03/22/00 Rauthe/Wolford MallDarlene Jump Rauthe
687 Scenic Drive
Kalispell, MT 59901
March 22, 2000
Mayor Boharski
City Manager Kukulski
City Council of Kalispell
P.O.1997
Kalispell, MT 59903
Dear Mayor Boharski, Manager Kukulski, and Council members:
My family and I own the land which is the preferred site for the proposed 750,000 sq. ft. mall
north of Reserve Drive on LaSalle. We have been advised by Mr. Wolford that the construction
of this facility requires that "the City of Kalispell" furnish sewer services. We also have been
recently advised that while the City of Kalispell acknowledges the current sewer facility has
sufficient capacity to service this development, the City through its manager and various members
of the City Council are urging Mr. Wolford and his company to abandon the purchase of my
family's property and relocate this mall and its surrounding development to properties suggested
by the City.
My family, or most of us, have lived many years in the Flathead Valley. While my deceased
husband's trucking business is located outside the city, we have employed many city residents in
that operation. We have utilized city businesses for supplies and services. We have shopped
within the City of Kalispell. Several of our family members have lived and live within the city
limits of Kalispell. In short, we have looked to the City of Kalispell as the economic center in
which we have spent our monies. We find it somewhat shocking that the City of Kalispell would
now "turn against us," interfere with our sale, and attempt to sell properties determined by the
City to be appropriate, all to our detriment.
It is likewise shocking to us that the City of Kalispell through its elected officials, none of whom
are experts in the world of mall development, now seek to impose their viewpoint as to the
location of a mall of this scope and size on Mr. Wolford, a known national expert in mall
development. My deceased husband, John Jump, purchased this property many years ago. Since
the acquisition of that property, to the best of my knowledge, most major developers looking at
developing any sort of commercial enterprise of any size have contacted us, have attempted to
acquire these same properties, and have advised that for a development of this scope these
properties constitute the ##1 site in the north Flathead Valley. My family and I have opted not to
sell properties to other developers as none of the proposals made to us (and we have had multiple
proposals) have been from developers with the financial capacity, know how, and proven track
record of Wolford Development. Our family is upset that city officials or at least some of them
feel they are more qualified to determine where a regional mall should go. The many developers
attempting to buy our site have done substantial market studies. The market has dictated where
this mall is desirable. We would urge the City Council to accept that determination by the experts,
let market forces drive the site selection, and approve this mall.
In the Daily Inter Lake of March 17 we noted that even though the properties are outside the city
limits and thus, in the same position as our property, the City is now urging a business
development on state lands located north of the City and west of Highway 93. We find it shocking
that the City would propose this type of development when it has a first-class development on the
table seeking approval. In addition, the development you are announcing for a business
development outside the city limits will require the contribution of City monies for support. I can
assure you, Mr. Wolford does not ask for City monies for his project.
I originally understood that the land subject to this mall development could be annexed to the City,
even though it is not contiguous to already annexed land. it was and is my understanding that
annexation has been done in other areas not contiguous to the City. I have recently been advised
that annexing non-contiguous land may not be legally appropriate or may be subject to attack. I
do not understand all of the details of the laws and regulations pertaining to annexation. I am
advised, however, that Mr. Wolford has agreed to waive any objection to annexation. I also
understand that even if the land on which this mall is proposed is not annexed to the City, Mr.
Woldford may be amenable to paying fees to the City in consideration of the supply of sewer
services exactly as if he were in fact annexed. Not only would this constitute substantial income
to the City, but would give to the City a larger base for future tax assessments in the event
improvements are needed in the overall sewer system.
It is readily apparent from my conversations with people involved or knowledgeable about matters
affecting this decision, to include Mr. Wolford and various residents of Evergreen, that one, if not
the major issue behind the City's conduct to date in their review of Mr. Woldford's proposal is
the underlying animosity between Evergreen and the City of Kalispell. My family and I submit
this should not be a factor in your decision. The north Flathead Valley is a single commercial
area. As indicated, my family uses and looks to Kalispell as the economic center. While you have
expressed token concern about the effect that this mall may have on the Kalispell City Mall and
to downtown Kalispell, these concerns are obviously not real. You have urged Mr. Woldford to
acquire properties for the development of this mall north of Kalispell, south of Kalispell and
probably west of Kalispell. Were there to be a mall of this size and scope in any one of the areas
you have been suggesting, the impact on the city mall and downtown Kalispell would be exactly
the same.
Your actions appear to be solely political. We are very offended that you would act in this fashion
to the detriment of a family which has lived, worked, and spent our money in this area for many
years. We urge you to put aside your very personal political concerns and grant to Mr. Wolford
the utilization of sewer services in accord with his application.
Sincerely,
Darlene Jump Rauthe