Special treatment

I am now an outsider twice over. As an "original" outsider, I bought some beautiful property northwest of Whitefish about 15 years ago and recently sold it since our family's plans changed.

I did not see the Kelly Mull letter that is referenced. However, I must admit to being, as a true "outsider" now, to being taken aback by the comments about the concerns she apparently raised and wanted to share my own "outsider" point of view.

No group has benefited more from special treatment, federal, state, city or county, than those developing in the Flathead region.

Whether it is the "malling" of Kalispell or the "condo-scending" of Big Mountain, they have the ear and voice of politicians at every turn. This is a group for which no variance or exemption will not be granted.

And if they are opposed or questioned, one is immediately accused of being anti-growth.

Now growth and change can be beneficial, and it can be malignant. It isn't automatically one or the other.

We can all point out some of the "tumors" that have developed around the Flathead region. And we can point at some developments that have added value to the area.

To whine that if a community is concerned about its environment and the things that made it a desirable place to live and raise a family is somehow being "small-minded" and/or "small-town mentality" strikes me as a gross missrepresentation of very legitimate concerns.

The developer does not survive without the benefits bestowed upon him or her by the community. No matter how lovely the building, if the community is not attractive either visually or spiritually, then folks are not going to want move there.

At the same time a community does not grow and prosper without the developer.

Is it a struggle and a constant balancing act of values, needs, wants, etc.? Yes.

But there is a difference between developing and metastasizing. One considers the overall health of the body (aka community), and the other is only concerned with its own needs, no matter the cost to the rest of the community.

Both approaches are legal, but that doesn't make them both right. Or frankly very good for the long-term value of one's real estate.

If Whitefish insiders and outsiders aren't careful, she won't become the next Jackson Hole (where the rules governing development would make those in Whitefish seem nonexistent), but a rather hard-to-get-to failed idea.

Just one outsider's opinion.

Bryden Becker

Overland Park, Kansas