02-26-24 Work Session Agenda and MaterialsCITY COUNCIL
KCITY OF WORK SESSION AGENDA
ALISPELL February 26, 2024, at 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers, 201 First Avenue East
See the bottom of the agenda to learn how to provide public comment
and watch meetings live or later.
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. DISCUSSION
1. Discussion of Judicial Order related to November Election
2. Solid Waste Master Planning
C. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the council are asked to do so at this time. See the bottom of
the agenda to learn the protocol for providing comment.
D. CITY MANAGER, COUNCIL, AND MAYOR REPORTS
E. ADJOURNMENT
UPCOMING SCHEDULE
Next Regular Meeting — March 4, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. — Council Chambers
Next Work Session — March 25, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. — Council Chambers
A work session is not scheduled for March 11, 2024
PARTICIPATION
Those addressing the council are requested to give their name and address for the record. Please
see the last page of the agenda for the proper manner of addressing the council and limit
comments to three minutes. Comments can also be sent to publiccomment(c�r�,kalispell. com.
To provide public comment live, remotely, register for the video conference through zoom at:
hllps://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/" GcYOpJZkRV-kyNLIXKPk7w.
Raise your virtual hand to indicate you would like to provide comment.
Watch City Council sessions live with the agenda and supporting documents or later with
documents and time stamped minutes at: https://www.kalispell.com/480/Meeting-Videos.
Watch City Council sessions live or later on Charter Cable Ch. 190 or via the City YouTube
page at: hlt2s://www.youtube.com/2cilyofkalispellmontana9632/streams.
ofkalispellmontana9632/streams.
Page 1 of 2
Kalispell City Council Agenda, January 22, 2024
The City does not discriminate on the basis of disability in its programs, services, activities, and
employment practices. Auxiliary aids are available. For questions about disability
accommodation please contact the City Clerk at 406-758-7756.
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
Adopted July 1, 1991
Section 2-20 Manner of Addressing Council
a. Each person not a Council member shall address the Council, at the time designated in
the agenda or as directed by the Council, by stepping to the podium or microphone,
giving that person's name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record, and
unless further time is granted by the Council, shall limit the address to the Council to
three minutes.
b. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any member of the
Council or Staff.
C. No person, other than the Council and the person having the floor, shall be permitted to
enter into any discussion either directly or through a member of the Council, without the
permission of the Presiding Officer.
d. No question shall be asked of individuals except through the Presiding Officer.
PRINCIPLES FOR CIVIL DIALOGUE
Adopted by Resolution 5180 on February 5, 2007
■ We provide a safe environment where individual perspectives are respected, heard, and
acknowledged.
■ We are responsible for respectful and courteous dialogue and participation.
■ We respect diverse opinions as a means to find solutions based on common ground.
■ We encourage and value broad community participation.
■ We encourage creative approaches to engage in public participation.
■ We value informed decision -making and take personal responsibility to educate and be
educated.
■ We believe that respectful public dialogue fosters healthy community relationships,
understanding, and problem solving.
■ We acknowledge, consider and respect the natural tensions created by collaboration,
change, and transition.
■ We follow the rules & guidelines established for each meeting.
Page 2 of 2
-addo'000114111k
CITY OF City of Kalispell
201 1st Ave E. P.O. Box 1997
KALISPELL Kalispell, Montana 59903-1997
(406) 758-7000 Fax (406)7757
REPORT TO: Mayor Johnson and Kalispell City Council
FROM: Doug Russell, City Manager
SUBJECT: District Court Order on Municipal Election
MEETING DATE: February 26. 2024
BACKGROUND: On February 16, a ruling from District Court was issued that set aside the
elections for Ward 1 and Ward 2 of the City of Kalispell municipal election. The decision was
based on Flathead County using the previous Ward boundary maps, rather than the updated
boundary maps passed by the City of Kalispell.
At the time of this writing, city staff is seeking clarification on what that order means for our
sitting councilors in Wards 1 and 2. Further clarification could result in proceeding with the
current make-up of the City Council until a new election is held, or potentially having vacancies
in those positions that may need to be filled be appointment under state law, MCA 7-4-4112,
until a new election is conducted by the County. We will continue investigating this issue
between now and the meeting on Monday the 26th to discuss the topic with Council.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff will review the available information related to the Judicial
decision with Council and outline potential avenues for action, if applicable.
