Loading...
3. City-County Growth PolicyFlathead e ional Development Office 723 5th Avenue East - Room 414 Kalispell, Montana 59901 Phone: (406) 758-5980 Fax: (406) 758-5781 PORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: Narda A. Wilson, Senior Planner SUBJECT Kalispell Growth Policy Issues MEETING ,DATE: July 31, 2000 Work Session BACKGROUND: At their July 10, 2000 meeting the Kalispell City Council held a public hearing and voted five in favor and four opposed to pass a Resolution of Intent to Revise the Kalispell Growth Policy Plan. Several members of the city council submitted comments to the city manager outlining issues related to the growth policy plan that may require additional work or refinement. The following list consolidates comments and issues which have been identified by the city council and the staff. Several issues fell under a related category, so those have been grouped together along with a "general" category for miscellaneous issues. It would be a valuable exercise for the council to prioritize several of the issues and potentially eliminate others in order to create a framework for revision and to develop a timeline for review. ® A memorandum of understanding between the governing bodies could be considered as a tool for intergovernmental cooperation. ® A provision in the plan that requires (new) zoning to comply with the adopted growth policy plan which currently it does not. ® That the city and county consider the adoption of extra -territorial zoning to provide greater consistency in development standards and to streamline the annexation process. ® There is no timetable for implementation of the plan or a statement for coordination with other jurisdictions. ® The growth policy must fully comply with the requirements of the Sections 76- 01-601 through 76-01-606, Growth Policy of the Montana Code and assurances made that all of the required elements are present. ® Baseline data which includes an inventory of land uses should be established in order to monitor and gauge the amount and type of growth within the planning jurisdiction. Providing Community Planning Assistance To: ® Flathead County ® City of Columbia Falls ® City of Kalispell ® City of Whitefish Kalispell City County Growth Policy Plan Memo July 26, 2000 Page 2 a That the 1998 draft be used as a beginning point for revisions. ® That the 1998 map be used. The idea that it is too complicated is sad. ® That the 1999 draft plan be used as a beginning point for revisions. ® That the 1999 map be used. It is easier to understand. ® That the 1997 information found in the Resource and Analysis Section is becoming dated and that there should be some discussion whether there is merit in waiting until some of the 2000 census data is available. ® Additional mapping of the fire districts, school districts and existing land uses could be done which are missing from the resource and analysis document. ® There should be discussion whether or not to include an urban growth boundary on the map. ® There is no extension of services policy. ® Development in areas immediately adjacent to the city, but without City services has not been addressed. ® The issue of where to provide for large scale and big box commercial has not been addressed. ® There is no policy for when annexation would (or should) occur. ® That the proposed map should be reviewed section by section and consideration given to reconciling the 1998 and 1999 map land use designations such as urban / suburban residential, commercial and the concept of "priority growth centers" and "urban expansion areas." Consideration whether the future urban expansion areas into the suburban residential areas. ® Policies for design standards within certain areas of the planning jurisdiction could be developed. i M. ® The sections dealing with open space, watersheds, wildlife habitat and other elements of the natural environment have been generally eliminated. Kalispell City County Growth Policy Plan Memo July 26, 2000 Page 3 ® That the existing neighborhood plans should be reviewed for relevancy and consistency with the adopted growth policy plan, especially those which are over five years old. Some may be outdated. ® Developing a policy regarding when productive agricultural land should be converted to a higher intensity residential or commercial uses. ® It appears that some of the housing issues are muddled and should be clarified. ® The Fairgrounds is nearly a viable issue. ® The 1999 draft eliminates nearly all references to natural resources, location of future developments and preservation of community values. ® The concept of "mixed use areas" has not been well developed and how they would function in neighborhoods. ® Parks and recreation have been generally eliminated. ® Agricultural issues are missing. ® A strategy for the development, maintenance and replacement of public infrastructure should be developed. ® There is no capital improvement program. ® The missing aspects of replacement of public infrastructure are quite striking with an entire section having been eliminated. ® There is no policy on how and when substandard roads would be upgraded when annexed from the County to the City. ® Public services and infrastructure should be developed in existing commercial areas rather than expanding additional commercial areas that do not have public services readily available. ® A more thorough treatment of how capital improvements will be addressed in the city and the county should be provided. ® Narration in the overall format of the document would make it easier to read and to understand as well has to provide a better overall understand of the community. Kalispell City County Growth Policy Plan Memo July 26, 2000 Page 4 ® That a fiscal impact statement is lacking. ® That the 1999 plan grossly overstates the property rights issues and lacks the balance a document of this type should reflect. ® The plan lacks a pedestrian and bicycle component of the transportation section which has been prepared in a draft form, but has not been reviewed or integrated into the plan. ® If the council gets into references regarding "dispersed development," we should try to get a copy of the information presented from Eastern Montana economics professor and from the Bozeman study because they appear to contradict each other. The council may want to incorporate some reference to impact fees or incorporate some fee recommendations into the document. ® The cost of new development is missing. ® An explanation of how costs associated with new development would be assessed RECOMMENDATION: The staff would recommend that the city council identify ten or so priority issues which need to be addressed. Those could be given a general priority and further developed if necessary. Based on the list of issues developed by the council and their level of priority, the staff would begin to address those issues individually and report back to the council on a monthly (or other) basis. EFFECTS: Hopefully, there will be positive effects for the planning jurisdiction as result of implementation of the plan. ALTE AT As suggested by the city council. v Narda A. Wil on Chris A. Kukulski Senior Planner City Manager Report compiled: July 26, 2000 H\... \KCCMP\UPDATE\2000\ISSUES1.DOC Citizens for a Better Flathead Ilk `�' . P.O. Box 771 a Kalispell, MT ® 59903-0771 (406) 756-8993 ® FAX (406) 756-8991 a e-mail: citizens@digisys.net July 28, 2000 Comments To: Kalispell City Council From: Citizens For A Better Flathead Subject: Work session items for July 23, 2000 Budget Review: Enclosed please find background information on the legislation that governs the use of TIF revenue and an overview of the goals of the three districts in Kalispell that are eligible to collect these funds. We want to urge this council to read these plans and their goals to ensure that any proposed use of these funds in your proposed budget is, as required by law, specified within the goals of these existing plans. For example, nowhere is the downtown district plan is there any goal that specifies using funding to expand city hall. "Creative" uses proposed to pool TIF funds with MDOT funds that blur the actual use of TIF funds outside of a TIF district, is also a highly questionable as a practice. This has been discussed as a way to help pay the costs of extending sewer and water during the construction of Hwy 93. We urge this council to review the appropriateness of final allocation of TIF money in this budget. City -County Growth Policy: As we have only received the council packet information today, we will not be able to have written comments for you until Monday. We hope that you will provide time in the work session to present comments at the start of the discussion. Additionally we note that no public process to compliment this revision process has been identified in this memo for board consideration at this time. We hope that you will give room to some consideration of this at this initial priority review stage. Every Voice Is t, et CMF P. 0. 