The ad hoc committee charged with recommending a future site for Whitefish City Hall is waiting for more information before moving forward.

The committee last month narrowed its focus to the current City Hall location and a lot on Baker Avenue across from the post office.

Last week the committee decided to wait on choosing a site until it could get input from Crandall Arambula, the firm charged with updating the city’s downtown master plan.

“If we’re able to make a decision today about a site, that’s great, but if not it highlights the reason to bring in some professional folks,” Mayor John Muhlfeld said. “I have questions regarding feasibility, myself.”

Based on a straw poll, the committee appeared to be leaning strongly toward recommending the current City Hall site. A few members said they remain undecided.

Some members of the committee suggested getting further public input before moving forward.

“Do we want more public input,” Toby Scott asked. “I suggested that we set up a booth with information at the Farmers Market.”

Councilor Phil Mitchell noted that while the city held a public meeting on the issue previously, now that two sites are the focus more input is warranted.

“Maybe we can do a mailer or something,” he said. “The taxpayers should get a say — they are paying for this.”

City Manager Chuck Stearns said the council created the committee to allow for further discussion, which seems in line with getting further input. He cautioned that further surveying might not change the preference to keep City Hall at its current location shown by the public during a meeting last fall.

“The general public is so used to City Hall being here,” he said. “There’s a lot of inertia to keep it here — it’s comfortable and it works here.”

The committee continues to weigh the pros and cons of each site.

The current site’s pros include that the land is already owned by the city, it’s centrally located and accessible for walking, and that it can accommodate a parking garage, among others. Cons of the site include increased traffic congestion.

A few members see selecting the Baker Avenue site, currently an office building, as a way to free up parking closer to downtown. The Baker Avenue site’s pros include that it has good accessibility and that it could provide extra parking for the park adjacent to the site. Cons include demolition costs of the current buildings and that it could add congestion to an already busy area near the post office.

Committee member Ian Collins took issue last week with the Baker Avenue site, noting that the city would have to spend up to $2 million to purchase the land while it owns the current site.

“I don’t want to spend tax increment fund money for land acquisition when City Hall will fit at the current site,” he said. “We have enough land already in public ownership.”

Stearns agreed that if the city purchased the Baker site it would need to consider selling a piece of its property to offset that. The original plan was to sell the current site if another was purchased, he said.

“If we’re buying one and keeping everything we’re using up precious resources,” he said. A tax increment fund, a loan or a bond paid by tax increment funds will likely be used to finance construction. The city currently has $1.5 million set aside to fund a City Hall project and they continue to set aside $250,000 a year.

The committee held the straw poll to decide if it wanted further evaluation — such as a soil analysis — of the Baker site.

Based on the results, the committee decided to hold off on testing at least until it had further information from consultants or the public.

“I don’t think I should get options on that property,” Stearns said. “But we might be back to talking about it later.”