17 lots up for annexation

Seventeen lots along the U.S. 93 South corridor are set to be annexed by the city using a method that excludes a property owner’s right to protest the maneuver.

Whitefish city councilors approved a resolution of intent to annex the properties Aug. 6 with a 4-1 vote, setting up what could be a contentious public hearing to be held Sept. 17. Phil Mitchell was the dissenting vote, Frank Sweeney was absent.

Each of the lots are entirely surrounded by land within the Whitefish city limits. Based on state code regarding “wholly surrounded land,” city council has the authority to incorporate those properties without challenge or a public vote.

City manager Chuck Stearns said the city was pursuing the annexations in an effort to establish “equity” among property owners within city limits. He said owners of the lots in question were receiving the same city services as others within the city — fire, police, ambulance, street maintenance — without paying city taxes.

“One property owner next to the other could be paying 20 percent more for the same services,” Stearns argued.

He said if there was an emergency at one of the properties, Whitefish police or fire crews most likely would be the first to respond.

If annexed, properties owners would also receive all municipal services ranging from electoral — being able to vote for city offices — to public works and garbage collection.

Stearns said the additional revenue brought to the city from the annexed properties is also an important factor. The estimated new property taxes to be collected adds up to about $22,600 annually.

“That revenue is important for city to offset costs we’re already paying,” Stearns said.

Sometimes annexation leads to increased expenditures because the city has to provide services to the additional residents. Stearns said that because these annexations are “infill” any increased costs will be marginal.

“As in-fill property, we do not anticipate the need to hire additional staff in order to provide the same level of service that is currently provided to other residents and property owners in Whitefish,” Stearns said.

A few councilors were concerned about pursuing the annexations alongside a fickle economy since some of the properties to be annexed are businesses. Those businesses would also be subject to Resort Tax collections, if applicable.

“We’re talking about increasing taxes [for those property owners] when times are tough,” Bill Kahle said. “Some businesses are just hanging on.”

Phil Mitchell didn’t see a need to rush into these annexations.

“We have poor economic issues here,” he said. “I don’t see any reason we can’t wait.”

Stearns again brought up equity and countered that the council should be considerate of the businesses along the corridor that already pay city taxes for services provided to all residents.

“Think of city businesses who are paying 20 percent more, who are doing business in the city,” he said. “You do represent the city. Focus on fair treatment for your existing businesses.”

Questions were also raised about the need to annex vacant lots. Those property owners are less likely to use city services, it was argued.

“They don’t have those needs because it is raw land,” Chris Hyatt said.

Councilor John Anderson said he was interested to hear more from both sides.

“My support is to get to the next step to see what these folks have to say,” he said. “I want to hear from other folks that bear the burden of what these folks enjoy.”

Whitefish grappled with annexation many times in the past.

In 2005 the city annexed Whitefish Lake, essentially doubling the size of the city. A year earlier, five Whitefish neighborhoods were officially annexed after years of judicial review. In 1995 the city annexed portions of the U.S. 93 corridor.

“If the city had not used annexation in late 1990s, city limits would look much different than it does today,” Stearns said.