by Mark Hebert
The race involved two Democrats battling to win Montana's June primary, and one Republican with his spot on the November ballot already secure, setting out his own positions on the issues.
The presidential race? No, it was the three candidates for the West End Mineral County commissioner seat Tuesday night in St. Regis.
Democrats Duane Simons and Glenn Ferren and Republican Curtis Cochran answered questions in a forum sponsored by the Chronicle and the St. Regis Community Council, and moderated by council president Jeff Noonan.
To open the questioning in the debate the candidates where asked what they felt were the most important issues facing the county and what they would first do if elected to the commissioner position.
Cochran said that though he did not have any single issue he was jumping up and down for, but added that he felt the most important item facing the county is the county’s budget, that he is firmly against raising taxes, and that he is a firm believer in private property rights.
Ferren agreed with the budget as a top priority, adding that the budget needed to be closely monitored with fuel costs rising, and that job growth and retention were two of his major concerns. Commissioners should work to promote new and existing business in Mineral County.
Simons said that the top issues in the county were economic growth and planning, that his top priority is to promote the jobs Mineral County has and to bring in new development, and he said there needs to be a stronger push on natural resource use.
“We have acres and acres of bug kill timber in Mineral County and the situation needs to be addressed quickly,” said Simons. “Why spend millions of dollars fighting fire and breathing smoke every year when some of this could be prevented, if not totally stopped, by the wise use of timber sale management?”
On the topic of growth and impact fees, Ferren said that he feels that Mineral County residents pay for government services through property taxes and that impact fees are another form of taxation. He added that if the people of Mineral County voted in favor of impact fees that he would support that decision.
Simons said that he is against impact fees and that schools and the hospital would not be negatively impacted by new growth in the area, but rather they would more than happy to have new students and patients.
Cochran said that though he does not think impact fees are appropriate at this time, he is not completely against the concept.
“Each individual subdivision is unique and I wouldn’t say that I’d throw the idea completely out the window,” said Cochran. “We are facing budget restraints, and the (rising) price of fuel, and someday, somewhere, it might be a thing we need.”
The topic of wildlife in the area has a large part to do with the quality of life in Montana and the candidates were asked about two major threats facing wildlife in the area, subdivision development and wolves.
Simons said that the whole county is a wildlife movement area and that wildlife easily adapt to their surroundings. He said that Mineral Count does not need more wildlife movement areas, that there is enough land set aside already, and that the only exception to that is if Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks designated a specific area as a spring elk calving site.
Cochran said that he also disagreed that there is a threat to wildlife movement in Mineral County and that private land in the area is extremely small when compared to federal land.
Ferren disagreed with the other two candidates stating that Mineral County receives a lot of money from tourism and recreation, that there is more of the money to be had and that he supports the idea of preserving wildlife movement areas and possibly wildlife viewing areas.
“We can do this by asking subdivision developers to design their subdivisions requests to accommodate wildlife. The (Mineral County) Planning Board and Fish, Wildlife and Parks will provide assistance in the matter,” said Ferren. “But more than just dollars and cents, our wildlife is an essential part of the life we have chosen.”
Concerning wolves in the area, Simons said that Montana is currently taking the correct stance on dealing with the predators, adding that if wolves are killed too quickly that the risk of putting them back on the endangered list would follow. Ferren said that if permits are sold to harvest wolves that he’d be first in line and that wolves were forced down Montanans' throats. Cochran said that Mineral County needs to follows Montana’s plan to regulate the predators stating that Mineral County has 17 percent of Montana’s wolf population and one percent of the state’s land.
“Maybe Yellowstone Park is a good place for wolves, but not here,” he said, adding that wolves need to be regulated the same way as mountain lions and bears are.
Asked to speak on whether Mineral County should peruse RS2477 to claim Forest Service roads as county roads Cochran said that RS2477 is a twisted way to look at the law and that the Forest Service needs to better work with off-road vehicle users on access issues. Cochran added that claiming some roads through RS2477 could help Mineral County receive gas-tax monies.
Ferren said that RS2477 should only be used on a case-by-case basis and that not every Forest Service road should be closed or open. He said that the use of RS2477 would need to be balanced and with the return on investment and that being able to walk quiet roads in the woods is a value to the human health and spirit.
Simons said that Mineral County cannot afford any more roads and needs to be more aggressive with the Forest Service as to the needs of Mineral County.
“The Forest Service works for you and I,” said Simons. “This is our land, not federal land that is off limits, so we need to communicate with the Forest Service everyday about what Mineral County needs and they have to listen.”
The candidates were next asked if they thought the county commissioners should be involved with the discussions with Plum Creek to get an idea of their future plans in Mineral County.
Simons said the commissioners are already as involved as they can be and that the only possible solution he sees is to join other counties in a joint lawsuit against the Federal Government for road use easements brought on by land sale by Plum Creek.
Cochran said that the commissioners should talk with everybody, but that the Plum Creek land is private land and if they sell it to someone else that the land is still private land and the owner can do with it what they want, adding that he welcomes development. He said that if some of the Plum Creek lands are subdivided that Mineral County will gain new taxes if lots are less than 15 acres.
Ferren said that county commissioners should be involved in Forest Service/Plum Creek discussion in order to be in the loop for informational purposes.
“We should increase county interaction and cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service,” said Ferren. “There is a potential revenue source here in Forest Service development for both tourism and recreation related activities and in timber thinning and fire prevention and suppression events.”
The proposed Mineral County Growth Policy calls for zoning in Alberton and Superior and the candidates where asked their opinions concerning zoning in the area.
Cochran said that the “Z-Word” brings up lots of dispute and that a Mineral County Planning board member told him that there is already zoning in Alberton. He said that if he was a county commissioner from St. Regis that he would not tell the people of Superior that they must have zoning, but rather leave that choice to the residents of the town and added that he wouldn’t push for zoning in St. Regis.
Ferren agreed saying that zoning and the growth policy are matters that will be accepted or rejected by the residents of Mineral County and Simons said he agreed and that St. Regis doesn’t need zoning.
Questions from the audience where then fielded by the candidates, the first asking if the three would support a county-wide garbage levy because of problems in the county in which people dump their garbage in places other than the dump in order to bypass dump costs.
Ferren said that he felt as if he would and in his own personal experience that he currently pays too much garbage pickup, adding that if there is any way to reduce that cost that he would be for it.
Simons agreed that taking items to the dump is expensive and said that, for example, that if someone has a freezer they need to get rid of but don’t have the money to properly pay for it that the freezer ends up getting dumped illegally. He said that Felstet Disposal does a good job with their dump, but added that looking at something else as an alternative.
Cochran said that he could possible see the problem that Simons spoke of, but added that such an endeavor would be expensive and that a close look at the matter would have to taken. He said that putting a private enterprise out of business – long time taxpayers who employ a large amount of people – wouldn’t sit well with him. He said that if a county-wide system could be put in place while keeping the private entity in place that he would be willing to take a close look at the idea.
###
Comments (0)
The Clark Fork Chronicle
http://www.clarkforkchronicle.com/article.php/20080509060633357