“I Want To Be A Good Neighbor”

Watch the short video below.

It’s Rhett Hulett, owner of M&D Construction which employs 30 folks here in Great Falls, making his case for a Conditional Use Permit at the January 2, 2018 Great Falls City Commission meeting.

“I want to be a good neighbor”

“We want to be a positive part of that part of town.”

“We look forward to staying there.”

So, sounds like granting the CUP should be a common sense decision, right? Especially since the city planning staff, NHC #7, and the planning/zoning board ALL recommended approval.

Thank you, Mr. Hulett for employing Great Falls folks, paying taxes and working hard to be a good neighbor. We appreciate your efforts.

So what do y’all think our illustrious City Commission did here?

I’ll have all the gritty details for you next week. Stay tuned.

Little Free Library Is A Whole Lot Of Cool

Have you seen the little wooden houses on posts in front yards around town? They look kind of like bird houses with a glass door on the front.

Those are Little Free Library boxes most likely. What is a Little Free Library?

“Little Free Library is a nonprofit organization that

inspires a love of reading, builds community, and

sparks creativity by fostering neighborhood book

exchanges around the world.”

I’ve got one in my neighborhood which my wife and I have used a few times to exchange books as we go on our daily walk. The other day I stopped by the house where the Little Free Library box sits to tell the folks who live there just how awesome it is that they installed a box.

It’s at the home of a local couple who for a long time have been deeply involved in the Great Falls community, Brad Talcott and Linda Caricaburu. I asked if I could take a picture and as you can see, that little library is as cool as the other side of pillow.

Ms. Caricaburu told me that she hopes the library box will encourage more children’s and young teen books to be exchanged on a regular basis.

I agree. I think we could probably all benefit from a lot more reading and a little less TV and video games. So keep your eyes peeled for the Little Free Library boxes in Great Falls.

And check out their website which includes plans to build your own box, and a whole lot more. https://littlefreelibrary.org/

How Are We To Select A Great Falls Ethics Committee?

Let’s say you needed to find a watchdog because your henhouse was recently raided by some foxes.  Would you go to the local fox den and ask the occupants therein, some with feathers still clinging to their little chins, to select the best watchdog to keep an eye on your cluckers? 

The Great Falls City Commission is accepting applications for a newly created Great Falls Ethics Committee. The deadline is December 15 for applicants to the three-member advisory board. 

So an ethics committee will be appointed by a City Commission which has one member, Tracy Houck, who was found guilty of and fined for violating Montana campaign finance practices. And who later in a separate incident required a hand delivered reprimand and warning from the city attorney for her blatant conflicts of interest surrounding the allocation of taxpayer funds, $29,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds which have been subsequently revoked by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development due to her self-serving conflicts. 

The very same Houck who also repeatedly lied to the public and press about sending reports to the State’s Commissioner of Political Practices, backdated official documents to avoid accountability for cheating, and attempted to deposit leftover campaign contributions in the bank account of the organization by which she is employed, Paris Gibson Square. 

An ethics committee to be appointed by a City Commission which has another member, Bill Bronson, who has repeatedly voted to allocate taxpayer funds to two separate local organizations, Paris Gibson Square and NeighborWorks Great Falls, organizations which employed his immediate family members. Conduct which has triggered HUD to require an investigation and audit going back three years for which our tax dollars are now paying. 

An ethics committee to be appointed by a City Commission which has another member, Mayor Bob Kelly, who not only has said and done nothing about the misconduct of the commissioners mentioned above but who also served on both the Great Falls Development Authority and NeighborWorks Great Falls boards and then voted to allocate CDBG money to those organizations shortly after resigning from those boards and against explicit HUD policy. 

These are the foxes – oops, I mean folks – who will be selecting our local watchdog ethics committee? A committee which is supposed to serve as an extra layer of transparency and help resolve ethics issues for not only city staff and other appointed boards but for the City Commission and its members. 

In my opinion a better way to select the three members of the Great Falls Ethics Committee would be to either elect the members at large during regular city-wide elections or to have the nine Neighborhood Councils each nominate a candidate from their respective areas and then have the Council of Councils elect the final three. 

Personally I prefer the Neighborhood Council selection method because it emulates a district or ward system of representation (a system I would like to see us adopt for electing our City Commission) and because it gives the Neighborhood Councils some extra heft and responsibility. 

