standard of God's word is calling evil good. Left to our own devices, this is a plight though that we all share because our moral compasses are miscalibrated because of sin. Personally, I have the experience of growing up in a home with ladies in a lesbian relationship. This experience for me was destructive and dysfunctional. Further, I could give you a list of reasons why your proclamation is harmful, I think, to people who engage in these abhorrent sexual acts that you are praising. But more important than my own experiences or any reasons that I can give is God's word. And this is why we have been given good news. The good news that God in Christ saved sinners and has through his death, burial, and resurrection revealed true goodness and life. Sexual perversion is evil and should not be celebrated. And it is only through our Lord Jesus Christ that we have the hope of turning from perversion and praising that which is truly good. Let me end by reading Titus 3, 3 through 7. For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. Thank you.

Thank you, RP. Further public comment this evening?

Ryan Motley, 186, Hyden Ridge. Good evening, Council. I stand today in opposition to your proclamation that June in the year of our Lord, 2026, be declared as LGBTQIA plus Pride Month in the city of Whitefish or anywhere else. I'm under no illusion that the power of my words today will sway any of you to turn from this wicked proclamation. The current of culture running headlong into destruction is hard to resist. To stand against a tide that may cost you personally takes courage that can be hard to find. I do not stand here today with hatred or malice in my heart. I stand here today out of a genuine care for people created in the image of God, people like you council members, like the others in this room, this city, and in our valley. I am commanded by my Savior Jesus Christ to love my neighbor as myself, and there can be no love without truth. The truth is that we are all wicked, spurning our Creator. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. In our pride, we reject God's rule and authority, seeking to create our own truths, be our own gods. But it is to no avail. Our feeble attempts at self-actualization only lead to further anxiety, depression, and oppression. We desperately look for the next thing to bring our lives meaning. Food, drink, a new cause, new things, or people that might need our help. It's all a mist. It satisfies for a moment, it dissipates, and then we must run into something else. All the while, we are running from the only thing which will give us actual purpose, glorifying our Creator. This proclamation today, meaningless. No amount of our saying, declaring, or proclaiming can turn wrong into right or bring satisfaction to our empty souls. We are not God. We do not possess such power. But what isn't meaningless in this conversation are the people involved, the men and women, the boys and girls. longing for something to satisfy their weary souls. Some of these people run to these perversions out of hate, anger, and rage, others out of loss, dejection, and confusion. In either case, we prove only to hate them, our cities, and our children more if we continue to celebrate wickedness and their demise into further darkness and destruction. In your proclamation, you attempt to link higher levels of depression than suicide to misunderstanding, bullying, and violence. But this is not true. When we reject the order that the triune God has wired into our very beings, we are left hopeless, bitter, and lost. Today, I make a true proclamation, a proclamation that is only true because the living God proclaimed it in his holy word. There is only one way by which humans can be saved, one person, Jesus Christ, where actual love and acceptance can be found. One God who alone can give hope, purpose, and reason to live. The only God who bore the punishment of wickedness, a price that we cannot pay upon himself, so that righteousness can be upheld even through his mercy. If you hear these words today, do not cast them aside. Repent of your unrighteousness, your selfishness, your pride. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. May God break the chains of the sin in Whitefish, the Flathead Valley, this state, and our country so that we may live as free men not bound to our sin. May it be done by his staff leading us gently to repentance, and if not, may it be done by his rod. All to the praise of his great name.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ryan. Who's next? Richard.

Honorable mayor, honorable counselors, Richard Hillner, 5th Street, Whitefish. I want to thank you for your courage and leadership in issuing this Pride Month proclamation. As an educator, parent, uncle, friend, I know firsthand how difficult it can be sometimes for those who are members of the LGBTQ plus community. As a former counselor, it was my great honor to join my fellow counselors and mayor in signing our non-discrimination ordinance. Thank you for honoring the spirit of that ordinance with this proclamation.

I unconditionally support it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Richard.

We just need a moment. Just need to set up the technology. Thank you for your indulgence. Hopefully it works. Okay. To edit my comments, Z418 East 2nd Street for your record. Okay. First of all, shout out to Cutthroat Bagel Company, Fleur Bake Shop, and Tamarack, Montana. Thank you for your support. My heart is pounding. If it wasn't obvious to anybody before this meeting, It will probably be obvious to you now why you needed to put forth this proclamation. So thank you. Okay. Last year, after the event genitals in Helena, once again, pass legislation targeting transgender Montanans. I appeared before council to request that you adopt the pride flag as the first official flag of the city of Whitefish. My request was met with Two weeks ago, I requested that the mayor issue an official proclamation designating the month of June as Pride Month in the City of Whitefish. In councilor comments, Rebecca, leading with empathy, courageously walked the talk. As the video replay on YouTube demonstrates, Andy immediately supported the motion, followed by Steve, and Ben and Frank, less enthusiastically, like signed. And like deja vu all over again, Giuseppe Caltabiano felt compelled to comment.

Can I make a comment? That's five, by the way. No, can I make something? Yeah, normally we speak to the motion. I find that very discriminatory towards the people who are not in those alphabet letters. As an example, I'm Italian. I'm not fully white. I'm Caucasian. And I feel discriminated against if we make a proclamation that even the people who forged this acronym cannot make it comprehensive enough, proves the fact that the number of letters to this acronym keeps increasing. So for that reason, I find it discriminatory to the ones who are not included in that acronym. For that reason, I vote against it.

OK. Thanks, Giuseppe, for a very interesting perspective.

Although I did not forge this acronym, as an educator of 18 years in this valley, I will take a moment to educate you on the reason that the alphabet letters have increased. L is for lesbian. G is for gay. B is for bisexual. T is for transgender. Q is for queer or questioning. I is for intersex. A is for asexual. And plus is to represent all other identities and orientations not explicitly covered by the acronym, such as pansexual, demisexual, nonbinary, genderfluid, aromantic, agender, or two-spirit. Inclusivity at its finest. If anyone has experienced discrimination due to your heterosexuality, please contact me and I will passionately, enthusiastically, and publicly call out this injustice. Meanwhile, I will honor, advocate for, and celebrate our LGBTQIA plus community members, of which I am one. We're here, we're queer, get used to it. Thank you.

No applause? Thank you, Zee. Further public comment this evening before I go to those online, sir.

Council members, my name is Zach Biggle.

I live at Canyon Road and First Avenue South. The God of heaven and earth is the God of love. And love is what brings me here tonight. Is it what brings you here? The Bible describes God as Father, Son, and Spirit. And these three have perfect love for each other. In creation, God created man in his image to reflect his goodness, truth, and beauty. Jesus was asked in Matthew 22, Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law? And he said to them, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment, and the second is like it. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. As God created man in his image, he created us to reflect goodness, truth, and beauty. My question to you all here tonight are these questions. Can it be good to allow, encourage, and promote our neighbors to cut off their body parts. How is this loving your neighbor? Is it true to tell a girl that she can be a boy? We know that even with all the medical and scientific procedures, this will never be true. And what is beautiful about a man in a dress? My questions to you as council members are these. Why are you seeking to proclaim and promote what the Lord has declared as wicked, dishonest, and grotesque? Why are you choosing to hate your neighbor and make this false and blasphemous proclamation of love? Thank you.

Thank you, Zach.

Hi, my name is Kelly T for Safety Concerns. My address is 418 Easy Second Street. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I came here tonight not only to speak about the Pride Month Proclamation, but also about something I observed during your last City Council meeting when this proclamation was proposed. If this proclamation is meant to promote dignity, inclusion, and respect, then those values must apply equally, especially to residents and elected officials who hold different views. True inclusion is not tested by how we treat people who already agree with us. It is tested by how we treat those who don't. When a fellow council member expresses a dissenting opinion on this resolution, they should not face ridicule or dismissal. That behavior contradicts the very principles the proclamation claims to uphold. The city's own non-discrimination ordinance and our laws already protect every individual from unlawful discrimination. We do not need a monthly proclamation that singles out one set of identities for official municipal celebration to achieve equal rights. The government's job is to protect the rights of all residents equally, not to endorse contested cultural ideologies. Our community includes people with sincerely held religious beliefs, different convictions about biology, sports, and privacy, and a wide range of viewpoints. Respecting diversity means respecting viewpoint diversity too. Before we officially celebrate one particular group, we should first demonstrate that we can treat all citizens and all elected officials with equal respect, even and especially when we disagree. I urge you to either rescind the Pride Month proclamation or replace it with a simple reaffirmation of equal rights and government neutrality for every individual without favoritism. Thank you.

Thank you.

Kevin. Kevin McDowell, 403 Texas Avenue. I just want to say I really love living in a city that includes everybody and wants to include everybody. And being a fifth generation Whitefish son, grandson of Les Mason, if you guys know where the park is, they like to include everybody as well. So nice job. And I just have two things for everybody in the room right now. For everybody to come down here to try and demonize one group of people, you might want to show up and come to a housing meeting. That might be a good thing as well. And just another thing, put some glitter on your face and go to a Pride event because it's pretty damn fun.

Thanks, Kevin. Further public comment from those in the audience? I'm going to go ahead and... Sir.

Good evening, Mick Holmes, 170 Johns Way, Whitefish. Just wanted to comment on the railroad crossing on 2nd Street. The grant application I think is something that you actually do need to do for the money and everything, but I do think we need to have a fair amount more input community-wise about where that overpass actually comes or that viaduct actually comes and dumps out, whether it's 2nd or Armory. PUTTING A LOT MORE TRAFFIC ON SECOND IS GOING TO REALLY CHANGE THAT EAST SIDE OF WHITEFISH. IT'S GOING TO BECOME A MAJOR TRAFFIC CORRIDOR ALONG WITH THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND EVERYTHING RIGHT THERE. WE'LL NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONSIDER ALL THAT STUFF, TOO. SO I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO TO GET THAT GRANT IN, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE ACTUALLY FORM THAT BIODOC. THANK YOU.

