Effects the existance or non-existance of a Growth Policy

Effects the existance or non-existance of a Growth Policy May 17, 2024 9:18:43 GMT -7 Admin and Town Crier like this

Quote

Post by Morris Hallowell on May 17, 2024 9:18:43 GMT -7

Mr. DeVault published an op-ed in the Park County Community Journal May 12 edition representing the non-profit MYLAND’s special interest perspective. Many have asked about this so I am responding. I hope you can help any friends who may be confused on this issue.

Mr. DeVault’s op-ed representing the MY LAND non-profit, which states his fear that the city will extend its power if the growth policy is repealed, is unfounded. He has made a glaring omission. Citing statute 76-2-310, he left out the first, most relevant, part of the statute. It reads: “76-2-310 Extension of municipal zoning and subdivision regulations beyond municipal boundaries. (1) Except as provide in 76-2-312.”

“76-2-312 Exclusion for commission-manager plan municipalities. A city or town which has as its plan of government commission-manager plan shall be excluded from the provisions of 76-2-310 and 76-2-311which define extraterritorial authority to review subdivisions.”

As we all know, Livingston has a commission-manager form of government. Therefore, whether the county has a growth policy or not, under Montana Code the city has no power over the county.

Additionally, to clarify for those who have confused zoning with annexation. A growth policy has nothing to do with annexation. You will, note Park County has had a growth policy in place for at least 10 years during which time several annexations by the city have taken place. Having a growth policy has been irrelevant to the annexations.

Most interesting to me was Mr. DeVault’s opening statement quoting George Washington, “Freedom and property rights are inseparable. You can’t have one without the other.” He then goes on to say the best way to preserve your property rights is to let the county commissioners decide for you how you will use your property utilizing commissioner-only adoption of a county growth policy.

How extraordinary to say giving up your right to vote and giving over control of your property rights to others preserves your property rights. This is the most backwards thing I have ever heard. While I respect Mr. DeVault’s right to his own opinion, I most certainly do not agree with it.

I will vote FOR Referenda R-1 and R-2 to preserve my property rights. I do not trust our commissioners, their staff or any of the non-profits that hunger for my property rights and my freedom. I will vote FOR both referenda to preserve my right to vote in a free and open society.

Sincerely,
Ann Hallowell

Effects the existance or non-existance of a Growth Policy May 20, 2024 7:52:20 GMT -7 Admin and Town Crier like this

Quote

Post by Morris Hallowell on May 20, 2024 7:52:20 GMT -7

Dear Friends,

I wanted to share with you this letter I sent to the Livingston Enterprise that was in Saturday’s paper as I know many don’t get the paper. It is another piece in the puzzle of our growth policy history.

Dear Editor,

Why have non-profits spent $57,000.00, the equivalent of a year’s wage, to stop rural county residents’ right to vote and the possible repeal of our old growth policy with R-01? Because those non-profits wrote that growth policy, literally.

As I was reminded by an acquaintance recently, we have a growth policy today because Park County Environmental Council, Yellowstone Coalition and the City of Livingston sued the county over land use. The settlement forced the county to write a growth policy conforming to the three parties’ demands for specific content by court order. Over a seven-year period, the county wrote and re-wrote the growth policy. Citizens demanded changes. When the county commissioners complied, the city of Livingston, PCEC and YC again dragged the county back to court to make sure the growth policy was done their way not the people’s way.

The bones of this ill-gotten beast still exist in our 2017 growth policy with more lipstick added over the years.

Park County landowners wish to be free of this tainted policy put upon them by the city of Livingston, PCEC and YC. It was never their plan for their future, and despite the lipstick never will be. It has always been the outsiders’ and special-interest’s plan; their over-bearing influence and manipulation of our property and rights. Never a rural county plan.

Are we to be indentured servants to a court-ordered growth policy from 20 years ago? These monied vote-buyers, against the referenda, sending lavish shiny mailers, spam text, anonymous phone surveys, and facebook ads to everyone with loud protestation that their mere presence is more local than the votes of actual county registered voters---are all the while flush from themselves selling out to corporate outsiders.

If there is to be a plan, we need a county citizen plan, not a special-interest or city-influenced plan without the taint of the court on our heads. It is long overdue. Vote FOR R-1 Repeal of the 2017 growth policy and FOR R-2 adopt future growth policy only by citizen vote.

Sincerely,
Ann Hallowell