Unfortunately, as I understand it, either of the two alternative systems for selecting an ethics panel I mention above would require a provision to be inserted into the City Charter, which in turn would require a vote of the people during the next municipal election. And to even get such a provision on the ballot would require the City Commission (yes, the same Commission which is about to select an ethics committee) to pass an ordinance or adopt a resolution – or by a referendum petition requiring signatures from at least 20% of the city electorate. Not much hope this City Commissions will choose to do so.  

For now it appears that we’re stuck with the current City Commission making the decision as to who their own watchdog will be. A City Commission with members who have been pelted with numerous conflicts of interest and ethical issues both in appearance and in reality. Again unfortunately, because of this lack of credibility, any Ethics Committee appointed by this City Commission will lack the vital confidence and trust of many local citizens. Including me. 

On Tax Abatements: Billings Says “Yes” Where Great Falls Says “No”

Back in the day, oh, forty or fifty years ago, there was an ongoing friendly competition between Great Falls and Billings as to which was the best and biggest city. The two Montana big dogs battling for bragging rights. I remember because I was a young sprout at the time, delivering the Great Falls Leader, going to the Liberty Theater for Saturday matinees and ice skating at the indoor Civic Center rink.

Well, Great Falls has been left in the dust by our one-time rival Billings. According to the US Census Bureau, Billings’ population as of 2016 is 110,323, and Great Falls is 59,178.

According to a presentation by Great Falls Development Authority President Brett Doney at a recent neighborhood council meeting, Billings has an industrial tax base of around 19% while Great Falls is at about 3%.

Why? There are several reasons, like the closing of the Anaconda Mining Company, a reduced BN railroad presence, no major college, we’re off the east-west interstate highway etc., but with each passing year the various “reasons” begin to sound more and more like excuses.

A good example of why Billings won the dogfight and continues to win can be found in a recent article from the Billings Gazette.

Two weeks ago, Yellowstone County approved a tax break for the Phillips 66 oil refinery in Billings for a $298 million project:

“The project added 18 full-time positions, bringing total workforce to 320 full-time and two-part time positions. Average wage of new employees is $71.30 per hour, including benefits.”

In contrast, in December of 2016 the Great Falls City Commission voted to deny a $6.3 million tax abatement spread out over 10 years for Calumet Montana Refining Co., which had just completed a $450 million expansion here in Great Falls. Approval of the abatement could have meant more jobs and more economic activity for local business. From the city staff report:

“Staff Comment: The expansion of the refinery has had a very positive impact on employment opportunities within the City. According to data provided by Calumet, the total cumulative effect of adding 40 full-time refinery jobs is anticipated to produce 276 jobs in the industry. It is not known how many of the 276 jobs will be located within the City of Great Falls or Cascade County.”

But no.

To be fair, I was conflicted about the approval of the Calumet tax abatement at the time and reluctantly opposed it after having read the city staff’s reasoning in their recommendation to oppose. Hindsight is always 20-20. I was wrong.

My reasoning at the time was basically that homeowners, especially those living on a fixed income, were going to end up paying more of the cost of local government and infrastructure if we didn’t spread those costs out more to our industrial tax base.

Boy, was I wrong. In the intervening year and a half we have seen our local homeowner taxes continue to go up, up and away with no end in sight. The relief and breathing room for working class citizens and small business I had anticipated has not materialized.

We’re not really in a friendly competition with Billings anymore. They’ve left Great Falls in the dust when it comes to growth and opportunity. But we can get back on track if we’re willing to look at what other state and regional communities are doing to prosper and expand and if we’re willing to adapt and adopt their winning policies and strategies here.

Even More CDBG Mania

Have you noticed that when it comes to Community Block Grant funding and voting, the Great Falls City Commission abounds with apparent conflicts of interest, or with situations with the appearance of conflicts?

We’ve already seen an article in E-City Beat about Commissioner Houck and the appearance of a huge conflict of interest involving Paris Gibson Square, the entity from which Houck draws a paycheck. There are other disturbing real or apparent conflicts involving other City Commissioners.

Let’s start with Commissioner Bill Bronson.