Thank you, Nick. I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to Michelle. Michelle, anyone online wishing to provide public comment this evening?

Yes, we have two. Valerie, please unmute your mic and state your name and address, please.

Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can.

Thank you. Sorry about that. I haven't done this before. Yes, my name is Valerie McGarvey. My address is 445 4th Avenue East. And I just wanted to comment tonight to thank the Whitefish City Council for this proclamation. And I have a few comments. Pride Month is not about superiority, but about visibility, historical equality, and community for a marginalized group. The other 11 months of the year are inherently center on the majority culture. Pride is a protest, a fight for the right to exist, a celebration for obstacles that have been overcome, for pride in community, and for self-expression. It is about visibility for people everywhere to see themselves represented and accepted. Acceptance and visibility save lives. I have heard enough from Christians who stand up and proclaim their faith and pat themselves on their backs for their steadfast love of God, then say nothing when children are bombed to oblivion, starved by our greed, and ignored unless they are straight and white. I will pray for you and for the queer members of your family and perhaps your children who are being taught to hate themselves. Thank you.

Thanks, Valerie.

Ed, please unmute your mic and state your name and address, please.

Dr. 955 Northwoods. This is interesting. There's a lot of people that Don't affect our lives at all, but in fact are separating us big time. I don't understand. I mean, if you don't deal with Pride Month, you don't want it, go ahead, don't celebrate it. You want Nuclear Family Month? Create one. Go ahead, make your own proclamation. Nobody's stopping you. I don't get what's going on here. This is insane. Everybody's speaking up against this. I mean, I guess this is very Christian to people, and I'm not as schooled in the Christianity part of this at all. Only thing I think about is when Jesus says, love your neighbor. And I don't see this at all of these people. These people are feeling sorry for people. They're saying that it leads to drug use and are depressed. Why in the hell do you think they're depressed? Because people like you don't want them to have some fun. It's just, I'm sorry for the language. That is me. That's all on me. Whoops. I do that a lot. You can check out more of that on the Beer, Buds, and Big Sky podcast if you're interested. Anyway, I don't want to believe most of these people think that Charlie Kirk was right and the Civil Rights Movement was a mistake and Martin Luther King was a grifter. you know I don't know where this comes from I really don't I mean I don't know why people have a problem with this and it's kind of it's kind of got given me a problem that we live around all these people that don't want this listen go start your own proclamation for anything you want you like frogs make it frog a month it doesn't matter but Jesus homosexuality brings real harm I mean, I know gay people that believe in God. We're harming our own people by doing this. We can't be proud of who you are. You're doing this to make yourself feel virtuous as a city council. I don't see that. I know all you guys. And, gee, man, I like you a lot. I don't know where you're coming from other than you want to be the Republican chair for the Flathead County, and this is your job. You have to be this way because that's what they love. I don't know why. Still, I really don't. But I've heard a lot of Bible quotes, a lot of weird things, you know, how this is hurting people. I mean, Kristi Noem's husband cross-dressed. I mean, he's a conservative. Is that guy bad? Is he super bad? Are we supposed to hate our neighbor? Man, live and let live and let the libertarian spirit be alive in Montana because we're losing it. And that sucks. Thanks a lot, you guys. I respect what you do. Sorry for the swearing.

Thank you, Ed. Further comments online, Michelle?

We do have one more, I'm sorry. Daniel, please unmute your mic and state your name and address, please.

A lot going on there this evening. I just wanted to inform the council and folks there on the upcoming constitutional ballot measure that is trying to get on the ballot this next election cycle. CI-134. It's claiming that it will fix property taxes, but unfortunately the initiative will upend Montana's property tax system, decimate local services, and do very little for the average Montana homeowner. This is really driven by out-of-state millionaires, that appear to be bankrolling the initiative with paid signature gathering across the state. As this is coming forward, Montana voters should be wary of the initiative and decline to sign the petition. And just for you, I'm just commenting tonight as a board member of the Montana Budget and Policy Center. So look for the ballot initiative and please decline to sign.

Thank you, Daniel.

Is that it, Michelle? Yes, it is.

I'm going to go ahead and close communications from the public. Any volunteer board reports from the audience? How about the council? Not seeing any, we'll move on to our consent agenda. You have the regular meeting minutes contained in the packet for May 18th.

Mr. Mayor, I move to approve the consent agenda, but I have one edit that needs to be made.

Is there a second to the motion? Seconded by Councillor Norton. Frank?

Yeah, we need to go back to clarify the record on page... Let's see if I can get back to where I need to be. Oh yes, it's page 48. We need to insert at the end of, for clarification purposes, The paragraph that begins, Norton asked to add to the Whitefish surface area letter, et cetera, second sentences and a proclamation for Pride Month. Kyle Tabliano opposed the idea, saying the proclamation feels discriminatory against those who are not included. But then the minutes say the majority of council supported issuing it. I think more correctly, it needs to say that all other members of council and the mayor support issuing it. I move that we make that amendment and approve the consent agenda.

Is that okay with the second? Yes, it is. Okay. Further discussion? Giuseppe.

Just a point for the record. At that time, I did not know the wording of the proclamation. We voted by a wave of hands to direct the staff to write a proclamation. None of us, nor the public, had the chance to review that proclamation before it was issued. BUT I AGREE WITH FRANK, FIVE OF YOU SUPPORTED DIRECTING THE STAFF AND I WAS OPPOSED.

THANK YOU, GIOCEPPI. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ADOPTING THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. THOSE OPPOSED, I LIKE THE SOUND OF THE MOTION DOES. care unanimously, which brings us to our one public hearing of the evening. Thanks for your patience, applicants. And that will be Resolution 26-14, a resolution to annex and incorporate within the boundaries of the City of Whitefish by petition and consent of the property owner approximately 18.01 acres of land known as Track 7D and 7CK, addressed as 5960 Highway 93 South. Located in Section 12, Township 30 North, Range 2 West, and the property is zoned WBT, which is our business transitional district based on the findings of fact in the staff report and subject to the recommended conditions of annexation approval. Dave.

Yeah, good evening, Mayor and Council. So this is a petition to annex 5960 Highway 93 South into Whitefish and change the zoning from County B4 to WBT, the Business Transitional District. The property is currently on the edge of the urbanizing city limits. It's currently developed with a boat storage facility, Whitefish Marine. It's close to 18 acres. IT'S AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 93 SOUTH AND HIGHWAY 40. LOTS TO THE NORTH AND THE EAST HAVE RECENTLY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. FOR OUR ANNEXATION POLICY, THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD PRIORITIZE THE ANNEXATION OF PROPERTIES THAT WOULD FILL GAPS LEFT BY PREVIOUS ANNEXATIONS THAT CREATED ISLANDS AND OTHER TYPES OF NONCONTIGUOUS BOUNDARIES. AND WHILE IT'S NOT FILLING A GAP, IT DOES HELP FACILITATE THE ANNEXATION OF MORE PROPERTIES IN THE AREA. IT IS WITHIN OUR URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY. Highway 93 South, a state road maintained by the state, will continue to be a state highway. It's not currently connected to city utilities, so any new construction or redevelopment will be required to connect to water and sewer. Both are located just to the north of this property. And there is a fire hydrant located within 500 feet. Included in this annexation petition was a development agreement. It's signed, and it includes an accompanying site plan and building elevations. While an agreement's not a requirement of annexation, it's a tool that the council can get a clear sense of the proposed development, as there will be no further council review. Once it's annexed and if the uses are included in there are uses by right within that zoning district, which would include multifamily, et cetera. Prior to any construction, it would be reviewed by staff to make sure it complies with our architectural review standards, our zoning, and our engineering standards. While it's an assigned agreement, it's still a draft agreement until approved by council, and it could be amended by council during the public hearing process. Just to summarize the developer's agreement, IT INCLUDES BUILDING NO MORE THAN 256 UNITS IN 24 BUILDINGS TO INCLUDE A CLUBHOUSE, TWO FUTURE COMMERCIAL PAD SITES, PROVIDING AMENITIES TO THE RESIDENTS, CONSTRUCTING A SHARED USE PATH ALONG HIGHWAY 93 SOUTH FRONTAGE. THE CURRENT BOAT DEALERSHIP WOULD BE MAINTAINED ON SITE FOR NO MORE THAN 24 MONTHS FROM THE CLOSING. OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS IS WORKING WITH A TRAFFIC ENGINEER IN MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO IMPROVE THE WESTERN APPROACH ON HIGHWAY 93 SOUTH AND HIGHWAY 40 INTERSECTION. AND THEN DESIGNING A SOUTHERNLY ACCESS AS A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ONLY. AND THEN THE DEVELOPERS WOULD BE PARTICIPATING IN THE LEGACY HOMES PROGRAM AND WOULD PROVIDE AT LEAST 10% DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND IN EXCHANGE TO RECEIVE A 40 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT WHICH IS ONE OF THE INCENTIVES OF THE LEGACY HOMES PROGRAM. Staff has reviewed the developer agreement. Overall, we're comfortable with the agreement. It does not preclude the city from enforcing all applicable city standards, including zoning and engineering standards. Some of the annexation policy criteria in looking at annexations, does it contribute to the logical growth pattern of the city? Does it fill gaps in left by previous annexations? Is it located within the urban growth boundary? Is it an area where proliferation of onsite septic may pose a threat to water quality? Is it advantageous to the residents both of the annexation area and the city as a whole does it provide additional community housing? Or the property owners generally favorable towards it and then where there's an existing annexation agreement signed annexation petitions or signed waivers or protests so looking at it in relation to the growth policy Our highway 93 a highway 93 South corridor plan identifies that land uses highway transitional with the appropriate highway to transitional zoning of WBT You know and looking at it overall The current zoning is County before which is secondary business highway overlay the comparable zoning to that is our WB to zoning WHICH ALLOWS MANY COMMERCIAL USES HOWEVER OUR CORRIDOR PLAN DID CALL FOR THOSE PROPERTIES WITH THAT ZONING TO GO TO A TRANSITIONAL ZONE AND NOT TO WB2 BUT RATHER THE WBT ZONING DISTRICT IS WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN OBSERVED IN THAT YOU GUYS ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF INTENT THAT'S YOUR LAST MEETING OR TWO MEETINGS AGO, AND THEN YOU SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING. WE DID NOTIFY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT NOTICES IN THE PAPER, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT. IN ASSESSING THE PROPOSAL, DOES IT AUTHORIZE LAND USES COMPARABLE TO THE LAND USES AUTHORIZED UNDER THE COUNTY ZONING CLASSIFICATION? AND IT DOESN'T IN THAT OUR COMPARABLE ZONING TO THAT B4 IS WB2. HOWEVER, OUR GROWTH POLICY DOES CALL FOR WBT. DOES IT AUTHORIZE LAND USES THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH LAND USES APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? AND AGAIN, OUR WBT IS NOT NECESSARILY CONSISTENT WITH THE COUNTY B4, AS THAT'S ALMOST IDENTICAL TO OUR WB2 ZONING DISTRICT. HOWEVER, OUR GROWTH POLICY DOES CALL FOR WBT. And is it consistent with our land use and zoning I set forth in our growth policy And yes, it is consistent with that with regard to the zoning proposed So based on that stuff does recommend approval of the subject annexation Subject to two conditions on that which would be Compliance with the approved signed annexation developer agreement and that the shared use path must be privately maintained and I do believe that the applicants are here with a presentation on but I'd be glad to answer any additional questions that you guys might have.

