A public hearing over a compromise for control of Whitefish's two-mile planning "doughnut" is sure to pack Whitefish City Hall tonight as the City Council considers a plan that gives the county final say on Whitefish laws as they affect the doughnut area.

A committee of city and county representatives has been meeting since March to talk about how much control the county should have in the Whitefish doughnut. The resulting rewrite of the interlocal agreement is aimed at heading off a lawsuit filed by the city against the county.

The county rescinded its interlocal agreement with Whitefish two years ago, claiming county residents had no representation when city laws such as the critical-areas ordinance extend to the doughnut.

The city, in turn, sued the county and later appealed an adverse District Court ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, which sent the case back to District Court.

In the meantime, the District Court put the 2005 interlocal agreement back in force pending the outcome of the lawsuit.

The proposed interlocal agreement would allow the county to review and re-enact any or all of 65 Whitefish ordinances passed since the original agreement was put in place in 2005. The county also would veto power over any new laws initiated by Whitefish that affect the doughnut.

Whitefish City Manager Chuck Stearns stated in his council report that he personally feels "it is probably better to continue the lawsuit as I think the city would prevail in most regards." He voted for the committee's compromise agreement, however, "to keep a cooperative and consensus approach" to the task at hand.

Stearns said he later made a motion to set up a land-use advisory council for the doughnut, but the committee overwhelmingly rejected the idea.

"If the council determines that it is desirable to settle the lawsuit, then the proposed interlocal agreement appears to be the mechanism to do so," Stearns said.

A couple of attorneys also have weighed in on the doughnut dispute, urging the city to continue the lawsuit.

Former Montana Supreme Court Justice Terry Trieweiler of Whitefish wrote a letter to the city on Sept. 17, encouraging Whitefish to stick with the lawsuit.

"I'm particularly concerned that the council is willing to cede control over territory that is critical to the community's future based simply on legal advice, which I consider misguided, that the city is unlikely to prevail in the current litigation over the 2005 interlocal agreement," Trieweiler said.

John Phelps, a doughnut resident and recently retired Whitefish city attorney, wrote a guest editorial in the Whitefish Pilot last week, urging the city to continue the lawsuit and imploring the public to get involved.

"Without a strong public response, they [council] will give the doughnut away," Phelps wrote. "If you do nothing, the commissioners will change the face of Whitefish."

Phelps, who still provides some consulting services to the city, said the proposed compromise would be "devastating" to Whitefish.

"The city gives up everything. The county gains complete control," Phelps maintained, blaming "election politics" and the election of three new council members promoted by wealthy doughnut residents who wanted the doughnut eliminated.

A work session on the revised interlocal agreement will start at 6 p.m, with the public hearing at 7:10 p.m.

Beyond the doughnut hearing, the council also has to deal with the hot-button issue of the interlocal agreement for the Whitefish library.

The city faces an Oct. 28 deadline to decide whether or not to terminate its agreement with Flathead County for the Whitefish branch library. Discussion begins tonight, but a vote on how to proceed could be pushed to the Oct. 20 council meeting.

Whitefish is contemplating breaking away from the county library system based on a study group's recommendation that the city would be better served by having its own library. A preliminary opinion from the Montana attorney general indicates that if the city wants to create its own library, it legally can do so.

The Whitefish Ad Hoc Library Committee earlier this year delivered a lengthy report to the City Council, detailing a long list of allegations, from heavy-handed administration to inequities in resources and unacceptable treatment of Whitefish branch library employees. The report also included a detailed proposal for an independent Whitefish library.

A third meaty issue on tonight's agenda is zoning along the U.S. 93 South strip. The council will discuss and may get the ball rolling on measures aimed at better controlling retail strip development.

The council recently backed away from a proposed zoning text amendment that would have expanded retail zoning along the highway, but that leaves several nonconforming businesses that need to come into compliance. The council also backed away from grandfathering the nonconforming businesses, based on advice from the city attorney.

That left the city essentially back at square one after more than two years of work on the issue.

At a Sept. 20 work session, three options were posed: site-specific business licenses, a new zoning compliance permit and increasing the number of allowed uses in the business district zone that includes the strip. Currently, city laws don't require businesses to get a new business license if they relocate.

The council begins its work session at 5 p.m. with discussion of subdivision plat expirations before it launches into doughnut discussion at 6 p.m. The regular meeting begins at 7:10 p.m.

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by e-mail at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com