The decision to select a location to build a new Whitefish City Hall became divisive last week when a few city councilors questioned whether the selection was being made too quickly.

“This is the largest amount of money we’re going to spend for awhile,” councilor Chris Hyatt said. “I think we need to slow down.”

Hyatt suggested the city should send out surveys to gather public input on the selection.

A number of sites have been considered for a new City Hall. The ad hoc committee charged with finding a site recommended the current location.

City Council voted Sept. 4 to keep City Hall at its present location at Baker Avenue and Second Street. Council tied on the vote and Mayor John Muhlfeld broke the tie to make the vote 4-3. Councilors Bill Kahle, Phil Mitchell and Hyatt voted against.

Councilor Phil Mitchell took direct issue with the selection of the current site.

“Having City Hall downtown, I disagree with it 100 percent,” he said.

A number of sites have been considered for a new City Hall, which is being planned in part because of the age of the current building and the need for more space for city offices. Recently, the current location and a lot across from the post office have risen to the top for prospective locations.

At a forum at the O’Shaughnessy Center last year most of those in attendance selected the current site as their choice. Of the roughly 60 people there, about 40 put that as their top pick. Proximity to downtown was also selected as important when considering the new building.

Councilor John Anderson Sept. 4 pointed to the forum and subsequent committee meetings over several months as proof that the public has been surveyed.

“It’s important to be informed by this community,” he said. “I’m satisfied that the people of Whitefish have expressed their opinion to keep City Hall where it is.”

Still, Hyatt disagreed.

“I think we need to ask the voters what they think,” he said.

Discussion also revolved around whether or not the current site is the best choice.

Turner Askew, Whitefish resident and former city councilor, said keeping city hall in its current location is not the best use for the block. He suggested it would be better for retail and parking.

“This is the most valuable block in the city and it could go back on the city tax roles,” he said. “People come downtown to eat and shop. They need a place to park. Think about 50 years in the future.”

Mitchell also said that parking is at the top of his list of priorities.

“My wish is to wait to see about parking solutions for this city,” he said. “City Hall does not need to be downtown. People have different needs. We are a tourist town here. We can move City Hall out of downtown.”

Councilor Frank Sweeney disagreed saying that for those that live here having City Hall downtown is important.

“One of the things we all agree on is that we don’t want to be just a tourist town,” Sweeney said. “We want to be a real place. We want to be a real town where people commute or they live and work. Part and parcel of those kinds of towns is having city hall downtown and being a focal point. That’s different than if we were just a resort town. Saying that it’s not important for a tourist town to have city hall downtown may be true, but I don’t think that’s what we want to be.”

Mitchell countered by stating that Whitefish has changed over time and has become a tourist town. He said residents want to find a place to park and they can’t.

Sweeney responded by saying that the current site would allow for both City Hall and additional parking.

Councilor Bill Kahle asked how serious parking was taken during the committee process.

Muhlfeld, who served on the committee, said parking was considered concurrently with a new City Hall site.

“A mixed-use facility at this site was overwhelmingly the recommendation,” he said.

In terms of the best site, Muhlfeld pointed to the recommendation given by Crandall Arambula, the firm updating the city’s master plan, that the current site is better than moving City Hall across from the post office.

“They define the downtown core as an 1/8-mile form the center,” he said. “They say we need to have City Hall in that area to lock in parking and the retail component. The information we received is that the [post office] site is too far south on Baker, which will never be a retail area. We would never be able to leverage City Hall to be an attractant there.”