Thank you, Director Taylor. Any questions for Dave on his staff report?

Dave, I just wanted to clarify that if we move to amend this, we are amending it subject to or on condition upon the developer agreement, which is in the packet. Is that correct?

That's correct.

And the way I read this, the developer agreement has to abide by that whether it's this developer or one that might be this might be transferred they'd be entitled to those or required to live up those conditions. Assume with me if we will that the developer takes this and we uh... amend it or we approve this what is the length of THE OBLIGATION OF THE DEVELOPER TRIGGERED TO ACTUALLY MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS AND COMPLETE THEM UNLIKE A REGULAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR ANYTHING ELSE? THOSE ARE LIMITED IN TERMS OF TIME WHEN THEY HAVE TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE THEY EXPIRE. WHAT IS THE ISSUE HERE?

TYPICALLY THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT'S REQUIRED TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS IS BASED ON THE specific approval of a development, for instance, a subdivision. When they apply for a building permit is when they're expected to have, you know, the utilities extended, the shared use path or whatever that's required completed, whatever improvements MBT is going to require at that intersection. There is some language in the developer agreement that has some expirations in there. Um, there's a contingency based on a sale and Angie can kind of speak to more of that aspect of things. Um, but you know, this developer agreement, while it's an agreement of the things that they're going to accomplish, but what triggers that is when they come to a place, whatever they plan on doing there, you know, which has to be consistent with the proposed zoning that they wish the WBT, um, whatever standards are in place for that with regard to a building permit, architectural review. And at that point, um, any of the improvements that would be required to, you know, to put those kind of facilities that they, whatever they propose within with their, um, um, building permit. And again, they're, they're showing a sketch of what they intend to do on that property, but it's not like a plan unit development where they're held to that site plan, for instance.

Agreed. And that's one of my concerns, but my, my question really is, We entitled this, we incorporated and entitled this property as we would do through a conditional use permit or a PUD. And the developer under those circumstances has not to exceed, what, two, three, four years to begin and complete the work, otherwise it expires. Is there anything in this agreement that identifies when this would expire?

No, because you're annexing it in and creating a zoning district. So whatever is allowed under that zoning is their entitlement. When you look at a zone change, you're changing the zoning, but there's not necessarily specifics with regard to that. I mean, there is language in this developer agreement that does talk about what they intend to do, but I don't believe there's any specific timeline of when that can be accomplished. Angie can speak more to that. I would need to read it again to see if there's more specifics of that.

Thank you. You've answered my question.

Steve. So let's say they don't build for 10 years. Are they still held to only building what they provide in the developer agreement, or are we just... Or does, I mean, what teeth does the developer agreement have and for how long? I think that's kind of the question that strikes me. Because we're not, I mean, we're presented with a plan to zone, to annex them in and zone them a certain way. And if they don't do anything, how long are they held to that plan? Forever?

Forever, yeah.

So they can only build what's in the plan? Are the teeth in it that way?

The agreement actually says that they're going to develop it in accordance with the site plan they provided.

So that's in perpetuity then, even if they sell it to somebody else? Correct. Okay, thank you.

Ben.

I'm a little confused. Just to make sure I'm clear, they do have to follow the site plan or they don't have to follow the site plan?

I mean, according to the agreement, I mean, it states in there that the development of the project will be in substantial compliance with the site plan provided, you know, and the amenities that they intend to include in there. So part of that developer agreement does state that. You know, what happens if years go by? I don't know. I mean, they come and ask to amend their developer agreement. I think that's happened in the past. So...

Okay. My second question has to do with the intersection at Highway 40, obviously an important part of this project. I'm wondering if you could step me through a little bit how that intersection would get designed and upgraded and when and how that would happen.

I'm going to defer to our Public Works Director on that portion of things.

Yeah, the state already has plans to reconstruct the intersection of Highway 93 and 40. I believe it's a 2028 construction project, which likely would align with construction of this work. But ultimately, it would be an MDT project.

Do we have any role in that?

NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. WE DID REACH OUT TO MDT EARLY AND TRIED TO PERSUADE THEM TO ADD BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ALONG HIGHWAY 40 AND AS USUAL WERE DENIED.

YEAH. AND DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT IN THE COURSE OF THAT PROCESS WE WILL NOT HAVE A DEGRADATION OF LEVEL OF SERVICE OF THIS INTERSECTION?

I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. OBVIOUSLY THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO HAVE INTERSECTION DESIGN ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION, BUT I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY DEGRADATION IN LEVEL OF SERVICE.

GOT IT. SO THE UPGRADES THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE DOING WOULD ONLY BE FOR THE WEST SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION, NOT THE INTERSECTION ITSELF?

CORRECT. Yeah, I mean, they wouldn't be adding lanes or changing signalization or anything like that. It would really just be construction of the intersection on the west side.

Okay. And do you think the current intersection with just the upgrades on the west side, will the level of service of that intersection still be maintained?

YEAH, I BELIEVE IT WILL. AND THERE WILL BE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE EAST SIDE AS WELL, BUT MDT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE. AND THEY ALREADY HAVE A DESIGN FOR THAT AND I BELIEVE HAVE IT SCHEDULED FOR CONSTRUCTION.

THANK YOU. REBECCA, ANY QUESTIONS?

I don't know if this is for Dave or the applicant, but I thought it said that there's only going to be right turn allowed going out of it. But I was wondering why we don't have, well, anyways, I'll ask the applicant when they come up.

Additional questions for Dave? I just had one, Dave. I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT SUBMITTING THE SITE PLAN. I BELIEVE WE DISCUSSED THIS A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN WE WANTED TO EVALUATE AN ANNEXATION PETITION ALONG WITH THE REZONE IN THE SAME MOTION OR SAME CONSIDERATION. AND I APPRECIATE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATES THAT IT WOULD BE DEVELOPED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN. I'm just curious, and this is probably a question for the applicant, but we have 5.5 acres of commercial on Highway 93 frontage with no concept presented. And so one question I have for you, or perhaps it's for the applicant, is what's anticipated there? What type of use? And I'd like to somehow tie this development agreement TO SOME AGREEMENT OR CONDITION THAT CONDITIONS THAT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO A CERTAIN USE?

SO, YEAH, I MEAN, PART OF THIS, I MEAN, I THINK THE INTENT FOR THEM IS THAT THIS, WHATEVER HAPPENS ON THAT PROPERTY WOULD EITHER BE A USE BY RIGHT IN THE BT ZONING DISTRICTS OR IT WOULD BE TIED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH. And so, you know, they didn't include that, you know, in the annexation agreement. And they're, you know, it's already, you know, going to be zoned WBT and whatever uses they have there will have to conform to that zoning district, correct?

Would this come back ultimately with the 256 housing units on 24, in 24 buildings, would this come back as a PUD to the council?

Yeah, the property to the north, I mean, just in some preliminary discussions with them, their intention is to come in with a PUD.

Well, I don't I don't care about the property on this particular project.

Yeah, there's no PUD being proposed Whatever there the residential units are used by right? Okay in the zoning and that all I know is within the developer agreement talks about them subdividing off the front portion So they'd be under different, you know on a different lot.

And how would that come back to?

either yourself or the council well would either be used by right used by right development or or it would be tied to another project that somebody would come in for. If there's a zone change or a PUD, then you guys would get it.

So in the event it's not use by right, meaning a permitted use, it would then come back to council?

Well, no. I mean, if it's not a use by right, then obviously they can't do that other than, you know. If it's something that needs a conditional use permit, then it would be a notification. But with the new process starting after July 1st, It'd be something that we'd notify the neighbors on, and then we'd have to determine whether or not there was impacts that weren't considered and whether it would be elevated, you know, either approved or denied or appealed to the Board of Adjustment and ultimately to you guys. But you'll have to ask them their specific intent for that lot. I can't speak to that. It's just a zone change to that WBT. And so anywhere on that property, I mean, it's the uses that are allowed within that zoning district. They happen to be showing you what their intentions are as part of this developer agreements to give you an idea what their intentions are. Okay.