ATTACHMENTS:
Judicial Order
FI ED
0/16/2024
Pe L. Allison
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Robert B. Allison, District Judge
Department No. 2
Flathead County Justice Center
920 South Main Street, Suite 310
Kalispell, Montana 59901
Telephone: (406) 758-5906
MONTANA ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
FLATHEAD COUNTY
In re the November 7, 2023, )
Cause No. DV-23-1393
Kalispell Municipal General Election )
ORDER AND RATIONALE ON
PETITION TO ANNUL ELECTION
Flathead ounty District Court
STATE OF MONTANA
By: f
DV-
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Flathead County Election Administrator
Debbie Pierson's ("Petitioner") Petition to Annul the November 7, 2023, Kalispell Municipal
General Election as to Wards 1, 2, 3, and 4 ("Petition").' Based on said Petition, Petitioner's
now ripe Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ("Motion"), the supporting and opposing
memoranda, the Court, being fully advised in the premises, now enters the following:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
RATIONALE
"[A] motion for judgment on the pleadings is appropriate only where all material
allegations of fact are either admitted or not controverted in the pleadings, and only questions of
law remain for determination by the court." Montana Interventional & Diagnostic Radiology
Specialists, PLLC v. St. Peter's Hosp., 381 Mont. 25, 31 (2015). Here, Petitioner alleges in her
Motion that "[t]he ward boundaries approved by the City of Kalispell in December 2021 that are
utilized for ballot distribution were not updated in the election system prior to the election,
resulting in the distribution of ballots with incorrect wards for 8% (1,413) of the eligible voters
in the City of Kalispell." ECF No. 8, pp. 1-2. In response, Intervenor Ryan Hunter
("Intervenor") concedes this point. See ECF No. 3, p. 1 ("Flathead County conducted the
November 7th Kalispell City Council election using old Ward boundary maps, having failed to
update their system with the new Ward boundaries. This resulted in a number of voters receiving
ballots for the wrong wards."). Accordingly, the remaining questions are whether Petitioner has
I The uncontested election for municipal judge that took place on November 7, 2023, is not
affected by ward boundaries because it is a city-wide race and thus remains valid. ECF No. 1, p.
3.
1
)23-0001393-MT
m, Robert B
10.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the authority to challenge the results of the Election and if so, whether the Election must be set
aside.
§ 13-36-101, MCA, states:
An elector may contest the right of any person to any nomination or election to
public office for which the elector has the right to vote if the elector believes that:
(1) a deliberate, serious, and material violation of any provision of the law
relating to nominations or elections has occurred;
(2) the person was not, at the time of the election, eligible to be a candidate for
the office;
(3) votes were cast illegally or were counted or canvassed in an erroneous or
fraudulent manner.
Petitioner is thus well within her right to challenge the results of the November 7, 2023,
Kalispell Municipal General Election ("Election"), although her office is at fault for conducting
the Election improperly in the first place. ECF No. 1, p. 1 ("[L]ess than one week before the
election, it came to the attention of the Flathead County Election Department that some absentee
voters may have received ballots for incorrect wards. The Election Department investigated and
discovered in the coming days that the ward boundaries approved by the City of Kalispell in
December 2021 had not been entered into the election system."). It is also undoubted that votes
were counted in an erroneous manner. Id at Ex. A, p. 2 ("1,413 [t]otal eligible voters impacted .
176 [t]otal voters receiving an incorrect ballot who VOTED.").
However, § 13-36-101, MCA, must be read in conjunction with § 13-36-211, MCA,
which states:
The ground of contest specified in 13-36-101(3) may not be construed to
authorize a nomination or election to be set aside on account of illegal votes
unless it appears:
(1) that the candidate or nominee whose right is contested had knowledge of or
connived in the illegal votes; or
(2) that the number of illegal votes given to the person whose right to the
nomination or office is contested, if taken from the person, would reduce the
number of legal votes for the person below the number of votes given to some
other person for the same nomination or office, after deducting the illegal votes
that may be shown to have been given to the other person.
