Paving project flawed
The proposed KM Ranch Road paving project and related approval process is critically flawed.
(1) Property owners must pay a flat rate of $650 peryear for 20 years per parcel owned. This means, for example, that an owner of a parcel assessed at $100,000 will pay the exact same amount as an owner of a parcel assessed at $1 million. This is, on its face, unfair and unduly burdensome, especially for people with low or fixed incomes, such as the elderly and retired.
(2) There will be no vote. Approval is mandatory unless the owners of 51 percent of the parcels protest within 30 days of published notice. Could anyone imagine property tax increases approved in this manner. It basically means that a non-vote is the same as a yes vote if voting were allowed.
(3) An unreasonable increase in traffic, once the road is paved, is inevitable. It will be an unimpeded direct bypass of Whitefish. Not only will safety be drastically degraded, but the economic loss to Whitefish businesses will be significant. Why do we have to pay for a shortcut for Canadians to get to Costco.
(4) One of the reasons given for paving is dust mitigation. Many of us do not have a dust problem. Why must those that are astute enough to provide their own dust control or not to live on the road pay for those now complaining about a long standing situation. They knew they were on a dirt road when they purchased or built their home. We live here because of the rural lifestyle a dirt road affords. A paved road with the increased traffic would degrade our quality of life.
(5) Our constitutional rights are being violated. The “equal protection” and “due process” clauses require no discrimination and only fair methods be used when the government affects the lives of its citizens. One of the reasons given for paving is that it will increase the value of ones property by 10 percent. Why do owners, for example, that would receive an increase in value of $10,000 have to pay in the same amount as someone receiving a benefit of $100,000. A flat percentage applied to the assessed value of all property would be more fair and less discriminatory. Also, actual secret voting ballots requiring a majority (or more) of owners to vote yes in order to gain approval is the only fair method.
Many of us are disappointed that the more powerful and affluent are trying to shove something down our throats. There is no consideration at all for the economic well-being or constitutional rights of many of us. Once again, we are seeing the “little guy” get hosed. The process now underway is totally against the core values upon which this country was founded.
— Tim Rubbert lives on Rifle Range Road