Those are my questions. Anything further from the council? We did advertise for a public hearing and we'll hold that public hearing now on what will be resolution 26-14. And I would ask the applicant first, if you have a presentation. or additional information to submit to the council. Will, good evening.

Will McDonald, 180 Fauna Road. And I've got David Coole with Cushing Terrell and Rory, and they're up here, so they'll stand up, you know, when we want to dig into stuff. I was going to go on about housing, and I've tried to find projects, but I'll just get right into it and address questions. So, you know, we did, we've been working on the site for about 12 months. It's taken a while. One of the things is just working with the seller. He originally said, you know, he wanted to keep a portion of the property. It just wouldn't work for us. We needed the whole site. And so that's the reason why it's 24 months and it's a lease back. And our intent is to focus on housing. I'm not specifically a commercial developer. uh developer uh developing pad sites and so what you're seeing here is the focus on the housing 256 units 10 of that deed restricted we're going to focus on 80 ami we might even increase it and we're going to evaluate that but that's really depends on securing litech funding That's a process. I'm sure you guys are aware of it, know it to some extent. They don't award the contracts until the fall. So we're going to be exploring that. We'd love to increase our workforce housing, but we're definitely going to do at least 10%. Phase one is the housing, which is on about 13, 12 to 13 acres. The 5.54 acres up front, Phase one is doing by right apartment housing. Phase two is coming back through with a subdivision. And so as Dave Taylor said, by right, with WBT zoning, it's only four uses, really, if you look in the zoning ordinances. Everything else is a CUP or a PUD. to do anything outside of that. Also, if you're doing more than 7,500 square feet as a building footprint, it requires a CUP. So you guys have all the zoning ordinances in place to control this. And so our intent is to annex in and focus on the multifamily. then what we want to do, because we're not commercial developers, we want to come back through subdivision. So that goes through planning board and you guys. So you would oversee that process as well. That's phase two. That's probably eight to ten months once we annex into the property. And so That's all the cards on the table. And we would be just selling those pad sites outright. We're not going to try and develop them further than putting all the infrastructure in and making sure that they're sellable. We have been approached by a grocery store. We have been approached by a couple other commercial developers. We're not in control of the land right now. You know, we'll put that on them, what they want to do. So anything that, you know, we transact, whatever they want to do, they can either do by use or by right, which is WBT, or they come back through with another entitlement. And so, you know, Council Member Frank, you know, to address sort of the question that you asked as well as Mayor Mulfeld. So... 10% talked about that. Also, one of the big things is the critical thing is the landscaping, is the Whitefish Marina. The big thing there that we're going to champion is really bringing it up to Whitefish standards and code. and really creating that pedestrian traffic inflow and outflow coming into the city and just where its location is. It's kind of the gateway into Whitefish. So just again trying to answer a number of the questions that I heard and then what I'll do is I'll let David walk through the slideshow and then Rory and I can also stand up for questions.

Thanks Will. Welcome David.

Thanks, David Cool, Cushing Terrell. Appreciate the opportunity. Yeah, I guess I don't have a clicker, so I have to rely upon her for this. Just a little bit of site orientation here. I think you all know where it is, but for anyone who isn't familiar, the yellow area there at the intersection of 93 and 40, that's the acreage we're talking about. You can go to the next one. little aerial view that shows about where it is. One great thing about this site, which is fairly unique, as you view actually a little bit to the north, but primarily to the east, it's elevated. And you'll see that on some of these topographic maps that the further back on the site you go, the higher it gets. And so the units and things that are back there I think they're going to have a pretty good view through our own corridor and even out into the canyon and probably very likely even some white peaks of Glacier Park. So it's a very interesting opportunity for housing, and so we're happy to be a part of that. You can flip to the next one. Some of the neighborhood views, we like to put these in here just for familiarity and understanding what's there today, what we hope to do with it, and also to understand what your neighbors look like today. You can hit the next one. There's your neighbor to the south, a couple of them. Current site as we head north here. And you can even see the elevation. I think we all know the site really well here. We can flip to the next one. I think that's the site to the north now, and you see the intersection. And one more, I think, is the town pump where that project is in compliance, I think, with the corridor plan there with respect to landscaping and so forth. So, of course, the goal is to get to that level of development along the highway. You can flip to the next one. This is just a closer aerial. Next one, please. topographic laid on top of it, and the next one kind of just diagrammatically shows if you can read that. Interestingly enough, you know, it's essentially a project of three tiers, we call it, the lowest tier along 93, the middle tier, and then the higher tier, which is fairly flat as you head to the west. Those red zones are areas I just kind of put in there that are fairly undeveloped. Those are very steep. And so we can consider the project really broken into essentially three tiers. The green area, I've been calling it the gorge. It's very steep there. And really the hope there is to, interestingly enough, it also aims toward the view. So you'll see in the site plan development we tried to utilize these as features. as impetus to the design, as opposed to just laying a bunch of buildings out as barracks. We wanted to take advantage of these contours to actually develop something unique, and I'll show you how we did that. So you can hit the next one. This is a quick preliminary sketch, and it does actually show, even though we're not talking about the buildings along 93, the idea of highlighting something on that in time on phase two. But this little loose sketch called the gorge there represented how we would take buildings and break them up. One thing we learned as we played around with this is that big buildings are not so good for this site. And it's because we have so much contour, there's so much movement up and down that big buildings, it's difficult as the bigger the building gets and you're stretching across contours that are moving down, the harder we have to comply with the height restrictions, right? Because you have a 35, or in this case a 40 foot, restriction and the building is trying to get bigger along something that is dropping or raising in elevation, it's very difficult for us to do that. So the secret was to break it into these little bite-sized pieces, if you will. These are all just 12 plexes. As we sprinkle them around the site, you can hit the next one. I think it's a little better. There it is. The most recent landscape plan, and that's probably the most accurate we have in terms of sketch, but you see a series of 12 plexes that when you break the buildings down into smaller sizes, they can rotate around the existing contours better. They can move up and down on the contours a little bit better, so it flows nice, a little more natural. And when they're smaller like that, additionally, we can actually stretch a hose around both sides and protect the building without having to have an inner road where we now, where we want the landscape feature, which is now the gorge, if you see it that way. So we'll try to hold some water there and turn it into a feature. And there will be nothing but pedestrian paths through that. We don't have to have a road back there. So I hope that makes sense. Cool. Yeah. That was part of the deal. And part of the joy of it was doing that. And so you see we wrap actually two entrances off of 93. The north one is the light. And then a simple loop around the outside. And then there's an inner loop so that no matter where you are in there, You should be able to get in your car or bike or walk and then walk and actually drive around and get to either of the intersections. If you want to go north, it's pretty easy in any instance to get to the light and turn left. That was the thinking there. I think you can flip to the next one. We're getting to some 3D modeling here. Go to the next one as well. Next one. I guess I have too many images. Sorry. There's a lot of them. I really kind of geek out on the imagery. Next one. You're dropping down now as you rotate around to 93, and I think the next one might even be eye level. Yeah. What's interesting additionally, because it sends back to the west and it starts to tear up, right now we're not showing anything at the lowest tier. The second tier, which is up that landscape, we're seeing a few of the three-story buildings, and then everything else, all 156 units are hidden behind that. And so really the impact visually on 93 is Surprisingly minimal, and I think that is something we like. It actually adds a sense of privacy, really, to these units as well. You don't necessarily have to hear the highway noise, and so pushing all those back there, I think, is a good thing. Next one. Just a couple of crews around the campus here. These are some of the units. I think you can go to the next one. I think we get a view, a couple views into that gorge area. Haven't shown a lot of detail here yet. That'll be as we move on to the next level related to landscaping and so forth. But the point here is to provide a nice big wide open space. That's kind of rare, really. We wanted to take advantage of that for this property. You see it kind of all culminates on the community building, which kind of hovers right on the edge of the precipice as you look down then toward 93. You can go to the next one. There's a couple shots in here. Next one's fine, too. I think we'll be able to... Throw a football or ride his motorcycle in here if you wanted to, your dirt bike. Maybe not, maybe not. Next shot, please. OK, just a quick shot of the architect. Again, we're going to mess with materials and things, but there's probably going to be two or three building types. They're all going to be very similar, though. These are 12 plexes. In the middle, there's an entry on both sides, so you'd be able to come in from parking lot or exit to the green space if you wanted to. The core areas up the middle are all sort of one-bedroom-ish designs, but then you see something off to the left, something off to the right. We didn't want to make this brick three-story brick that was the full height. So there may be a two-bedroom on one side and then a three-bedroom on the other. Second floor, something different. Third floor, all one bedrooms in this one. So you see a lot of emulation in the architecture to make it, as opposed to just one big old brick, it's got some movement left and right. That was intentional. Most of these buildings are going to look like that will just sort of play with the materials differently in order to add some more, I would say, joy to the architecture. So that was the theory behind the design. That's one side, and that's the other. I think that's about it. You might want to go to the next. Yeah, I think that's the last one. So any questions on the architecture, happy to answer it. Oh, did you have one? Oh, okay, sorry.

Otherwise, let Rory speak to Civil.

I think Rebecca has a question. David?

Well, I just was wondering, did I read that it's 50 feet in the frontage area, or is that? Okay, yeah. The setbacks are 50. I thought it was 50 feet in the front. Sorry, Will. Yeah.

No, so one of the things that we are adhering to is all the setbacks, and so one of the things that we'll be doing is just the landscaping as well as the bike path, and so that 50-foot setback, and then, yeah, I mean, we're not asking any variances.

Okay, but what about all the water that's sitting there?

So we did a wetland delineation, and I think we might have put it into the report, but we did do a determination by the Corps. Okay. It's all runoff, and I believe that was in our submittal, and we did consult with them. They made a determination that it was essentially surface water that was coming, and essentially 93 was basically creating a barrier that it is actually not wetlands, and so we have the documentation for that. Yeah, they're non-jurisdictional.