80X 771 KALISPELL, MT _""J6091 Tax Increment Funds --what you always wanted to know What is T.I.F. "the collections realized from extending the tax levies, ex- pressed in mills, ofall taxing bodies in which the urban renewal area or an industrial district or a part thereof is located against the incremental taxable value. " --7-15-4283 M. C.A. Where are T.I.F. 's? Tax Increment Financing (T.I.F.) is a technique that municipalities may use to carry out redevelopment activities on a local basis. Tax increment financing allows a community to capture the increase in various state and local taxes that result from a redevelopment project to pay for the costs involved with the project. Tax revenue obtained from the redevelopment is called the "tax increment." This is why the technique is called tax increment financing. T.I.F. is a financial tool for cities. Its intent is to remove blight and restore investor confidence. T.I.F. provides a mechanism whereby cities can finance urban renewal projects without having to rely on outside grants and without levying new taxes. Under tax increment financing, a city must calculate the equalized assessed valuation of real estate at the time the "blighted", "conservation" or "industrial park" area is designated as a T.I.F. area. This base amount of taxes that had previously been levied on the real estate, continues to go to the taxing bodies serving the T.I.F. area such as the county, school district, city, etc. This system does not lower the tax revenues collected by the various taxing districts; nor does it impose special assessments on the proj ect area. However, the growth in property tax revenues generated in the T.I.F. redevelopment area (the tax increment) above the base amount goes to a special "tax allocation fund." These funds are then used by the municipality to pay for the investments made in the T.I.F. area. Tax Increment Financing is based on the assumption that money spent on urban renewal will result in not only aesthetic improvements to the community, but also lead to an increase in the tax base over and above that which would occur without these improvements. Typical life spans of a T.I.F. is 15 years, after which the new taxable valuations are returned back to their respective taxing districts. T.I.F. funds are not a slush fund to finance development projects. Nor is it a means to extend services to un-serviced areas. The legislative intent was never to encourage strip commercial development or to justify or support annexation. In order to insure the funds are used as intended, the municipality must prepare an annual urban renewal budget and plan for expenditures, which can constitute the annual plan. The Montana Urban Renewal Law is very specific on how increment segregated dollars can be spent, and the municipality must follow their original plan. There is a list of activities and specific reference to activities identified in the municipality's Urban Renewal Plan adopted and or amended only by ordinance after publication of a required legal notice, written notification to all owners of record within the urbanrenewal area, and after holding a public hearing. Tax Increment Financing may only be used in conjunction with the implementation of an urban renewal plan and project. The City Council must declare that urban renewal is necessary and in the public interest and that blight exists in an area. The principle of T.I.F. is that the redevelopment project is financed through the use of new tax dollars generated as a result of increased private investment stimulated by a redevelopment project. It assumes that the existence of blight has deleterious effect on private investment in an area. It must also be assumed that if a city adopts a redevelopment plan which will instill developer/investor confidence, the existing tax base will be maintained at least at present levels and improved measurably over the term of the proj ect. The tax increment financed urban renewal project then is intended to assure that all levying agencies (school, county, state) may continue to count on a stable original base value ofprivate property on which to levy taxes. Kalispell currently has three increment districts; the Downtown District, West Side District, and the Airport District. All of these increment districts have a plan in place for urban renewal. These plans are available from Kalispell City Hall. Cumulative proposed revenue proj ections for the increment funds, including cash carryover, exceed $6.88 million for FY 99/00. A breakdown ofthe revenue and expenditure is available in the city budget. Tax Increment Funds continued -- In the early 1990s the city ofKalispell and the county discussed including the current fairgrounds in the West Side District. A mixed -use commercial/residential PUD adaptive redevelopment of the 53-plus acre fair- ground site was part of the neighborhood plan and discussed in the original draft. The city was ready to include the site in the district until the county refused to consider its inclusion within the boundaries of the plan. Since it was pulled out and excluded from the West Side Plan, the City ofKalispell can not now use T.I.F. to acquire or encourage its development unless the West Side Plan is amended as required by law. As stated in the plan, modifications or amendments involving the addition or deletion of land from the West Side Urban Renewal Plan Area, MUST be made by ordinance, detailing the modifications or amendment, and ONLY after a public hearing. Law requires that notice of the public hearing on the proposed modification or amend- ment must appear once a week for two consecutive weeks prior to the hearing and by mailing notice of said modification or amendment to all persons whose names appear on the county treasurer's tax roll as the own- ers, reputed owners, or purchasers under contracts for deed of the property, at the addresses shown on the tax roll. The primary goals in creating the West Side Urban Renewal T.I.F. District were to implement the North Meridian Neighborhood Plan, aid in the redevelopment of the Gateway West Mall and former Crop Hail Building, and to use T.I.F. money to assist in the reconstruction ofMeridian Road and associated projects such as providing storm drains in the area. The West Side Urban Renewal Plan did not, however, contemplate spending any public funds for private improvements at the intersection of Idaho and Meridian. While the taxable valuation ofthe Downtown and Airport Districts favor commercial over residential, the West Side District is split pretty evenly. (This does not, however, look at the number of residence versus commercial buildings in the districts.) The North Meridian Neighborhood Plan The plan was adopted as an amendment to the Kalispell City County Master Plan in 1994. The plan was adopted to serve as a guide for the most appropriate action to take when a request for a change in zoning or major development is proposed for the area. The land immediately adjacent to Meridian Road has a haphaz- ardly organized regarding its zoning and land -use patterns. This situation makes it difficult for property owners to predict what will happen regarding land use in their neighborhood. In addition to land use and zoning, the neighborhood plan looks at the needs ofthe neighborhood regarding infrastructure, such as roads, pedestrian access, water, sewer, and storm drainage, and