Petitioner proffers no evidence that Intervenor "had knowledge of or connived in the
illegal votes," resulting from ballots issued in accordance with outdated ward
boundaries. Moreover, Petitioner concedes that Intervenor "won the [Ward 3] election by
372 more votes than his opponent" and that "in Ward 3 there were 64 impacted voters
receiving an incorrect ballot who voted as stated in the 2023 Municipal General Election
Canvas Report." ECF No. 8, p. 2. It follows that even if those 64 votes had gone against
Intervenor, he would have still prevailed. Accordingly, "whatever voting irregularities
occurred ... had no effect on [Intervenor]'s election." Baker v. Bink, 223 Mont. 375, 378
(1986).
V4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Petitioner also "does not dispute that Ward 4 was an uncontested race," which
means Petitioner cannot meet the requirements of § 13-36-211, MCA, to set aside that
election either. ECF No. 8, p. 2. As for Ward 1 and Ward 2, Intervenor's recitations of
those elections are well taken. To wit: "In the case of the contested elections in Wards 1
and 2, [Petitioner's] mistake could have been determinative in the outcome of those
elections." ECF No. 3, p. 1. This is because in "Ward 1, a total of 80 votes separated the
two candidates on the ballot. Of the votes cast in Ward 1, a total of 124 ballots were
impacted by the County's mistake." Id. "In Ward 2, a total of 109 votes separated the
two candidates on the ballot. Of the votes cast in Ward 2, a total of 155 ballots were
impacted by the County's mistake." Id. Thus, § 13-36-211(2), MCA, mandates the
elections in Ward 1 and Ward 2 be set aside.
In review:
o Ward 1: the Petition is GRANTED.
o Ward 2: the Petition is GANTED.
o Ward 3: the Petition is DENIED.
o Ward: 4: the Petition is DENIED.
DATED and electronically signed below:
3
Electronically Signed By:
Hon. Judge Robert B. Allison
Fri, Feb 16 2024 11:08:52 AM
201 1` Ave E
CITY OF Post Office Box 1997
N%"%%Kalispell, MT 59903
KALISPELL Telephone: (406) 758-7720
www.Kalispell.com
To: Doug Russell, City Manager
From: Susie Turner, Public Works Director
Re: Solid Waste Master Planning Discussion
Meeting Date: Febuary 26, 2024
Enclosed: 2024 Solid Waste Survey Summary Results
BACKGROUND:
During the January 22, 2024, work session, Public Works presented a comprehensive review of
Kalispell's current solid waste services as part of the development of the Solid Waste Master Plan. The
presentation encompassed an in-depth analysis of existing services, service and financial policies, as well
as an examination of current costs and projected revenue requirements.
Kalispell's solid waste service is extensive, and staff is seeking Council insights and feedback during the
upcoming work session discussion to shape the subsequent development phases of the master planning
process.
• Financial Policy — Annual Reserves at 40% of Operating Costs
• Key rate design considerations
1. Ensure rate equity between services (Commercial vs Residential)
• Alley Cleanup Services
1. Remain as is and develop rate schedule for alley collection costs — apply to alley customers
only
2. Remain as is and residential rate schedule absorbs costs for all alley collections
• Spring Cleanup Services — Curbside (90 Gallon) Customers
1. Remain as is and develop rate schedule for spring collection costs
a. Apply to all customers or apply to only curbside customers
2. Increase service (2x year) and develop rate schedule for spring collection costs
a. Apply to all customers or apply to only curbside customers
• Funding for Additional City Service (Services benefits all City residents and businesses)
1. Develop rate schedule and charge only solid waste customers
2. Develop rate schedule and charge all city properties (includes proprieties without solid waste
service)
3. Develop rate schedule and charge internal departments for service
• Further Recycling Consideration
1. Yes or No
• Further Pay -as -you -Throw (PAYT) Consideration
1. Yes or No
• Fund Front Loader Transition
1. Develop rate schedule for commercial front load services
To assist Staff and Council a survey was carried out to gain information on the topics listed above and the
solid waste services being provided. A summary of the draft survey results is attached for reference.
Additionally, the January 22,2024 work session presentation and slides are available for reference on the
City website at the following link: AV Capture All.
Survey Results & Analysis BURNS SMSDONNELL
Burns & McDonnell Engineering Co. was tasked Q7: Which of the following curbside services
with creating a survey for the City of Kalispell,
does your collection service provider offer?
MT to evaluate residential views towards the
City's Solid Waste Master Plan. The following is
Garbage
80%
48
an overview of the survey results which was
Recycling
5%
3
conducted from January 16, 2024, to February
Yard Trimmings
8%
5
14, 2024. There was a total of 486 respondents.