Thank you. Yeah, I just want to make sure because we had so many trees across the street, which to me meant that we had tremendous amounts of water for centuries going there. So I just wanted to make sure that that was dialed in. And then do you mind addressing the traffic issue? And how that will work onto 93?

Yep. So there was, I actually think there was a correction in the staff report. So the first staff report said that the intersection would be right out at 40. And so there's three, or no, there's two movements. There's two movements, one that goes left and then one that goes straight and right. And so our southbound exit will basically be a right out only. And so no traffic can basically cross over and create, you know, a traffic issue. So Bob Abeldeen did our TIS and that definitely was something that we investigated because there's a lot of moving pieces with this large land play.

Rory, anything to add? OK, no problem.

Any other questions?

Frank? Is there some graphic that's going to show me how this works or how it connects into Highway 93, vis-a-vis the Highway 40 intersection?

So with regards to our preliminary civil, and Rory can go into it, our preliminary civil, we did study that traffic intersection, and it will be coordinated with MDOT. But I mean, we have to go through the whole civil design. And you should see in the packet the actual intersection. So it is in the packet. And one thing that's important that I forgot to mention is we did reach out to, I reached out to two of our neighbors to the south, Steve Gordon and Mike Bode, and both walked them through this because that intersection on the south, it will be potentially a little bit on Mike Bode's property, but we have to go through actual design THAT IMPROVEMENT WOULD BE DONE 100% BY US, AS WELL AS THE INTERSECTION TO THE NORTH. ERIC PAIN, WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED WITH HIM. DEPENDING UPON WHAT HE DOES, THAT INTERSECTION WILL ALSO BE SORT OF JOINTLY DONE.

FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR WILL, DAVID, OR RORY? We're gonna hit a quick pause and take about a five minute break and then we'll reconvene and take general public comment. Thanks you guys. Unless you have anything else to add.

Yes, Rory and I were just talking again about this intersection. In our TIS, we do bring out our traffic counts. One of the reasons we did use a grocery store is that's going to have a lot more trip counts than a brewery and an office building. And so we did load it, even though that use would have to come back through a CUP or a PUD. And what you'll see in our TIS is that it does stress that intersection. MDOT does have a 10-year plan, as Craig Workman alluded to. And we had a number of calls with MDOT. As you guys know, you can't force MDOT to do something that they don't want to do. They move their own speed. But we are doing everything possible to work with them, and that intersection is a critical intersection. I've tried two other developments. Mountain Gateway was a very contentious one. because everybody cited the traffic. Just how do you put that many people? High point on second was originally going to be apartments. I don't know if we want to build housing in our community. I think we're going to have to go through a little bit of stress, but we are committed to improving that intersection. I know there's going to be frustration, but the TIS says it does not fail. It does downgrade, I think, with just our fully built out, but fully built out is going to take us three to five years. We do fully intend to, we're working with LHC right now on numbers. You know, we plan closing is in September. This development plan will be in perpetuity. SO IF WE DID SELL, LET'S SAY, AND WE PHASED IT, SOMEBODY WOULD BE HELD TO THOSE DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND WE TRIED TO GET VERY SPECIFIC. WE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY. AS WELL AS CRAIG WORKMAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TRIED TO SPELL OUT EVERYTHING IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SO THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY MYSTERY. SO WE'RE TRYING TO PUT OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD. WE ARE 100% GOING TO WORK WITH MDOT AS WELL AS THE CITY. WE KNOW THAT THAT'S A STRESS POINT, BUT IF WE WANT TO BUILD HOUSING, THIS IS ARGUABLY THE BEST LOCATION. SO.

THANK YOU, WILL. WITH THAT SAID, WE WILL OPEN PUBLIC COMMENTS. I WOULD JUST ASK IF YOU COULD JUST KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO ABOUT THREE MINUTES.

I'D APPRECIATE IT. 625 SUMMERS AVENUE SPEAKING TONIGHT AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SHELTER WF. FIRST OF ALL SHELTER WF OVERALL SUPPORTS THIS ANNEXATION NOT BECAUSE IT'S PERFECT BUT BECAUSE WHITEFISH IS IN DESPERATE NEED OF HOUSING. More and more of our workforce are forced to commute and whether deed restricted or market rate, these units will house the people that keep this town running and these 256 units of workforce housing are needed and will be positive. We also appreciate the integrated commercial aspect of this project and we think the developers have done a really good job with the site. We urge council to approve this request and to bring desperately needed workforce housing to Whitefish and Shelter WF is excited to have more neighbors. but this type of development is also pretty frustrating. To step back, if you're thinking as a planner, this housing should be closer to downtown, when we put density on the edge of our city, we force everyone who lives here to drive most of the time, we add maximum traffic and sprawl, and we push into wildlife corridors. We are also putting the housing for working people in the least desirable place in the city. If you live out here, you don't get to walk to downtown or to school or to the lake. Your walkable opportunities are limited to that commercial subdivision. And then you're on an island of asphalt. You don't get the things that people love about Whitefish if they are lucky enough to live near downtown. But I mean, this is what we do. This is what our land use paradigm is designed to do. It's greenfield development and it's sprawl. You can see it when you drive from Whitefish to Kalispell. It's more and more open space converted into car dependent housing. and it happens precisely because this type of development is easier. Our zoning code is designed around it, and there's fewer neighbors and less controversy. The path of least resistance runs straight through the edge of town, and that's why these keep getting built. It's not natural that the place we build housing is the edge of the city. Cities don't have to look like this. It's downstream of restrictive zoning that blocks more housing in the places people already live. Over the next 20, 50 years, we're going to see more of these annexations. When we refuse to let any existing neighborhood change, when we fight every taller building, growth goes to the edge. We do a traffic impact study for each new project, but we don't question the assumptions of car exclusive efficiency that underlies our transportation engineering profession. That's why I'm no longer an engineer. My nightmare is that it's 2050 and the entire drive from Whitefish to Kalispell is developed. We just approved a growth policy that slates almost no change for the vast majority of existing neighborhoods, so we will get more of these. And we waste a tremendous opportunity to harness strong market demand for a more integrated community. None of that is the developer's fault. None of that's going to change here tonight. But we are once again pitting new housing against open space. Tonight, please choose the housing. But don't forget that this is a false dichotomy that we've created ourselves. Thank you.

Thanks, Keegan. Who's next? Not seeing, Richard. I don't get one?

Maybe Michelle will share.

Just kidding, Richard.

Honorable Mayor Mulfeld and Council, I'm Richard Hildner, 5th Street, Whitefish. Just right off the bat, I want you to know I'm opposed to the annexation of the reference property at the intersection of Highway 93 and Highway 40 in order to construct 256 dwelling units, a clubhouse, and two future commercial pad sites. Number one. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE RECENTLY APPROVED GROWTH PLAN. THIS WAS NOT ONE OF THE GROWTH PLAN LOCATIONS. THE GROWTH PLAN IDENTIFIES THREE LOCATIONS, A, B, AND C IN THAT PLAN, AND THIS ISN'T ONE OF THOSE. THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT SERVE A PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF THE GROWTH PLAN TO FOCUS GROWTH INWARD. AND THAT'S A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE PLAN. The developer promises that 10% of the 256 units will be deed restricted. Will these units be built concurrent with each construction phase or will, as so often happens, the developer claims the units don't pencil and will offer in return cash in lieu? The cash in lieu won't deliver 25 affordable housing units. If, on the other hand, you were to green light the Habitat for Humanity proposal for the snow lot, you would get 22 units in the next 18 months. Traffic. The proposed development will create an unimaginable malfunction junction. Just look at the numbers. 5,593 additional vehicle trips per day. The level of service dropping from the current C to a D. The Alpine 9340 now under construction will add 1,981 vehicle trips per day. How many additional trips when the commercial pads are developed? The language used by the Montana Department of Transportation to describe the highway situation and future development is ambiguous at best. quote, may create capacity issues at the intersection of Highway 93 and Montana 40. The intersection will likely require construction of one or two additional travel lanes. Which is it? The developer should coordinate with MDT Why not? Must. To improve operations at the intersection of US 93 and Montana 40, additional traffic lanes will need to be developed. Montana Department of Transportation is planning to install intersection improvements at the intersection to improve westbound approach capacity, but no mention of exactly when. NEED I REMIND COUNCIL THAT MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PROMISED A DIVIDED HIGHWAY 93 FROM HIGHWAY 40 NORTH WHEN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF WARRANTS OR VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY WAS REACHED. THAT WAS REACHED SEVERAL YEARS AGO. I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT WE EXCEEDED IT THEN, AND WE HAVE EXCEEDED IT NOW, AND STILL ALL WE HAVE IS A SUICIDE LANE. There is nothing about when any of the existing projected deficiencies of this junction will be constructed. There is no mention of how children will be protected as they cross a widened Highway 93 and Montana 40. Think about all the kids for just a second. Let's assume one child per unit. That equates to 466 children between the Marina Project and Alpine 9340 having to cross multiple lanes of highway to get to the Smithfields or the town pump or anywhere in that neighborhood. The proposal before you is in opposition to the recently approved growth plan. The proposed development will create an untenable traffic jam. The proposed action creates a major safety hazard for pedestrians, especially children and the mobility impaired. There is no firm timeline from an MDT to correct the deficiencies and construct the necessary improvements. This is a really, really bad idea, and I urge you to say no. Thank you.

Thank you, Richard. Mary.

Thank you again, Mary Flowers Sissons, for a better flathead. I don't think Richard could have said it better, so I will fully endorse all of the things that he has raised before you. We have not had the time to delve into this as much as we would like. At the very least, I would like to see it tabled, but I wholeheartedly endorse denying it. I don't understand why you would bring in a development like this with a sketch of a site plan. I think we need much more robust commercial and traffic information on how this is going to work at that intersection. And I also am concerned about this cash in lieu loophole that we may not ever see the affordable housing that, the built affordable housing that would be needed. So in short, please listen carefully to the issues that Richard just raised. We fully endorse those and urge you to deny this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary. Further public comment on this item? Michelle, anyone online?