sets general policies toward supplying those services. The neighborhood plan identifies four major issues of concern for this area and identifies goal for each issue. • Issue 1: The present urbanized land -use pattern incorporates a haphazard and incompatible mix of uses. Goal 1: To set a pattern of land use that incorporates sensitivity to neighboring uses • Issue 2: The interaction of pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles can create dangerous situations. Goal 2: Create a circulation pattern that maintains a separation of incompatible systems. • Issue 3: As the city grows, additional traffic will strain the existing system making it more dangerous. Goal 3: Create a street system that can accommodate increases in traffic safely. • Issue 4: City services are not yet available to part of the North Meridian area. Goal 4: Provide a full range of services to the area. Can the plan change? The West Side Plan Tax Increment Funds continued -- More on the West Side Plan Downtown Meridian Road Reconstruction: The adopted Kalispell Transportation Plan identified the reconstruction ofNorth Meridian from US Hwy 2 West north to US Hwy 93 North as the top priority for urban system funding. The project includes the widening of the road to accommodate additional travel lanes, turn lanes, curb, gutter and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Redevelopment of the Gateway West Mall and former Crop Hail Building: Developers' goal is to reverse the trend toward deteriorating physical facilities and falling property values associated with the property by creating new tenancies in the existing facilities as they move forward with the formation of an acceptable redevelopment plan. As the redevelopment plan is established, the developer is prepared to make the necessary investment to eliminate blight and economic distress currently associated with the property. The post redevelopment ofthe Gateway West Mall could generate an annual tax increment of $285,827. This incremental tax value could support the issuance of an urban renewal bond in excess of $2,000,000. Infrastructure Improvements: The West Side of Kalispell has grown piecemeal over the decades, with city services of sewer and water extended incrementally when requested by developers. Road construction has been limited and added on to narrow county roads as expediency dictated. Major widening and reconstruction of existing roads along with new arterials are critical to reduce the increasing traffic congestion associated with the retail and residential development occurring on the West Side. Storm drainage and flood plain management are two other critical areas that need analysis to develop and implement solutions. Properties South of US Hwy 2 West The area lying to the south ofUS Hwy 2, east ofMeridian Road, has been included in the West Side Urban Renewal Tax Increment District to encourage and facilitate the following projects: 1. To assist in the redevelopment ofprivate property to provide opportunities for light industrial uses in an appropriate neighborhood of similar uses. 2. The construction of additional access roads to better serve underutilized industrial land. 3. Completion of storm drain and flood plain mitigation measures implemented on the north end ofthe district. 4. Extension of water mains to provide adequate pressure for fire hydrant flows. The Downtown District It is hard to imagine that the intent of the Downtown Plan was for the City to fund a share ofthe Hwy 93 infrastructure project to the border of Airport District to the tune of $.8 million. Then the Airport Plan to continue to fund a share ofthe city's Hwy 93 infrastructure project to the sum of $1 million within the Airport District, all within the spirit ofurban renewal and the removal of blight. At the same time the City Council did agree to increase sidewalk expenditures from $75,000 to $150,000 for the Downtown District. The Kalispell Redevelopment Plan Update, 1987, says "In some respects, the streetscape of Downtown Kalispell can be compared to an uncompleted building; there is no place to sit down, to get a drink of water, to throw the trash, or to go to the restroom. In other words, the downtown streetscape has not been furnished with pedestrian conveniences, other than cosmetic solutions (i.e. street trees), the 1979 goal on enhancing the pedestrian environment has been largely forgotten or overlooked. It is the intent of this study [Kalispell Redevelopment Plan Update 1987] to visualize and reintroduce some of the means by which Downtown Kalispell can revitalize its streetscape. Malls are popular because they provide a pedestrian biased protected environment and well distributed parking to the user. Some of the same principals can be applied to a place like Downtown Kalispell without losing the charm and or historic character ofthe existing buildings. We need to create some magnetism downtown .... something that makes it pleasurable to be there. Providing an envi- ronment in which both the driver and the pedestrian have a clear mental map of how to park and circulate Tax Increment Funds continued -- efficiently is a very worthy goal. Providing pedestrian conveniences and setting precedence for aesthetic standards is a component of that goal." This somehow seems to sound like a Walkable Community, not just a means to rebuild roads and funnel traffic. Wouldn't it be nice if walking and biking were easy in Kalispell? It would appear that a plan which boasts as one of its objectives `to give priority to pedestrian movement in core area development through overhead walkways, development of a second story commercial theme, open space and plazas and develop- ment of alleyways as alternative pedestrian routes', may be forgetting the basis for such redevelopment. The municipality must prepare an annual urban renewal budget and plan for expenditures, which can constitute the annual plan. Again, it cannot amend the plan or extend the boundaries or expend T.I.F. without legal notice, written notification to all affected property owners and levying agencies, and new public hearings. The plan update goes on to say that "One of the great disadvantages shared by almost all Western United States Cities in terms of street and property layout is the `grid' system... it is rigid and basically uninteresting unless topography makes it otherwise (San Francisco or Butte). Downtown Kalispell is still very much a slave to the grid. The strict regimen of rectangular patterns limits the ingenuity with which we can approach design solutions. Kalispell has also fell victim to the convenience ofthe automobile. The result ofhaving three parallel major traffic collectors (I It Ave East, Main Street, and 151 Ave West) within 300 feet of each other is that pedestrians find themselves on a traffic median by the name of `Uptown Kalispell'. A small city such as Kalispell should not be subjected to major city traffic standards in every instance." The Airport District The Airport Plan found that the Kalispell City Airport constituted blight in that it was a threat to public safety and created a public liability. The proximity of the ballfields further endangered the life, safety and health of occupants and those who utilized the ballfields. The plan adopted was quite specific in that it was to provide safety improvements to the airport and relocate these fields to an appropriate complex. Airport improvements contemplated are spelled out in the plan and the cost of relocating the ballfields was identified and budgeted as a specific project. The Airport Plan's short term priorities (1-5 years with total expenditures of $619,996) are: Fence the perimeter of the designated boundaries of the airport Purchase or trade for land to permit the extension of Runway 31 Install a PAPI navigation system on Runway 13 Install strobe lights on the FM tower south of the city Improve the wiring system of the runway lights. Tax IncrementBondsambondsbackedbytheTax IncrementDistrictsoldtofinance urbanrenewalprojects. Because Tax IncrementBonds are riskierinvestments forthebond holder, they usually command ahighermterest rate. Theyarenot ageneralobligationtothe city, bid tothe Tax IncrernentDisinct