Bulky Item
2%
1
Other
20%
12
Total Respondents
60
Q1: Are you responding to this survey as a:
Q8: How frequently is your material collected?
Residential Customer 93% 451
Weekly
70%
43
Business Owner/Manager 7% 35
Every other week
7%
4
Total Respondents 486
Other
23%
14
Total Respondents
61
Q2: Do you live in the City of Kalispell?
Q10: Please indicate how you set out your
Yes 89% 308
material for collection based on your home's
No 9% 31
configuration:
I'm not sure 2% 8
Total Respondents 347
At the curb (roll out)
59%
196
In an alley
26%
85
In a shared container
15%
51
Q4: Are you a homeowner or a renter?
Total Respondents
332
Homeowner 92% 318
Renter 8% 29
Q11: How often do you set out material outside
Total Respondents 347
the 300/400-gallon containers?
Every week
26%
21
Q5: Do you receive solid waste collection
Every other week
9%
7
service from the City of Kalispell?
Once per month
17%
14
Yes 79% 274
Every 6 months
15%
12
o 65
No 19/0
Once per year
13%
11
I'm not sure 2% 8
Other
21%
17
Total Respondents 347
Total Respondents
82
Survey Results & Analysis
Q12: On a scale of 1 — 5, rank your level of
satisfaction with the current weekly garbage
programs and services offered by the City for
single-family households.
(Alley Customers)
Garbage
Alley
Cleanup
Very satisfied 63% 47
43% 34
Somewhat 20% 15
23% 18
satisfied
Neutral 5% 4
19% 15
Somewhat 7% 5
6% 7
dissatisfied
Very
3% 2
4% 3
dissatisfied
I do not
receive this 3% 2
5% 4
service
Total 75
79
Respondents
Q14: On a scale of 1— 5, rank your level of
satisfaction with the current weekly garbage
programs and services offered by the City for
single-family households.
(Curbside Customers)
Very satisfied
Somewhat
satisfied
Neutral
Somewhat
dissatisfied
Very
dissatisfied
I do not
receive this
service
Total
Respondents
Spring
Garbage
Cleanup
65% 146
31% 68
9% 20
18% 40
10% 22
22% 49
2% 5
5% 10
4% 8 2% 5
11% 24 22% 49
225 221
BURNS SMSDONNELL
Q15: As part of its Spring Cleanup program the
City collects reasonable amounts of yard
trimmings, bulky items, and garbage from City
serviced curbside customers in a week-long
special collection event. Are you aware of the
City's Spring Cleanup Program?
(Curbside Customers)
Yes 57% 129
No 30% 68
I would need more information 14% 31
Total Respondents 228
Q17: How receptive would you be to having
recycling collection?
Very Receptive
63%
191
Somewhat Receptive
11%
33
Neutral
8%
24
Somewhat Opposed
3%
10
Very Opposed
5%
14
I would need more information to
decide
10%
30
Total Respondents
302
Q18: If the City provided recycling collection,
how much more per year would you
be willing
to pay for service?
$50.00
26%
79
$100.00
21 %
64
$150.00
5%
14
$200.00
9%
28
I would not support a rate
increase for recycling service
39%
117
Total Respondents
302
Survey Results & Analysis
Q19: The City is considering options to provide
equal levels of service to customers in the alleys
compared to curbside customers. How receptive
would you be to having set out limits (e.g., not
allowed to set out more than a specified number
of items or cubic yards of material) on yard
trimmings, and bulky items collected in the
alleys?
Very Receptive
10%
8
Somewhat Receptive
25%
20
Neutral
9%
7
Somewhat Opposed
9%
7
Very Opposed
23%
18
I would need more information to
decide
25%
20
Total Respondents
80
Q20: How receptive would you be to reducing
the frequency of collection of yard trimmings
and bulky items collected in the alleys to once
per month?
Very Receptive
10%
8
Somewhat Receptive
20%
16
Neutral
15%
12
Somewhat Opposed
20%
16
Very Opposed
35%
28
I would need more information to
decide
0%
0
Total Respondents
80
BURNS SMSDONNELL
I
Q21: The City provides a high level of service to
customers in the alleys. What is the maximum
increase you would be willing to pay annually to
ensure all solid waste customers are equitably
paying for alternative collection service?