I'm not sure. Ed, are you still there, and are you interested in commenting on this item?

Oh, there he is.

Did you get that?

No. We can hear you, Ed.

Okay, cool. Thanks. Good night.

Good night. No comment, Ed? Assuming none, Michelle, anyone else wishing to provide comment?

No, man. You can't hear me? What the hell are you laughing at? No comments.

Do you have a comment tonight? No. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing and turn it back to the council for discussion or preferably a motion one way or the other. Giuseppe.

MR. MAYOR, I WOULD HAVE A MOTION UNLESS THERE ARE FELLOW QUESTIONS. I LOST THE TRACK. IT'S RESOLUTION NUMBER 26-14. I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 26-14, A RESOLUTION TO ANNEX AND INCORPORATE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF By petition and consent of the property owner approximately 18.1 acres of land known as tracks 70 and 70 K Charlie kilo addressed as five nine six zero highway 93 AS IN SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 30 NORTH RAGE TO WEST AND ZONE THE PROPERTY TO WBT, BUSINESS TRANSITIONAL DISTRICT, BASED ON THE FINDING OF FACT IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION APPROVAL, WAR 26-01 IN THE PACKET.

THANK YOU THANK YOU JOSEPH IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION SECONDED BY COUNSELOR NORTON JOSEPHIE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION

Yes, Mr. Mayor. First of all, I understand the concerns on both sides of the supporting and not supporting this annexation. This is not a project. We're looking at an annexation conditioned to a development agreement. So although I would like to see what the, COMMERCIAL AREA LOOKS LIKE, I DO NOT KNOW HOW MUCH PRESSURE I CAN PUT AS A CITY COUNCILOR TO A DEVELOPER TO COME HERE WAY BEFORE ANNEXING WITH PLANS THAT ARE MORE DETAILS THAN WHAT WAS SEEN. AS KEGAN SAID, It's not ideal because we indeed wanted our houses downtown near the Depot Park, and we still haven't done it, but it's a good place for housing. If we said that the other side of the Highway 93, the one across the street, was a good place for affordable housing, this is a good place for affordable housing. similar size, a little bit more smaller scale of the buildings, shared use paths, hopefully some connectivity for some pedestrian. So it allows us to bring that piece of land, which many of us have complained about, under the city's jurisdiction with an agreement that says within 24 months that building that brought some pain, I wish Andy were here right now, to be looking something different and housing people. It provides 256 new homes, including 10% restricted. And you know what, Richard, I agree with you. The rules are the rules. So if the developer figures out that it's not panning out and can legally go for cash in lieu, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN AFFORDABLE PROGRAM FUND THAT HAS DEVOLVED ALMOST A MILLION DOLLARS, AND THAT CASH IN LOOP COULD GO TO THE AFFORDABLE PROGRAM FUND, AND MAYBE WE FIGURE OUT DEPOT PARK AND THOSE 22 UNITS. SO ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, I'M SUPPORTING OF THOSE 10% UNITS. I understand we want to control more and more of the details of the project, but we should also be able to set clear rules, require compliance with those rules and the development agreement, and then allow the reasonable project to move forward. and then we should now move the goalposts either side of us in the future. I keep saying this, developers who are also our citizens have capital at risk. They also have choices about where to put that capital, where to invest. If Whitefish becomes too unpredictable, too hostile, or too slow to approve reasonable projects, I'm not saying crazy projects, that investment I haven't talked to the applicant, but if I were a business person, that investment will go elsewhere. We should hold developers to clear standards, but we should also recognize when a proposal provides housing, affordable units, cleanup of an unattractive site, and public improvement. For those reasons, I am in favor of my motion.

Thank you, Giuseppe. Further comments? Rebecca, we'll start with you and then Steve.

Yeah, I'm actually really happy that we're going to be getting housing at this site and that there will be some commercial opportunity as well. I am concerned about the traffic, but you know it was going to be a problem. But like Craig said, in two years, MGT is going to be improving housing. that intersection so they'll be able to help manage the flow and i i we all knew things were going to develop out there anyway so i'm happy that we're getting affordable housing as part of this project too so i'm in favor thanks rebecca steve i'd like to offer a friendly amendment to the conditions if possible

MY AMENDMENT WOULD BE THAT THE LANDSCAPING WOULD BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH PHASE ONE. I DON'T SEE THAT ANYWHERE, BUT I KNOW THAT THIS, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT THIS SITE HAS BEEN AN EYESORE FOR A LONG TIME, AND THE COUNTY HAS REFUSED TO EVEN ENFORCE THEIR OWN STANDARDS, AND I'D LOVE TO SEE THEM START WITH THE LANDSCAPING UP FRONT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

THE ENTIRE PROPERTY?

THE PART THAT'S NEXT TO HIGHWAY, ALONG HIGHWAY 93, THE PART THAT WE HAVE ALL WATCHED JUST BE A PARKING LOT FOR YEARS. WITH NO LANDSCAPING EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTY HAS LANDSCAPING STANDARDS. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

SECONDED BY COUNSELOR NORTON.

IF I COULD, IF I COULD ASK THE DEVELOPER A QUESTION AT THIS POINT, IT MIGHT BE. I just want to watch you get up and down more, Will. Would that be, I hope you understand the intent. I don't know if it would.

We feel the same way. Okay. And so the question is, is the ground lease, it is the immediate area around the structure. And so there is that 50 foot setback. There's areas, we're all for it because it will create the sense of arrival. The intersection will be part of phase one. And so we fully intend, we want to create an attractive site that brings people in. So that is in line with our vision. I don't know to what detail right now exactly, but that's something we're on board is attacking the landscaping.

Okay. All right. Thanks. Further comments on the friendly amendment?

John? Dave? Just a note on, you know, if those two commercial lots are part of this, we look at landscaping at the time of building permit. So if those become separate lots and subdivided, we would review the landscaping based on whatever the site plan is on that site, and that's how we determine what the required landscaping is. He's talking about landscaping potentially within that 50-foot setback, the frontage improvements along the road. which wouldn't be necessarily tied into a specific building permit and so i mean i think tying trying to tie the required landscaping on those commercial lots without knowing what's happening what size buildings go in there what kind of infrastructure the parking lots are things we review for landscaping none of that stuff's being proposed at this time so it'd be very difficult for them to install that stuff without for us to review it without a you know a plan

That's a good point.

Okay. So we're talking about the landscaping within the 50-foot buffer, right? That's what I'm talking about. So within the highway right away? Yes, where the shared use path is going to go, which is already part of Phase 1, I do believe. Okay. All right. Just so we're clear.

OK. FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WHICH AGAIN WILL ADD A CONDITION TO REQUIRE LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE 93 HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY IN CONJUNCTION WITH PHASE ONE.

JUST A CLARIFICATION QUESTION. THIS CONDITION IS TO BE CODED WHERE? INSIDE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? BECAUSE WE'RE ANNEXING LAND. WE'RE NOT APPROVING A P.O.D. AND PUTTING CONDITIONS ON LANDSCAPING.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE ARE AMENDING THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT.

I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM WHERE THIS VERBAGE IS GOING TO END UP.

I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, CORRECT,

There's a list of recommended conditions in the development agreement on page 322 of our packet.

Okay. Thank you. Then don't get up. You can nod or shake your head. I have seen development sites and some have come back to us with requests for change of timing and priorities. where there is a logical process. You put some infrastructure, you put some roads. If you're driving heavy trucks, you don't want to put nice landscaping until you're done with the heavy equipment and all of that. Are you guys sure this is okay and the project, it's not going to get that impacted if we vote in favor for this and now it's getting up for this amendment?

Warrenson.

Conversation. So landscaping is technically, you know, when you start doing hardscape, you're essentially doing landscaping. We're going to be doing mass grading. We're going to be building, depending, because of this 24-month ground lease, we are actually going to be building around his site. And he's just going to have to endure it. And we fully intend to... If that's in our mass grading plan, we're going to address it. And so, again, hardscape is part of the landscaping plan. So I feel as though the intent is there. We are going to be held to whitefish landscaping standards, so we can't let it turn into a weed farm. You know, if it's dirt and we're moving it, we have to mitigate it and do all that stuff. So I'm not concerned.

Weed farm is approved.

East by right. I'm just kidding.

Further comments on the friendly amendment?

IS IT CLEAR WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BEFORE THE ORIGINAL MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. THOSE OPPOSED LIKE SIGN ON THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT DOES PASS UNANIMOUSLY WHICH BRINGS US BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

STEVE. JUST A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS. I AGREE WITH PORTIONS OF WHAT RICHARD SAID AND PORTIONS OF WHAT KEGAN SAID. I DO THINK THAT I DON'T I LIKE THE PROJECT. I DON'T LIKE WHERE IT IS. WE JUST PASSED A GROWTH POLICY WHERE WE SAID WE DON'T VALUE BUILDING ON THE EDGES OF TOWN. WE WANT DENSITY TO FLOW TOWARDS THE MIDDLE OF TOWN WHERE PEOPLE CAN QUICKLY ACCESS THE TOWN AND ESPECIALLY IF THEY WORK THERE. PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO RIDE THEIR BIKES TWO MILES INTO TOWN FROM THERE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE DRIVING. AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATE AT THE SAME TIME WE NEED THE HOUSING. SO I DO LIKE THE PROJECT AND I And I look forward to seeing how it all comes together. I just wish we could get more of these in town. And I agree with Richard that we need to get something done on Depot Park townhomes sooner than later.

Thanks. Further discussion or comments on the motion? Frank.

