Loading...
*** Pre and Post-Public Hearing LettersRECEIVED 2 G 0 1 wc)ola oc�opy -7 -vs Cc),�� Orl^\Qr MOA or) A-)q pc) -79 Chris Kukulski Box 99 JUN 1 B Y � - � z �z - � "! z-'� '�-' � ..... I am writing to gou to express my support for the proposed mail feuelopment or of Yy the city of Kalispell. Hued o. past s. gears and ouer that time, I haue seen many changes in our o ... , taken anything away from our quality of life here in the Flathead, ip fact, I loue Kalispell more than ever. Unfortunately,r property ouer the years. This is one reason I fauor the mail costsdeuelopment-to extend the tax base and help out with the increases in i d with a growing community ours. The good createdjobs would further enhance the quality of life in the Flatheait d shrink the demand for public wouldI also like to see a quality deuelopment in the Euergreen since it has had such a spottyrandom historyo belieue the mail deuelopment in . wouthe area ld o the right track for the future, seruing as an example of the I st class deuelopment we expect in Kalispell and the Flathead. I haue heard that the proposed deuelopers are a top of the line company prouen track record. belieue that such a deuelopment wouldbe uery positiue forp• opportunityand Flathead County, and it would be a loss for our community to let this Thanks for hearing and considering my opi i i t s"� utter \ � i William m Rice 5 1 st Rue E- Kalispell 4 P i � 1-'1-, 20101 3 1-J- P.0,Box 351 West Glacier, MT 59936 16 September 01 Kalispell City Council P.O.Box 1997 Kalispell, NIT 59903 Dear Council Members, Though a resident of West Glacier, I am also a member of Kalispell's greater shopping community. When I "go to towif ', it's to patronize mostly downtown businesses, especially the restaurants, bookstores, sporting goods and clothing stores. I much prefer the more personal service and setting of those locales and the assurance that I'm smpportina mostly local buiinessies, rather than the super—ah-wins and mega -complexes of the large malls. IsIgI Hwy- I I WUU1U UlLr, YU#,1 cuunull 114 Ulsig -uJ--SJ)THW17dr R*,PW4PPRWW1 conversion of Kalispell into just another "Anytown, USA7. Respectfully, Becky Williams 200 i SLEP 17 Alf 10: 4 KALISPELL CITY CLERK Kalispell City Council 321 1 st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Dear Sirs: 364 Ponderosa Street Kalispell, MT 59901 September 14, 2001 I am writing to express opposition to the proposed zoning change which would allow the building of a new "super -mall" in the Evergreen area. In discussion with neighbors and friends, I find that many of us are complaining about the proposed change, but few of us seem to be expressing our feelings in any official way — therefore, this letter. My reasons for opposition are all ones you have heard before, I'm sure, but I can't seem to find that you have answered the concerns in a way that soothes these worries. My concerns include a combination of the following: Seeing empty stores downtown and in the Center Mall, then reading about tax increment dollars going to "improve" the downtown area to draw more people, then finding that there is a move to increase competition from a new "super mall." Fighting increasing traffic along Highway 2 in order to get to Walmart, Shopko, Kmart, etc. (because Fred Meyer and Woolworth no longer exist downtown). Having heard "promises" from other mall managers/developers that "several major stores" were committed to their project (years ago at Gateway West, for example), only to have the plans fall short; therefore, wondering how dependable the promises from the current developers are. Hearing that "people would shop here if there were a better selection" and knowing that friends in Tacoma, Washington, sometimes claim that they "can't find anything" there and have to shop when they go to California. Also, friends here often mention that they shop in Missoula or Spokane because it gives them an excuse for an excursion away from home. Wondering once again whether the costs of sewers, water, fire protection, crime protection, etc. can possibly be outweighed by the potential income from jobs and taxes. I know that changes continue in our valley, as in other parts of the country. Many of the changes are good, and many others cannot be halted, whether or not they are good. I would just ask that the Kalispell City Council do the best job you can in evaluating what is good for this community and act accordingly. Thank you. Diane Conner i September 10, 2001 Mayor Boharski P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Wolford's Glacier Mall Dear Mayor Boharski, I would like you to consider Wolford's Glacier Mall project for approval. We have the support of the city and county planning board, county commissioners, and a city council member. Your support as well as the remaining city council members is crucial to this project. We have hindered growth here in our valley respectfully for many years now, but it's time to make a move into our new century, and boost our economy to meet the needs of our growing population. We cannot afford to close our eyes to such an outstanding retail complex as a positive benefit to all of us. As I see it, if Mr. Wolford does not receive our approval, he will be considering other areas for his project that would not bring forth the increased economy for our city, but will for another. Mr. Wolford is not asking the city to fund his project, just extend the water and sewer lines to meet the project, at his expense. And a spot annexation would certainly benefit the city of Kalispell for ten years without any city involvement. We need your support in this project. Vote "yes" September 17". Your people are counting on you to make a difference. Very Truly Yours, John F. Hammett �- /0 09/17/2001 e3:13 4068442264 RICHARD S H EIC E PAGE el «z« We 2 Road Rollins, MT 59931 (f+1)%<?-e::c»*I* »;\ «»>@v><+*r*» TO: Chris 2,»� ? 2 = » . < Manager I >°< <»» ° ° » d 4#:« f¢ Z«#### 2 © £ #• «<#«`® «»*«# 207 11717#7 1111111110TY=f « #tom«° <#»&. ©&_ °-»©■ ©■:-_ «_ »�«■=r ��«,©� <V»�°� ©,f-=�=,=#£-7d .»■ «� »#°«_�� °_;» If you ae not =«=;4 there is# huge underground river network that extends-�,. £o< the entire Evergreen:» te a The Flathead =? ~ w#t.-#»# throughout this region but is now covered with veneer of soil but is extremely »■ « Because the ground is so porous, 4©-w=:.= sweptunderground intothe river and transported Flathead Lake, This process clearly demonstrated at "monitoring well" operated by the FlatheadBiological Stationnear -■.4 .- ,C <r e would urge you 4review the scientific and environmenta©»=2 commercial « -.=.a— « ©♦ this scope will have on the entire: __.,especially the jewel state I4 >=■.—i2 Pease consider this bany master plan for the Evergreen region. 2 01 SET 13 AM 10: 3 KALISPELL CITY CLERK September 10, 2001 Chris Kukulski City Manager P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Wolford's Glacier Mall Dear Chris, I would like you to consider Wolford's Glacier Mall project for approval. We have the support of the city and county planning board, county commissioners, and a city council member. Your support as well as the remaining city council members is crucial to this project. We have hindered growth here in our valley respectfully for many years now, but it's time to make a move into our new century, and boost our economy to meet the needs of our growing population. We cannot afford to close our eyes to such an outstanding retail complex as a positive benefit to all of us. As I see it, if Mr. Wolford does not receive our approval, he will be considering other areas for lus project that would not bring forth the increased economy for our city, but will for another. Mr. Wolford is not asking the city to limd his project, just extend the water and sewer lines to meet the project, at his expense. And a spot annexation would certainly benefit the city of Kalispell for ten years without any city involvement. We need your support in this project. Vote "yes" September 17". Your people are counting on you to make a difference. Very Truly Yours, ohn F. Hammett Date: September 7, 2001 To: Mayor Boharski P O Box 1997 Kalispell MT 59903 From: Brent Hall Subject: Wolford Regional Mall Development I would sincerely like you to approve the Wolford project as the city/county planning board did; unanimously, including the vote of a city council member. The county commissioners have also recommended approval. It would be a travesty if the city council put a damper on this project. We have a definite need for the development both economically and strategically. If it doesn't go on the Jump property, it will go somewhere else. The twenty-first century is here and all of us need to be visionary enough to see the positive implications of this outstanding retail complex. Too often we draw the shades over our eyes and only see the negative side of things. Mr. Wolford is creating an economic center for us, strategically located and at no cost to the City of Kalispell. Basically, all I can see he is asking for is the City of Kalispell to extend water and sewer to his project at his own expense. This is a whole lot better than other developers have treated us in the past. This is a win win project and I didn't cry out when you let Home Depot move up the hill on West Reserve to compete with my store. I can compete, if not I'd better get out of the lumber business. Wolford, in my eyes is no different than Home Depot and should receive the same fair treatment. Your understanding, cooperation and support of this project will be greatly appreciated. The beneficiaries down the road will be your constituents and all of the people in our Flathead Valley. Sincerely yours, 4� Brent L. Hall P.S. We've all known for two years now that this project was forthcoming as was Home Depot. There is no need to delay it anymore. If we do, Mr. Wolford will build it somewhere else in the valley. Let's all win and vote yes on September 17`h as it's now time to step up to the plate. Jlader Country ,Rcgional Tourism Cornmis— P.O. Box 1035 Bigl'ork, MT 59911-1035 406-837-6211 Fax 406-837-6231 800-956-6537 email: glaciercountry®montana.com glacier.visiuntxom August 31, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: On behalf of the Glacier Country Regional Tourism Commission, I am writing this letter to let you know we support the Glacier Mall Project. Shopping is now the number one activity of tourists throughout the United States. In Montana, and in the Flathead, Retail Sales make up 25% of the tourist dollar and we feel that a project of this caliber will only lend to the experience the tourist has and will entice that tourist to stay one night longer, therefore bringing more revenue into the community. In an average year of tourism, $395 million is spent on retail sales in Montana. We represent at least 251/o of that figure in Northwest Montana. It stands to reason if we have more accessible shopping, we will reap more retail sales. The location of the Glacier Mall Project is central to the valley, surrounding counties and especially to the tourist either corning in from or going out of the Glacier Park International Airport and/or traveling Highway 2 to and from Glacier National Park, or Eastern Montana. This is a very busy and valuable corridor in promoting tourism into this area. The Flathead Valley will only benefit from another attraction to offer the tourist that is convenient and easy to access. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 406-837-6211. Again, we find this project a welcome benefit for tourism which is the number two industry in Montana Sincerely, Linda J. An son Executive Director /lja AUG-14-2001 TUE 04:29 PM ANDERSON LUMBER KAL 4067524128 P. 02 Date: August 14, 2001 To: Mayor Bohmki and City Councilman From: Brent Hall Subject: Wolford Regional Mall Development We are looking at something great here for our city and county. The tax revenue alone amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Our city budget was $28,000,000 while our neighbors to the north in Whitefish had a $3 IP000,00 budget approved. They can see the future and are being very aggressive to ensure future tax revenues. We need to become more visionary. Wolford is not asking for any tax increment funding and promises to give us a quality development. Annexing this project to the city is certainly a step in the right direction. We have many families dependent on both spouses working in order to survive. Wolford provides this opportunity for supplemental income Which allows these individuals to sustain their economic well-being. The financial benefits created by all of the people who will come here to shop are very substantial. Our hotels, motels, service stations, restaurants and many others will see increased revenues and profits. The huge outtlow of people going to Missoula, Spokane and other large cities throughout the northwest to shop will be greatly reduced. Because of our beautiful area and everything we have to offer recreationally., people will flock our way. I encourage you to put on your "visionary hats' and support this project. It is a win win opportunity for the people of Flathead County. Your support is appreciated. Brent L. Hall RECEIVED October 4, 2001 Flathead Business & Industry Association NE MEAN BUSINESS The Daily Inter Lake POBox 7610 Kalispell, MT 59904 RE: Letter to the Editor The Flathead Business and Industry Association is deeply concerned by the political processes exhibited by the City Council in their deliberations concerning the master plan amendment requested by Mr. Bucky Wolford. Wolford seeks to develop a 750.000 square foot shopping mall near the northeast corner of U.S. Highway 2 and East Reserve Drive on approximately 150 acres of land. It appears as if Citizens for a Better Flathead has again dominated our City Council's thinking on this issue and is doing everything in their power to delay and obstruct plans for creation of new business in Flathead County. The request is an appropriate change in land use, to conform light industrial and ag-10 to existing B-2, commercial. The issue is simply, "what is the highest and best use of this land?" The City Council has taken discussion of this development off their agenda four times. In so doing, they have been unfair to the people who have, in good faith, presented their ideas to them anticipating deliberation and a decision in a timely manner. There has been talk that the City Council is reacting out of fear -of a lawsuit from Citizen's if they proceed to endorse this master plan amendment. The FBIA believes that zoning of the entire parcel as B-2 is consistent with the intent of our master plan. Glacier Mall's goals of establishing the Flathead Valley as a regional shopping center, and creation of an estimated 900 new jobs would create a situation that is good for business in general and for our citizens as well. It's time our City Council approves this "higher and better use" amendment as requested by the proponents of this development. The city -county planning board and county commissioners have ah7cad a J�J V V u t111J 1G UGSI 1U1 llle Ci'.ilGiiilSilC%116. Vt.