Kaplan Request for DocumentsF low City of Kalispell
Post Office Box 1997 - Kalispell, Montana 59903-1997 - Telephone (406) 758-7000 Fax - (406) 758-7758
July 17, 2006
Mr. Eric Kaplan
Kaplan Law Firm, P.C.
511 First Ave. West
PO Box 2071
Columbia Falls, MT 59912-2071
RE: Request for Documents — Schwarz Construction, Inc.
Dear Mr. Kaplan,
Enclosed please find a copy of the documents and e-mails you requested from the City
Attorney's office. I am sorry for any inconvenience due to the delay in receiving them. I have
personally looked into several of your concerns. I would like to point out that Mark Crowley has
not worked in the Planning Office for almost a year. He is working in the Department of Public
Works offices as the City's construction inspector. In October 2005, MDEQ, on their own
initiative, visited the Department of Public Works and requested that a member of the City Staff
accompany them to all the in progress subdivisions. As a result of that visit there were several
subdivisions in violation and several developers received similar letters. At no time was Mr.
Schwarz singled out by the City or the MDEQ. I am also convinced that Mr. Harball had no
knowledge of the MDEQ site visits until after they had been completed.
It is the City policy to protect proprietary work if it is identified as proprietary. In the case of
Mr. Billmayer's work, it was marked proprietary and the City has the responsibility to notify the
creator that his/her work may be released to a third party and give them an opportunity to seek
relief, as was the case with Mr. Bilimayer.
If there is any other information that I can furnish, please do not hesitate to contact me at 758-
7703 or e-mail at: jpatrick@kalispell.com.
Sincerely,
James H. Patrick
City Manager
cc.: Mayor and City Council
511 First Avenue West Eric F. Kaplan
Foot Office Box 2071 cricOkaplaillamore
Columbia Falls, Montana 59912-2071
Telephone(406) 892-4446
Facoimile(406) 892-4449
afrAWTUR M,
Sally 5. Miller
Legal Aooiotant
oallygkaplamlamorg
We represent Schwarz Construction, Inc., as well as its affiliated
entities and John Schwarz. I am writing in connection with several
unfortunate incidents involving your City Attorney's Office. 1 was very
reluctant to write this letter, but Mr. Harball has given us no choice in
the matter.
Although we have always had the utmost respect for Mr.
Harball's integrity and work ethic, several recent events have caused
us considerable consternation. In November of 2005, he and I, and
others, had numerous conversations regarding a construction project
within the City of Kalispell's jurisdiction. Although the substance of
that episode is not particularly relevant to the point of this letter, some
of the details of that incident are set forth in my enclosed letter of
March 24, 2006. As that letter indicates, all of the parties reached and
signed an agreement in complete resolution of this matter.
Nevertheless, we later learned that a complaint had been filed against
my client by the City at approximately the same time these
negotiations were in progress. Regrettably, that complaint was never
disclosed during my numerous conversations with various City
employees.
John takes great pride in his work and was disturbed by the
complaint filed by the City. Although no action was taken against any
of My clients by the DEQ and none is contemplated, we nevertheless
Mr. James H. Patrick
June 7, 2006
Page 2
want to investigate all of the facts leading to the complaint, including
what it was based on, who filed it, and why it was filed but not
disclosed. Accordingly, my enclosed letter of March 24 made very
specific requests for the production of various City documents. As you
undoubtedly know, nearly all City documents are available to the
public for their review and copying and these certainly fall within that
rule. To the extent there are limited exceptions, none of them apply
here.
We waited approximately one month for a response from Mr.
Harball, but never received any word from him whatsoever.
Accordingly, on April 26, 2006, 1 sent another letter to Mr. Harball
requesting the information again, a copy of which is also enclosed. To
date, we have never had the courtesy of any response whatsoever to
this request. Mr. Harball has not supplied the documents, he -has not
notified us that we can review the documents, he has not raised any
objections --he has simply ignored these requests. We have very
strong feelings about Mr. Harball's lack of action in this matter f but we
will withhold them until we receive your response. We find it hard to
believe and very troubling that the right of Montana's citizens to
review the workings of their local government, as set forth in our
Constitution, our statutes and in numerous opinions of the Supreme
Court, can be so cavalierly ignored.
Unfortunately, the foregoing is not the only example of your City
Attorney's Office lack of respect for your citizens' "right to know."'
During approximately the same time, in November of 2005, our client
made a request to the City for certain public records relating to a flood
study. The City recognized that the documents were public and should
be produced to our client, but nevertheless took the questionable step
of notifying the author of the documents, Jay Billmayer, of their
intended disclosure and invited him to go to court to block the request.