$15.00
24%
19
$20.00
8%
6
$25.00
11 %
9
I would expect the rate for this
service to stay the same
58%
46
Total Respondents
80
Q24: The City is considering options to provide
more frequent "Cleanup" collection events to
curbside customers. How receptive would you
be to having two scheduled "Cleanup" collection
events per year (with set out limits) instead of
the annual spring cleanup event.
Very Receptive
45%
100
Somewhat Receptive
17%
37
Neutral
20%
45
Somewhat Opposed
0.5%
1
Very Opposed
4%
8
I would need more information
to decide
14%
31
Total Respondents
222
Q25: If the City transitions to two "Cleanup"
events per year what is the maximum increase
per year you would be willing to pay for
service?
$5.00
28%
63
$10.00
26%
57
$15.00
13%
29
I would not support a rate
increase for recycling service
33%
73
Total Respondents
222
Survey Results & Analysis
BURNS �MSDONNELL
Commercial Sector
Q29: Do you receive solid waste collection
service from the City of Kalispell?
Q26: What is your role within your business?
Yes 60% 18
Company owner
63%
19
No 27% 8
Office manager
13%
4
I'm not sure 13% 4
Personnel manager
0%
0
Total Respondents 30
Sustainability/environmental
manager
7%
2
Other
17%
5
Q30: The City is considering transitioning how
Total Respondents
30
commercial customers are serviced to provide a
safer and more efficient operation. If your
business has the available space, how receptive
Q27: Please select the statement that
is
would you be to transitioning to frontload
applicable for your business:
dumpsters and collection?
My business is located within
Very Receptive 40% 6
Kalispell City limits
73%
22
Somewhat Receptive 20% 3
My business is located outside the
City limits but operates within
Neutral 13% 2
Kalispell City limits
27%
8
Somewhat Opposed 0% 0
Total Respondents
30
Very Opposed 7% 1
I would need more information to
decide 20% 3
Q28: How would you describe your
Total Respondents 15
company/organization?
Health Care and Social
Q31: How much more would you be willing to
Assistance
7%
2
pay per collection to receive frontload service?
Retail Trade
10%
3
Professional Services (consulting,
$1.00 0% 0
banking, real estate)
13%
4
$2.00 13% 2
Manufacturing/Industrial
3%
1
$5.00+ 13% 2
Transportation/Logistics
7%
2
I would not support a rate
Educational Services
0%
0
increase 73% 11
Restaurant
0%
0
Total Respondents 15
Hospitality/Accommodation
7%
2
Construction
10%
3
Q32: What equipment do you use to store solid
Non -Profit
10%
3
waste materials?
Other
33%
10
Total Respondents
30
2 Cubic Yard Rear Load
Dumpster 37% 7
300/400 Gallon Container 32% 6
Shared Container 32% 6
Total Respondents 19
Survey Results & Analysis
Q33: How often is your dumpster/bin serviced
per week?
Once
74%
14
Twice
5%
1
Three
21 %
4
Four
0%
0
Five
0%
0
Six
0%
0
Total Respondents
19
Q34: How satisfied are you with
your current
garbage collection services?
Very satisfied
53%
10
Somewhat satisfied
16%
3
Neutral
11%
2
Somewhat dissatisfied
11%
2
Very dissatisfied
11%
2
Total Respondents
19
BURNS �R MCDONNELL
Survey Results & Analysis
Demographic Questions
Q36: If you would like to receive occasional
updates about the ongoing Solid Waste Master
Plan, please provide your email address.
Total Respondents
156
Q37: Please select the following indicating your
age range
18 and under
0%
0
19-29
5%
14
30 — 39
28%
86
40 — 49
26%
81
50 — 59
11%
35
60 and over
27%
84
Prefer not to disclose
4%
11
Total Respondents
311
Q38: How do you prefer to learn about City
solid waste services and programs (e.g., changes
to existing services, new services, reminders
about upcoming events or service days,
educational information, etc.)? Please check all
that apply.
City Press Release
40% 121
City Website
31 % 95
https://www.kalispell.com/list.a
spx (Direct email/text)
36% 109
Social media (e.g., Flathead
411, Facebook, Twitter,
Nextdoor, etc.)
63 % 193
Flyers or notices posted in
public places (e.g., the library)
15% 47
Total Respondents
304
BURNS �R MCDONNELL