�r �l.11.y �,U111i�11 i11 LiSl 1-ealIZe �11dt iItGy J11V tA1i1 not continue to be unduly swayed by organizations who are opposed, in principal, to growth in the Flathead County and whose people are paid by outside organizations to implement that philosophy. We believe it is fair to request that our City Council make this decision in the near term. We endorse the proposal as a positive development for the Flathead. Sincerely, Doug Denmark, President Flathead Business & Industry Association, 257-8900 Cc Chris Kukulski, City Manager, City Council, County Commissioners, FBIA File P.O. Box 8635 - Kalispell, MT 59904 - Phone(406)752-8681 - Fax(406)755-9213 2001 SEE I I AM 10: 46 KALISPELL CITY CLERK September 11, 2001 Chris Kukulski City Manager P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Wolford's Glacier Mall Project I would sincerely like you to approve the Glacier Mall Project. The planning boards approval along with your approval would show a united front in support of the project for the citizens of the flathead. The consumers of the flathead have been going out of town for too long to shop, not having the variety of stores we need that are offered in other cities. This money being spent out of town could stay here in the valley, where it will support the local economy. The city in turn will not need to foot the bill for water and sewer as, this expense is being provided by the mall's developer. This development will help the city's budget and provide the people of Evergreen adequate water flow for proper fire protection. Please, support us in keeping our local earned dollar here in the flathead. Support us by supporting this project. Sincerely Yours, Matthew J. Hammett IT MMI 2�1SE 14 Am 1'.28 'ALISP LL CITY CLERK September 11, 2001 Chris Kukulski City Manager P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Wolford's Glacier Mall Project Dear Chris, Your approval for the Wolford project is needed. This project is a must for our community's economic growth. We as a community must recognize the benefits Mr. Wolford has presented to us, and realize the Flathead Malley has been stagnant for this kind of development for too long. Our growing community must capitalize on this opportunity. As I understand this, Mr. Wolford is asking the City of Kalispell to extend water and sewer to his project at his own expense. He is not asking the city to fund the project. Also, a spot annexation would benefit the city for many years to come. Please support this project. This is a win -win situation for the Flathead Malley. Mote "yes" September 17cn Sincerely Yours, Dick Hammett RECEIVED " � /UN �� 70A7 '^"n Mayor Pam Kennedy City Hall 312First Ave. East Kalispell, K8T59901 Dear Mayor Kennedy and City Council members, | would like huexpress nnyviews onthe proposed Glacier Mail. Mvresidence address h;inthe county, just south east of Woodland Pork, but mybusiness is at 10 Second St. East in Kalispell. My concerns regarding going forward with the mail are not centered onpersonal preferences, but rather onthe vio|bi|itynfsuch aproject, ondtheoonsequenneaforthe people ofthe Valley. Specifically: A Valley population growth rate of 10,000 per every six years (which I believe is the current statistic being circulated) is unlikely to provide the customer base necessary to support so much new retail. |fthis isthe case, all sales generated at the Mall will not be^nevv dollars to the Valley economy, but merely dollars moved from existing Valley businesses to the new Mall businesses. And the projected 4Omi||ionin''new"ae|ariea.wi||on|ybeaa|arieannoved0omexiating employment tonew employment. In essesence, we could be putting established Valley businesses out of business in favor ofnew businesses with much higher overhead. Given the optimum scenario, even though 40 million in new salaries may be generated, this will only be a fraction of the total revenues taken in, most ofwhich will sent out ofstate. |othere enough money coming into the Valley each month tosupport such mcapital drain? I do not know what Glacier International Airport's master plan is, but as malls draw adjoining residential developments, what will be the default plan for limiting airport growth, or even relocatfing the airport when enough of the area's residential base shifts tothe northeast? More generally: I moved to the Kalispell area almost three years ago, and since I arrived I have been practically beaten over the head with the phrases, "Montana Way ofLhe".and "Montana Vm|ues" But with the coming nfthe high aommagenna|hsandbi box otVnea' | think there's e more urbanized way of life and set of values taking hold. Many cities across the nation have, after the influx of the big malls, restored and rejuvinated their original commercial districts with the period buildings and original character of the city, in order to get back something of what they gave away. Have wegiven any thought tojust starting there? Thank you for your attention, Les Brown LFBrovvn Go|dvvork' Inc. 19Second St. East, Ste. 3 Kalispell, MT589O1 257-112Q 07/01/2002 14:14 7523416 KALS PAGE 01/01 iyn->✓,e Y �4 JUIN-27-2002 THU 03:44 PM FLTHD LAKE BIO STATION FAX NO, 406 982 3201 P. 01 Flathead Station The tdniversuy nr mon cana F� 311 Bio Station Lane Polson, Montana, U.S.A. 59860-9659 Phone (406) 982-3 3 01 Fax (406) 982-3201 http://vwvw.umt.edu/biology/flbs CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This facsimile transmission (and/or documents wcompoying it) may contain confidential information belonging to the sender. This information is irmndcd only for the use of the individual or entry name below. If you are not tho intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any diselosurn, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephone (406/982-3301) to arrange the retum of the document. To: The Honorable Mayor From: Jack A. Stanford, Bierman Professor Pamela B. Kennedy and and Director City Council Members Organization: City Council of Kalispell Company: Flathead Lake Biological Station Phone: 115( Phone: 406-982-3301 Fax: '759-775 Fax: 406-982-3201 Date: 6/27/2002 3:28:17 PM ubjeet: Short Vitae from Dr. Jack A. Stanford dated to Kalispell City Council, Followup to letter dated 6/26102 Number of Pages (including cover) 6 , ME�&" COMNTS: JUN-%27-2Q02 THU 03 ; 44 PM FLTHD LAKE B I O STATION FAX NO, 406 982 3201 VW .TACK A. STANFORD Bierman Professor and Director Flathead Lake Biological Station The University of Montana 311 Bio Station Lane Polson, Montana 59860-9659 Phone: (406) 982-3301; FAX: (406) 982-3201 stanford@selway.umt.edu; www.umt.edu/biology/fibs EDUCATION: B.S. .Fisheries Science Colorado State University 1969 M.S. Limnology Colorado State University (E. B. Reed, Advisor) 1971 Ph.D. Limnology University of Utah (A. R. Gaufm, Advisor) 1975 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Jessie M. Bierman Professor of Ecology, The University of Montana (1985-present). Director, Flathead Lake Biological Station (1980-present). Associate professor (1979-1981) and Assistant Professor (1974-1979), Department of Biological Sciences, North Texas State University, Denton, Texas. BACKGROUND: Dr. Stanford is the Jessie M. Bierman Professor of Ecology and Director at the Flathead Lake Biological Station of The University of Montana. Dr. Stanford's research emphasizes natural and cultural interactions of large catchment ecosystems in western North America. He has published 120 juried papers and books in limnology and ecology since receiving his Ph.D. from the University of Utah in 1975. He is most noted for his long-term studies of the 22,241 km2 Flathead River -Lake ecosystem in Montana and British Columbia. He has served on many national and international science review panels and editorial boards. See www.umt.edu/biology/flbs for details. SELECTED PUBLICATIONS (from 120): Stanford, J. A. and B. K. Ellis. In press. Natural and cultural influences on ecosystem processes in the Flathead River Basin (Montana, British Columbia). IN: Baron, J. S. (ed.), Rocky Mountain Futures: An Ecological_Eg en ctive. Island Press, Covelo, CA. Stanford, J. A., N. J. Gayeski, D. S. Pavlov, K. A. Savvaitova and K. V. Kuzishchin. In press. Biophysical complexity of the Krutogorova River (Kamchatka, Russia). - Yerh. Internat. Yerein. Limnol. 28:000-000. - Whited, D., J. A. Stanford and J. S. Kimball. In press. Application of airborne multispectral digital imagery to quantify riverine habitats at different base flows. Raver Research and Applications 18:00- 00. Stanford, J. A. and J. V. Ward. 2001, Revisiting the serial discontinuity concept. Regulated Ravers: Research and Management 17.303-310. Stanford, J. A. and T. Goner (eds.). 1998. Rivers in the Landscape: Special Issue on Riparian and Groundwater Ecology. Freshwater Biology 3:402-585. RECEIVED J U N 2 7 2, OCR June 27, 2002 Kalispell City Council Mark Holston 104 Northern Lights Blvd. Kalispell, Montana 59901 406.752.8959 mholston*digisys.net V*11067TION-TTITISM I appreciate the delicate position you are currently in and respect the high level of attention you paid to comments of dozens of local residents at the recent public hearing. I would ask that you consider a number of points, many of which have been articulated in various degrees by those who testified verbally in comments of opposition to the master plan (mall proposal) amendment. Whether or not the mall proposal is a feasible idea from an economic standpoint (and this is open to serious question), the proposed location, situated partially in the flood plain, will, if approved, instantly become a poster project for bad land use planning. Unfortunately, Flathead County currently is something of a laughing stock in the state due to our elected county officials and the haphazard planning for which they and their appointees to the planning board are responsible. Approval of this request will only serve to solidify the image of the Flathead as a kind of political "black sheep" of the state and a cultural backwater. I've yet to hear anyone present credible information on the economic feasibility of this project. Does anyone seriously believe that the largest retail shopping mall in the state can survive and prosper in this local market area? Does anyone seriously believe that large numbers of shoppers will drive to Kalispell from Missoula, Butte, Great Falls and other large cities just to shop at such a mall? It's one thing to talk of creating jobs, but will those jobs be there six months or a year after such a mall opens its doors? In simple terms, it just does not pencil out. The city, I believe, has some moral obligation not to lend its support to an enterprise that appears to be an economic failure from the outset. The tragic consequences such a large-scale development will have on Kalispell, Whitefish and Columbia Falls should be contemplated by council members long and hard before such a decision is made. We risk destroying what makes our area unique in favor of something of generic and transitory values. As one speaker put it so pointedly, why would we chose to buck current national trends and go the route of a mega -mall when other communities, large and small, have seen the error of such a strategy and are developing their historic urban centers. Why do we in the Flathead seem to be condemned to be several decades behind national trends? Let's, for once, try to get out ahead of the curve rather than be slaves to yesterday's outmoded thinking. Environmental, traffic, and other concerns have been well addressed by local residents, some of them qualified experts. The issues raised in the engineering study commissioned by CFB need to be addressed and not just swept under the table. (The Flathead should be considered fortunate to have a local NGO that has the fortitude, foresight, and financial resources to take on such an important public service.) Finally, I was dismayed at statements made on behalf of the Kalispell Area Chamber of Commerce and several others speaking in favor of this project. Their comments reflect the kind short sighted, knee-jerk thinking that comes to the fore when long-term consequences are not fully understood. Their positions, I believe, are simply not credible. However, they appear a relatively small minority. We now have a council the city can be proud of. It is, in most respects, a vast improvement over what preceded it. I trust your ultimate decision will reflect the level of integrity and wisdom many voters believed you possessed when they cast their ballots for you. I wish you the best in your deliberations and ongoing service to the City of Kalispell. Sincerely, ark Holston RECEIVED H02 JUN 27 PM f : 36 KALISPELL CITY CLERK Wednesday, June 26, 2002 To: The Honorable Pamela B. Kennedy, Mayor To: Mr. Robert Hafferman, City Council -Ward 1 Mr. Don Counsell, City Council -Ward 1 Mr. Hank Olson, City Council -Ward II Mr. Fred Leistiko, City Council -Ward II Mr. Jim Atkinson, City Council -Ward III Mr. Randy Kenyon, City Council -Ward III Mr. Jayson Peters, City Council -Ward IV Mr. M. Duane Larson, City Council -Ward IV City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Dear Mayor Kennedy & Councilpersons: "Mall or No Mall" Lets look at reality. In 1998 & 1999 many good Kalispell businesses presently located in Downtown Kalispell created the Kalispell Downtown Business Association. For a brief period, I personally was involved in that program. Many good business people worked very hard on this program. The primary intent of the Association was an effort to revitalize the Kalispell Downtown Area by improving the character of existing buildings and upgrading the entire downtown area. In order to put such a program into reality required the unanimous support of building property owners, which required a financial commitment as well. There was much support for this revitalization on the part of the City of Kalispell, the Kalispell Center Mall, the major Banking Institutions and many of the businesses and property owners in the downtown district. The primary focus of this program was to revitalize the entire downtown area with upgrades to all existing buildings, interior & exterior. This was to be done to create a better environment for new businesses to occupy empty buildings and to further create a warm and inviting character for the general public and re -attract downtown shopping, and to create a total downtown atmosphere as has been done in many other similar cities. Downtown Kalispell, has a OWN 4 10--- - - ANORMP 2141 Teal Drive —Kalispell, Montana 59901—Phone: 406-257-6704 Ela's E-Mail Address: elapinoy@aboutmontana.net - Rich's E-Mail Address: rindes@aboutmontana.net lot going for it already with its historic buildings, landscaping, lighting and warm feeling. The new Streetscape