They are dependent onpropestytaxesandpropertytax laws. Also, because other taxing bo dies may not "buy into" the philosophy of "short term sacrifice for long term gain," they may mountalegalchallmge. hiremtfundsdenvedfromresidentialareasofthedistnctareofpartcularcorrcern. Themoney isdiverted frompropertytaxrevenues thatotherwisewould go to operating local schools. Thetax mcrernentfinanceurban renewalprojectisintendedtoassuri that all levyingagencies(school,county, state)mayoo uetocountonastableonginal base value ofpnvate property onwhich to levy taxes. But because the taxable valuation ofthesedistnctrenimn stable for levying purposes, other districts maybeforced to increase mill levies to oompensate for shortcomings. Total FWimd County FfrghSchool enrolhnent(Bigfork, ColumbiaFalls KdispelLand Whitefish)rose33%firm 1989to 1998. Backm 1988the WhitefishCityCouncilapprovedanagwnerrtwithSchoolDistrict44whereby100%ofrmdenti mc=enttaxeswould berefirndedto the schools annuallywhichwouldhave otherwise gone to local schools had Tax IncrementFinancingnot existed Thisinter- local agreementismuqueamongMontamTaxhia=entFmmrmgcities. NoothercityinMontanahas afomralagternenttoreturn aportionofitsT.LF.fundstolocal schools. Sevemlcommmutieshavefromyeartoyearrehmred The Airport How do they work? Page l4 The Citizens' News Nouember:1999 Tax Increment Funds continued -- Whitefish Roundup someoftheirTIF. fimdstoothertaxingbodies=kidingsdmis. Billingshelpedf wxitherdabilitationofajuniorhighschool building into an admuvs=onbwlding. Missoulap> uchasedanoldschoolbuilding fivmthedistnctand convertedit into a home fortheMissoulaChildren'sTheater, helpedalocalhighschoolrelocateits athleticpractice field, andhelpedHellgate High Schoolreplacehistonc features ofits 86-year-oldbwlding. Buttesolda $1.89 million bond issue to help expand and renovate Butte Public High School and acquire an old building for conversion into a public library. Whitefish's Urban Renewal Plan identifies the need to develop a master plan ofproj ects to ensure that the City of Whitefish properly addresses the infrastructure needs. It recognizes that the needs of the community are enormous due in large part to the many years of inactivity by the council in addressing these needs. Projects are (dated March 1987): • A good portion of the area that is located north of Hwy 93 W, west ofBaker Ave and South of the railroad tracks, contains many housing units that are substandard and deteriorating. The development of additional new units to replace additional substandard and deteriorating houses in this area may be accelerated by lever- aging private investment through the use ofmunicipal powers. • Millions of dollars ofwater and sewer needs have been identified in newly developed capital improvement plans. The quality of the city's water is substandard during spring runoffwhich will necessitate the construction of a water treatment plant. • The provision of recreational facilities is a critical component of any urban renewal plan. This would include improvement to City Beach as well as pedestrian walkways to link Riverside Park to Mountain Trails Park to City Beach Park. • The creation of an industrial park on city owned property could lead to the attraction ofnew businesses to Whitefish and allow Whitefish to be less dependent upon tourism. • The redevelopment and rehabilitation of the downtown business area is an important aspect of the overall urban renewal plan. Parking problems have and will exist in the downtown area. The aging downtown buildings require that some types of economic revitalization plan be implemented. A pedestrian mall proposal would eliminate all vehicular traffic on Center Ave from Railway to Fourth Street. The construction of a new city hall facility. The development of a performing arts center and historical museum. Street reconstruction, development of street sections, sidewalks, and storm sewer needs. Increment funds are tax dollars diverted from the traditional venues, (city, county, and school districts' general funds) to be reallocated for urban renewal projects. The intent is that by reinvesting these funds, into urban renewal and elimination of blighted areas, back into the specific district from which they were derived, the taxable valuation ofproperties will increase. This increase will generate new tax dollars which will be reinvested. The hope is that revitalizing the increment district, new business will also invest and create jobs. The true test of any redevelopment and or economic development plan is whether or not the plan stimulates private investment, which results in jobs, and improved tax base and amore humane environment. Planners, community leaders, and elected officials must realize that profit, reasonably secure investment, and the oppor- tunity for investment growth motivate the investor developers. Redevelopment and economic development plans must not just treat the symptoms ofblight, inadequate public improvements and stagnate tax base, but attack the cause, which is lack of profit incentive. For further review ofUrban Renewal Laws, check out MCA 7-15-42** and 7-15-43** at the legislative web site: http://leg.state.mt.us/services/legaVlaws.htm. —CFBF Sources: Flathead County, City of Kalispell, City of Columbia Falls. City of Whitefish, MCA from Montana State, City of Whitefish's Urban Renewal Plan, Airport r 11- P,,,,...-.i M", 1919 and update 19Rv, Statistical Reonn of Sehnolc. Flathead ('omiw Statitticol Legislative information on Urban Renewal Laws can be found in section 7-15-42 through 7-15-43 of MCA. This is a partial copy of Urban Renewal Laws. A full copy of the Urban Renewal Laws can be found either at the city attorney's office of by visiting the web at htip:Hleg.state.mt.us/services/legal/laws.htm ***Section 7-15-4298 deals with infrastructure -deficient areas which exist in the municipalities. ***The Downtown Urban Renewal Plan adopted in 1979 was updated in 1987. Copies of both are available from city staff. Refer also to Ordinance 933 and 1140 ***The WestSide Urban Renewal Plan was adopted in 1997. Copies are available from the city staff. Refer also to Ordinance 1259 and Resolution 4309 *** The Airport Urban Renewal Plan AKA The Kalispell City Airport/Athletic Complex Redevelopment Plan Analysis. Copies available from city staff. Refer also to Ordinance 1242 ***For informationon Daley Field refer to LotDaley Field Subdivision,Redevelopment a Available. 'Development agreements are available for Haven Field and Daley Field. Copies are available form city staff. - - • tr r r. _ • r . ri• •. - -•; . • ,< declared: (1) that blighted areas which constitute a serious and growing menace, injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and welfare of the residents of the state, exist in municipalities of the state; (2) that the existence of such areas: (a) contributes substantially and increasingly to the spread of disease and crime and depreciation of property values; (b) constitutes an economic and social liability; (c) substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of municipalities; (d) retards the provision of housing accommodations; (e) aggravates traffic problems; and (f) substantially impairs or arrests the elimination of traffic hazards and the improvement of traffic facilities; and (3) that the prevention and elimination of such areas is a matter of state policy and state concern in order that the state and its municipalities shall not continue to be endangered by areas which are focal centers of disease, promote juvenile delinquency, are conducive to fires, are difficult to police and to provide police protection for, and, while contributing little to the tax income of the state and its municipalities, consume an excessive proportion of its revenues because of the extra services required for police, fire, accident, hospitalization, and other forms of public protection, services, and facilities. urbantime by the local governing body. If modified after the lease or sale by the municipality of real property in the project modification be • to such rights. or • or • ... or his successor or • be entitled • assert. (2) An urban renewal plan may be modified by ordinance. (3) All urban renewal plans approved or modified by resolution prior to May 8, 1979, are hereby validated. (4) A plan may be modified by: (a) the procedure set forth in 7-15-4212 through 7-15-4219 with respect to adoption of an urban renewal plan; (b) the procedure set forth in the plan. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(e); amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 667, L. 1979 CFSF f'. 0. B(I Y 771 L1spL _ ;;?,f 7-15-4212. Preparation of urban renewal plan. The municipality may itself prepare or cause to be prepared an urban renewal plan, or any person or agency, public or private, may submit such a plan to the municipality. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(part). 7-15-4213. Review of urban renewal plan by planning commission. (1) Prior to its approval of an urban renewal project, the local governing body shall submit the urban renewal project plan to the planning commission of the municipality for review and recommendations as to its conformity with the growth policy or parts of the growth policy for the development of the municipality as a whole if a growth policy has been adopted pursuant to Title 76, chapter 1. (2) The planning commission shall submit its written recommendations with respect to the proposed urban renewal plan to the local governing body within 60 days after receipt of the plan. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11- 3906(part); amd. Secs. 3, 34, Ch. 582, L. 1999. 7-15-4214. Hearing on urban renewal plan required. (1) The local governing body shall hold a public hearing on an urban renewal plan after public notice thereof. (2) Upon receipt of the recommendations of the planning commission, or if no recommendations are received within said 60 days, then without such recommendations, the local governing body may proceed with the hearing on the proposed urban renewal project plan. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(part). 7-15-4215. Notice of hearing on urban renewal plan. (1) The notice required by 7-15-4214(1) shall be given by publication once each week for 2 consecutive weeks, not less than 10 or more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing, in a newspaper having a general circulation in the urban renewal area of the municipality and by mailing a notice of such hearing, not less than 10 days prior to the date of the hearing, to the persons whose names appear on the county treasurer's tax roll as the owners, reputed owners, or purchasers under contracts for deed of the property, at the address shown on the tax roll. (2) The notice shall describe the time, date, place, and purpose of the hearing, shall generally identify the urban renewal area affected, and shall outline the general scope of the urban renewal plan under consideration. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(part); amd. Sec. 8, Ch. 526, L. 1983. 7-15-4216. Requirements for approval of urban renewal plans and projects. (1) The local governing body shall not approve an urban renewal plan until a comprehensive plan or parts of such plan for an area which would include an urban renewal area for the municipality have been prepared. (2) A municipality shall not approve an urban renewal project for an urban renewal area unless the local governing body has by resolution determined such area to be a blighted area and designated such area as appropriate for an urban renewal project. (3) An urban renewal plan adopted after July 1, 1979, must be approved by ordinance. (4) All urban renewal plans approved by resolution prior to May 8, 1979, are hereby validated. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(part); amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 667, L. 1979. 7-15-4217. Criteria for approval of urban renewal project. Following the hearing required by 7-15-4214, the local governing body may, by ordinance, approve an urban renewal project if it finds that: (1) a workable and feasible plan exists for making available adequate housing for the persons who may be displaced by the project; (2) the urban renewal plan conforms to the comprehensive plan or parts thereof for the municipality as a whole; (3) the urban renewal plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the municipality as a whole, for the rehabilitation or redevelopment of the urban renewal area by private enterprise; and (4) a sound and adequate financial program exists for the financing of said project. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(part); amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 667, L. 1979. History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 195, L. 1959; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 38, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 210, L. 1969; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 158, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3906(part); amd. Sec. 46, Ch. 575, L. 1981. 7-15-4219. Effect of approval of urban renewal project. Upon the approval of an urban renewal project by a municipality, the provisions of the urban renewal plan with respect to the future use and building requirements applicable to the property covered by said plan shall be controlling with respect thereto. a :, • R Y •..., • •. .. • • 3 R . R (a) sell, lease, or otherwise transfer real property in an urban renewal area or any interest therein acquired by it for an urban renewal project for residential, recreational, commercial, industrial, or other uses or for public use and enter into contracts with respect thereto; or (b) retain such property or interest only for parks and recreation, education, public transportation, public safety, health, highways, streets and alleys, administrative buildings, or civic centers, in accordance with the urban renewal project plan and subject to such covenants, conditions, and restrictions, including covenants running with the land, as it may deem to be necessary or desirable to assist in preventing the development or spread of blighted areas or otherwise to carry out the purposes of this part. (2) Such sale, lease, other transfer, or retention and any agreement relating thereto may be made only after the approval of the urban renewal plan by the local governing body. (3) Such real property or interest shall be sold, leased, otherwise transferred, or retained at not less than its fair value for uses in accordance with the urban renewal plan. In determining the fair value of real property for uses in accordance with the urban renewal plan, a municipality shall take into account and give consideration to the uses provided in such plan; the restrictions upon and the covenants, conditions, and obligations assumed by the purchaser or lessee or by the municipality retaining the property; and the objectives of such plan for the prevention of the recurrence of blighted areas. (4) Real property acquired by a municipality which, in accordance with the provisions of the urban renewal plan, is to be transferred shall be transferred as rapidly as feasible, in the public interest, consistent with the carrying out of the provisions of the urban renewal plan. (1) infrastructure -deficient areas exist in the municipalities of the state and constitute a serious impediment to the development of infrastructure -intensive, secondary, value -adding economic development in Montana; (2) municipalities lack sufficient capital to rectify the infrastructure shortage in infrastructure -deficient areas, thus impeding the ability of municipalities to achieve economic growth through the development of secondary, value -adding industries; (3) the creation of industrial infrastructure is a matter of state policy and state concern because the state and its municipalities will continue to suffer economic dislocation due to the lack of secondary, value -adding industries; and (4) the state's tax increment financing laws should be used to encourage the creation of areas in which needed industrial infrastructure for secondary, value -adding industries could be developed. History: En. Sec. 2, Ch. 712, L. 1989. 