Last year at the January 19, 2016 City Commission meeting, Bronson affirmatively voted to hand NeighborWorks Great Falls (NWGF) management of the city’s CDBG rehab revolving loan program (worth over $2 million in funds already loaned) under a contract which was to pay NWGF $50,000 a year. Commissioner Bronson has an immediate family member who works in a significant position at NWGF. Perhaps sensing that this would become an issue, Bronson pre-empted his critics and declared at the meeting that he would not recuse himself:

Commissioner Bronson noted that his wife is an employee at NeighborWorks. He explained that his wife is not involved with this particular program. She operates a totally separate and independently financed program. After consulting with City Attorney Sara Sexe and concluding that there is not a conflict of interest he will be participating in this matter.

Then-Deputy City Manager Jennifer Reichelt led the staff presentation explaining that, as reported in the minutes, “NeighborWorks was identified as an ideal partner, and staff began discussions regarding the future of the program.” (Reichelt also sat on the NWGF Board at the time.)

A number of citizens objected to NWGF taking over the fund, including Terry Thompson, CEO of the Great Falls Association of Realtors:

Ms. Thompson urged the Commission to table this matter until such time as sufficient research has been completed by City staff to identify other non-profits, such as a local credit union, if interested and/or capable of being certified by HUD, to administer this program.

The Commission, including Bronson, did not want to consider other organizations, and voted to hand over the keys to NWGF.

Bronson’s participation on the matter does not seem to jive with HUD rules (Conflicts of Interest CDBG and HOME Programs):

  • Generally, the regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 84 and 85 prohibit an employee, officer or agent of the grantee/subgrantee or recipient/subrecipient from participating in the selection, or in the award or administration of a contract supported by Federal  funds if a conflict of interest, real or apparent, would be involved.
  • Such a conflict would arise when:
  • (i) The employee, officer or agent,
  • (ii) Any member of his immediate family,
  • (iii) His or her partner, or
  • (iv) An organization which employs, or is about to employ, any of the above, has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for an award….

And I note:

  • There are no exceptions for real or apparent procurement conflicts of interest.

So, a few questions here…

Does Commissioner Bronson have a member of his immediate family employed by NeighborWorks? Yes! Does that mean that Bronson’s family member, by receiving a paycheck, has both a financial and other interest in the firm selected for an award? Moreover, even if Bronson can legally justify his participation, does that make it right for him to do so? Or, put another way, does Bronson’s “just trust me” attitude strengthen or weaken the public’s trust in him, and in the City Commission?

Bronson pontificated that his involvement did not constitute a conflict of interest because the member of his family employed at NWGF worked in a different department than the one actually receiving the funds. While HUD rules do not seem to define separate departments of a firm as reasons to exempt one from a conflict of interest, again, is Bronson’s entrenched defiance the kind of conduct we want in our elected officials? At a minimum, this looks bad. Why not step aside?

More recently, at the March 21, 2017 meeting of the City Commission, commissioners voted to accept CDBG allocations on Timeliness Projects. NWGF and Habitat for Humanity combined on a project and received $116,000 for purchasing lots. Unsurprisingly, Commissioner Bronson participated here, too, and again voted to give money to NeighborWorks Great Falls.

Then, at the April 18, 2017 City Commission meeting, the commission voted to accept the proposed CDBG funding allocations for 2017-18 and to set a public hearing for May 16. Bronson voted affirmatively to authorize $40,000 to the City’s revolving block grand loan fund. In other words, the vote authorizes the City to receive the money, but that money, again, ultimately flows to NWGF, who now administers this fund.

On top of all this, Commissioner Bronson may be poised not only to vote on June 6 on CDBG funds to the City (and by extension, to NWGF), but also to weigh in and vote on CDBG funds to Public Facilities, of which Paris Gibson Square is now a recipient — and an entity which employs another immediate family member of Bronson’s. (The public hearing on this matter is Tuesday, May 16.)

Commissioner Bronson’s family members are good, upstanding, hard working community members.  This is not about them in any way, shape or form. This is about Commissioner Bronson refusing to recuse himself from voting when there appears to be, as HUD states, either real or apparent conflicts of interest. In Bronson’s case, this includes both NWGF and Paris Gibson Square.

Frustratingly, the murkiness on CDBG funding extends beyond both Commissioners Bronson and Houck. At the same March 21, 2017 city commission meeting, both Mayor Bob Kelly and Commissioner Bronson abstained from voting on CDBG Timeliness funds to the Great Falls Development Authority (GFDA), since both were, at the time, members of the GFDA Board.

