A proposal by the city of Whitefish to partner with Flathead County on a corridor study of U.S. 93 south of Whitefish has been declined by the county commissioners.

The commissioners voted 2-1 Wednesday to send a letter to Whitefish outlining their reasons for rejecting the offer of a “mutually agreeable process.”

Commissioner Pam Holmquist voted against the letter. She said she doesn’t support working with Whitefish on a corridor study, but didn’t agree with some of the language in the letter.

The county is in the throes of a zoning amendment and proposed overlay zone that would rezone 490 acres of agriculture land on U.S. 93 S. just outside Whitefish city limits. That proposal includes 56 acres of new highway commercial zoning and 286 acres of one-acre business-service zoning.

The area includes about 1.5 miles of the highway corridor south of the Montana 40 intersection in what was the Whitefish “doughnut” area where Whitefish once had land-use control. A Montana Supreme Court 2014 ruling ceded planning control to the county following a years-long court battle

When Whitefish officials learned of the county’s effort to rezone that portion of the doughnut area, the City Council held a public hearing on the county’s proposal last November to provide more feedback on the proposed corridor plan, even though the city has no jurisdiction.

In late January Whitefish Mayor John Muhlfeld sent a letter to the county commissioners, asking them to consider partnering with the city on the development of a U.S. 93 S. corridor plan.

The city is concerned that the county’s proposed zone changes will increase commercial growth along the highway, and doing so without the benefit of a corridor plan with input from both government bodies is “short-sighted,” Muhlfeld said.

“Financial cooperation would be helpful, but more important would be coordination with your planning staff and planning board,” Muhlfeld wrote, adding that Whitefish officials believe a plan could be initiated as soon as March, and could be complete in six to eight months considering that some of the ground work has been done by Land Solutions, LLC, on behalf of private property owners there.

Muhlfeld acknowledged that Whitefish and the county haven’t always seen eye-to-eye on development issues, but he said a joint corridor plan would be a way to set aside differences and work cooperatively.

The commissioners in no uncertain words said thanks, but no thanks to Whitefish.

“Our experience with Whitefish for the past decade teaches us that, at the end of the process, you likely will object and sue us,” the county’s letter to Whitefish, drafted by Commissioner Phil Mitchell, stated. “You will seek an injunction and, if granted, the affected county property owners will be in limbo for years as the case slowly moved through the courts.”

The letter details several times when the county’s attempts to undertake joint efforts with Whitefish have been “a fool’s errand.” It pointed out the doughtnut dispute that dragged on with litigation for eight years, and the county’s attempt to work with Whitefish on joint lakeshore protection regulations on Whitefish Lake.

“We conceded to every Whitefish demand and Whitefish never reciprocated,” the commissioners’ letter states about the lakeshore protection issue. “We learned that ‘working with Whitefish’ means doing it Whitefish’s way.”

The commissioners cited the U.S. 93 West corridor study as another failed attempt to work together.

“After the joint committee concluded its work and presented it to the Whitefish council, the council ignored it and fashioned its own study. Our time spent on this effort was wasted,” the letter stated.

The letter further pointed out that any delays to planning and zoning applications are contrary to the county growth policy’s “property bill of rights.”

Commissioner Gary Krueger said a key reason for his opposition to a joint corridor study is the fact that the county currently is taking applications from property owners who want to make changes to their property.

“Those applications are in the pipeline,” Krueger said. “In this instance, where citizens of Flathead County have been put on hold for a long time, eight years, and people were told to put their lives and their property decisions on hold, that’s not fair to our citizenry.”

Krueger said he sees Whitefish’s recent effort to get involved in the county’s corridor plan process as “somewhat a delay tactic.”

Mitchell said as a former Whitefish City Council member, he’s been on both sides of the issue.

“What Whitefish says and does tend to be two different things,” Mitchell said.

The Flathead County Planning Board will hold a work session at its March 8 meeting to continue discussion on the county’s plan to create a new overlay use district and change the zoning in the highway corridor.

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