Council’s approval of bar a bad precedent

The Council’s approval of a bar in Kemo Sabe sets a bad precedent. Council members Ben Davis and Guiseppe Caltabiano said at a recent candidate forum that they supported approval of the conditional use permit because they don’t want to pick “winners” and “losers,” and they feel obliged to approve most CUPs to avoid lawsuits. Candidate Nathan Dugan expressed a similar sentiment and said he would have approved the CUP. 

These comments demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the City’s responsibilities. A CUP is not a property right. Activities not listed as permissive uses are either prohibited entirely or allowed only if identified as a conditional use and approved by Council. As such, a CUP is an exception to property restrictions. It is a special allowance the City has broad discretion to deny or approve, so long as the City does not act in an arbitrary and capricious manner. Having set this precedent, the City could face lawsuits if other retail stores seek to operate a bar but are denied. 

Under Whitefish Code Section 11-7-8(J)(7)(e), the Council must find that the proposed use is compatible with the established community character. Whitefish’s established community character is not one of combination retail stores/bars. People shop at retail stores to purchase items, not to hang around and drink. Families and others who do not want to be exposed to alcohol consumption can simply avoid going into bars, but they may not be able to avoid going into retail stores selling what they need. 

Another concern is that Kemo Sabe is located within 150 feet of and directly across the street from a school. Montana law prohibits alcohol sales within 600 feet of a school. While the City has some authority to alter that restriction, it appears that proximity to the school was not even considered. The condition prohibiting liquor sales after 8 p.m. does not help, as school operates during the day. 

I urge the Council to reconsider and deny this CUP. 

Andrée Larose, Whitefish