However, at the April 18 meeting of the commission, we see two members of the City Commission in virtually identical situations doing two very different things: Mayor Kelly voting and Commissioner Bronson abstaining from a vote to give the GFDA an additional $40,000 in CDBG allocations for economic development. The mayor stated he had resigned from that board, and that he would now participate and vote on the matter. “I feel free and clear of that obligation as a matter of fact,” he said.  Still a conflict? At one meeting he recuses himself and at the next he votes. Why does Bronson (of all people) feel compelled to sit this one out, yet Kelly doesn’t?

Look at how much has changed since July 21, 2015: recall Kelly’s comment on the controversial Thaniel Addition, where he had just resigned as a member of the board of NWGF and when a potential conflict of interest loomed large in the public eye (and just as he was running for the position of Mayor):

‘I have every legal right to vote…but I’m going to choose to abstain. It wouldn’t be appropriate to resign on one issue so I could come back and vote again…Sometimes there’s things that are legal, sometimes there’s things that are right.’

‘I have every legal right to vote…but I’m going to choose to abstain. It wouldn’t be appropriate to resign on one issue so I could come back and vote again…Sometimes there’s things that are legal, sometimes there’s things that are right.’

As much as I appreciated Kelly’s sentiments at the time — it really seemed like he “got it” — I can’t help but wonder: What was different about this situation? On Thaniel, Kelly didn’t think it was appropriate to resign on the issue so he could come back and vote, but he does here? What’s the difference?

And finally, have you noticed that Mayor Kelly and Commissioner Bronson at times appear to pass the voting baton back and forth? When one abstains or is recused from voting, the other votes, even though the apparent conflict of interest (or lack thereof, to be fair) is exactly the same for both. This happened in 2016 with the NWGF contract for rehab loans, and it happened at the April 18, 2017 commission meeting with GFDA on the docket for CDBG funds.

Such behavior gives the appearance that when votes are needed to pass an item before the commission, commissioners agree ahead of time on who will abstain and who will vote. While this is probably not the case, it’s the appearance of such that incurs public distrust – and that is exactly the reason for HUD rules regarding “a real or apparent” conflict of interest on CDBG funding. Public trust.

There is a relatively simple fix to all of this, however: participating members, both on the Community Development Council (CDC) and the City Commission should be required to submit conflict of interest forms. People who represent organizations applying for CDBG funding should not be permitted to serve on the CDC. And City Commissioners who serve on advisory boards whose organizations do businesses with the city commission should, once they are elected, resign from those boards. Working as a city commissioner is a tough job, and I applaud all those who step up to do it, but once they are elected, it’s time to drop the other stuff and focus on us, we the people.

The citizens of this great city deserve that much.

Tryon: Wages, Population Stagnant; City Taxes And Utilities Up

With the City of Great Falls moving past the financial fiasco of the $5,553,054 bailout (decrease in unassigned General Fund balance) in 2013 to cover the electric power business (see City 2014 CAFR Financial section, p. 14), the City’s financial position has improved, but the needs of the City are still great.

The façade of the Civic Center needs fixing. It’s a big ticket item and the money has to come from somewhere. City staff reports that costs to repair the Civic Center are estimated in the $6 – 8 million dollar range.

City officials are also discussing a “need” to increase legal staff and increase staff workspace. And then there is the recently passed Park and Recreation Master Plan, which cost the City $89,970 to produce, as reported in October of 2015.

As E-City Beat reported on February 17, from the City Manager’s packet: “After discussion about implementation of the Park Master Plan, it was the consensus of the Commission to pursue a Park Maintenance District, but agreed that the fees imposed should be reasonable and not include golf or the Natatorium. Manager Doyon suggested that a more robust maintenance fee may result in more money in the general fund to support public safety and ultimately less cost to the public versus a public safety levy. The Commission concurred.”

Manager Doyon gets it: how far can we stretch our property tax dollars? How many more increases, beyond the ever-seeking public school administration and the Great Falls Development Authority, can fixed income and lower income families bear?