Mr. Mayor, I am not in a position where I can support this project at this time. I could support a motion to postpone to a date certain, potentially in July, where we could more fully understand the development agreement and how it ties our hands and gives the developer in perpetuity the right to do this so that he can do it any time between now and kingdom come. Most of the time when we are annexing as we did with the Highway 40, I'll call them apartments, we negotiated part and parcel of that exactly what kinds of commercial development could be on that site. We limited it from what it would otherwise have allowed under the pure zoning. And so we don't understand that very well. We don't understand the effects of this development agreement and how it affects and affects ties our hands in perpetuity, regardless of when and if this project takes place. I know the intent is there, but I'd like to understand how we could better manage that AND I THINK THAT I KIND OF AGREE WITH YOU, STEVE. I THINK THAT THE PROJECT ITSELF IS NOT BAD, BUT THERE ARE TOO MANY UNKNOWNS HERE IN TERMS OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS, HOW SOON THEY MIGHT BE RESOLVED. Given the discussion tonight, we don't have anything other than the commitment or the discussion and the agreement. And I want to believe those, but we've been misled way too many times. I'd really be happier if we could understand what, in fact, commitments we could get from MDT to define how we fix this problem before we create it. And so I... I can't support it at this time. I think with some further discussion and a work session to understand it more completely I could, but at this point I cannot.

Yes, and then we'll go to Ben.

Dave, I thought I read in our updates that people can have extensions, like once a project's approved. Is that only PUDs, though? I thought it was extended for 10 years, not just two or four.

That's subdivisions.

Is it subdivisions? Okay, so would this be a subdivision?

Nope. I mean, they might subdivide it in the future, which would require them to do some improvements and things like that. But this is an annexation. So there's no limitation on when they... Annexation and rezone is what you're reviewing tonight.

Okay. And when it comes back to you then? Will it come back to you?

Yeah, well, I mean, any development will have to apply for an architectural review and a building permit and all that stuff. And if there's any other additional things that happen on the vacant lots, they'll have to come through the process for those.

So they're just showing us what the vision could be, and they're committed to a site plan, but there's no...

The site plan is part of the developer agreement. You guys are approving this site plan as part of the developer agreement for the multifamily projects.

Okay. All right, thank you. There you go.

Ben.

I'd start by saying that, and I've said this many times up here, I am no general fan of dense development on the periphery of town. I think good city planning does target the growth inward. With that said, you know, I have to acknowledge the fact that there is a very large apartment project directly across the street. AND I ACTUALLY VOTED YEARS AGO AGAINST EXTENSION OF SERVICES SOUTH OF 40 BECAUSE I THOUGHT THIS WAS A LIKELY OUTCOME. BUT THAT CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG. I THINK THAT WHOLE PORTION, IN THIS ONE SPECIFIC AREA, I THINK I'M WILLING TO ROLL WITH IT. IT'S ALREADY THERE. THE CAT IS ALREADY OUT OF THE BAG. IT'S ALREADY A COMMERCIAL ZONE ALL THE WAY UP AND DOWN THAT HIGHWAY. WE NEED THE HOUSING. AND SO I THINK OVERALL THIS FINE. IT'S DECENT. IT OFFENDS ME LESS THAN THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET, FRANKLY. THAT'S ALREADY BEING BUILT. NO OFFENSE TO THAT ONE. BUT I JUST THINK THAT WE DO NEED THE HOUSING. AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO APPROVE PROJECTS LIKE THIS AS LONG AS THEY WORK IN OUR LONGER-TERM GROWTH PLANNING. AND I THINK THAT THIS IS PROBABLY THE ONLY LOCATION AROUND THE PERIPHERY OF OUR BOUNDARY OF OUR TOWN THAT I WOULD PROBABLY BE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS. But here we are, and it's in front of us, and I am, so I'm going to support the motion. Thanks.

Thank you, Ben. Further comments on the original motion as amended? All those in favor, please raise your hand. Those opposed, like signed, and the motion does carry on a four-to-one vote with Councillor Sweeney voting in opposition. Thanks, you guys. We will move on to item eight of our agenda, which is a consider... Consideration of a request to submit a grant application to the Railroad Crossing Elimination Program for the East 2nd Street Overpass. Director Workman.

Good evening again, Mayor and Council. Before I jump into my staff report, I just want to point out that Zach Mason and Spencer Dodge are here from HDR, as well as Mary Ann Minaldo from BNSF. So if there are questions that I can't answer, I may... turn to them. So I think everybody's well aware that we were awarded a grant from the FRA for the railroad crossing elimination plan to do a planning grant. This planning grant provides funding for a document examining the existing crossings in Whitefish and to propose projects to improve safety. THE CITY AWARDED THE CONTRACT TO HDR FOR CONSULTING AND ASSIGNED A TASK FORCE IN 2025. SINCE THEN THERE HAVE BEEN THREE TASK FORCE MEETINGS AND TWO OPEN HOUSES. RECENTLY THE CITY HAS BEEN APPROACHED BY BNSF AND THE FEDERAL RAIL, BASICALLY BNSF, TO JOIN THEM IN A SECOND GRANT APPLICATION TO THE RCE PROGRAM. THIS ONE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OVERPASS AT EAST SECOND STREET. This is the preferred project that will come out of the plan as well as being an objective in the recently adopted growth policy. It's important to note that the plan depicted in the packet is extremely conceptual and the final design will not encumber any portion of Armory Park under land and water conservation restrictions. THE FINAL DESIGN WILL ALSO NEED TO CONSIDER ADEQUATE ACCESS TO THE DOG PARK, THE PUMP TRACK, AND THE AIRPORT. THE TOTAL FUNDING FOR THE RCE GRANT NATIONWIDE IS EXPECTED TO BE ABOUT $1.1 BILLION, AND IS EXPECTED TO BE THE LAST ROUND OF FUNDING FOR QUITE SOME TIME. CAME UP PRETTY QUICKLY AND APPLICATIONS ARE DUE NO LATER THAN JUNE 8TH, SO A WEEK FROM TODAY. IF AWARDED, THE GRANT WILL COVER 80% OF THE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS. THE REMAINING FUNDS WILL BE SPLIT BETWEEN THE CITY AND BNSF. HOT OFF THE PRESS, BNSF HAS VERBALLY AGREED TO PROVIDE UP TO $6 MILLION FOR THE PROJECT, LEAVING APPROXIMATELY $2.8 MILLION FOR THE CITY TO COVER. SO ROUGHLY 75-25 ON THE MATCHING FUNDS. SO BASED ON ALL OF THAT, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RESPECTFULLY RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL CONSIDER THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE RCE PROGRAM FOR THE EAST SECOND STREET OVERPASS AND I GUESS WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR A MOTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IN ORDER TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATION. THANKS, GREG. STEVE?

CRAIG ARE WE LOCKED INTO THE PLAN AT LEAST ROUGHLY AS IT'S DESIGNED HERE WITH THE BIG HORSESHOE SHAPED OVERPASS?

THAT'S THE CONCEPT AND ULTIMATELY THE FINAL PLAN WILL MIMIC SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT. BUT IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT THAT The concept extends too far to the south and does encumber that land and water restricted area. You know, we heard some comments earlier tonight about why can't we go to Armory. Well, if you want to cut straight through the middle of the softball fields, that's an option. Literally, Second Street lines up with the lacrosse field and the softball fields to get to Armory. So I don't really see that as a valid option.

Okay.

All right.

Just checking.

Yeah. And I mean, the intent is to follow the existing alignment of Second Street, which is a horseshoe. So...

Okay, thank you. Further questions for Craig? I would entertain a motion, please. Ben?

I would move to approve a request for a grant application to the railroad crossing elimination program for the East 2nd Street overpass. Is there a second to the motion?

I second it.

Seconded by Giuseppe. Further discussion? If I could, John. Ben?

Looking into the far, far, far, far distant future, it seems likely to me that this town will need a second crossing. And if you look geographically where that might exist, this seems like a probably logical location. I would emphasize that that is likely in the far, far distant future. However, this type of planning requires PLANNING WAY IN ADVANCE. I NOTE FROM THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE THAT THIS WOULD COST THE CITY $2.8 MILLION TO CONSTRUCT THIS OVERPASS. THIS MAY BE THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY WE WOULD EVER HAVE IN OUR LIFETIME TO BUILD AN OVERPASS FOR ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE TO $2.8 MILLION. ANY OTHER OPTION WOULD LIKELY BE EXPONENTIALLY HIGHER. So I speculate we may or may not get this grant, but if we do, I trust that we will take a harder look at this design. I understand it is conceptual, conceptual, or however you said it earlier. I have concerns about the design, frankly, I think a lot of people do, but we haven't really had time to look at that design. So I think, I trust we will evaluate that further in the future, find something that can work with the community and support the long-term growth of the town. So therefore I do believe that we should make an attempt here to see if we can get a whole lot of free money.

Thank you, Ben. Further comments? Giuseppe?

Yes. Mr. Mayor, first of all, I want to thank the team here from the consulting firm and BNSF who learned a lot about our town tonight. So I appreciate you sticking around and still supporting this motion. You picked the right meeting. Right. I've come pretty intimate with the inner workings of BNSF during the last few years, and I know that they're adamant about safety. And if they could raise that chain link fence on the viaduct 10 more feet, they would do it. So eliminating a great crossing like that means a lot, both to BNSF and to the FAR, which the Federal Railroad Administration, FRA, which is like RFAA for airplanes. And all the rest that I was going to say was well said by Councillor Davis, so I support this motion.

Thank you, Giuseppe. Further comments? All those in favor of the motion, please raise your hand. Those opposed, like, sign, and that motion does carry unanimously. Thanks, you guys, for joining us this evening. Very much appreciate it. We'll move on to Item 9A. You have Dana's written report enclosed in the packet. Any questions for Dana? Rebecca?

Yeah, Dana, could you just talk a little bit about how the Big Mountain, you mentioned that the Big Mountain's new resort tax, they were discussing how it was impacting them, and I was just curious what they said, and then Columbia Falls too, because you went to a resort tax meeting. Yeah.

