Council will not back streetscaping referendum

Whitefish Pilot

Opponents to streetscaping plans for Central Avenue were rebuffed in their attempt to get a referendum on the ballot this year, as the Whitefish City Council decided the issue was settled and it's time to move forward.

Whitefish city manager Chuck Stearns advised the city council at their June 1 meeting not to submit a referendum to the voters on the downtown project.

The advice came on the heels of city attorney John Phelps' explanation that the city's decision to include wider sidewalks, bulbouts and raised pedestrian-crossings in the Central Avenue reconstruction project was administrative and not legislative, and therefore not an appropriate issue for an initiative or referendum.

Toby Scott, who requested the referendum, says he has more than 600 signatures on a petition opposed to the streetscaping elements, which represents about 10 percent of the voters and "well over 50 percent of the downtown merchants affected by those plans."

Scott would need 15 percent of the city's registered voters to sign the referendum to get it on the ballot, Phelps explained, but "the right of initiative and referendum applies only to resolutions and ordinances adopted under the 'legislative jurisdiction and power' of the city council."

While no one act of a governing body is likely to be entirely administrative or legislative, the initiative and referendum statute is restricted to measures that are "clearly and fully" legislative, Phelps said. The streetscaping design elements are clearly administrative, he said.

"Just as the voters could not insist on determining the types of trees to be planted in the boulevard, or the color of the benches or height of the streetlights, state law does not allow the voters to control fine details of public works projects, such as the width of sidewalks and streets," Phelps said.

Phelps said he provided Scott with his explanation, and Scott responded that his intent was to ask the city council to agree to submit the design elements to the voters. But the voters' decision would not be binding, Phelps pointed out.

Holding a special election in August could cost the city about $4,000, but putting the matter on the November ballot would not cost the city anything, he said.

Public works director John Wilson weighed in by saying an August special election on the project could delay reconstruction of Third Street from this fall to sometime next year.

Stearns tabulated some additional costs in explaining his opposition to the referendum. In addition to city staff time spent on the project, he estimated about one-fifth of the $232,654 spent on consultants for the downtown master plan went to streetscaping, and a portion of the $208,002 spent on engineering design "could be wasted, duplicated or increased with future revisions."

Stearns also provided a philosophical pros-and-cons analysis. While the initiative process provides direct democracy and is generally favored by voters, proposals can be misleading and the process can undermine representative government by creating "minority rule" or "popular tyranny."

"Although it is a fairly controversial issue with some vocal opponents, I do not believe that the Central Avenue infrastructure project is appropriate for a referendum," he said. "An all or nothing or a yes or no vote is not the best solution for a project like Central Avenue."

Stearns said he expected citizens would become confused by contradictory information presented by both sides, which could be entirely unnecessary considering his interpretation of the growing consensus about the project.

"I already sense a feeling among some citizens that they are ready to move on and be past any decision-making point," he said.

Scott responded sharply to Phelps' and Stearns' comments on his proposed referendum. He said delaying the street reconstruction project might make sense under current economic conditions, and duplication of efforts took place for the proposed parking structure that in the end will not be built at Spokane Avenue and Second Street.

As for the city manager's pros-and-cons analysis, "The 'Cons' side of the list seems to be an accumulation of paranoid, fallacy-filled reasons with little substantial thought behind them," Scott said.