The City routinely raises annual property taxes under the inflationary percentage allowed by State law, which is one-half of the average rate of inflation for the prior 3 years. For the 2016-17 budget year, that rate was .67 percent. Here is a brief description of the 198.24 mill levy passed by the City Commission for the budget year 2016-17, as taken from Resolution 10152

Section 1. – Determination of Mill Levy Limit

  • Appendix A shows the determination of the total mill levy limit of 167.26 mills.
  • An additional 26.14 “Permissive Medical Levy” is allowed under 15-10-420(9)(a)(vi) for increased health insurance premiums not included in the Appendix A calculation.
  • An additional 1.90 mills is allowed under 15-10-420(2) for additional voter supported mills. On November 4, 2003, a $2.5 million general obligation bond was approved by voters for construction of a soccer park. It has been determined that 1.90 mills for soccer park debt service payments is needed for Fiscal Year 2017.
  • Lastly, an additional 2.94 mills is allowed under 15-10-420(2) for additional voter supported mills. On November 7, 2006, a $2.27 million general obligation bond was approved by voters for repair and improvement of city pool facilities. It has been determined that 2.94 mills for swimming pool debt service payments is needed for Fiscal Year 2017.

The 20-year soccer park bonds were issued in June 2004. The 10-year pools facilities bonds were issued in May 2007, expiring after this year.

To provide a snapshot of yearly property tax levies, here is a rundown for Great Falls over the past 7 years (information from annual property tax increase and mill levy requests to City Commission):

Year Base Mill Levy Permissive

Med Levy

Soccer Park Pools Facilities TOTAL Base Inflationary % increase taken Perm

Med

Infl %

2010-11 152.94 15.54 2.45 3.83 173.10 0 1.06
2011-12 164.27 15.44 2.56 3.72 183.24 0 0?
2012-13 169.13 17.93 2.58 3.93 193.57 1.2 1.4
2013-14 172.19 20.06 2.57 3.92 198.74 1.03 1.3
2014-15 175.77 22.87 2.82 3.62 205.08 1.03 1.25
2015-16 162.17 23.03 1.97 3.12 190.29 .67 2.17
2016-17 167.26 26.14 1.90 2.94 198.24 .5 2.48

The base mill levy is a formula regulated by the State under MCA 15-10-420. A portion of that code reads:

“The maximum number of mills that a governmental entity may impose is established by calculating the number of mills required to generate the amount of property tax actually assessed in the governmental unit in the prior year based on the current year taxable value, less the current year’s newly taxable value, plus one-half of the average rate of inflation for the prior 3 years.

    (b) A governmental entity that does not impose the maximum number of mills authorized under subsection (1)(a) may carry forward the authority to impose the number of mills equal to the difference between the actual number of mills imposed and the maximum number of mills authorized to be imposed. The mill authority carried forward may be imposed in a subsequent tax year.”

The result of the mill levy increase over the years results in a continual increase by the City in property taxes with the exception of 2015-16. And while the base mill levy for this year, 2016-17, is just under the rate of 2013-14, property taxes have increased with increases in streets, lighting districts, the boulevard district and the permissive medical levy. It is evident by the statistics on the permissive medical levy that government regulation of the health care industry has done nothing to stop the rising costs of medical care and insurance, an issue both the public school system and the county are also dealing with.

Additionally to property taxes, city utility rates have increased each year. While these increases may be necessary to maintain critical infrastructure, many citizens in this town do not get cost of living increases or annual raises, and often work two or three jobs to make ends meet. Increases in taxes and services for them means a decrease in other household spending.

To provide a snapshot of just one area of yearly increases, here are the basic utility service increases for Great Falls over the past 7 years and this year’s proposed increases (information taken from annual utility rate increase requests to City Commission):

2010: water 5%; sewer 7.5%

2011: water 5%; sewer 7.5%

2012: water nearly 5%; sewer nearly 10%

2013: water 5%; sewer 10%

2014: water 5%

2015: water 7%; sewer 3%; storm drain 10%.

2016: water 10%; sewer 3%; storm drain 10%

2017 (proposed) water 10%; sewer 3%; storm drain 10%

You get the picture. Are utility increases now a standard and a FOREVER thing? And when did these annual rate increases actually begin? Are we trying to outclass other cities in Montana with our rates? The conundrum is that infrastructure in communities across America is aging, is costly to repair and update, and is becoming more costly with federal regulations.

The City Commission set a public hearing date of May 2, 2017 to address the proposed utility increases for this year to be effective in June. There would be public outcry if the same annual increases were applied to gas and electric rates.

Take a drive around areas of town in the summer and you see more and more dried up lawns. Seniors and low income families water their lawns less as the cost of water services increase.

The answer to the tax dilemma is complicated. Taxes and utility fees are a necessary component of suburban living. In comparing the tax climate of Great Falls to other major Montana cities, Great Falls appears to be reasonable in how much taxes are levied on the average homeowner.