We have enclosed a copy of P.J. Sorenson's letter in which he indicates
that he has been instructed"' to provide this notice to Mr. Billmayer
and he copied the City Attorney, Charlie Harball, on the letter. It
seems apparent that Mr. Harball knew the documents should be made
available, but nevertheless offered Mr. Billmayer the opportunity to try
to prevent that.
Mr. James H. Patrick
June 7, 2006
Page 3
Not surprisingly, Mr. Billmayer filed a lawsuit against the City in
December, in which my client, Schwarz Architecture & Engineering,
intervened. At least two points are noteworthy about this
episode. First, although Mr. Harball apparently knew, or certainly
should have known, that these documents were public documents, he
refused to take a position at the hearing held in Court on January 24,
2006. The Kalispell City Attorney stated he was looking for direction
from the Court in regard to how they should handle these
,"copyrighted" documents, but then admitted to the Judge he did not
know whether or not they were copyrighted. He also candidly
admitted in Court that these files should be available to the public, bu"!
did not know whether or not the public should be allowed to copy the
documents. It is unfortunate the Court did not have the benefit of the
City's analysis , research or position on these compelling municipal
issues.
In any event, on April 10, 2006, Judge Stadler issued an opinion
in favor of Schwarz Architecture & Engineering, Inc. Judge Stadler
concluded by stating as follows:
In summary, Montana law provides for inspection and
copying of public writings and Plaintiffs' request that an
injunction issue to prevent copying based upon purely
cpeculative reasons is not appropriate.
It is disappointing that what was so clear to the Court and to our
clients was a matter upon which the City of Kalispell would not ev
take a position. I
To make matters worse, the City Attorney's Office arbitrarily and
unilaterally decided not to comply with the Court's Order. Shortly
after the decision was rendered, a representative of my client sought
to obtain the documents in question. I am advised that the City
refused to produce those documents based upon an oral
representation by Mr. Billmayer's attorney that he plannedto file a
motion to prevent the City from producing the documents pending an
appeal to the Supreme Court, which also had not yet been filed. We
do not know if the City Attorney's Office initiated the call to Mr.
Billmayer's attorney, or how the entire matter came about. In any
Mr. James H. Patrick
June 7, 2006
Page 4
event, I believe it is inappropriate for your City Attorney to refuse to
follow a Court Order based upon an informal, ex parte, statement of
some potential future action itssing party. It would be even
more troubling if it were determined that your City Attorney's Office
initiated the call, which appears to be a distinct possibility inasmuch as
there would have been little reason for Mr. Billmayer's office to place
an unsolicited call to the City Attorney.
As I mentioned above, it is with great reluctance and hesitation
that we write this letter. However, the two incidents described above
combine to depict a lack of respect for the public's right to know, as
well as a lack of interest in the legitimate request of your citizens.
With Mr. Harball ignoring our initial letter for over two months now, we
had little choice but to look elsewhere for help.
In closing, we would greatly appreciate it if you could let us
know the status of our document request and the reason why there
has been no response to it. We would also like to learn more about
Mr. Harball's decision not to release the documents that were the
subject of the lawsuit and whether or not he or his office initiated a call
to Mr. Billmayer's counsel upon receiving my client's request. Any
additional light you can shed upon any of the other issues we have
raised would also be appreciated.
Thank you for your prompt attention to these matters and please
do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
LMAJUUMB�
EFK/ssm
Enclosures
pc: Pam Kennedy, Mayor
Charles Harball
John Schwarz
511 First Avenue West
Post Office box 2071
Columbia Falls, Montana 59912-2071
Telephone (406) 892-4446
Facsimile (406) 892-4449
March 24, 2006
Mr. Charles A. Harball
Kalispell City Attorney
Post Office Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903-1997
Re: Schwarz Construction, Inc.
Floodplain Permit #KFDP-05-05
Dear Charlie:
Eric F. Kaplan
eriG01kaplanlamorg
Sally 5. Miller
Legal Assistant
sally0kaplan lamorg
As you will recall, you and I had extensive conversations and
negotiations in November of 2005 concerning the captioned matter.
Specifically, we tried to formulate a stipulation regarding this matter that
was acceptable both to my client and the City. As you know, we did
reach an agreement which was signed by the parties on November 23,
2005.
Despite the foregoing, my client just received a "warning letter"
from the Department of Environmental Quality concerning this specific
matter. I have enclosed a copy of this letter for your convenience. As
you will see, the letter indicates that the City of Kalispell filed a
complaint against Schwarz Construction, Inc. on October 18, 2005. The
letter also indicates that our client's activities constituted a violation of
the Montana Water Quality Act.
I am troubled by the fact that at no time during our conversations,
nor during my conversations with other City employees, were we notified
that the City had filed this complaint. The stipulation that we negotiated
does not suggest in any manner whatsoever that our client violated any
laws and specifically states that the agreement was not to be construed
as an admission of liability. Moreover, I am advised that you told two
Schwarz employees that the stipulation ended the matter and no further
action would be taken.