7-15-4299. Industrial districts. (1) A local governing body, by ordinance • following a public hearing, may industrialdistrict: (a) consists of a continuous area with an accurately described boundary; (b) is zoned for light or heavy industrial use in accordance with the area master planning document; (c) does not include any property included within an existing urban renewal area district created pursuant to this part; (d) is found to be deficient in infrastructure improvements for industrial development; and (e) has as its purpose the development of infrastructure to encourage the growth and retention of secondary, value -adding industries. (2) An industrial district may use tax increment financing pursuant to the provisions of 7-15-4282 through 7-15-4293. History: En. Sec. 3, Ch. 712, L. 1989. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(part); amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 712, L. 1989. 7-15-4283. Definitions related to tax increment financing. For purposes of 7-15-4282 through 7-15-4292 and 7-15- 4297 through 7-15-4299, the following definitions apply unless otherwise provided or indicated by the context: (1) "Actual taxable value" means the taxable value of taxable property at any time, as calculated from the assessment roll last equalized. (2) "Aerospace transportation and technology district" means a tax increment financing aerospace transportation technology district created pursuant to 7-15-4296. (3) "Aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure development project" means a project undertaken within or for an aerospace transportation and technology district that consists of any or all of the activities authorized by 7-15-4288. (4) "Base taxable value" means the actual taxable value of all taxable property within an urban renewal area, industrial district, or aerospace transportation and technology district prior to the effective date of a tax increment financing provision. This value may be adjusted as provided in 7-15-4287 or 7-15-4293. (5) "Incremental taxable value" means the amount, if any, by which the actual taxable value at any time exceeds the base taxable value of all property within an urban renewal area, industrial district, or aerospace transportation and technology district subject to taxation. (6) "Industrial district" means a tax increment financing industrial district created pursuant to 7-15-4299. (7) "Industrial infrastructure development project" means a project undertaken within or for an industrial district that consists of any or all of the activities authorized by 7-15-4288. (8) "Municipality", for the purpose of an industrial district created pursuant to 7-15-4297 through 7-15-4299 and operating pursuant to 7-15-4282 through 7-15-4293 and part 43 of this chapter, means any incorporated city or town, county, or city- .;ounty consolidated local government. (9) "Tax increment" means the collections realized from extending the tax levies, expressed in mills, of all taxing bodies in which the urban renewal area, industrial district, aerospace transportation and technology district, or a part of an area or district is located against the incremental taxable value. (10) "Tax increment provision" means a provision for the segregation and application of tax increments as authorized by 7-15-4282 through 7-15-4292. (11) "Taxes" means all taxes levied by a taxing body against property on an ad valorem basis. (12) "Taxing body" means any city, town, county, school district, or other political subdivision or governmental unit of the state, including the state, which levies taxes against property within the urban renewal area, industrial district, or an aerospace transportation and technology district. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(2); amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 667, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 712, L. 1989; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 269, L. 1999. 7-15-4284. Filing of tax increment provisions of urban renewal plan or industrial district ordinance. (1) The clerk of the municipality shall file a certified copy of each urban renewal plan or industrial district ordinance or an amendment thereto containing a tax increment provision with the state, county, or city officers responsible for assessing and determining the taxable value of taxable property within the urban renewal area or industrial district ordinance or any part thereof. (2) A certified copy of the plan, industrial district ordinance, or amendment must also be filed with the clerk or other appropriate officer of each of the affected taxing bodies. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(part); amd. Sec. 6, Ch. 712, L. 1989. incremental taxable values of such property. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(part); amd. Sec. 6, Ch. 667, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 7, Ch. 712, L. 1989. 7-15-4286. Procedure to determine and disburse tax increment. (1) Mill rates of taxing bodies for taxes levied after the effective date of the tax increment provision must be calculated on the basis of the sum of the taxable value, as shown by the last equalized assessment roll, of all taxable property located outside the urban renewal area or industrial district and the base taxable value of all taxable property located within the urban renewal area or industrial district. The mill rate determined must be levied against the sum of the actual taxable value of all taxable property located within as well as outside the urban renewal area or industrial district. (2) (a) The tax increment, if any, received in each year from the levy of the combined mill rates of all the affected taxing bodies against the incremental taxable value within the urban renewal area or industrial district, except for the university system mills levied and assessed against property, must be paid into a special fund held by the treasurer of the municipality and used as provided in 7-15-4282 through 7-15-4292. (b) The balance of the taxes collected in each year must be paid to each of the taxing bodies as otherwise provided by law. 7- 5-4287'Provhshmnfmrusemf portion of tax increment. (1) At the time of adoption of a tax increment provision mradany time subsequent thereto, the governing body mfthe municipality may provide that a portion of the tax increment from the incremental taxable value shall bmreleased from segregation bomnadjustment mfthe base taxable value, provided that: (a) all principal and interest then due on bonds for which the tax increment has been pledged has been fully paid; and (b) the tax increment resulting from the smaller incremental value is determined by the governing body to be sufficient to pay all principal and interest due later onthe bonds. (2) The adjusted base value determined under subsection (1) shall be reported by the clerk to the officers and taxing bodies tmwhich the increment provision in reported. (3) Thereafter, the adjusted base value is used in determining the mill rates of affected taxing bodies unless the tax increment resulting from the adjustment is determined to be insufficient for this purpose. In this case, the governing body must reduce the base value to the amount originally determined or to a higher amount necessary to provide tax increments sufficient topay all principal and interest due onthe bonds. History: En. 1Y-2921bySec. 