Click Here to Open as PDF    Back to Index
 

September 19, 2007 – Committee members present:  Dick Shockley, Kerri Payne, Doug Marshall, Diane Volkersz, Christie Francis, EJ Engler, Dick DeBernardis, Margaret Jarrett, Warren Vaughan (CP)

Community members present:  Amy Davis, Brad Parsch, Earl Wortman, Terri Nuss, Nikki Robbins, Ada Montague (CP), Ralph & Bernice Payne.

Gateway School Tour & Talk:  Presented by Kim DeBruycker, Superintendent/Principal.  Kim provided our group with a hand-out covering Gallatin County statistics with regard to increasing population, enrollments, and potential growth.  Mill levies, market & taxable values, mill values and bonding capacity were addressed as well.  And finally, a map of the school indicating all additions and upgrades since 1914 was provided.  It was absolutely apparent that Kim’s first priority is safety – whether it is from traffic in front the school, the building structure, playground equipment, etc.  As we toured the facility, Kim repeatedly stated that so many of their upgrades, “fixes”, or extras were funded by community donations, parent participation, and children’s fundraising activities.  At current enrollment the school is “maxed out” in many ways:    sewer system, cafeteria & playground space, storage for teachers and PE equipment.  Many programs are funded by private donations (ie., music, media, etc.).  Because there are 300 available lots in the Gateway area now, enrollment numbers will increase.  This is regardless of any new development plans in the future.  Expansion will be necessary and is most notably driven by the need for land and money.  Our group’s dialog with the Gateway School will continue to gather information and hopefully, formulate ideas and solutions for a viable, healthy school long into the future.

Old Business

Dick S. asked that a motion be made to accept the meeting minutes from Sept. 5^th; Dick D. motioned; Doug seconded; motion carried.  Financial report:  Dick S. submitted a bill for $82.86 to cover the envelopes/printing/postage for the Aug. 15^th Town Meeting results mailing.  Margaret made a motion to pay; Diane seconded; motion carried.  Kerri stated that our balance is (will be) $887.00 after payment of that bill.  GAP Proposal:  Dick S. spoke with Tim Davis and was assured that we will receive the $4,000 GAP grant very soon.  Tim has been involved in an office move, so it’s taken him awhile to get organized.  Doug said that he had received our group’s Tax I.D. number and would be giving that to Kerri, along with any mandates or requirements for non-profit status, so that we could be in accordance.

New Business

Gateway Opencut Mining Action Group (GOMAG) update:  Margaret stated that GOMAG presented a letter to the Gallatin County Commissioners requesting emergency zoning (w/regard to opencut mining) on Sept. 14, 2007.  Attached to the letter were 293 signatures on their petition.  They expect to hear back from both the Planning Board and the County Commissioners in the next couple of weeks.  Carol Lee-Roark is compiling a grid map that will show where signatures have been gathered in our focus area.  Canvassing of areas that have not been covered will continue.  GOMAG is also considering pursuing the legal counsel of Roger Sullivan in Kalispell.  Warren said that the county attorneys were reviewing many of the same questions that GOMAG has regarding when pit applicant rights are vested . . .When the application is filed?  When it’s complete? or When granted?  The Commissioners will act on it - some how, some way – probably in the near future.

Developer Dialog:  Regarding the informal meeting with David Loseff, to be attended by a few members of our group, EJ was brought up to date on what had transpired in his absence.  He will arrange for a casual meeting to provide Mr. Loseff with information on our planning process and progress.  Others interested in being in this group are:  Jerry Kawasaki, Doug Marshall, Christie Francis and Warren Vaughan.  The intent is to also elicit Mr. Loseff’s needs, ideas, and proposals and to find out how involved with our group/process he would like to be.

EJ asked if we would be pursuing small meetings with big landowners (similar to the Reese Creek process).  This topic was tabled due to time constraints, but will be revisited in the future.