I suppose it is conceivable that you did not know about this
complaint, but I would like to find out from you whether or not that was
Mr. Charles A. Harball
March 24, 2006
Page 2
the case. In any event, the letter from DEQ is copied to Mark Crowley of
the City who works with Tom Jentz, who was also involved in these
negotiations. Indeed, you, Tone, and I were the principal parties involved
in these talks.
John is also upset by the way this was handled and I too have a
number of concerns. Accordingly, we hereby make the following
requests so we may get to the bottom of this. We would appreciate it if
you would very promptly supply to us all of the following documents:
1. All files in the possession of the City of Kalispell, wherever
located and however denominated, which discuss, refer or relate to the
captioned matter or to any aspect of the negotiations or the stipulation
referred to in this letter. So that there is no misunderstanding, we intend
for the word "documents" to be understood in its absolute broadest
sense and to include written, graphic, or electronic inedia of any kind
whatsoever, including emails, correspondence, drafts, reports,
recommendations and other documents. We would expect you to make a
comprehensive search for these documents in all locations where they
might conceivably be found.
2. To the extent any City employees have emails or other
documents on their computers relating to this matter, we request that
copies be printed and be delivered to us.
3. Please identify the individual who is primarily responsible
for filing this complaint and please summarize the basis for the
complaint. Based upon the DEQ letter in question, we will assume that
Mark Crowley initiated this action unless and until you advise us
otherwise. If it was Mr. Crowley who did initiate this process, we would
like to know whether or not it was approved by anyone else in your office
and we will expect all documents relating to Mr. Crowley's analysis and
complaint, as well as any documents of others in your office dealing with
said analysis or complaint, to be produced pursuant to request number 1
set forth above.
Each day that the letter from DEQ remains of record, it has the
potential to further damage our client. Accordingly, we respectfully
request that you do everything you possibly can to expeclite the
production of these documents. If you withhold on any basis any
Mr. Charles A. Harball
March 24, 2006
Page 3
documents or if you are aware of any requested documents that have
been destroyed either in the ordinary course of business or otherwise, we
ask that you so advise us.
In closing, please be advised that our client takes this very
seriously. Not only do we have serious questions with regard to how DEQ
handled this, but we are troubled by the fact that this complaint was filed
during our negotiations and, despite its obvious relevance to our talks, it
was never disclosed to us. Accordingly, we will expect a timely and
satisfactory response.
Thank you.
F. Kaplan
EFK/ssm
Enclosure
pc: John Schwarz
1
511 First Avenue West
Post Office box 2071
Columbia Falls, Montana 59912-2071
Telephone (406) 692-4446
Facsimile (406) 892-4449
April 26, 2006
Mr. Charles A. Harball
Kalispell City Attorney
Post Office Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903-1997
Re: Schwarz Construction, Inc.
Floodplain Permit #KFDP-05-05
Dear Charlie:
Eric F. Kaplan
ericMaplanlamorg
Sally S. Miller
Legal Assistant
eally0kaplanlamorg
I sent you a letter dated March. 24, 2006 in connection with the
captioned matter. As you know, we have not received any response from
you.
I would appreciate it if you would let me know the status of this
matter. As you will recall, in addition to a number of other matters, we
requested a number of documents which we clearly have a right to
review.
If we do not receive a prompt and satisfactory response, we will
take whatever additional lawful action may be required to obtain this
information. I am hopeful we can resolve this on an informal basis, but
we will not hesitate to resort to the Courts, as well as other City officials,
if necessary.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
EFK/ssm
pc: John Schwarz
Dec-05-05 12:59pm From-
T-999 P.002/003 F-934
City of Kalispell
Planning Department
17 - 2°d Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901
December 2, 2005
.Tay Billmayer
Billmayer Engineeriaug
2191 Third Avenue E
Kalispell, MT 59901
Re: Request for copies/Hampton Tea. Flood Study
Dear Mr, Bilimayer:
Telephone: (406) 751- t 850
Fax: (406) 751-1858
Website: kalispellplannlno.com
Our office has recently received a. written request for photocopies of our files relating to
LOMR case #02-08-300P (i.e. the Hampton Ian Flood Study). Our files contain a number of
documents which you produced which contain language to the effect that Unauthorized use,
reproduction or duplication is strictly prohibited.
I have been instructed to provide you with notice that the request has been made, and that
we will provide a t=-day window (i.e. through December 15) for you to take formal action to
bar the request If we do not receive notification of formal action, we will provide the requested
copies to Schwarz Architecture and Engineering.
Sincerely,
P Sorensen
Kalispell Planning Office
Cc: City Attorney
Schwarz Engineering