project may also have a positive influence as well. Several meetings were held to enlist the support of the majority of the Businesses & Property Owners in Downtown Kalispell. Unfortunately, this majority of interest never materialized because the majority of building owners & businesses voted it down! Some of them were very hostile in their attitudes, while others just laughed it off! As far as the majority was concerned, the status quo was just fine, and that no improvements were necessary! Since that time, more and more businesses have left the downtown area, even though some property owners have made significant upgrades to their buildings — i.e. The KM Building, as a fine example of urban renewal. It is truly unfortunate other property owners don't have the foresight of the Goodman's, who have made a significant financial commitment to improve their facilities. The Central School Project also added greater improvement to the downtown area. The New Depot Square Development is a fine example of new development. When are the rest of the property owners & businesses going to step up to the plate? Or is the status quo still good enough? If this new mall becomes reality in Evergreen, it may not matter anymore! If the new mall is approved, there may be a significant exodus of businesses from downtown Kalispell, with more and more buildings & spaces sitting empty for the foreseeable future! If I were one of those Downtown property owners with empty buildings, I'd sure want to lease them, if possible. Perhaps though, having tax write offs is better than having tenants! It's kind of like not paying your property taxes, as some of our more creative politicians have found! My sympathies go out to the lease tenants who presently occupy these buildings, all of whom have built-up strong loyalties to their landlords. I certainly have no sympathy for the property owners, who sit back clipping coupons and do nothing. It takes strong commitment by everyone in the city to keep the central business district steadily growing and vital & dynamic! You can be assured if this new Mall is approved and an exodus from downtown and Kalispell Center Mall occurs, there will be a huge outcry by downtown property owners, blaming the city and their former tenants and everyone else for their financial woes! Lets face it though, there are many possible occupants of a new Mall that need large volumes of space, and that type of space simply does not exist presently anywhere in Kalispell. I have heard JC Penny & Herberger's would like to expand their facilities - a new mall would be a welcome environment for them. If Kalispell Center Mall loses these two anchor tenants, then "THE ARTIST WHO AIMS AT PERFECTION IN EVERYTHING ACHIEVES IT IN NOTHING."-DELACROIX "HE IS RICHEST WHO IS CONTENT WITH THE LEAST, FOR CONTENT IS THE WEALTH OF NATURE."-SOCRATES surely most of the other stores in the existing mall would move with them! Now, just picture a Kalispell Center Mall sitting empty like the Gateway West Mall - not a pretty picture! Losing them, along with the anchor tenants would in all likelihood turn downtown Kalispell into an impoverished atmosphere! Is that what the people of Kalispell want? We don't need a Mega -Mall in Kalispell or anywhere around it. Besides all of the infrastructure costs (highways, roads, access, sewers, etc.), the dangers inherent to water quality and the well being of our rivers and lakes, its poor location in relation to our major north -south corridor, it just doesn't make any good sense to consider it further. In my opinion, if this project is built, all that will happen is the deterioration of our quality of life, and ultimately creating another Missoula or worse in the long-term future. I would much rather drive 120 miles south or 250 miles west than to see Kalispell ruined all because of buying habits. I didn't move here so I could have the same things that have effectively ruined other cities! Let us not Californicate Kalispell! Instead, let us work together in a spirited sense of commitment to make our beautiful Valley better and to improve it! We also must make a strong commitment to local property owners who themselves need a vision to the future. Tell them all we are not interested in Mega - Malls. Let us all begin now to build for a better future, and for our Valley's well being! _,yery truly yours, 'Richard L. Neuschaefer : rin "THE ARTIST WHO AIMS AT PERFECTION IN EVERYTHING ACHIEVES IT IN NOTHING.-DELACROIX "FIE IS RICHEST WHO IS CONTENT WITH THE LEAST, FOR CONTENT IS THE WEALTH OF NATURE."--SOCRATES - -7 2 Cj C, z Dear City Council Members Please take a look at the enclosed pictures and brief summaries of articles about large malls and Cinderella City, in Englewood, CO. Please ask yourselves if the Glacier Mal , lls- a step into the future or the last gasp of a dying trend in retail business, At thi's point in time Kalispell is a strugglingcommunity, economically, would a huge empty mail be a boost or a deterrent to the future quality of life of the area? Malls seem to be a thing of the past, please have the vision to picture a new approach to planming and a bigger picture of the future. Also enclosed are some possible options for Wise land use, and watershed safety, these might be helpful in using the proposed mall site to enhance our community, in a far-sighted and visionary direction. Thank You, Lois H. Bergeson 1137 Aspen Lane Kalispell, MT Women's Wear Daily Date: 01/22/1997 Citation Information: (ISSN: 0149-5380) Vol. 173 Iss. 14 Pg. 1+ Author(s): Sharon Edell thriving. But in a strategy that appears to defy logic, developers are still clearing land for new shopping centers. For the remainder of the Nineties, about 10 new regional malls will be built per year; a startup rate that is not as strong as it was in the Eighties, but moderately stronger than in the earlier part of this decade, when an average of seven new malls opened each year. While some of the new centerswill be built in markets created by population shifts, and some -will be replacements for outdated malls, many others will muscle their way into regions that are already well served by existing malls. The competition Title: Demographics as destiny: why mall -based department stores are imperiled. (Talk Back) Source: Daily News Record Date'. 08/25/1997 Citation Information: (v27 n102) Start Page: p76(l) ISSN: 1041-1119 Author(s): steidmann, Carl Summary: Department stores are facing challenges of survival as the number of consumers that go to malls each month declines by over it Title: Purchase of Englewood Stores to Spur Cinderella City Area Source: Color,?.do-C�owA4uet-.on7D-7-te: 08/1998 Citation Information: Vol. I No. 6, Pg. 60, Section: Legal & Financial News Summary: The purchase of two stores for $ 10 million near the vacant Cinderella City comp! n Englewood bodes well for the Lgonosed Ledevelopment o e g -, --all area ch is scheduled for a WOMEN - I lilt I City Center Englewood is a transit -oriented development in the heart of the City. This innovative approach to redevelopment replaces the former Cinderella City Shogging Mall, once a crown jewel in the City of Englewood. When it's completely built out, City Center will include retail, entertainment, luxury apartments, open space, civic and cultural arts elements which were designed to complement the transit focal point of the site, the Englewood Station stop on the RTD Southwest Light Rail Line. Demolition Photos of Cinderella City - Page i Mid-late'70's - Post Card of Center Court fountain Sept'98 - Center Court - The columns contain asbestos so they must each be surroundeda plastic tent before removal of the surface material. Sept'98 - Rose Mall - looking from Foleys toward Montgomery Wards. Demolition Photos of Cinderella City - Page 2 Apr 98 - Gold Mall looking toward Joslins - The scaffolding is in place on the left side so that the columns can be surrounded with plastic sheeting. Sept 98- Gold Mall looking toward Joslins - Scaffolding, surface materials, floor tiles and ceiling tiles have been removed. Oct 26, 1998 - Looking from Gold mall toward Joslins. Cinder Alley lies in the rubble below. Nov 1, '98 - Demolition photo - taken from Wells Fargo Bank looking west. Demolition Photos of Cinderella City - Page 3 April 7, 1999 - The last building to be demolished from the Cinderella City Mail comes clown. The Foleys building on the left will be renovated into the new City Hall. by Will Rogers President, Trust for Public Land Too often we hear that commues cannot afford to "grow smart" by conserving open space. But accumulating evidence indicates that to space conservation is not an expense but an investment that produces important economic benefits. Some of this evidence comes from academic studies and economic analysis. Other evidence is from the firsthand experience of community leaders and government officials who have found that open space protection does not "cost" but "pays." This casebook presents data and examples that can help leaders and concerned citizens make the economic case for parks and open space conservation. Some communities protect open space as a way to guide growth and avert the costs of urban and suburban sprawl. In others, new parks have invigorated downtown businesse:a ? neighborhood economies. Some communes work to conserve economically important landscapes, such as watersheds and farn-dand, or they preserve open space as a way to attract tourists and new business. And many communities are learning that conserved open space contributes to the quality of fife and community character that supports economic well-being. Too many community leaders feel they must choose between economic growth and open space protection. But no such choice is necessary. Open space protection is good for a community's health, stability, beauty, and quality of life. It is also good for the bottom line. npace 01/22/94 results "prove that New Yorkers love and appreciate their parks. Ninety percent of New Yorkers recognize how crucial neighborhood parks and playgrounds are to [their] quality of life ... and in a city where consensus is unheard of, it's practically unanimous that parks make the city livable." 90 Unfortunately, half of those surveyed said they use parks less often now because of concern over violence. But to get improvements in the park system that mi4t add to safety, 65% said they would be willing to pay a small additional voluntary tax. TPL is assisting several communities in figuring out how to raise funds for green space. The organization provides technical advice to local groups on drafting and promoting bond issues or other financing tools. In King County, Washington, which includes Seattle, the Council has approved $60 million for parks and greenways on top of the $117 million alread-y spent from a 1989 countN, bond issue. Seattle 9,arks advocateg.- a 'A--XkV how to fashion another bond issue to continue the work. In California in 1994, voters in Sacramento and San Diego will consider assessment district taxes similar to Los Angeles' Proposition A. Measures may also be up for votes over the next few years in San Antonio, V"hoenix, Minneapolis, Miami, Charlotte, Austin, and Portland, Oregon. Denver is considering a unique financing plan: selling its Winter Park ski area to create a trust fund for city parks.9' �= �f , �. , s -r � s s � � � � s �s - ♦ - � i - s � r - .# �� �- � � .- � � r s • � � .� x. ��- � • � � s ., �► s s x -� ,� •- s• x -� s a� s �,- �-. s � � �. � � - � � -rt -� • �� �. ; � = r � - �r- _ i ,� - •• •- - #.• • - ', is • � � � -a � . � , -; �• -r ► � �• � s •. • _ • ..� - � � • - � s Mat aM threatened by development. In Gunnison County, home to the Crested Butte ski resort and mountain bike center, efforts have focused on preserving a critical mass of ranchland, especially private land that offers access to summer grazing allotments on U.S. Forest Service land. These lands also provide habitat for wildlife that attracts tourists, hunters, and anglers. Hunting and fishing alone contribute more than $62 million each year to the Gunnison County economy.93 Ranchlands and Tourism Ranchland protection also helps safeguard the tourist economy by preserving the vistas and open landscapes tourists love, says Will Shafroth, executive director of GOCO, which hamoh 4.,d more than �22,5 mon of state lotte*p funds intothe (turchase, of a4cultural easements in Gunnison County, "Surveys tell us that the people who come to Crested Butte to ski in the winter and mountain bike in the summer place a very high value on open space," Shafroth says. "They leave the airport and they don't have to drive through subdivision after subdivision to get to the ski area. Some ski areas may have great skiing, but their surroundings are less interesting because they're completely paved over." GOCO's efforts in Gunnison County have been in cooperation with the Gunnison Ranching Legacy Project, a local group dedicated to ranchland preservation. 