1,Ch. 28T L1S74;emd.Sec. tCh. 452 L1975; anmd.Sec. 2.Ch. 532,L1077;mnnd Sec. 31.Ch. 7- 5-4288'Coststhmtmmay be paid bytax increment financing. The tax increments may be used by the municipality tmpay the following costs oforincurred |nconnection with anurban renewal project, industrial infrastructure development project, or aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure development project: (1) land acquisition; (2) demolition and removal of structures; 8Arelocation ofoccupants; (4)the acquisition,uonotnuction.ondimnprovennentofinfraetn/ctuna.induetho|infromtnuoture.o/oerompacetnaneportaUon and technology infrastructure that includes streets, roodo.ourba.gubeos.eidevvo|ka.pedeothennnaUu.a|leva.parbinglots and offstreet parking facilities, sewers, sewer lines, sewage treatment facilities, storm sewers, waterlines, waterways, water treatment facilities, natural gas |inao. electrical lines, telecommunications lines, rail |ineu, rail spuro, bridgen, spaceports for reusable launch vehicles with associated runways and launch, recovery, fuel manufacturing, and cargo holding facilities, publicly owned buildings, and any public improvements authorized by parts 41 through 45 of chapter 12, parts 42 and 43 of chapter 13, and part 47 of chapter 14 and items of personal property to be used in connection with improvements for which the foregoing costs may beincurred; (5) costs incurred in connection with the redevelopment activities allowed under 7-15-4233" (G)acquisition ofinfrastructure-deficient areas orportions ofareas; (7) administrative costs associated with the management of the industrial district or the aerospace transportation and technology district; (8) assemblage of land for development or redevelopment by private enterprise or public agencies, including sale, initial leasing, orretention bythe municipality itself otits fair value; (9) the compilation and analysis of pertinent information required to adequately determine the infrastructure needs of secondary, value -adding industries in the industrial district or the needs of an aerospace transportation and technology infrastructure development project in the aerospace transportation and technology district; (1U)the connection nfthe industrial district orthe aerospace transportation and technology district toexisting infrastructure outside the industrial district or the aerospace transportation and technology district; (11) the provision of direct assistance, through industrial infrastructure development projects or aerospace transportation technology infrastructure development projects, to secondary, value -adding industries to assist in meeting their infrastructure and land needs within the industrial district or the aerospace transportation and technology district; and (12) the acquisition, construction, or improvement of facilities or equipment for reducing, preventing, abating, or 7-15-4289. Use of tax increments for bond payments. The tax increment may be pledged to the payment of the principal of premiums, if any, and interest on bonds which the municipality may issue for the purpose of providing • t • pay such costs. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(part); amd. Sec. 9, Ch. 667, L. 1979. 7-15-4290. Use of property taxes and other revenues for payment of bonds. (1) The tax increment derived from an urban renewal area may be pledged for the payment of revenue bonds issued for urban renewal projects or of general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, or special assessment bonds issued to pay urban renewal costs described . a . 7-15-4289. The tax increment derived from an industrial district may be pledged for covenantthe payment of revenue bonds issued for industrial infrastructure development projects or of general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, or special assessment bonds issued to pay industrial district costs described in 7-15- 4288 and 7-15-4289. Any municipality issuing such bonds may, by resolution of its governing body, enter into a r: of bondholders,detailing the calculationand adjustment of r taxablethe on based and,after apublic hearing, pledging or • • , • i otherof municipality, except property taxes prohibited by subsection (2), to the payment of such bonds if collections of the tax increment are insufficient. (2) No property taxes, except the tax increment derived from property within the urban renewal area or industrial district and tax collections used to pay for services provided to the municipality by an urban renewal project or an industrial infrastructure development project, may be applied to the payment of bonds issued pursuant to 7-15-4301 for which a tax increment has been pledged. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(part); amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 667, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 615, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 712, L. 1989. WWWA fM - • -• ! r,•• - f • •• - r •w :r ! W-I IIW Ills MAN principal of premiums, any, andinterest on bonds - - ) to in is •:. History: En. 11-3921 by Sec. 1, Ch. 287, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 1975; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 532, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 31, Ch. 566, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3921(part). the later of: (a) the 15th year following its adoption or, if the tax increment provision was adopted prior to January 1, 1980, upon the 17th year following adoption; or (b) the payment or provision for payment in full or discharge of all bonds for which the tax increment has been pledged and the interest on the bonds. (2) Any amounts remaining in the special fund or any reserve fund after termination of the tax increment provision must be distributed among the various taxing bodies in proportion to their property tax revenue from the district. (3) After termination of the tax increment provision, all taxes must be levied upon the actual taxable value of the taxable property in the urban renewal area or the industrial district and must be paid into the funds of the respective taxing bodies. (4) Bonds secured in whole or in part by a tax increment provision may not be issued after the 15thanniversary oftax increment provisions adopted after January 1, 1980, and the 17th anniversary of*tax increment provisions adopted prior to January 1, 1980. However, if bonds secured by a tax increment provision are outstanding on the applicable anniversary, additional bonds secured by the tax increment provision may be issued if the final maturity date of the bonds is not later than the final maturity date of any bonds then outstanding and secured by the tax increment provision. History: En 11-3921 by Sec. i,Ch. 287 L. 1974;arrid. Sec. t Ch. 452, L. 1875;amnd.Sec. 2'Ch. 522 L. 1977| amnd Sec. 31.Ch. 566L18T7;R.C.M0.1947 11'3821(7); amd.Sec. 1.Ch. 251,L1985;mnnd.Sec. 1tCh. 7i2'L1089|amd Sec. 3,Ch. 441.L FA_ by Mike Swaim It's time for some straight talk about growth. To put it bluntly: Are we growing better, or just bigger? The growth industry argues that if we impede growth in any fashion, housing costs will skyrocket and locals will lose out on needed jobs. Nocertifiably sane mayor wants to be responsible for that, so I might just as well put the noose around my neck and jump off the horse right now. But is the growth industry correct? Do we really have to accept more congestion, pollution, and tax subsidies while losing open space, natural resources, and funding for youth recreational programs? I don't think so. Growth is expensive and can throw communities, like my city of Salem, Oregon, into significant distress. We have huge infrastructure deficits (overcrowded schools, congested and potholed roads, an overflowing sewage plant, and inadequate primary water mains);'huge facility maintenance deficits (city -owned historic properties in disrepair, chunks of concrete falling off of City Hall and our parking structures); a noticeable reduction in public services (fewer police officers and fire fighters per capita, longer process times for city services, reduction in library hours, and in social and recreational services); increased public bonded debt to do major infrastructure construction (such as new taxes for new roads, schools, and higher rates for waste water treatment plant expansion). Growth does create jobs, but oftentimes more people come to a community seeking those jobs than actually land them. That means unemployment increases following the employment expansion. And, if the kind of jobs created are low wage, you end up with greater competition for low-cost housing stock, which drives up prices and hurts the very population for which "low- cost" housing was built. Why do we have these problems? Because we keep growing larger and larger, while falling further and further behind in our ability to pay for the care of the larger community. New residents are seldom, if ever, required to cover even half of the costs generated by the growth. So existing taxpayers in the community are forced to pick up the rest of the tab, and they rightfully resent it. In