What Great Falls really needs is an expanding tax base to ease the burden on individual property owners. That means more and better paying jobs. The more property owners and business owners there are to spread the wealth of tax burden, the less impact tax increases have on each individual. The more TIFs and tax breaks given to select projects, the more the average Joe tax payer has to provide for every aspect of the community, city, schools and county included.

The Politics Of Pretending: Crime On The Rise In Great Falls

Three young men beat someone up and stole his shoes and coat on February 26 right in front of the friendly IGA store off 25th Street North and 6th Avenue North here in Great Falls. Passersby watched it happen. Someone in the store called 911, but no passersby moved to stop the thugs, no doubt out of fear for their own safety.

A week later a young female clerk at a local store in Great Falls told me she doesn’t like to “go out” because she worried about “getting beat up, especially downtown at night.” Not long ago, she was on a GF transit bus and a man on the bus was passed out.  She informed the driver of this passenger, and when the bus stopped, the drooling man arose from his stupor and started screaming at her. It was a scary scenario. This same young female said she was also recently surrounded and intimidated by a group of panhandlers on the lower south side. She suggested that it’s time we start doing something about the growing crime and poverty problems in our community.

Hardly a day goes by that we don’t hear about another vehicle being stolen or burglary or child abuse or assault or a meth or heroin bust or a drunken rampage. More and more indigents, transients, homeless, addicts and out-of-work are wandering our streets and public places.

Here are three questions for all Great Falls citizens:

What’s happening to our town?

What are we going to do about it?

Why do some of those in positions of leadership and influence seem so blissfully unaware?

Great Falls is still, for the most part, a good place to live, raise and educate a family, work and recreate. But the not so hidden secret is that we are experiencing an increase in poverty, crime and family and drug abuse without a commensurate increase in population and tax base to deal with those problems.

Indeed, our local CASA-Can Facebook page points out that in 2016, there were 700 children in the foster care system in Cascade County alone. By February 16, 2017, 70 more children were added to the ranks. 

The Great Falls Police Department has their hands full. In a report to the community on January 30, 2017, Chief Bowen reported that the GFPD “ended 2016 with a total of 42,140 calls for service. Our teams were busy with this massive increase of 4,066 more calls for service in 2016 than in 2015. As we prepare our year-end reports we found there may be several factors playing into the increase.

“In May we implemented the Data Driven Approach to Crime and Traffic Safety (DDACTS) patrol model and designated almost 200 square blocks in the heart of our community as the DDACTS Zone. Officers assigned to this area are dedicated to being highly visible with frequent traffic enforcement.  

“We also experienced a surge in stolen autos,” Bowen stated in the report.  

It is not immediately clear whether one can interpret the implementation of the DDACTS model as a reason for the massive increase in calls for service, or whether Chief Bowen is simply noting the GFPD response to the problem. But the question remains: what do we do about the increase in calls for service?

First, let’s not pretend that the problem doesn’t exist. The mural of Charlie Russell with a flying saucer hovering over his head painted on the North parking garage looks cool and upscale modern, but doesn’t fix what’s going on inside the parking garage. It doesn’t take much “ear to the ground” to hear citizens’ concerns about downtown parking garage safety or the serious issues surrounding increasing problems of vagrancy and drug abuse associated with both parking garages. It isn’t a new problem, but it is a worsening problem. 

Real solutions are not obvious or simple. There will be no real solutions, however, without solid public discourse, acknowledgement by the powers that be, and more options than glossing over the existing problem with a pretty paint job. We have to stop playing the politics of pretending that everything is great in Great Falls.

It’s commendable that the GFPD implemented DDACTS and offers a Citizen’s Academy to provide interested citizens an education in how the police department operates and the policing challenges our community faces. Still, there needs to be more viable solutions to the rise in crime.

Let’s clearly define and prioritize the most pressing safety issues in our city. The mayor and city commission have made so much ado over cell phone use by licensed drivers and so little ado has been made about the increasing overall crime rate, as well as the increase in serious crimes, in Great Falls.

So what are we going to do about it? For starters, we need to clearly define and prioritize the set of crime and safety issues so apparent in our city. The continuing word from local city commissioners and the Great Falls Tribune is that the overall outlook for Great Falls is great and getting greater. It’s so great in fact, that the City Commission has addressed increased fines for drivers using cell phones because, well, cell phone use by drivers must be one of the single most pressing issues in our fair city.