95 Other funding for land protection has come from county and local sources. In 1991, Crested Butte began collecting a real estate transfer tax that has raised more than $1.5 million for open space conservation, and in 1997 county residents passed a dedicated sales tax to fund open space protection. In addition, more than 100 Crested Butte merchants collect an informal I percent sales tax and donate the money to the Crested Butte Land Trust and the Gunnison Ranching Legacy Program. The idea for this voluntary customer donation was generated by the merchants themselves. The donation program raised an estimated $100,000 for land protection in 1998. Working together, the town of Crested Butte and the Crested Butte Land Trust have helped protect more than 1,000 acres around their mountain community. " There're just a lot of people in this town that really value open space," says town planner John Hess. Throughout Colorado, 29 counties and municipalities levy taxes or have approved bonds to fund the protection of agricultural lands and other open space, and the number is gra,wing An (aleL199�8 y - 600 r,%.n, mr *41jor:141w, approval for local land protection programs. In Colorado communities lacking a land protection program, 63 percent of the respondents wanted one; in communities that already had a program, 81 percent approved of it.96 In Colorado --as across the nation -- communities are recognizing that once farms, ranches, and other open space are gone, the economies they support are lost forever. Chapter 5 - Sidebars Fresno's Choice Fresno County, in the heart of the fertile San Joaquin Valley of California, is the nation's top producing agricultural county, generating $3.3 billion in gross agricultural revenues each year. But if current development patterns continue, the county's population is o trity] mwe _rthh- In response, farm and business groups have formed the Growth Alternatives Alliance to work against farmland loss. In a 1998 report, "A Landscape of Choice: Strategies for Improving Patterns of Community Growth," the Alliance proposed a plan that would direct development away from valuable farmland and into somewhat denser, n-�xed-use, pedestrian-ftiendly neighborhoods in existing communities. According to the report, "Each acre of irrigated agricultural land should be considered a factory that produces between $6,000 to $12,000 per year for the local economy. The loss of even 1,000 acres of agricultural land can remove as much as $15 million from our local domestic product. "84 Let them eat sprawl? A recent report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture documents the loss of U.S. farmland. During 1992-1997, the report found, nearly 14 million acres of farmland were taken out of production --nearly 320 acres every hour. 16 Ikeaction to the report singled out sprawl development as a prime culprit. "There's a market force at work that makes it more and more difficult for the farmer," banker Jim Kommertzheim told Kansas's Wichita Eagle. "Demand for land for home development increases the price to the point wherea farmer can't afford to buy it for agricultural production. ,87 Scott Everett of the Michigan Farm Bureau also blamed urban sprawl for driving up the price of farmland. "Once the erosion of our land base begins to affect productionhe said, 11you're never going to be able to turn it around."" Minding your PDRs States and communities use several techniques to help keep farmland and ranchland in agriculture. In some instances farmland may be taxed at a special lower rate so long as it is _Lc&4xLf_v.LbnnLng rights to agricultural land and restricting this land to farm, woodland, or other open space use. 2Ami4i- o . si-ice ,p+j;nm�bagar. *,i+hc­E*st-G# v , spread across the country. Fifteen states and dozens of county and municipal governments now sNonsor PDR programs, with funds for some tmnsacti local sources. State PDR programs alone have protected more than 470,000 acres. Maryland, among the first states to launch a PDR program (in 1977), has protected nearly 140,000 acres of farmland. Other states with major PDR programs include Vermont, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and C3nnecticut.92 Saving a billion dollar breadbasket Each year, urban sprawl consumes 15,000 acres of farmland in the Central Valley of California, the nation's most productive agricultural region. At current growth rates and development patterns, the valley's $13 billion in annual production will be slashed by $2.1 billion a year by 2040--a reduction equivalent to the current agricultural production of New York, Virginia, Oregon, or Mississippi. A 1995 study for American Farmland Trust examined two growth scenarios for the Central Vall In onepTlieveLraw1m per acre. In the other scenario, this rate of growth was doubled, to six dwelling units per acre. Among the study's finding are the following: Compact, efficient growth would slash farmland conversion in half between now and the year 2040. While agricultural sales and related economic benefits would decline under both growth scenarios, compact growth would reduce this loss by more than half, saving communities $72 billion by 2040. Farmland protection and efficient growth would save 21,500 jobs, equivalent to the number of civilian jobs lost in California during the recent round of military base closings. Because low -density growth costs governments more to service than does high -density development, farmland protection and efficient growth could save Central Valley taxpayers $1.2 billion each year. 94 Farms keep taxes lower More than 40 studies from I I states have found that farms can save communities money by contributing more in taxes than they demand in tax -supported services. Examples include: Hebron, CT: Farms required $0.43 in services for every dollar they generated in taxes. In contrast, residential properties required $1.06 in services for every dollar contributed in taxes. Minneapolis -St. Paul, MN: In three nearby rural communities, farms drew an average of $0.50 in services for every tax dollar paid. Residential properties required an average of $1.04 in services for every tax dollar. Dunn, WI: Farms required $0.18 cents in services for every tax dollar; residential development cost taxpayers $1.06 for every tax dollar collected.97 Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space 06/01 /99 The Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space: How Land Conservation Helps Communities Grow Smart and Protect the Bottom Line. Communities around the country are learning that open space conservation is not an expense but an investment that produces important economic benefits. TPL's entire report on the economic benefits of open space is available in portable document format (pdf) or in text format by chapter. http://www.tpl.org/tier3—cdl.cfrn?content- item id=1145&folder id=727 National Programs http://www.t.pl.orp-/tier2—cl.cfi-n?folder id=173 1: Green Cities Initiative --UPDATED 02/01/02 Photo by: Phi! Schermeister In 1994, TPL launched its Green Cities Initiative to help create parks and protect greenspace in urban areas, where 80 percent of Americans live, work and play. In the years since, TPL has helped nearly 20 cities complete over 250 park projects. This page describes this program. 2: Center for Land & People 09/24/01 Photo by: Peter Forbes The Mission of TPL's Center for Land and People is to foster the connection between people and special places, explore why this connection is so important, and make the case that conservation in the 21 st century must include a sharper focus on the interrelationship of land, people, and community. 3: Conservation Finance 08/15/01 Photo by: Kent DuFait Conservation Finance -- Creating Public Funding for Parks and Conservation. TPL's Conservation Finance Program works with community groups, elected officials, and public agencies to help design and pass conservation funding measures. For the November 2000 elections, the Conservation Finance Program assisted 54 local and state ballot efforts nationwide. Thirty-nine of these measures passed, generating $3.3 billion to protect parks and open space. This section of TPL's website contains information on TPUs Conservation Finance Program, with links to press releases for successful measures and other resouces. For more information on State and Local Funding visit the Research Room section of TPL's website. 4: Tribal Lands Program 01/31/01 Photo by: Bowen Blair This page describes TPL's Tribal Lands Initiative, a joint effort of TPL's Midwest, Northwest, Southeast, and Southwest regions that works to reverse a history of dispossession by helping to bring traditional Native American lands under tribal ownership --or into federal ownership that affords legal protections for spiritual, cultural, and subsistence resources. Subject: Glacier Mall Bate: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:10:34 -0700 From: Dan Virkstis <danv@bigmtn.com> To: council@kalispell.com To Whom It May Concern, I would like to thank you for the care and consideration you have put into this process; you do justice to your public office. Having said that, I implore you, elected officials of Kalispell, to weigh all elements of this pivotal decision. I do not know Bucky Wolford and I do not oppose a healthier job market in Kalispell and the Flathead Valley. However, I guarantee that when all is said and done, when and if this monolithic structure goes up, you and I will be the ones dealing with the potentially devastating environmental and aesthetic repercussions while Bucky Wolford kicks back in pristine Jackson, Wyo. watching his wallet expand at the expense of our dear valley. I have witnessed identical projects strip the commercial identity and aesthetic health from similar communities. I have watched as once -vibrant towns were abandoned for concrete commercial centers and industrial parks that leave no room for trees and meadows let alone pedestrians and bicyclists. Please, let us first fill those empty storefronts in downtown Kalispell. The one notion I heard repeated over and over by proponents of the project during public forum was "do not let your emotions get involved." Impossible for me, essential for you. It's emotional because there is so much at stake. But I urge you to please take your time with this decision . . . wait for all the appropriate tests and facts to come in and consider your children and grandchildren. Flathead Valley is growing exponentially; our economy will strengthen. Let us capitalize on what is unique about this last best place, not damage it by creating something that our visitors and residents can find anywhere else in America. Please stand strong and act wisely, it is your elected duty and you have my faith. Thank you. -Dan Virkstis Dan Virkstis Communications Coordinator Big Mountain Resort P.O. Box 1400 Whitefish, MT. 59937 www.bigmtn.com Phone - (406) 862-1948 of 1 6/27/02 4:20 PM IJ U 2 7 2002 Carla Augustad 1395 Lower Valley Road Kalispell, Mt. 59901 257-5009 June27, 2002 Dear Elected and Appointed Officials of Flathead County; Re: Amendment of the Master Plan. It does seem that the master plan may need to be changed to accommodate growth in a way that does not impinge on the quality of life that we currently enjoy. To change it without a long range plan as to the type of community we hope to become seems hasty and incredibly wrong. At this point, it seems the safest way to incorporate Glacier Mall would be for them to hook into the Kalispell Sewer System. No one has mentioned the inconvenience and cost of ripping up over a mile of roads, and rerouting traffic. It seems that it would be only prudent to annex the rest of the strip at that time, are we prepared for a change that monumental? What changes need to be made to relieve congested traffic in the rest of the city, and whose homes, neighborhoods, and farmlands will be sacrificed for that? Our public transportation system is already woefully inadequate, where will the dollars come from to expand it as well as reeducate the citizenry to the necessity of using it? There is already a shortage of affordable housing in the valley. When Meridian Point apartments went in, they were supposed to be affordable. How many minimum wage hours a week need to be worked to pay subsidized rent in excess of $400.00 per month? The majority of the jobs that would be available are the same type of low paying jobs that many people already have two or three of. What about air pollution? Will we need to monitor and report it daily like Missoula? Who will pay for that? Next there is the issue of the possible contamination to the aquifer, and to Flathead Lake. It may be possible to minimize the risks, or mitigate damages. Human cloning is also possible, but that doesn't mean we should do it. Thank -You for your attention and consideration, Citizen and voter, Carla Augustad \ IX °- L _.� Marian & Kevin Ellison 1484 Memory Lane Kalispell MT 59901 6,12,53-1102 AM people who have moved here, sought a place that provides clean air, [Timm Sincerely, is a NIN1111 � 11 11 le III I IIIII 11�;! i7 I 11! qIIIIII 111111 1111111 1� 11 June 26, 2002 2000J UN 21 P M I : 3 City of Kalispell and County Commissioners Unfortunately, I was not able to make the protest meeting the other night and, therefore, this letter is written to voice my opinion and protest of "Bucky's mall." I am not a newcomer to this Valley. My parents moved here in 1964 and I graduated from high school in 1969. I moved away for a short time, living in both Washington, D.C. and then in western Washington. I have seen the uncontrolled growth with the developments, strip malls, apartment complexes, fast food chains — whatever — now encompassing what were the separate towns of Sumner, Puyallup, Graham, Eatonville, all the way to Mount Rainier where we used to hike. The drive there is now unrecognizable. What used to be a beautiful area is now nothing more than a mass of buildings, people, traffic congestion, and so on. I now see the same thing happening here. Over the last four or five years, I have watched the Flathead Valley change drastically from the beautiful place that made it so special to the mess that it is now becoming. I find it very, very depressing to watch these changes and feel so helpless to do anything about it. We do not want or need this monstrosity of a mall in our Valley. Bucky is nothing more than a self-centered, egotistical developer who is looking after his own best interests. I am absolutely disgusted and furious with those of you in both the city and county who have allowed him to get this far in the destruction of the Flathead Valley and our once peaceful way of life and "lack of progress." Debora Hall Columbia Falls, MT "DrAMORM 21110112 JUN 27 PM 1: 35 To the Kalispell City Council, We were unable to attend the Monday council meeting but wanted to add our voice to the people who opposed the amendment to the master plan that would allow the construction of a mega mall on the site in Evergreen. We feel a mega mall is a bad idea for the valley and this site with its' potential for water quality damage is a very bad idea. We have heard a good deal about property rights. The idea that a person has the right to do what they want with their property is fine on a simplistic level but when what they want to do has the potential to affect so many people then the idea becomes more complex. We would like to urge the city council to oppose the construction of and annexation of a mega mall on the proposed site in Evergreen and vote no on the amendment of the master plan that would allow this. FORIffew Mike Wickersham Nina Wickersham -7 -1 4S' 1 NORNW1 2002 JUN 27 PM 1: 35 To: The Kalispell City Council Re: Opposition to the proposed site of new mall Precedent?? If existing asphalt lots are part of the rationale to build more, perhaps Grace's activities in Libby would allow me to mine vermiculite! I'm not against a new mall. Trying to prevent such an edifice is like standing in the path of an avalanche and "willing" it to stop. But there is no need,, economic or otherwise, to further endanger the waters of the Flathead and there is ample evidence that such would be the case. Signed, James D. Holland 919 Is' Ave. E. Kalispell, MT 59901 Arys Wednesday, July 10, 2002 Pamela B. Kennedy, Mavor P.O.Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 641 E. Lake St., #226 Wayzata, MN 55391 (952) 476-7281 (952) 476-7293 fax jfcarisch@aol.com Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager P.O.Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Dear Honorable Mayor Kennedy and Mr. Kukulski: RECEIVED 2002 JUL 15 AM 10: 30 KALISPELL CITY CLERK The purpose of this letter is to encourage you to work with Wolford Development in the development of an indoor mall and adjacent retail center next to the airport in Kalispell. I see many advantages to all of Flathead Valley that would result from the construction of Montana's largest indoor mall. The most obvious advantage is you will not lose retail dollars that are now traveling to other parts of Montana in search of retailers who currently are not available in Kalispell. Another advantage is the 100's of jobs the Mall will create to alleviate the high unemployment that exists in Flathead Valley. A third advantage is the substantial tax dollars that will be generated by the Mall. Currently, we operate one Arby's in Flathead Valley. We would like to build another but because there is no concentration of retail or residential population we have been unable to find a suitable second location. I perceive that Wolford's Mall will provide a focus for the entire valley. The result is, it will provide many retailers with the opportunity to establish a second location that otherwise is not available in the valley. Therefore, please encourage this group to follow through with their plans. 08/04/1994 22:24 4068372036 FRENCH PEACHEV PAGE 04 • ci �" • ,r •.. Although there is a general perception in the combined communities of Kalispell and Bigfork that the proposed Glacier Mail In Evergreen is a done deal with money as : controlling factor,surelydemocratic process "E• : 'm,will prevail sufficient number of citizens voice their concerns and rationale for opposing the project Is It really worth a temporary gain In tax breaks and jobs opportunities to set lovely Kalispell on the road to decay? A look at the history of other towns across the country will quickly show that the slippery downhill slope starts with a mall on outskirts ofthecommunity.■ :smallbusinesses, unable to meet the prices of the competition, will be forced to close, and their employees will be among those hired by the now stores for minimum wage and no job security. Gradually, the central area of Kalispell will become a wasteland as the town fails to attract visitors, residents move to other areas In search of better jobs and realtors have` • prospects. Surely you do not want to be remembered as the official who presided over the destruction ofsuch a uniqueand • desirable •urgeyou,Mayor to developers whose sole purpose Is to line their own pockets and who don't give a fig for the long-term effects of their project. i OOJ4X • c' French Flathead County Commissioners June 26, 2002 To: Kalispell City Council My name is Mark Guest, I reside at 233 Lake Blaine Dr. in Kalispell, and I am a downtown business owner. The business that I operated is a national company with many of our stores located in large regional malls. The store my wife and I operate is located in Depot Park Square on Main Street. Unfortunately I could not attend the city council meeting the other night, so I would like to voice my opposition to the new mall. My descent concerns the future of downtown Kalispell and the economic impact on my livelihood. I have survived doing business in Kalispell for over 12 years, 8 of which was in the Gateway West Mall. I have experienced firsthand what a new mall does to the existing one and more importantly what it does to the merchants and their families within the mall! Make no mistake about it, a new mall will be the death of the Center Mall and downtown as we know it. Businesses like mine will be forced to relocate to the new mall, and then try to choke down the 300 to 400 % increases in rent that will go along with it. Our company has approximately 800 stores and I can't tell you how many new franchisees I have seen go into these regional malls and then file for bankruptcy 12 to 18 months later. The director of real estate at our company has told me that the death rate of independent business owners in these kinds of malls is staggering. He said the only businesses that can survive the first 4 to 5 start up years will be the big corporate stores with the deep pockets that can afford to operate at a loss until the mall develops the fringe markets that are vital to its success. The bottom line is this new mall will leave in its wake more bankruptcies and financially shattered families than we would like to think, small business owners like me that have survived and even thrived in downtown Kalispell. Landlords in these big regional shopping centers can be ruthless when it comes to collecting on their leases, and usually won't budge an inch for a struggling business. So here we are at a crossroads, do I try to make it in a downtown business district that has terminal cancer eating away at it, or do I take the high -risk road of the new mall! a'ou have the power to impact not only my family, but also hundreds of families in a variety of ways. Don't make downtown a reclamation project for some future city council to deal with, protect it now. A wise man once said to me, "when in doubt, don't►" Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Siri�Pr�1v Mari- C-hu-Ct RECEIVED July 31, 2002 The Honorable Mayor Pamela Kennedy City of Kalispell PO Box 1997 Kalispell MT 59901 Dear Mayor KenneV.* I am writing to convey my disappointment in the City Council's vote to proceed with the plans for the new mega -mall in Evergreen. As I stated at the July I Council meeting, I have see what a major mall has done to the city of Hattiesburg, MS and I regret that such damage will likely befall Kalispell as well. Since July 1, 1 have learned about major flooding that is taking place at the Hattiesburg Mall as a result of storm runoff from the massive parking lot. This flooding is happening despite the fact that intensive engineering studies and multiple government agency sign - offs were completed prior to the construction of the mall. The fact that this could easily happen here, threatening our beautiful Flathead Lake, is frightening. I urge you and all other Council members who voted in favor of amending the Master Plan to seriously reconsider your decision. The damage done to our community and to our environment will be in -eversible. Sincerely, Ann H. Tucker PO Box 1627 Bigfork MT 59911 Cc: Mr. Robert Haffen-nan Mr. Hank Oldon Mr. Jim Atkinson Mr. Jayson Peters Mr. Don Counsell Mr. Fred Leistiko Mr. Randy Kenyon Mr. Duane Larson J September 27, 2002 2002OCT _ l PM 1 * 1 KAUSPELL CITY CLERK To: Our Kalispell County Commissioners and City Council First, thank you for your service to our county and city and its constituents. We respect your efforts you put into our community." The primary purpose is to let you know we are unequivocally in favor of a major mega mall for the Flathead Valley. We live in a gorgeous area of the world that has grown nicely with time. Our desire is to continue that growth through positively enhancing our valley with classy developments like the mall being proposed in Evergreen. This project is an opportunity to bring (and keep) many dollars into our area that will bring jobs and economic support. We believe the hype over environmental concerns are way overdone and overly sensitive. Also, the lawsuit thing is a joke -they only sue because they can't compete. Is this the free market economy? Where were all these people when Target and Walmart and Home Depot came in? Competition is supposed to make us better business people which only helps the consumer!! Let's move forward and say `yes" to progress and embrace it!! Sincerely, The Terry and Sarah Falk family - part of the Flathead for 23 years! ! f 9 x C�LL�-�:-e.1„E.-.tf� _ ✓ti. a ...�f,% //' �� �-�-t�-f'�Y--�G`. . �`/`Z�� a/mac!✓✓ / •��6"f3'JJ ����G-'C. Yrf�...%•�� _ - �.��-- , RECEIVED September 13, 2002 LOC2 S P 11 Ali 1 = 22 Attention City Council Members & Mayor I,ALCSP ELF. CITY CLERK I have decided to write this letter concerning the proposed new mall. I suppose I am like most of the people & just assume the city & council will do the right thing & I would leave them alone to do just that. I have lived in Kalispell since 1975, having moved here from Phoenix, AZ, when I was a teenager, imagine that! Talk about malls, I was utterly dismayed then at the lack of shopping available. This group of people that is trying to stop the mall are saying that is what the majority wants - well 15% is not a majority by any means! It's like the old saying "the squeaky wheel gets the grease." Yes, I do enjoy getting out of town once in a while to go shopping, etc. But not every weekend or any time I need to buy a new dress, etc, is it feasible to run to Missoula, Spokane or such, let's be serious. I am a quite frequent shopper to Kalispell Center Mall, and have been dismayed with it for a long time. They supposedly had such big plans when they first opened, then what happened? I have never been a shopper of the downtown area, except for a few minor stores once in a blue moon, and let me tell you this new beautification program is absolutely ridiculous & I have yet to talk to anyone that doesn't agree, even some CIty Council members. But once again, I believe the same "squeaky wheel" is mostly responsible for this. I'm just glad I don't live in the neighborhood & have to worry about my taxes going up to support it. Also, I live in Silver Shadow Estates, right off LaSalle/Hwy 2 & Reserve, so you know I will be affected by this new mall, however I am willing to take that chance. I have already seen the traffic increase immensely & am adjusting to that the best I can, & would continue to adjust to it for the new mall! Kalispell is going to grow, let's let it grow in a way that will benefit all. Sincerely, Sue Cunningham Subject: New Mail for Flathead County Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:34:35 -0600 From: Mike & Brenda McKnight <brendami@aboutmontana.net> To: Flathead County Commissioners<fccommissioners@co.flathead.mt.us> CC: council@kalispellxo�)i, info@cityofcolumbiafalls.com, Chris Kukulski <ciN,,_i�anager@kalispell.com>, "Repr. Verdell Jackson" <vjack@cyberport.net>, Roger Somers''.- <usom@digisys.net>, Senator Jerry O'Neill <oneil@in-tch.com>, Superintendent of Schools Donna Maddux <schools@co.flathead.mt.us>, Whitefish Pilot <wfpilot@cyberport.net>, Daily Inter Lake <edit@dailyinterlake.com>, City Hall <cityhall@kalispell.com>, Mike Taylor <mike@taylorussenate.com>, Senator Bob DePratu <bob@depratu.com>, Seeley Swan Pathfinder <pathfinder@montana.com>, Hungry Horse News <newsdesk@hungryhorsenews.com>, Bigfork Eagle <mteagle@digisys.net> Dear Commissioners, I am writing once again to offer my unequivocal support for the new mall Bucky Wolford is trying to bring to our valley. It will mean new jobs and increased wages, better selection of goods and services, and more tax money into our government - and maybe, lessening of the tax burden on our citizens. I see it as a total "win" for Montana. As for the "obstructionists" and those that support them - often "behind closed doors" - I yearn for the day we throw each and everyone of them out of office, to be replaced with men and women of conviction, honor, principle, integrity, and a true sense of what is "the right thing to do" for our valley and our state. Respectfully, Mike McKnight ION 9/16/02 9:19 AM Dear Community Leader, Rather than seeing the Glacier Mall as a detriment to the downtown businesses of Kalispell, I think the proposed mall presents an excellent opportunity to revitalize the downtown area and create the charming and historic atmosphere that many business owners and civic leaders desire. One of the valuable, yet neglected, resources that Kalispell possesses is a large and talented artistic community that includes hundreds of hardworking volunteers dedicated to the arts and philanthropic organizations. These groups are scattered throughout the city, and unfortunately, productions by the Glacier Orchestra and Chorale, Flathead Valley Community Theater, Community Concert Series, local dance companies, the high school band and many other dance, music and arts venues in Kalispell are performed in the uncomfortable, hot, overcrowded high school auditorium, or on makeshift stages in rooms at FVCC or the Outlaw or West Coast Hotels. More and more these organizations, and the crowds that attend their performances, leave Kalispell and use the performing arts centers in Whitefish or Bigfork. These cultural centers are the hub of the downtown areas, and judging by the crowds in the shops, restaurants and on the streets, my husband and I aren't the only ones who enjoy spending an evening out in these vibrant and welcoming downtown businesses before or after a show. It is always sad to drive through downtown Kalispell on our way to and from these events and see the shops and galleries closed up, the restaurants quiet and the streets empty, even on the nights when the city hosts the Picnic in the Park concerts. Large fundraising events also have to look outside the downtown area for accommodations, and our thriving Farmer's Market is also constrained by weather, limited space, and a non -compete agreement with the Kalispell Center Mall owners. Now our county library is planning on building a larger, more modern facility, and the Hockaday Museum of Arts is also outgrowing their facility and looking to expand or build at a new location. Depot Park already serves as a prime site for outdoor concert and arts venues, and the Kalispell Center Mall property would make an excellent location for a performing arts district. This community would benefit from centrally located, modern facilities and would compliment the businesses who are desperately trying to find a way to bring people back to downtown Kalispell. In the past, the City of Kalispell has subsidized the interests of Stream and the Kalispell Center Mall owners with the hope of generating foot traffic, jobs and tax revenues, with limited or unsuccessful results. Right now, Barbieri is faced with losing their anchor stores to the Glacier Mall; not to mention the support of many tenants, customers and taxpayers who are fed up with their long unfulfilled promises to improve on that property. Their investment could be salvaged by renegotiating terms on the undeveloped and vacated properties with the city. WestCoast could then focus on developing a comfortable convention center and hotel located in the heart of the new performing arts district, all of which is within walking distance of unique shops and galleries, quality restaurants, banks, county and city government and a variety of professional services. Then, rather than fighting the Glacier Mall, make Mr. Woiford an ally in establishing Kalispell as the cultural center in the Flathead Valley. It would certainly be in his interest to help, and he does have the resources to be a strong partner. With the box stores and chain stores in one centralized location on the outskirts of town, renegotiating annexation would supply a much - needed source of tax revenue for the city. Why look to annex a fixer -upper district like Evergreen when Kalispell could design and manage a new, up -scale commercial district in the north? With neighbors like the Big Mountain golf course, Semitool, Majestic Valley Arena and