Growth policy feedback offered
Lake County provides a myriad of protective services to defend and to enhance enjoyment of our lands.
In turn, land owners pay property taxes to fund these county protections. A simple transaction, yet a complicated balancing of trends, affordability and quality of life. The county commissioners are elected to serve and to protect. Have you seen the second draft of the upcoming replacement of Lake County’s 2003 Growth Policy and accompanying 2005 Density Map and Regulations (DMR)? A copy can be obtained at www.lakemt.gov. An established growth policy is a good thing. However, see page 19 where it states: “The Lake County Commissioners see the current situation with fee land going into tax exempt status at a critical stage, that if not addressed by the county....may result in a failed county”.
A failed county is tantamount to bankruptcy. County commissioners seek solutions. Furthermore, page 21 reveals a 2015 census bureau statistic forecasting a reduction of Lake County’s population by 2%, from the then estimated 29,157 existing residents to 28,474 by the year 2035. The new proposed growth policy may be in place until the year 2037. These two negative trends have a devastating effect to projected county revenues, potentially resulting in Missoula County and Flathead County swallowing up Lake County, a loss of local governance! The county commissioners seek to protect and need support. Page 5, 2015 census reveals that greater than 60% of our county population lives rurally, outside of the nine most populous areas. Clearly, our valley attracts new residents as a destination for rural living. The commissioners agree to a certain extent and prefer to create a new growth policy that embraces smart and affordable rural growth. The solution: adopt a new, advisory-only, DMR. Those in favor of the existing DMR say it creates developmental, countywide certainty; however, that is not true when considering that new, rural, parcel development often occurs by way of family transfers, boundary lot adjustments, claim of federal trust status, court order, et cetera, which circumvents existing, rigid, DMR guidelines. Tax enhancing rural growth, county failure or much higher taxes, which do you prefer?
David Passieri, St Ignatius