The Flathead County commissioners on Friday finalized a letter addressing the water rights compact involving the Confederated Salish-Kootenai Tribes, soft-pedaling their support for “a compact process” instead of overtly endorsing the compact as it’s currently written.

Commissioners Gary Krueger and Cal Scott voted Dec. 30 to draft the letter while Commissioner Pam Holmquist remains opposed to the show of support for the compact.

The letter was sent to the Legislature’s Water Policy Interim Committee, which met in Helena on Monday.

Scott said the language of the letter was purposely softened to state that the compact “can” rather than “will” create certain outcomes.

“This letter does not support the compact as written nor ‘the’ compact,” Scott said. It simply supports a compact process.

The proposed water rights compact would quantify the tribes’ water rights and spend millions of dollars to improve the Flathead Indian Irrigation Project, but opponents argue it could impair landowners’ water rights and usage.

The commissioners have been chastised for their vote by some of their constituents, including Kalispell resident Mark Agather, who stated in a letter to the Daily Inter Lake that “the commissioners have done irreparable harm to this political process.”

Several people have faulted the commissioners for casting a vote on such a monumental issue during a holiday week with little advance notice.

Scott stands by his decision to draft a letter, saying it prompted the local public discussion that was needed on the issue.

“An affirmative ‘no’ would leave us where we were, with no sensationalism to drive widespread public furor and understanding, relevance and action,” Scott wrote in an email to the Daily Inter Lake. 

An excerpt of the commissioners’ letter states that “Most fundamentally, we agree with the conclusion in the introduction to the report that the compact ‘will provide future protections for state water users, contribute to a quicker resolution of the ongoing water rights adjudication, provide economic certainty and protect property values, provide access to new supply of water that will fuel economic growth in (affected counties) and result in an infusion of money that will not only create jobs and boost the local economy, but will accomplish much needed repairs and upgrades to irrigation project facilities.’

“Because the compact can create these outcomes, we believe that it can promote the well-being of the constituents we serve,” the letter further states.

During discussion on Dec. 30, Krueger said he had sifted through “copious” amounts of information regarding the compact, including letters from the Bureau of Land Management and the federal side of the regulatory process.

“In looking through all that information, I still find it somewhat confusing,” Krueger said. “However ... it is time to move [this] forth to the Legislature to go through due process.”

Krueger acknowledged his constituents are “somewhat split” on the compact, but wondered if misinformation or a lack of information about the document are driving the opposition.

Following the 2-1 vote on Dec. 30, Krueger asked Holmquist to reconsider her vote so Flathead County could send a unanimous show of support for the compact. Holmquist continues to opposed the compact as it’s written.

On Monday, Krueger said he doesn’t expect the commissioners to reconsider their vote on the compact or hold a public meeting.

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