Rebecca Farms, and residents like FVCC, the existing merchants and hopefully, the Glacier Mall, the area already draws people who also appreciate the arts, music, theater and unique shopping and fine dining experiences. All this could be found with a quick trip to downtown Kalispell, rather than the long drives to Whitefish or Bigfork. With the right attitude and focus, this plan could be a win/win situation for everyone involved, most notably, the taxpaying citizens of Kalispell who would finally see a financial and lifestyle return on their investment. Which brings me to my next point. I am concerned about the direction the city is taking with this northern area in regard to casino licensing. We need to focus on creating positive sources of tax revenue, and supporting a cultural center and the Glacier Mall, and prohibiting gambling in this area, is cheaper and healthier for our community in the long run. Revenues generated by casinos are lost to the hidden costs of higher crime rates and other social problems associated with gambling and alcohol. Our families, police, emergency medical and social services already struggle to make ends meet, why make it more difficult for them? Why welcome these insidious services when Glacier Mall could provide quality retail stores and infrastructure that will ease the burden for city workers and taxpayers? Another related issue is the U.S. 93 bypass. In the past, downtown businesses argued that the highway is a main artery bringing customers to Kalispell; nothing could be further from the truth. Many people avoid Main Street because walking its sidewalks holds all the charm of strolling along the shoulder of Interstate 90 near Missoula. Exchanging a cultural district for a four -lane highway would restore the historic charm of the area and revitalize this business district, while supporting the Glacier Mall, insuring the success of a sustainable source of tax revenue at both locations. And last, rather than funding pools and skate parks with taxpayer dollars, why not let the community build these projects. It means more to those who use it if they have a significant part in working for it and building it. And others may think twice about lawsuits and vandalism if they know their neighbors and local youth groups worked hard to provide these amenities. Then Kalispell could focus development dollars on revenue generating projects, like this cultural center, and the creation of a wonderful city airpark. We need to do something to help develop our unique airport and it's related business district, and to welcome the air tourist community that now passes us by, taking their business to more inviting airparks in Polson and other areas. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Bliss' Sow N ille June 26, 2002 Kalispell City Council Members City of Kalispell 312 1"Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 RE: Glacier Mall Proposal Comments Dear Chairman and Kalispell City Council Members: Please accept the following comments as part of the public record for the proposed Glacier Mall master plan amendment. These comments were conveyed to you on June 24, 2002 during the public scoping meeting. At this time, I would like to formally submit my comments in writing for your consideration. I hope that you consider the comments detailed in the following correspondence. I am qualified to comment on the proposal based on my personal knowledge of the project area, and current and past work experience as detailed below: 1) Sr. Hydrologist, Water Consulting, Inc. (2000-Present) 2) Hydrologist, Land & Water Consulting, Inc. (1998-2000) 3) Hydrologist, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, 1997-1998 4) Hydrologist, US Forest Service, 1995-1997 Based on the potential for water quality impairment, and the precedent that has been established by the Flathead County Commissioners on past proposals of similar scope and complexity (refer to county commissioner public hearing, James and Vicki Swartzenberger, November 1999), I recommend a more thorough evaluation of potential risk to groundwater and surface resources, threatened and endangered species, wetlands, and general water quality be conducted fir all areas tributary to, draining from, and down -gradient of (both surface water and groundwater) the proposed development site. Please refer to the following sections for supporting information. 1.0 Precedence In November 1999, the Flathead County Commissioners reviewed an application submitted on behalf of James and Vicki Swartzenberger for the proposed relocation of their wrecking facility to the headwaters of Spring Creek, an area contiguous with the Evergreen Shallow Aquifer (Tract 113, Section 15, Township 29 North, Range 21 West). Land & Water Consulting, Inc. was retained by Dr. Loren Vranish to evaluate the potential effects of the project on natural resources associated with the project area, including groundwater, wetlands, domestic wells, and surface water quality. At that time, I contributed to the authorship of the report with Roger Noble, Sr. Hydrologist with Land & Water Consulting, Inc. As you are aware, Land & Water Consulting, Inc. has been retained to provide comprehensive stormwater management consultation for the proposed Glacier Mall project. I would recommend City Council obtain a copy of this report in its entirety prior to making a decision on this project. Pursuant to public comments and a public hearing held in November 1999, the County Commissioners voted to deny the proposal based on the potential for adverse impacts to water quality and lack of a credible, defined stormwater management plan. As described in the report prepared by Land & Water Consulting, Inc., "the underlying soils are highly permeable and the stormwater would infiltrate directly into the shallow aquifer." The inherent risk to groundwater resources was identified at this time based on aquifer characteristics. Since precedent has been established, I would request the Council to act in a similar manner and deny the Glacier Mall proposal until adequate analyses are conducted to determine the potential effects on groundwater, surface water, and wetland resources. Until these determinations are accurately evaluated and documented, a sound decision cannot be made that ensures both groundwater and surface water resources are safeguarded from potential contamination. 2.0 Groundwater Resources) The Evergreen Aquifer, which underlies the proposed Glacier Mall site, is composed of unconsolidated sand and gravel that was deposited as riverine sediments. The aquifer is overlain by a thin veneer of sandy soils ranging from the 0 to 10 feet thick depending upon location. The aquifer extends from the mouth of Bad Rock Canyon near Columbia Fall to the confluence of the Stillwater and Flathead Rivers. The aquifer is bounded on the west by the Whitefish River and on the east by the Flathead River. The groundwater flow direction is from north to south. Groundwater within the aquifer moves exceptionally rapid at a rate of approximately 15 to 20 feet per day. The aquifer is hydraulically connected to the Flathead River and provides supplemental base flow to the river near the confluence with the Stillwater River. As stated in the Land & Water Consulting, Inc. report of November 1999 (Swartzenberger public record), "the depth to groundwater ranges from 2 to 12 feet below the ground surface." At the Glacier Mall public hearing on June 24, 2002, Roger Noble indicated a depth to groundwater of 4 to 12 feet below ground surface. Apparently, there is a discrepancy regarding the true depth to groundwater in this vicinity. During preparation of the Swartzenberger report, I personally measured a static groundwater elevation approximately 4 to 4.5 feet below ground surface in November 1999 (in Tract 113, Section 15, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, approximately 2 miles north of the proposed Glacier Mall site). Groundwater levels are dynamic in this vicinity, and subject to fluctuation based on the hydraulic connectivity with adjacent waterbodies including the Whitefish River, Flathead River, and Flathead Lake. Considering a depth to groundwater of 4 to 4.5 feet was recorded when these rivers were at base flow conditions (in November 1999), it is plausible to assume that depth to groundwater is within several feet of the ground surface during spring runoff when these river systems are experiencing peak discharge and Flathead Lake is at full pool. I recommend a more thorough evaluation of groundwater characteristics in the proposed vicinity of the Glacier Mall site. At a minimum, numerous piezometers (shallow groundwater monitoring wells) should be installed to define and characterize the seasonal changes in static groundwater elevations during atypical water year (prior to approving the project). In addition to groundwater resources, and as alluded to in Billmayer's assessment, numerous shallow groundwater and surface water rights occur down -gradient of the project area. Residents rely on shallow groundwater resources for potable and irrigation supply. Trumbull Creek and swales drain the project area, and are in direct hydraulic communication with the Evergreen Shallow Aquifer. Any potential impacts on the shallow groundwater system would be readily transmitted to surface water resources. This point was also made in Land & Water Consulting, Inc.'s 1999 report regarding the potential effects of the Swartzenberger Auto Wrecking facility on water quality. 3.0 Threatened and Endangered Species The Evergreen Shallow Aquifer is hydraulically connected to the Flathead River and provides supplemental base flow to the river in the vicinity of the confluence with the Stillwater River. Bull trout (salvelinus confluentus), has been identified as a threatened fish species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Westslope cutthroat trout are currently petitioned for listed under ESA. ESA requires that for projects that have the potential to impair habitat and/or water quality associated with occupied habitats be evaluated under Section 7 of the ESA. Due to the extremely shallow groundwater environment, a thorough analysis on threatened and endangered species should be conducted to ensure the proposed project does not further degrade water quality associated with the Flathead River. The treatments must address aquatic toxicology, which are typically more stringent than drinking water standards. 4.0 Federal Clean Water Act and Surface Water Quality Standards The groundwater in this vicinity is rated as a Class I standard. This rating is suitable for public and private water supplies, culinary and food processing purposes, irrigation, livestock and wildlife watering. In general, the ground.=later is a calci m-b?Carbonate type with low dissolved solids concentration. This type of water is considered to be excellent for both potable and irrigation purposes. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality is mandated under the Federal Clean Water Act to identify streams and lakes (and other waterbodies) that are not currently supporting their intended beneficial uses or water quality standards. The underlying aquifer associated with the proposed Glacier Mall site is hydraulically connected to the Evergreen Shallow Aquifer. Groundwater within the aquifer moves exceptionally rapid at a rate of approximately 15 to 20 feet per day. The aquifer is hydraulically connected to the Flathead River and provides supplemental base flow to the river near the confluence with the Stillwater River. The project area is bound to the west by the Whitefish River, and serves as a groundwater recharge zone to Flathead Lake. Flathead Lake, the Whitefish River, and the Stillwater River have been identified as water quality limited under Section 305(b) of the Federal Clean Water Act and are listed on the 1996 and 2002 303(d) lists as water quality impaired. The probable causes and sources of impairments are noted in Tables 1-3 . Table 1 Probable Causes and Sources of Impairment Flathead Lake Causes Sources -Algal growth/chlorophyll a -Municipal Point Sources -Mercury -Silviculture -Metals -Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers -Nutrients -Hydromodifications -Organic enrichment -Atmospheric Deposition -PCBs -Other Unknown Sources -Siltation Table 2 Probable Causes and Sources of Impairment Whitefish River Causes Sources -Metals -Industrial point sources -Nitrogen -Silviculture -Nutrients -Construction -Oil and grease -Urban Runoff / Storm Sewers -PCBs -Priority organics -Thermal modifications Table 3 Probable Causes and Sources of Impairment Stillwater River Causes Sources -Nitrate -Construction (land development) -Nutrients -Urban runoff -Other habitat alterations -Storm sewers -Phosphorus -Habitat Modifications -Siltation -Other hydromodifications -Temperature & pathogens -Removal of riparian vegetation At a minimum, the proposed development needs to address applicable water quality impairments associated with these waterbodies. 5.0 Stormwater Management The current application does not identify appropriate technologies for pollutants that would be generated at a facility of this type and scale. The application fails to recommend appropriate technologies for fluid and chemical handling, stormwater drainage controls, or BMPs to mitigate potential impacts. MDEQ has identified various contaminants of concern that require proper handling and disposal. It is highly likely that the proposal will generate automobile related fluids such as gasoline, crank case oil, and anti -freeze (to name a few). These fluids contain a variety of constituents that are listed as chemical hazards by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Table 11 Contaminants of Concern Type of Fluid Chemical Target Organs Anti -freeze Ethylene Glycol Central Nervous System Crank case oil Lead Gastro-intestinal tract, Central Nervous System, kidneys, blood, Chromium Eyes, skin, respiratory system Gasoline Benzene Blood, CNS, bone marrow Toluene Eyes, skin, CNS, liver, kidneys Eth lbenzene Y Eyes, skin respiratory system Y P �' Y Xylenes Eyes, skin, CNS, liver, kidneys MTBE Eyes, respiratory system, liver, kidneys As described, most of these constituents are highly mobile in both the soil and groundwater due to their low water solubilities and minimal soil adsorption capacityl. Once in the groundwater, some constituents will move through the aquifer at nearly the same velocity as the groundwater (15-20 ft. /day). Because the Shallow Alluvial Aquifer is highly transmissive, a thorough evaluation of stormwater drainage, potential effects, and mitigation alternatives should be addressed prior to approving the application. While the conceptual stormwater plans presented by the consultants at the June 24, 2002 public hearing are intended to handle solids, soluble constituents need to be addressed as they are mobile in both the soil and the groundwater. 