A citizen-initiated proposal to pave nearly 6 miles of KM Ranch Road using a Rural Special Improvement District funding approach has rankled many longtime residents along the gravel road who say they can’t afford it.

Marshall Friedman has spearheaded the effort to get the road paved. He submitted a petition and formal paperwork to the Flathead County commissioners last week, asking for the creation of a Rural Special Improvement District.

Along with the request, he attached the results of a neighborhood poll that showed 72 property owners in favor of paving and 54 against.

A portion of KM Ranch Road is a historic freight route that was part of the Fort Steele Trail connecting the Flathead Valley with Canada more than 120 years ago. The road runs northwest from U.S. 93 south of Whitefish, connecting with Twin Bridges Road not far from U.S. 93 West near Spencer Lake.

KM Ranch Road already is paved from its intersection with U.S. 93 to the intersection with Spring Prairie Road. The proposed paving would begin at Spring Prairie and continue to Twin Bridges Road. Another 1,000 feet or so is paved in front of the entrance to Whitefish Hills.

“It would be a good road to have included in our paved road network,” Flathead County Public Works Director Dave Prunty said, adding that the 35 mph speed limit would remain if the paving district is approved.

The proposed district includes 157 lots, with the cost split between the county and the property owners. The county is prepared to chip in $2.5 million, or 64.5 percent of the $3.9 million project, leaving KM Ranch Road property owners within the designated district to pay the remaining $1.4 million.

Annually, property owners would pay about $650 per lot. That comes out to $8,746 per lot over a 20-year period.

“We don’t know until we see the bond rate what the actual cost” per lot will be, County Administrator Mike Pence said. Estimates submitted with the petition note that with a 3.75 percent bond rate, the per-lot cost would be $625 a year; at 5 percent it would be $697.

If the commissioners approve a resolution of intent to form the paving district, a protest period begins during which opponents can submit signatures. It takes opposition from the owners of more than 50 percent of the lots to kill the project. In this case, protests from 79 parcels would be needed to stop it.

Greg Sorenson of Columbia Falls, who owns farm acreage off KM Ranch Road that has been in his family since the early 1940s, said the tax burden on him and his sisters would be more than they can bear. Retired and on a fixed income, Sorenson owns two parcels and shares another parcel with his sisters. His sisters own nine parcels plus the one they share.

If the paving district is approved, Sorenson said he and his sisters would be forced to sell their land, a move that “would be like amputating one of my limbs,” he said.

“It would be devastating to me since I have been involved with this property for over 70 years,” Sorenson added.

And he’s not alone.

Dan and Diane McEntire have lived on their KM Ranch Road property for 48 years. They have four lots that would push their annual paving cost to $2,600 a year. Pat and Ken Weed have had their place along the road for 44 years.

They all oppose the paving proposal.

Some neighbors see it as a very black-and-white conflict: It’s the rich landowners versus the poor ones.

Joseph DeCree, who lives on Eagle View Trail off KM Ranch Road, said it boils down to money.

“The prevailing feeling is the folks with the money want to pave the road,” he said.

Wealthy venture capitalist Michael Goguen owns 26 lots in the proposed district, and six lots are in the upscale Whitefish Hills development. Goguen and the Whitefish Hills property owners favor the paving project.

Tim Rubbert wrote a letter to the Whitefish Pilot, saying many KM-area residents are “disappointed that the more powerful and affluent are trying to shove something down our throats ... Once again, we are seeing the ‘little guy’ get hosed.”

Some neighbors allege the district boundaries were massaged to include more wealthy property owners, but County Administrator Mike Pence said the boundaries can’t be arbitrary. The county will verify the proposed boundaries, but Pence said it’s the petitioners’ responsibility “to submit something that meets defendable criteria.”

Friedman, who has a home on KM Ranch Road, said he went to great lengths to contact everyone along the road and “feeder” roads to KM Ranch Road.

“One allegation is we heard is that we selectively let people know about this; that I was a meddler. That’s a total lie. We put in a huge effort to make sure everybody knew.

“We had a meeting about three years ago of the neighbors, to find out how everybody feels about at least getting the process so the neighborhood can at least make the decision,” Friedman said. “A lot of people were involved, even people who didn’t want it paved. We wanted to get it to the point where we can decide. Now the neighborhood can make a decision.”

Once it was determined there was enough interest to move forward, a committee was formed that included Friedman, Alan Wendt, Leslie Hunt, Brian Cole and Ruby Zimmerman. Wendt, an engineer, put together much of the proposal, and an independent geotechnical engineer was hired to “confirm exactly what had to be done,” Friedman said.

Eby and Associates was hired to define the district boundaries and compile names and addresses of every parcel owner.

Friedman and Wendt met with county officials numerous times to fine-tune the proposal.

In addition to eliminating a chronic road dust problem, paving KM could increase property values and make homes easier to sell, Friedman said.

KM Ranch Road resident Diann Heivilin said she has heard the argument that homes on dirt roads don’t sell, but she knows of several parcels along KM Ranch Road that have been purchased in recent years.

DeCree moved to the KM Ranch Road area four years ago because he wanted to live on a rural gravel road.

“Dust is a problem,” he admitted. “Yes, we go through tires at an alarming rate.”

Bonnie Hodges, a KM Ranch Road resident who’s heading up a petition drive for paving opponents, said she doesn’t want the rural landscape to be changed by making KM a high-speed through-road.

Canadians already use KM Ranch Road as a bypass from U.S. 93, and traffic would increase dramatically if it were paved, Sorenson said.

Paving KM Ranch Road may be a now-or-never proposal.

“The only way the county can participate is if we have enough money set aside for our share,” Pence explained. “We’ve set aside enough money, so it could be done in the next fiscal year. It’s in our CIP [capital improvement plan] now. If the RSID isn’t formed, we’ll use the money for other road needs.”

The county has paved about 12 miles of roads through the Rural Special Improvement District process over the past eight years. Several projects such as Mennonite Church Road and Jensen Road were equally controversial because they are considered through-roads.

Only one proposed paving district has failed in recent years. A road in Lakeside was put out to bid and the bids came in too high so the project has to be restarted, Pence said. Once a second proposal was underway, the recession began and a group of protesters emerged to “barely” kill the project.

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