Deputies called to Somers meeting

The effort to establish a Somers neighborhood plan has been ongoing since 1994, and throughout the various attempts - which have been hitherto unsuccessful - residents of the community who supported such a plan have encountered some degree of opposition.

Even so, the opposition has never escalated to the degree that it did last Monday evening, when two sheriffs deputies had to be called during a meeting moderated by Flathead County Planning Director Jeff Harris and planner Allison Mouch.

The meeting had barely gotten under way, with Harris introducing himself and projecting the first slide in his presentation on the purpose and functions of a neighborhood plan, when local property owners launched a verbal assault on planning staff, accusing Harris of violating the protocol for neighborhood plan formation as outlined in the county growth policy.

Property owner Dennis Thornton loudly questioned Harris at the start of his presentation, asking Harris who had given him the right to hold such a meeting. Thornton also contended that the growth policy states a neighborhood plan must be initiated by the community.

According to Harris, Thornton's argument is based upon Goal 44 of the Flathead County Growth Policy, which includes the statement that a "clear majority of both landowners and acreage represented within the established boundary … should be in support of a proposed neighborhood plan."

However, Harris alleged that Thornton and others who are "intentionally trying to disrupt the process" have taken these goals out of context to say that the planning office should not be involved in the process until a clear majority of landowners and residents has been established.

A group of Somers residents, Harris said, has sought a neighborhood plan for years and initiated the process again in 2005, producing a partial draft in 2007 that was never presented to the public for a number of reasons, not the least of which was its non-conformance to the 2007 growth policy, as mandated by the state of Montana.

"They produced a working draft with baseline information," Harris said. "They had started to deal with future land use and demographics. Now, we're starting fresh, but we will take a look at some of what's in that draft. We would bring that to a group from the community, who would spearhead the process. We envision our role as being to assist them."

With the new growth policy in place, there were clear steps to be followed in the formation of a neighborhood plan, which is why the planning office offered to bring the community up to speed and guide the process in accordance with the goals and policies of the growth policy, specifically chapter 10, regarding neighborhood plans.

Since the first of six basic steps in the neighborhood plan process involves notification of landowners within a possible planning area, the planning office sent out 422 mailings to all of the landowners within the area determined by planning staff as the most likely to be included potential Somers plan boundaries.

"We came up with a notification area that we thought was reasonable," Harris said. "It covered all of the Somers area down to the area covered by the Lakeside plan."

The notification area followed Spring Creek Road, west to the power lines and then north to include the Best View subdivision, stopping short of Mackinaw Estates on the north side of Montana Highway 82, squaring off on property lines all the way to Somers Road.

According to Harris, everyone within the notification area received the and as of last week, the planning office had recorded 146 responses, of which 68 percent were in favor of a neighborhood plan and 25 percent said they wanted more information. Only seven percent said they were opposed to such a plan.

"I don't know of anyone who was inside that area who complained about not receiving the mailing," Harris said. "We can look at the list and see whether they got it. They people who are saying they didn't get a letter were outside of the notification area."

Thornton's property lies to the west of the notification area, beyond what the planning office thought might be including in the Somers planning boundaries. However, during the second planning meeting, when planning staff broke attendees into groups to mark on individual maps where they thought potential boundaries made the most sense, one group placed that boundary far enough west on Boon Road to include the Thornton property.

Although these were speculative boundaries intended only reflect one view of where a potential boundary might be placed, the activity generated significant confusion and sparked debate over the possible implications. That debate led Harris to clear the slate again and set aside the June 15 meeting to present a more thorough overview of neighborhood plans.

"This group, whoever was here last time, sat and drew our property in," Donna Thornton said during the June 15 meeting, adding "You don't have a right to have a meeting to decide what you're going to do with our property without notifying us."

The Thorntons and others also accused the planning office numerous counts of illegal activity related to work on a Somers neighbor plan, as well as the Lakeside plan revision.

While some residents supported the Thorntons - even to the point of shouting profanities at the planning staff or pro-planning landowners - others said they were appalled by the conduct and may avoid future meetings if this were any indication of how they would end.

"It was anarchy," Ed Gilliland, who attended the meeting to hear more information about the neighborhood planning process, said. "It was incredibly childish."

Harris said he called the sheriff's office because of the need to provide a safe work environment for his planners and added that he was unwilling to subject Mouch to further abuse, verbal or otherwise.

During a meeting with the county commissioners the day after the Somers meeting, Harris cited page 148 of the 2007 growth policy, which states, "County planning staff is expected to work with the communities to provide guidance and assistance with the planning process." He outlined such involvement to include assistance with the notification area, assistance with informational and other community meetings, collection of surveys, preparation of meeting materials, research, drafting of maps and text and other aspects.

"It says quite clearly that the staff is supposed to work with the community to make sure that there is enough interest to move forward," Harris told the commissioners.

Commissioner Jim DuPont acknowledged the need for county guidance but cautioned Harris to exercise fairness to both sides.

"Are we guiding them toward the conclusion that we want, or are we giving them all the information on both sides of the fence?" DuPont asked.