Salem, voters recently defeated two levies that would have assured more library hours, improved streets, and provided monies for underfunded fire protection. While nearly everyone agreed these were serious needs, voters were unwilling to dig deeper into their tax pockets. The backlash is being felt throughout Oregon, where voters have passed several dozen local ballot initiatives mandating voter consideration of all proposed annexations. Insanity is sometimes defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. If we hope to avoid the insanity of places like Los Angeles, then we've got to quit doing things the way Los Angeles did. Many planners and politicians are trumpeting the virtues of well -planned, "smart" growth. Under such policies, farm land, forest land, and open spaces disappear slower and, perhaps, in a more methodical fashion; but they disappear nonetheless. Dr. Albert Bartlett, a University of Colorado professor, says that "Smart growth ultimately gets you to exactly the same place as dumb growth -- you just get there first class." Ultimately, we must go toe -to -toe with growth itself. Let's not succumb to the "Growth is Inevitable" mantra that the growth industry drams out. Like those folks in saffron robes at the airport, they're just after our money. We need not be helpless victims of change. We can, and should, set limits to our rate of growth, and even consider capping the ultimate size of our communities at whatever size we collectively feel is in our best interest. If public funds are sought by development, then we owe it to our taxpayers to require a cost - benefit analysis, which should also look at all of our priorities, including schools, libraries, and fire and police officers. By taking such measures, we are not being "anti -growth," but rather "pro -community." I Nearly 20 years ago, then Oregon Governor Tom McCall warned us that "...there is a shameless threat to our environment, and to the whole quality of our life, and that is the unfettered despoiling of our land: sagebrush subdivisions; coastal condomania; and the ravenous rampage of suburbia here in the Willamette Valley; all threaten to mock Oregon's status as the environmental model of this nation..." You were right, Tom, both then and now; perhaps even more so now. But Westerners are waking up to the threat and the challenge that you saw so clearly. The only question is whether we are willing to elect public leaders with the political guts to do something about it. PRIORITIES FOR A FINALIZING THE KALISPELL PLAN Comments prepared by Citizens for a Better Flathead, 7/31/00 Citizens for a Better Flathead encourages the Kalispell City Council to use the 1998 draft and 1998 Land Use Map as the two beginning points in preparing a final Kalispell Growth Policy. The 1998 draft includes a fairly comprehensive set of policies and direction for influencing proper growth and preserving a wide range of community values - natural resources, wildlife, wetlands, agriculture and agricultural lands, stable neighborhoods, historic and cultural assets, and parks and open space. The 1998 draft gives sound direction for addressing public facilities and services, and it provides for proper public involvement in planning processes. The 1998 map shows the Urban Growth Boundary. It's future land use proposal offers a balance among residential, commercial, industrial, mixed uses and other land uses. The 1998 identifies "Important Farmlands," a category important for implementing the agricultural policies set forth in the 1998 draft. The 1999 draft, in contrast, (1) minimizes or eliminates provisions that urge conservation of agricultural land and other community values (2) reduces emphasis on sound, efficient provision of public services, and (3) reduces citizen involvement in the planning process. We applaud the Kalispell City Council's leadership in calling for the adoption of a strong growth policy that will give a sound direction to guide future growth and include policies to enhance existing neighborhoods and business sectors. Beginning with the 1998 draft will allow for a greatly reduced effort to develop a sound plan worthy of Kalispell. CFBF believes the following work elements are the priorities that should be addressed by the City Council and FRDO staff. These priorities are based primarily on timing that should offer a sensible sequence for completing the final Growth Policy. Priorities #1 - 7 are basically public policies that the City Council would deliberate, refine and adopt, probably with research and suggestions from the FRDO staff. Priorities #8 - 10 would probably be developed primarily by FRDO staff with final consideration and approval by the city council. Land Use 1. Develop policies regarding agricultural land and agricultural issues. Policies relating to conversion productive agricultural land to urban uses; Policies relating to protecting agricultural operations from the adverse impacts of urban/suburban development (e.g., increased traffic, dogs, weeds, vandalism) 2. Develop policies addressing open space, watersheds, wildlife habitat and other natural resources. 3. Include a section that deals with parks and recreation, hiking and biking trails. Public Facilities 4. Develop a strategy for the development, maintenance and replacement of public infrastructure Reinstate the public facilities section Develop policies for upgrading county roads and addressing all capital improvements upon annexation into the city Develop policies setting priority for extending services to existing commercial areas rather than expanding additional commercial areas with no services Comment: Developing a capital improvements program is vital to the Growth Policy, but CFBF recommends deferring the preparation of the CIP until after the work elements below have been completed. 5.. Develop growth management Policies for extension of city services. Develop policies for annexation, including when and where annexation is appropriate, and policies for providing city services such as roads, fire and police protection, water and sewer. 6. Assess the 1998 and 1999 land use maps to reconcile land use designations and to determine an acceptable allocation and location of various land uses. Decide whether to incorporate the concept of and Urban Growth Boundary Decide whether to incorporate concepts such as "urban expansion areas" and priority growth centers." Comment: CFBF urges the city council to recognize that the concepts of an Urban Growth Boundary and 'priority growth centers " and "urban expansion areas " can be both addressed on the map and in a variety of policies that allow for flexibility needed to meet Kalispell's unique needs. 7. Prepare a Capital Improvements Program. Develop an assessment of the cost of new development. Prepare an explanation of how costs associated with new development would be assessed on a case -by -case basis. 9. Bring final Growth Policy into compliance with SB 97. Develop policies to guide the city and county in reviewing subdivisions: - Define the subdivision review criteria in 76-3-608(3)(a) - Determine how the city and county will implement the criteria - Set policies relating to conducting public hearings on subdivisions Prepare an implementation schedule and conditions for implementing and revising the growth policy Prepare statements of how the city and the county will coordinated and cooperate with other jurisdictions 10. Other elements to update or to "tie up loose ends" Prepare an assessment of present housing stock and the current and future housing needs. Develop clear concepts of "mixed use areas" and how they function in neighborhoods. Consider adoption of extra -territorial zoning Update baseline land use data to facilitate monitoring the amount and type of growth Develop plans for addressing large-scale commercial uses Note: Census 2000 data will not be available for several years. It is probably not worth delaying completion of this growth policy to allow for updating of the R&A section. Some preliminary information being released in Flathead County as a result of Flathead Counties inclusion in a special census data collection and release may warrant being included in a partial up -date..