East Boundary Re-designation update: Since there was some discrepancy as to the exact border re-designation, this topic was tabled for the moment.  Dick D. and Diane will work out the details and Dick D. will provide us with a technical description of the new boundary in the near future.

Fall Community Event update:  The “You Spoke, We Heard” event will take place on Wednesday, Oct. 17^th, in lieu of a regular meeting.  An event announcement will be mailed to all property owners in our focus area in advance.  Warren said that he felt the structure of the event should again include small group discussion, then disseminating to the entire group.

Vaughan Advisory

Warren distributed his *very rough* draft of the Gallatin Gateway Community Plan.  Committee members are to read this carefully and make recommendations to Warren, if you would like to make changes.  These changes must be based upon the information we have received from the community at large, not personal opinions.  We need to substantiate where this information was gathered.  The plan contains three layers of guidance for residents and decision makers:

• Overall vision and 12 guiding principles, which set the stage for more specific direction that follows.

• Goal Statements in each chapter, which are broad statements about how the community will address a particular issue or need.

• Policies, which are more specific statements about how the community will achieve each goal.

Keep in mind that all of the principles, goals and policies will apply to each of the three distinct parts of our focus area:  Downtown Gallatin Gateway, Rural Gallatin Gateway, and the Highway 191 Corridor.

Next, Warren distributed several different versions of templates for the Guiding Principles Matrix hand-out.  The clearest version, and the one most likely to fine-tune responses, is the one that has an “importance scale” between 1 and 5 (1 = most important).  At the Fall Event, we will use these to structure our group discussions, come to a group (each table) consensus, and then share with the entire group.  Doug suggested sending these hand-outs out with the announcement mailing, so that people could read them ahead of time.  This idea was well-received.  This would help to move quickly (or quicker) through the principles, so that we could possibly have more time to spend on developing policies.  Amy Davis questioned why we would even spend time discussing the principles, when it all seemed very repetitive.  Dick S. reminded her that this event is called, “You Spoke, We Heard”, and we (as a group) want to make sure that we have interpreted all of our gathered information to date correctly.  He also stated that the planning process is tedious, time-consuming, and very detail-oriented.  We need to have as many people in our focus area “on the same page” as is possible, so that we don’t have to be redundant at every future meeting.  We are hopeful that we will be able to spend more time on forming policies, discussing implementation, and exploring the community’s interest in zoning.  The most important goal for this meeting will be deciding whether these guiding principles are the ones that will lead to our policy building. From these principles (whether altered or not) we will draw conclusions that will help us formulate policies.  Neighborhood Plan Specifics:  The policy-building is dependent upon the community’s opinions, visions, and principles as a whole.  After the Fall Event, Warren surmised that we will have enough formal results to support our policies.

Dick S. said that our committee will have to continue to step up and be engaged.  If you are a committee member, now is the time to attend all meetings and help facilitate the planning process.  Our Oct. 3^rd meeting will be spent in preparation of and rehearsal for the Fall Event.

The structure of subsequent meetings was discussed.  It was decided that we should plan an outline of upcoming issues so that we dedicate time to shape and target discussions that can lead to policy.  For example, if “sewer & water district” is the target issue, people most interested in the issue could attend.  We would then arrange to have people that are experts on that issue to be present and speak, as well as answer questions.  In lieu of a studied expert, we will provide and research as much information on any given issue so that our community members can make good decisions based on reliable facts.

Public Comments:

Brad Parsch asked, “How long does it usually take to form a Neighborhood Plan?”  Warren said that at the pace that our group is moving, he thought that we may have a usable plan in another 6 months.

Earl Wortman was concerned that some of the guiding principles seemed to be “in favor of” a certain issue, rather than “in favor of exploring” that issue.  His comment was welcomed and duly noted as an important detail to remember.

Siobhan made a motion to end the meeting; Diane seconded; motion carried.  Our next meeting is on Oct. 3^rd at 7 p.m. in the Gallatin Gateway Community Center.