Our mayor even goes so far as to take credit for instituting the driver cell phone ban when in fact he was not even an elected commissioner at the time the ordinance was initially passed. In a January 13, 2017 article in the Great Falls Tribune, the mayor is quoted:

‘My goal in putting it in place (driver cell phone ban) was to alert the community and others who visit Great Falls that we insist on safe driving habits.’

The ban on using a cell phone while driving was passed by the city commission in July, 2012. Kelly was not appointed to the city commission until December, 2012 and was not sworn in until January, 2013.

The point here is that the mayor and city commission have made so much ado over cell phone use by licensed drivers and so little ado has been made about the increasing overall crime rate, as well as the increase in serious crimes, in Great Falls.

While the mayor pushes for murals on the parking garage, takes credit for a cell phone ban while driving, and discusses options for more office space for a growing city government, perhaps there should be public discussion from the city commission about safety issues and how to bolster support for the GFPD.

Perhaps the surest way to deal with the increasing crime problems in Great Falls is to target more resources to law enforcement. Is it a stretch to consider that one of the main challenges for our GFPD is that we simply don’t have enough police on the beat? Or do we? Would increases in our PD force help reduce crime, or are there other models we can draw from? Is it time to review our GFPD policies and our city ordinances on how we deal with some of these issues?

No solutions will be easy because implementation will mean prioritizing our city budget to lean more towards safety and local law enforcement. It shouldn’t require yet higher local taxes, fees or additional levies. However, the city is already discussing increased staffing needs and a resulting increase in office space. While the Children’s Museum as a possible space for future development of city offices has been the topic of heated public discussion and discussion among the city commission, there has currently been no clear information to the public about exactly what the commission may propose. Clearly there has been discussion about new construction.

From a Feb. 17 article in the Great Falls Tribune:

Great Falls Mayor Bob Kelly said, ‘It would be silly to start a big construction project if the museum comes to us when the lease expires in ’18 and says they’ve outgrown the space.’

Actually, it would be silly given the current increase in crime in Great Falls to prioritize expanded office space over additional law enforcement resources.

While tax hikes and special elections for mill levies is business as usual, citizens of Great Falls may be feeling a bit pinched. The school system just passed a $100 million levy last fall and is prepping the public to request two additional million dollar levies this spring. County commissioners just announced a possible $450,000 request for a mill levy to help fund the Great Falls Development Authority. City taxes and utilities increase annually on homeowners’ property taxes. There seems to be no government agency that isn’t holding a hand out for more, yet wages and job prospects in Great Falls remain fairly stagnant.

Which brings us back to a need for open and honest public discussion and the need to prioritize the most pressing issues facing the good governing of our city.

In conclusion, Great Falls is still a marvelous place to live, work and raise a family but we have to be honest and vigilant. We should be optimistic about our potential but realistic about our current situation. Our community is not well served by those who gloss over or try to spin reality into a cheerful but fake assessment of what actually is. We can do better.

Dismal Jobs Report Means It’s Time For Real Change In Great Falls

We should be at the Defcon 1 level of concern after hearing Brett Doney’s comments about our local economy. His analysis in this instance is very disturbing but not surprising.

Not surprising to me because I’ve been watching what I call the ‘Glass Half Empty/Half Full Switcheroo” for a long time in this town. Here’s how it works:

Politicians and the heads of taxpayer funded non-profits and government agencies all understand that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. The various organizational and political poobahs have become adept at massaging statistics to meet their situational needs. When it’s election time or time for the public and/or higher-ups to be convinced how great you or your organization are, out come the ‘facts’ and figures showing how rosy and wonderful everything is. But if you’re not an incumbent or your organization needs more funding, you trot out the dim and dire numbers to convince everyone how essential you or your organization is to the survival of common interests.

Doney’s statements are disturbing for obvious reasons. A net loss of 707 jobs in our already stagnant, low-wage economy is potentially devastating. To hear such alarming stats and assessments coming from the leader of our local economic development agency makes me wonder when the usual suspects who comprise the good ol’ boys and girls network here are going to start calling for his head for such negative blasphemy.

“We’ve lost the equivalent in the last couple of years in the City more than the nation lost in the Great Recession.”

“And frankly, these numbers scare the hell out of me.”