Sure, so the Montana Resort Tax Association is a group of resort tax communities, districts, and areas. And so we held our spring gathering in Whitefish and Columbia Falls. The sessions that we had, actually, Councilor Furey attended AS WELL AS DOUG REED FROM OUR RESORT TAX MONITORING COMMITTEE. BIG MOUNTAIN SHARED THE CHALLENGES THAT THEY'VE HAD BECOMING A NEW DISTRICT, LEARNING THE ENFORCEMENT ASPECT, GETTING PEOPLE ON BOARD WITH A NEW DISTRICT, A NEW TAX. WE OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T HAD TO DEAL WITH THAT SINCE THE 90s. I THINK SOME OF THE GOOD THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF IT, WHEN, FOR EXAMPLE, BIG MOUNTAIN AND THE CITY, WE RAN INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE HAD A BUSINESS THAT WAS OPERATING IN CITY LIMITS BUT ALSO DELIVERING PRODUCT TO BIG MOUNTAIN, AND IT BECAME AN ISSUE OF, WELL, WHO DO WE PAY TAX TO? AND SO WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER, BOTH THE BIG MOUNTAIN RESORT AREA DISTRICT AND THE CITY, TO COME UP WITH GUIDANCE FOR OUR BUSINESSES THAT WORK AND OPERATE IN BOTH OUR COMMUNITY AND UP IN THEIR AREA. THOSE ARE KIND OF THE HIGHLIGHTS WE GOT TO SHARE, BUT THEY'RE EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE GRANT FUNDING. I THINK THEY ESTIMATED ABOUT $500,000 A YEAR THAT THEY COULD PROVIDE TO NONPROFITS IN ADDITION TO WHAT THEY'RE PROVIDING TO THEIR FIRE DEPARTMENT UP THERE TO INCREASE STAFFING FOR THEIR FIRE RESPONSE. SO PRETTY GREAT THINGS. AND THERE WERE A BUNCH OF COMMUNITIES THERE, AND WE'RE EXCITED THAT THEY CAME TO THE NORTH OF THE STATE BECAUSE OFTEN WE SEE A LOT OF THESE CONFERENCES MORE CENTRALLY LOCATED IN THE STATE.

THANKS FOR THE UPDATE.

THANKS, DANA. ANYTHING ADDITIONAL TO REPORT ON?

JUST THIS WEEK WE'VE BEEN WELCOMING OUR SECOND GRADERS IN THE COMMUNITY TO COME AND LEARN ABOUT THE CITY. SO IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY. EVERY YEAR WE HAVE THEM. SO IT'S A LITTLE CHAOS DURING THE AFTERNOONS, MONDAY, TUESDAY, THURSDAY, FRIDAY HERE. BUT ALL THE STAFF HAVE BEEN GRACIOUS TO TAKE A LITTLE TIME AWAY FROM THEIR DESK TO HELP EDUCATE OUR YOUTH. AND THEN THE CITY STAFF, WE'RE HOLDING OUR CITYWIDE TRAINING ON WEDNESDAY FOR OUR ANNUAL SEXUAL HARASSMENT TRAINING, WHICH IS REALLY NEAT. BUT THE GREAT PART IS MMIA IS PROVIDING THAT FOR FREE. SO IT'S JUST GETTING SEATS IN HERE FOR THEM TO HAVE THEIR ANNUAL TRAINING. AND THAT WAS OUR TOPIC THIS YEAR.

THANKS, DANA. We'll move on to item 10 of our agenda, which is communications from the council. Giuseppe, would you like to start this evening?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a quick reminder to whoever is listening that June 10th, the O'Shaughnessy Habitat for Humanity will hold an open house, and they're inviting community members, business people, developers, and to come and ask questions or give feedback. They are getting traction, as we have seen, and it's exciting to see what they're managing to do, and it would be good to have as many community members as can make it to maybe even apply for some of those weddings. So just a reminder, it's June 10th at the O'Shaughnessy.

Thanks, Giuseppe. Steve.

Yeah, I just want to address a little bit about what happened earlier tonight with our resolution and our proclamation because I think people want to hear more from us about it rather than just listening to what people said. I do want to say that issuing a proclamation like this is not about... placing one identity over another. It's about celebrating, it's about, we're not celebrating or promoting any identity. It's simply an acknowledgement and a visibility that there's a difference the way certain people are treated in our community. And I think, and it's not just here in Whitefish, it's across the country. And there's a lot of unfortunate blowback across this country, especially about LGBTQ people. And we heard it here tonight, and it comes from a very specific SECTION OF OUR SOCIETY BASED ON RELIGIOUS VALUES AND AS WE KNOW, THERE IS A WALL BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE. IT IS CREATED IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND WE KEEP THOSE THINGS SEPARATE AND ASKING THE CITY TO to abide by some natural law that's based in Christianity is simply not proper. And then, you know, in an email earlier this week, Giuseppe, you asked for proof that LGBTQ plus people are marginalized more than their peers, that students are. There is a study out there called the Youth Risk Behavior Study. It's given every year to all high school kids. And I'll just read you some quotes of why this proclamation was important and why it was pertinent. Approximately one-fourth of transgender and questioning students miss school because of feeling unsafe in the past 30 days. 25.3% and 26.4% respectively, compared to 8.5% of their cisgender male students and 14.9% of their cisgender female students. Being bullied at school in the past 12 months was the most prevalent experience of violence for all four gender identity categories. But a higher prevalence of bullying was reported by transgender, 40.1% and 39.9% of questioning students. Then cisgender female 20.3% and cisgender male students 14.8%. So those are the hard statistics about what happens in schools to LGBTQ plus students. And you can come up with whatever justifications you want for those things, and we heard a lot of that tonight. But these are the hard statistics. And I'm a teacher, and I work with these kids every single day. And I see it all the time. The bullying doesn't happen in front of adults. It happens behind the scenes, and it leads to these kind of things. And it's not unheard of for teens, especially teenagers. in just coming out of their adolescent years to question who they are. It's part of our natural growing up process. And by giving them grace, we give them a voice rather than telling them that they're wrong. And then just in the past two weeks since Ken Paxton won the Republican primary for governor, not for governor, for senator in Texas, the administration, high-ranking government officials have started slurring transgender people. Stephen Miller called James Tallarico Texas Democrats' first transgender Senate candidate. because apparently he's not macho enough for Stephen Miller. Ken Paxton, who won the Republican primary, called him six gendered Jimmy. The RNC national chair, Joe Grutter, said Tallarico wants to mutilate children because of Tallarico's stance on LGBTQ plus rights. The president himself called Tallarico transgender, which is not only not true, But it was designed as a slur. And a slur is meant to belittle and dehumanize people. And that is precisely why the city proclaimed what it did today. They didn't say black or Latino or Somali or Italian or German or rich or poor. They used the slur trans. I grew up in the South where the N word was used all around me my whole growing up life. Why do people use that word? Because it dehumanizes and it targets people that they disagree with. Intolerance is a problem in our society and it has been from the beginning of this country. And it's something to be acknowledged, not swept under the rug of we need to recognize everyone for everything rhetoric. This proclamation doesn't aim to solve the problem of intolerance. It simply aims to say, we hear you and you're welcome here. It acknowledges a targeted part of our community, and it does no harm to anyone. No one. And if you feel harmed by this, I challenge you to do the most Christian thing you possibly can, which is walk a mile in one of these kids' shoes. Ask them how they're feeling. Ask them how they're doing. Ask them how they've been bullied. And you might not be so quick to point the finger and say you're wrong. You might realize how difficult it can be to find your way in the world as a teenager. And you might just find some peace in the fact that your city council is willing to recognize your struggle and say, yes, we hear you, we see you, and you're welcome here.

Thank you, Steve. Frank, anything this evening?

No, I am very pleased that we took the position we did and issued the proclamation acknowledging and honoring that the civil rights of our transgender and LGBTQ individuals should be honored and should be recognized. So thank you. Thank you, Frank. Ben?

No comments. Thank you, Ben. Rebecca?

Yeah, I just want to talk a little bit since everybody was kind of blaming me for the proclamation. I just turned 68 and so I wasn't raised with people openly out and it took me a while to figure out how this all worked. So for the people in the audience who are Christians, just pray about it. And what happened to me is God kept bringing me people that were wonderful human beings, and after a few years they felt safe enough to tell me that they were gay. Or I had patients that were trans that I had to work with and understand their struggles. Or I had family, friends whose kids were transitioning. The people tonight that showed up that demonized people that are in this community, you just might not know people and you might need to just stay open to the fact that these are human beings It's a difficult life for some people that are part of this community because it's not heteronormative. So I think rather than judging, we need to really be working on our tolerance and acceptance of what God did create, and every human being is a miracle. And so I'm really thankful that all of you were supportive of this proclamation. I mean, it's heart wrenching to hear the statistics about how traumatized kids feel. It's very difficult for a lot of people to just be openly who they are. And I hope our community can grow into a better understanding that this is a natural, very natural part of being human beings and it's been part of our evolution for centuries. It's not going away and I think it should be part of our celebration of this month that we get to have the joy of having these kids and people in our lives that teach us how to accept our humanity more fully. So that's it. It was hard to listen to all the rhetoric that made MADE IT BAD TO BE WHO PEOPLE ARE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. HOPEFULLY WE CAN ALL WORK THROUGH THIS AND GET BETTER AT IT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR THE COMMENTS TONIGHT. DANA, ANYTHING FURTHER FROM STAFF?

JUST A REMINDER THAT YOU HAVE A BUDGET WORK SESSION NEXT MONDAY AT 530.

Hopefully better attendance this time. I won't be there. Okay. I have nothing. Thanks, everyone, for your work tonight and to those who attended, and we are adjourned.