6.0 Conclusion The County Commissioners established a precedent for these types of facilities in 1999 when they denied the application submitted for the Swartzenberger Auto Wrecking facility. This determination was based on the potential for groundwater and other resource impairments, including surface water. The level of risk the City Council is willing to accept for a project of this scale and magnitude is what remains to be determined. Any infrastracture, including stormwater facilities, are designed to accommodate failure in the event of unforeseen conditions such as extreme storm events, flooding etc. Is the City Council willing to accept an undetermined level of risk to water quality? Risk, at this point, cannot be determined due to insufficient information. I would request this information be provided, at a minimum, prior to considering this application. My recommendation would be to deny the proposal based on the location relative to the Evergreen Shallow Aquifer and inherent risk of potential water quality impacts. At a minimum, if this project is approved, a stringent, long-term effectiveness water quality -monitoring program should be instituted to confirm the function and effectiveness of the proposed stormwater treatment facility. Sincerely, John M. Muhlfeld 245 Somers Avenue Whitefish, MT 59937 1 Public record submitted to County Commissioners. Prepared by Land & Water Consulting, Inc. (November 1999). TMDL Full or Partial Report Page 1 of 2 Report 1 of 1 Select Form Waterbody: MT76P003_010 - Whitefish River(River) - Map Waterbody 23.7 Miles Waterbody on year 2000 303d list?: Yes Assessment Record Sheet Bet Description: WHITEFISH RIVER Whitefish Lake to the mouth, confluence with the Stillwater R EcoRegion(s): County(s): Beneficial Uses: Northern Rockies Hydro Unit: 17010210 FLATHEAD Basin: Columbia Watershed: Flathead Agriculture Aquatic Life Support Cold Water Fishery - Trout Drinking Water Supply Industrial Primary Contact (Recr) Probable Causes: Metals Nitrogen Nutrients Oil and grease PCBs Priority organics Thermal modifications Use Support Fully Threatened Partial X X X X X Probable Sources: Industrial Point Sources Silviculture Construction Land Development Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers Assessment Methods and Information Sources: Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys Fish surveys Not Supporting Not Assessed X n- � PT-ot-anS7&C'md=6/26/2002 TMDL Full or Partial Report Page 2 of 2 Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) Non -fixed -station monitoring (conventional during key seasons and flows) Primary producer surveys (phytoplankton/periphyton/macrophyton) Visual observation, may not quantify some parameters; single season; by prof. Report 1 of 1 0-0-,D_ „Q,Tnc!t=Qn57&Cmd6/26/2002 TMDL Full or Partial Report Page 1 of 2 Report 1 of 1 Select Form Waterbody: MT760003_010 - Flathead Lake(Freshwater Mai) Waterbody Lake) - 126006.9 Acre Waterbody on year 2000 303d list?: Yes Assessment Record Sheet Help Description: FLATHEAD LAKE EcoRegion(s): Northern Rockies Hydro Unit: 17010208 County(s): LAKE Basin: Columbia Watershed: Flathead Use Support Beneficial Uses: Fully Threatened Partial Not Supporting Not Assessed Agriculture X Aquatic Life Support X Cold Water Fishery - Trout X Drinking Water Supply X Industrial X Primary Contact (Recr) X Probable Causes: Algal Grwth/Chlorophyll a Mercury Metals Nutrients Organic enrichment/Low DO PCBs Siltation Probable Sources: Municipal Point Sources Silviculture Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers Hydromodification Upstream Impoundment Flow Regulation/Modification Atmospheric Deposition Source Unknown Assessment Methods and Information Sources: —1-1,-. -. - n,-. rr nr r. n n nn n nr I nncnnr--_i_�rn'-innnn TMDL Full or Partial Report Page 2 of 2 Chemical monitoring of sediments Fish surveys Fish tissue analysis Fixed station biological monitoring Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) Primary producer surveys(phytoplankton/periphyton/macrophyton) Visual observation, may not quantify some parameters; single season; by prof. Report 1 of 1 - - - - - . r I - r r r ., n - - 0 "- ^-- °-T--_.-nnco O-f —A </74/7nM I.ECEIVED JUL 2 3 2002 r 4.- - 7-4 -­kjuiiLu b,nowu nave 1 closed door to `ifi mall" The City Council meeting of July 1 relative to the Master Plan amend- ment for the Evergreen Mall was the sorriest example of government in action that1have ever, wit nessed. Nearlq all council members` expressed logical and important.' reasons why the hall should not be built, then five out of nine for 'What- ever reason didn't vote their con- viction. I applaud Councilmen. Counsell, Kenyon, Larson and Leistiko. The other five should resign en-masse and slink out of town. Mayor Kennedy, while expected, was par- ticularly disappointing. Her main reason for approving the amend- ment was "we have to look ahead and move on." What better way to look ahead than by rejecting this fiasco on the basis of the very possible environ- mental damage and certain econom- ical disaster to the present city and Kalispell Center Mall. Even if these were not important issues, the extensive' verbal and documental opposition indicating a large major- ity just plain don't want the mall was ignored when it came time to vote. Is this the type of representa- tion the taxpayers and voters deserve? It is a cop-out to vote in favor with the caveat that there may be trouble down the road. Of course there will be trouble which could have been avoided at this meeting. Due to the seriousness of this matter it would seem reasonable for all city and county officials that support this mall be held responsi- ble for any business failures that result should this mall be finally approved and constructed --Howard Stockwell, KalispeL Don't let the Valley be malled To the editor, I feel I must add my voice against the con- struction of Wolford Mall, "the largest Mall in Montana," in Flathead County. This unneeded eyesore would destroy the whole character of this "last best corner" of the "last best place." My family has lived in Montana since 1891. We have witnessed the comings and goings of generations of rich and greedy out- landers who have pillaged the resources and beauty of Montana and left us with the mess. When will we learn? Speak out today. Tomorrow will be too �; 3 Cettert-to the p-p#-- vti Mall not:rlgh fop�r 'ibe Flathead -r1-•hl + I attended the inbeting at"the Kalispell qty Hall , " onthe ?21tlr of June concerning the site for;,* Wdii ford's mega=mall.- With few exceptions, of com fi ents; both pro and oon, I was not particularly , impressed. Th&pertinent issue appeared to can K this development assure'the community that it ivould not pollute the Flathead River and Labe rm not suie`Wolford put tins to rent" Of particular interest to me: was Mr. Goodman's =Sentation on the.results of the previous malls , olford built iii other"immunities. Goodrnan's vestigative research, indicated downtown buss Mess devastation in each of these citiesT`5 Even though Wolfordand his associatesz innclud ing our local law firma, are in it for the money, r'nr t sure he would:conso,agfeat mall, 1JULMLILAX.0 MIA G1LL1 u1KG va ar w boarded ervently believe that we, the citizens of our lipvonderful community wouldn't wish this to hap - :pen Poul Houlberg, Kalispell Proposed) mall's price t6o,,Ngh Hattiesburg,Miss., is home to Turtle Creek Mall developed by Wolford Development, which now wants to build a mall in Evergreen. I am from Hat- tiesburg, and have spent much time there over 50 years. - Turtle Creek Mall and its predecessor, Clover- leaf Mall, brought major changes to Hattiesburg, most of them not good. Downtown Hattiesburg, 'which had'a much larger retail community than Kalispell,,is virtually a:ghost town There are lots of boarded -up buildings and no retail businesses. Property values have plummeted .An expensive revitalization program is having measured success Cloverleaf Mall, the first mall in Hattiesburg was a nice mall, larger than the pre- sent Kalispell Center Mall. Cloverleaf initiated he exodus of retail businesses from downtown. Turtle Creek Mall resulted in further deterioration of downtown.-" •4 Today virtually all of the retail business district of Hattiesburg is located at or near Turtle Creek Mall. Traffic on a new, four -Lane highway is 'bumper -to -bumper. Strip malls abound —some -occupied, some vacant. Eyesores are common- . But a more important problem for the Flathead Salley is the flooding around Turtle Creek Mall. During El Nino, homes flooded 14 times in two months. Many blame the storm run-off from the mall for the flooding. The mall ownership claims no responsibility. But despite massive engineering studies and approvals from county and state . experts prior to construction, Lamar County is seeking federal government help to buy flooded homes!! someone at the Council Meeting said that there ;is no Flathead Lake in Mississippi What we have here in the Flathead is too, precious to risk damag- ing. I urge the Council to consider the full ramifi- cations of this mall. We may not be willing nor able to pay the price for such progress! Ann H. Tuck- 'Cou"'Ot yne,ects y an gro By JEANNE TALLf\MAN ,.� y Just one year ago on June 6, 2001, `'' Richard Moe, president of the Nations al Trust for Historic Preservation; spoke at the Museum of the Rockies in Bozeman as part of. Bozeman'Historiq Preservation Days. His timely mes- sage was a warning to all, Montanans) about the dangers of urban sprawl ,,;. "Urban sprawl is not only eating up farmland and leaving old neighbor- hoods run down in Montana, but. it .: will ultimately.cost tax~yers a lot of mcn- Gl1eSt ey. A recent Greater .t �� Yellowstone (Coali- p tion) report says that. in Gallatin County, '1 farmland requires only 25 cents in services for every dol- lar it generates in taxes. Residential, areas require $1.45 in services in exchange for every tax dollar generaft' ed." The growth problems facing Gal- latin County and Yellowstone County: are mirrored in Flathead County. ; With the advent of advancing technol= ogy, people from urban areas are flock- ing to the wide open spaces, clean' air and beauty of Montana — the "Last, Best Place." Mushrooming subdivi- sions, strip malls, miles of new pave- y ment and big box stores are turning = the outskirts of our charming Mon- I tana towns into entrances indistin guishable from those surrounding Dal= las, Cleveland or Los Angeles. In MoWs words, "Every place winds up looking like no place Controlling growth is not the job of the federal government, cautioned Moe. It is the job of local and state gold ernmems. Only when there is cooper4- tion between city, county and state can wise planning decisions be implement- ed for the future growth of Montana. ; Bozeman and Missoula residents are. finding out how much time it costs. get- ting stuck in traffic and the accompa- nying frustrations. They ask them- selves what has happened to the quali; ty- of life theyieaeto M so�tP jd ...enjoy. .,flathead Cottiit�-'& fHeadi fifi `ffd, ? same direction. Only a few years ago it was a pleasure to approach Kalispell or Whitefish from any direction with 'a view of the mountains across rolling farmlands. The lack of cooperative r planning in our communities is evi- dent when driving those same high- ways today. Subdivisions and com- mercial projects have moved out of the jurisdiction of the cities and into the country where just about anything goes. Bozeman), where 1acK of zonn ` Gallatin County ]ores develox side the city limits, leaving Bc with all the problems' and non benefits. Becauselocal govern have limited jurisdiction, the is best dealt with by the state ment.>;.;..° "What's needed is smartlpx islation with teeth in it, legish that requires local; governmen work together in deciding whf go. places.", � r �: ,,The conversion of a warehouse , into 40 dwelling units reduces the I demand for 10 acres of farmland," Moe said. ,If we allow government to keeR pouring funding into new beltways I and bypasses and more suburban, 3 infrastructure, sprawl will: continue., Moe's warnings; seem prophetic.inl . the face of discussion,about.the mega Glacier Mall Ding proposed- hy Wool-j ford Development dtChattanooga,,.°fis,: Tenn. A project of this size will impact all of western Montana - increased traffic, pollution, ]empty businesses. within the surrounding towns 1. Some of the hard questions we have to ask ourselves: Will this project lien efit the city and county tax base?' WiR the possibility of increased retait'shop- ping in Flathead'County benefit esta� lished local..businesses? Is_there .: enough population in Flathead and the surrounding counties to s4ppokt-1.1,11 million square feet of additional`retall: space? What will a development of this` size lock like in 10 or 15years when a lack of customers- forces retail clo= sores? Growth is inevitable and can be a good thing; but it isAyery,hardtoy z reverse sprawl once it has approved and established. Moe said, "A community has to ask —itself,' do we want our community to be?" we want Flathead County, to be one: those places .where"every„place up looking like no.place j Tallman is a Whitefish res+dent and'f - mer manager of the Mountain Mall id life in the Flathead What is the one thing that unitE all of us who live and work in the ;1, Flathead Valley, despite our eco- nomic woes and differences in opi ion? What brings several million people here from all over the worl each year to visit and spend their money? Our Wal-Mart? Our Kmart? Our potential mega -mall? No. People come, people stay because this plat( is like no other place on Earth. Whether you itch to get out and hur, in fall's crisp air, enjoy the multituc of recreation opportunities, or just "enjoy living in a small town where life is more peaceful and simple, thi,, place offers a way of life found in fev Places elsewhere. What would endanger our unique- ness? A developer from somewhere else who comes in to make our valle3 look and feel like every place else in the world, then takes off with the profit. You can be at a mega -mall any- where in the world and have no clu( what town you are in. They all look the same and they all have the same economic and social ramifications on the communities that they occu- py- .They run locally owned compa- nies out of business, they cheapen the aesthetic character of the town and they degrade the cultural iden- tity that makes the town unique. The $6- $8-per-hour jobs that a mega -mall could bring will not be an economic windfall. They will be an economic travesty because the people making the real money will be execu- tives who live far away. By approving a mega -mall we sell our souls to out-of-town developers and say, "Yes. You can have our land, our money and our future." Let's keep our future in our hands by say- ing no to the mall. —Ashley Emer- son Mason, Kalispell By RICHARD H. SCHAUS I am writing about