Good heavens! If I were to make a public statement coming anywhere even close to these made by Doney, the City Commission and the downtown elite would have my head on a spike in front of the Civic Center with a placard reading, “Such will be the fate of all nay-saying nabobs of negativity who dare to question.”

The fact is that Doney’s pitch for CDBG grant funds here actually contains the brutal and inconvenient truth: things are not all sunny and rosy right here in River City. I’m afraid that because most of the power players with money and influence who are currently calling the shots in Great Falls are doing well, they assume that everybody else must be too.

Unfortunately, it appears to me that the little bubble of old Great Falls money, non-profit organizations and government entities is blissfully unaware of the struggle going on here. Doney touched on it by pointing out that there are too many citizens working two or three low wage service sector jobs to make ends meet. And this lack of higher wages combined with a stagnant population “…puts tremendous pressure on the City, on the County, on healthcare, and all of the social agencies in town.”

Great Falls has a thriving poverty industry – non-profits and government agencies that do pretty well for themselves under the mandate to help the less fortunate. It’s a good mission but the goal should be less poverty and dependence and fewer non-profit/government jobs, not more. And certainly not a local economy based on poverty which benefits the few. We are also seeing a growing child abuse, substance abuse, gambling and crime problem here, which are all exacerbated by low wages and a stagnant and limited tax base.

We need a growing population and an expanding economy with more primary, private sector employers paying higher wages. Unfortunately, Doney’s assessment makes it clear that we are moving in the opposite direction.

My personal opinion is that we’ve been doing the same thing and getting the same results for a long, long time in Great Falls. We should try something new, encourage new and different solutions from outside the box. We should invite new and different voices and try some bold action. We have a whole lot of potential in Great Falls but we need more hard and honest evaluation, and most of all we need a common vision and agreed upon goals.

Guest Opinion: Rise Above Partisanship, Legislators

The Montana Legislature meets for ninety days every two years. Please, oh please, Representative Dude and Senator Dudette, don’t make us wish it was two days every ninety years.

Be civil. Be sensible. Don’t put your party or your own political ambitions above doing what’s right.

The efficacy of your work won’t be judged by the number of bills you pass, your ideological purity, or your good intentions. Your work this session will be judged by the real impact it has on the prosperity, liberty and opportunities preserved for your constituents.

For example, it was reported that Senate President Scott Sales, Republican from Bozeman, said recently at the Montana Chamber breakfast that he would probably not vote for any infrastructure bill. I hope that any Republican who thinks that way would reconsider.

While government wasteful spending is bad, bad, bad, common sense says – no, screams – that building and repairing public infrastructure is exactly the kind of spending state and local governments should be focusing on. As long as the goal is to promote the common good and not to create more bureaucracy and make-work for favored constituencies, well planned and carefully prioritized infrastructure is exactly what our state needs.

We sorely need to create an economic climate in Montana that attracts and retains more and higher paying private sector jobs. Roads, bridges, water projects and high speed internet, etc., are essential to that end. So lets not play, “Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the ideologically purest of them all?” on either side of the aisle.

By the way, and here I digress a bit, Senator Sales is one of the GOP contestants in the “Who Wants To Replace Ryan Zinke?” show. A couple of others who have thrown in their Montana cowboy hats are Great Falls’ own, Republican Senator Ed Buttrey and Democrat Casey Schreiner.

Former GOP gubernatorial candidate Greg Gianforte, Public Service Commission Vice Chair (and Great Falls High School grad) Travis Kavulla, newly elected State Auditor Matt Rosendale and Democrat Rep. Amanda Curtis are a few other names rumored to be possible entries in the Congressional race.

The state Central Committees from each party will entertain their respective list of interested candidates and select one to go on to a special election sometime in the very near future. Wouldn’t it be cool if we had a U.S. Congressperson from Great Falls? Yes, Rick, it would be way cool.

Anyway, back to our Montana legislative session. Congratulations and good luck to all of those who are sacrificing to go to Helena and serve as citizen legislators. We need you all to behave with honesty, integrity and goodwill. We love our Treasure State and we don’t want to be in the economic doldrums anymore. We have yuuuuuuuge potential here and we are trusting y’all to get ‘er done in the next 90 days.

In conclusion, all of you hardworking Montana Reps and Sens shouldn’t think of yourselves as Democrats or Republicans. Instead, think of yourselves as employees under the watchful eye of your boss. Because that is exactly what you are. Now get to work.