proposed changes to our master plan that would allow development of a "mega -mall" on LaSalle Road. I am appalled that this issue has proceed- ed this far at all. I Guest cannot comprehend Opinionhow any responsible citizen who values the quality of life here could support suc"development proposal., ` e issues that mitigate against `& this development include, but are certainly not limited to, the degrada- tion of general valley aesthetics, core downtown businesses, core downtown civic and social structure and sense of community, our val- ley's water supply, the quality of Flathead Lake water, the general air quality, traffic flow, and the public's ` tax liability. I can see absolutely no redeeming qualities such develop- ment would bring. I see this proposed development as nothing more than a further fouling of our own nest. We already have the clearest of exam- ples of what has happened in other areas that have pursued unbridled commercial development: Mis- soula, Hamilton, Bozeman, and further afield, Aspen, Telluride, Sun Valley, and on and on. The mere thought of the Flathead Val- ley evolving further and further toward a regional commercial shopping center is completely repugnant to me, and violates the very nature of this magnificent land, its history, and its people. Together we have a choice. We do not have to blindly, dumbly fol- low the same shameful, short-term course of development that others have allowed their communities to follow. We can opt for a clearer, long-term course of planning and action that will keep the quality of life and community in this valley something to enjoy, be proud of, and be proud to pass along to our children and grandchildren. " I-JUL VLl1ri1J 1GJJ V1 Ivl141y G UYY ` ,., random, unbridled commercial IVJLa.0 JLIUL U L)dU 1LICU ievelopment turn their cozmum I would like to thank Robert Blake des into squalid, impersonal strips . for his letter about the bright side of ind malls, devoid of the humanity t.' the mall in Evergreen. Everything I md'sense of community --we have `;r; have read in the paper the developer mown up with here. �: � s [from Tennessee has done a lot of - �.This is -our chant rise above the 1 research in this matter and has tries rho -term the greed, the lossso ' }to accommodate all interested and tc natural beauty an community. One 1 apply to all the rules. Hundred from now it will be i I have lived in Montana all my IifE e I I'm always impressed with the envi- mmumty, and tie �Y of life ronmental issue when, it applies to that �Tes the a ead Val- something that people object to, it is [ev — not our s tom, , casinos, like a tool only use if it suits your end commercial development purpose the rest of the time put it up I encourag�ispell eity C on a shelf. I would suggest anyone council to oppose this change to `w "I that is interested in the environment the master plan! By doing so, it to take a drive down in the Helena would set an astounding and won- Flats area and the surrounding area ierful precedent that would surely and take a really good look and see be emulated by communities fac- some environmental issues if that is ing similar pressures around our what you're going to use against the nation. mom• I can think of no finer contribu- I hope the people making the deci- tion the council members could sion will consider the great opportu- make at this time, individually and nity the mall will bring to the valley. ollectively, to the long-range future Everything changes, nothing stays of this beautiful valley, its people, the same. We want to be more invit- and other communities in Montana ing to people to come see our beauty. and across our nation. The mall could add to that beauty, no take away. Schaus, of Kalispell, is a professor I also read the tragedy this will of physics and mathematics. have on the downtown area. Why not look at this positively, the more peo- ple that come.to this area, will also visit the downtown area. I under- stand the stores that want to come here if the location is right are ones we do not have at this time. It a posi- tive thing. Question: How many of us go to Missoula for shopping? How many more public hearings are there going to be? No matter how many you have not everyone is going to be able to voice their for or against, isn't that what the council is for and the planning committee? And please do not let this become a political forum to stand for or against. — Shelley Naylor, Kalispell Lowntown, is issue Y s I Over the past month or so, rve fol ' lowed the editorials and letters, pro and con regarding the mall . The issue,. as far as I'm concerned, is not the surface water, traffic, 4 urban sprawl, taxes or greed, its sim- 4 ply this. Do the citizens of Kalispell _. � Ond the Flathead Valley want the -------- downtown core of Kalispell to be a viable, healthy business eriviron- ment, or do we want it to be a ghost ; town, boarded'up and abandoned? • , All the other issues area smoke screen to obscure the core issue; namely a viable Kalispell or a dead one. I am most emphatically against the mall. I urge the Council to reject further consideration of it and fur- ther, stop all consideration of devel- opment north of Reserve Drive! Sprawl never stops, and if it it not 'stopped now, future years will see a strip city along U.S. 2 to Columbia -Falls, and strip city along U.S. 93 to Whitefish, and a strip city south Tong 93 to Somers, If one looks criti- ;cal)y you can see the sprawl already tieveloping. It's pretty unsightly and • each year it gets .worse. Let's all join in preserving down- lown Kalispell. It's our last best chance! Tedrowe Watkins, Big - 'fork Council defied will of people I have worked in the political field for many years, always, laboring under the premise that the person elected to office (be it City Council or.eresi dent) was obligated to represent the views of their constituents. It would be very hard to find 50 per- cent of the population of Kalispell in favor of a mega -mall. Didn't they hear the clamor of the ; crowds? Has any member polled his ward? Whose views were they voting? I give the people of Kalispell and surrounding communities credit for being intelligent enough to know who is going to pay for this in taxes, busi- ness failures, and death of the smaller cities. If this is such a great advantage why would Wolford choose a remote Montana town of approximately 14,000 people with below -average incomes? Did they feel we are so stupid and greedy that we would embrace it? It appears they were right. The Council members who voted for the mega - mall areOlson, Atkinson, Hafferman, Peters and Kennedy. Analyze these people as to why they would vote this way. However their day of fame and fortune is over, and they should resign. Their value of trusted judgment no longer exists. If they do not resign, is there a possibility of recall? Ours is supposed to the a government of the peo- ple, by the people and for the people. It is absolute- ly unbelievable that five people can make a deci- sion of such magnitude that will affect our city and valley forever, despite the vocal and physical protests. Please let us, everyone, in every way try to stop or reverse this error. —Dorothy Stenseth, Kalispell rom a lastb est vi iaeet3to�the L lace Y ,�hk e her�he e ear r��w e For the last several months I unique, and weigh that against have been reading with great ;;shopping opportunities, and 'tor letters`to the edi find it pretty ridiculous that �tor reg the proposed `anyone would want to,,inject .� e,��'`$ _ sd I"have arsoIeinirig like w s�nple.queetYoas I woul� �vr�e e to have answered. The let- -'oper who wiii' P� `Aers that have really piqued ,s the money and leave. I can my curiosity are those refer-,' understand ring to all the people who have ` We are rapidly becoming not ,to go to Missoula to do their ':the last, best place, but the `:shopping in order to find what place like everywhere else. ,they want. ra . : Maybe these hundreds or My questions are: f' maybe it's thousandsof people 1. Who are these people who who are forced to shop in Mis- . ,can afford to make regularsoula to find whatever it is 4trips to Missoula to shop? _they have to have;`snould con- 2: What is it you leave to - ` : inue to do so, so that we. don't drive to Missoula to buy that = ` end up looking like Missoula you can't find at Wal-Mart, and Everywhere Else, USA. Kmart, ShopKo, Home Depot, Who and what are really our existing Center Mali and building this mall for? And all the wonderful specialty art does this beautiful valley real 'and craft stores we have in ly need the added'attraction of :.this valley? That is only - `the "Mega -Mall of Montana" to ,cratching the surface of the lure people from other congest - ,.shopping choices we have ed, noisy, high crime, traffic here. clogged areas to get them to 3: What things wilt; the, procome here, so they have a place posed new mail have, that to shop? I" seriously doubt it.. 'according"to these" people, are " " I I am old, opinionated; a not available. here now? " fourth generation valley resi- I think these arereasonable ' 'dent, and my roots and feel - "questions and I am only seek- . ings run deep for this valley I Ung reasonable answers. live in. I love it and care pas- ` I think about all those beau- sionately about what happens ,Qtiful acres, Flathead Lake (and to it. I am looking forward to ,even the possibility of a threat some answers to my questions. to the lake is unacceptable), —Bubbles Grundstrom, Blow our valley used to be Columbia Falls _ _J0 Foo*X HE nth_ or: :cure. By SHELIE R. P Lt study conveyed was, t lowed. Wh>le �iusinesses e are no longer living off , require a certain budget allot n, k A,Mea tres. mteresf, but nature's 4- ment for spending, our,task isLife is bTibu it essone pital: Sustainable economies fto ensure that our develop= . that relies solely upon " - -are not possible if,we.live' �J went practices 'replenish our` resource funds *6'borrow� ��beyond the means _ofnature."� savings, not further deplete ; from the Bank of!iotl}er.,;Our planet's once ahundant, r them. Continuing develop- , Nature intlie %rm of air - though not `irifuiite; resources " _ment practices whose final ` water, and land: Our iieg�' shave been depleted`beyond . results are more insufficient gent withdrawA'and refusal what we-needao sustain'this "funds notices is a bad busi- to deposit savings'in our ' I 1 i'business of Life: Overdue * , , ness decision. Bad business 0 --`:�" resource _'. t . _ t iioti'ces first started comini in decisions in the business of accounts have over two decades ago, but we = Life can mean failure, and G Lies ,put�the. busi- have; yet to�curtail our - ,n;-� � there is no filing for. Opinion'' `ness of�Life in resource spending demands � `bankruptcy in this business,_ the red. Mother nor have we made any venture. i Nature has just attempts at depositing funds r The decisions regarding the sent us a notice Lmto our resource supply proposed. Glacier Mall site of insufficient funds .. account. - i provide an excellent opportu- ` Our notice came in the form By refusing to address our nity for our local government of a journal publication in the flagrant consumption of to ensure our own ecosys- "Proceedings of the National nature's bounty, we have put . "-. teen's resource account Academy of Sciences"' enti- our biggest and most impor- remains intact. Hidden costs tled "Tracking the Ecological tant business, Life,, in jeopardy associated with development Overshoot of the Human of failure. All of our resource of this magnitude should be Economy." The report, "out- accounts are seriously over- thoroughly considered. Pre - lined in the Inter Lake', June drawn. Sadly, the U.S. con- liminary analysis regarding 26 reprint of a Los Angeles tributes the most to the world's this, proposal show most like - Times article stated that resource, deficit with our lais- ly a deficit would occur, leav- "humans now consume more sez-faire approach to resource ` us once again in the red. of the Earth's naural"` ` budgeting, our over-consump- We have been in the red at resources than the planet can -lion, our rampant waste pro- this very site in the past. East replace, raising doubts ;about ' duction, and our refusal to _ Spring Creek that runs the long-range sustainability design and impTemen wi through and borders the site, of modern economies." j eve o ment ractices was almost lost to us in the This fascinating'article "While it takes an average 1970s due to overdevelopment examined a study undertaken , of 5.75 acres of land to sustain .., and improper. land use. Luck. - by international researchers. -one average.person on Earth, : -Jy, we heeded our "Funds ..;_ They estimatedthe-"ecologi- it takes nearly twice that Due" notice and paid up. We cal footprint left by :_ much to support one Euro- paid to the tune of over humankind over the past 40 pean and nearly four times" $300,000 and 20 years of work years, calculating how much that much to support one P by agencies and volunteers. land and biological produc- "American," 'one study , - - , ; Rehabilitation efforts paid off tion is devoted to certain showed. The laws of. supply and in 1998, East Spring activities and how -much is . and demand have been bro- ..;.....Creek was removed from needed to sustain them." The ken and Mother Nature is ' impaired stream status. researchers looked ,At "grow- calling to all notes! Where. - Let our valley take an ing crops for food and other will we garnish the funds to unprecedented approach. products; grazing animals for repay her?` t x Let's ensure any new develop - meat, milk and wool; logging; We must adopt a more hobs= ment in this area will bring fishing; providing space and tic approach to development 'anly much -needed interest materials for houses, high- and revamp our modern eco and not further deplete our ways, dams and industries; nomic principles in order to waning resource capital. If we and fossil fuel burning." The ensure our account status , continue to ignore Mother analysis concluded that our with the Bank of Mother Nature's "lack of insufficient demand for resources, which Nature remains active. We funds" notices, we may find has nearly doubled in 20 must curtail all unnecessary,, our next notice could read years, has exceeded Mother spending of our remaining, . "Account Closed!" Nature's ability to resupply resources and ensure by 20 percent. resource -saving guidelines. Spilis, of Kalispell, is a fifth - The most sobering thought are implemented and fol- generation valley resident. .� ;� �� _ � �� � �� � �� JJ i 15 �- �� w�,r v V ,. lr� �f �. lU�- � ' � � � � 3' F � `� . -�-) C7 rC, E I V E D ,.E It n Es (7. 3-7 6,'cl �-, , K Oq —k --s c�i U - ',q 9 B*7 cofi fnc�yr Pam, K&u&a Ckfn v-u f, 4 f) (� tease ma u am +-D AS+ +V)IS n&ea Kkhnc� noi- Q, j/, Ll McknLl uu�, « b,,+ 'VnE 0 us w it(A r�abnst v JV C 0 a �--�t� �-oc&uc--c cAncioc�E c cin& vull _LL4a- r c C--uk r) c RECEIVED !AN - 200? JL P