V2N39: The Public Fought Back at the City Council Meeting

People have figured out what is going on and they don't like it

I missed this meeting (I was at the Ukrainian Recovery Conference) and just watched the video. I am bummed I missed this one.

The people spoke up in mass. When public comment was opened, they rejected the pro-development, anti-resident values of the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map (FLUM).

One person asked, given our low hotel occupancy, why are we increasing short-term rental density in residential neighborhoods? I think she missed the opening where Amanda Breen lauded the expansion of more flights into SUN. One of the most astute comments was “this is a how-many-tourists-can-we-cram-into-Ketchum plan.” That is actually the plan! Build more STRs. Expand the airport to bring in more tourists to fill them. Push low-revenue locals down the valley. Tax whoever they can via the LOT to promote growth in the tourism industry and subsidize low-income housing to depress wages for the tourism industry.

Bad Process —> Bad Outcome

The 7/7 Ketchum City Council started as I expected. The staff and some of our elected officials are determined to upzone Ketchum. As I have repeatedly stated, there is no consensus within the community on this matter. Upzoning came from the staff, not from the residents. In this meeting, they spent a considerable amount of time defending the upzoning proposal. I found it not only unconvincing but disingenuous.

“We want to support tourism in our economy.” Not a single sentence on supporting the quality of life for Ketchum residents. In a five-hour meeting. The primacy of tourism development is clear. ¹

Here are the arguments the staff and mayor put forth for the FLUM:

• The goal of it is workforce housing.

• If we don’t do it, we will get more of what we say we don’t like

• Ketchum is aging

• Too many homes are dark

• If we aren’t going to permit five and six-story buildings in the core, we have to upzone in the neighborhoods

• Don’t worry, it’s just a FLUM; it’s the zoning code that matters

• If you are against the FLUM, that means you don’t want workforce housing (code for prejudiced).

Did I miss one?

Even if you support addressing these issues, the FLUM doesn’t do it. This is the core of the hypocrisy that the community is becoming aware of. The FLUM is cloaked in virtue but is only certain to accomplish one goal: more tourism condos and second homes in what are still residential neighborhoods.

The whole debacle was predictable and avoidable.² The “audit” approach to Comprehensive Planning that the mayor jammed through is not a legitimate approach, which is why the community is rejecting it. The Mayor tried to pull another fast one, and he still might get away with it, but this is all his doing, abetted by Ms. Breen and Ms. Hamilton.

They Act Like They Have a Mandate—They Don’t

In the meeting, the Mayor stated that the City’s top priority is workforce housing, and that if this is not the community’s top priority, they need to elect different people. We tried! In 2021, 65% of the town voted AGAINST him, but since we don’t have runoffs, he was returned to office. He has no mandate.

He is being disingenuous about the term “workforce” housing. As I have written about in other posts, and as he is well aware, his team at the Ketchum Housing Department has a broader agenda than addressing housing affordability challenges to meet Ketchum’s workforce needs.

FLUM Implications—I Think Many of Them are Bad

To my observation, the staff presented the FLUM without the full picture of its implications.

If the goal is workforce housing, why does that require upzoning in residential neighborhoods? The answer is it doesn’t. As I have written in previous posts, we have ample land for this. Upzoning near the Baldy bases is a disingenuous way to get more tourist condos and second homes under the cloak of workforce housing.

Take an area slated for upzoning to medium-density. The max permitted units increase from 11 to 18. “But only for community housing,” we are told. First of all, who cares what is in an 18-unit building—it’s just too big on its face. But how many of those 18 units will be “community housing?” No one knows! Literally. Because that will depend on a future zoning code.

If it aligns with current practices, it won't be many. We cannot require community housing for development. You can only provide incentives to developers for community housing. Generally, for Ketchum, those incentives result in approximately 7% of the square footage allocated to community housing. One of the new 18-unit buildings they plan to build in Warm Springs will only have one or two units of community housing.

But, now, instead of 11 units of market-rate housing in a medium-density zone, you get 16 units of market-rate housing and 2 units of community housing. The juice is not worth the squeeze. This is why people don’t trust them.

Then there is more traffic, more competition for fewer parking spaces, more risk to wildlife corridors, more danger for emergency services on the second busiest road in Blaine County, and the only way out of Warm Springs.

We Don’t Trust Them to Act in Our Best Interests—Because They Don’t

During a five-hour meeting, not once did anyone explain how upzoning benefits residents. They only tell us why it’s not as bad as we think. What? Whose interests do they represent?

The theme of the public comment period was that this is a bad plan, we don’t want it, and let’s wait for the next Council to proceed. That’s not my interpretation; that is how the Planner summarized the public comments.

This leads us to another lie from the staff: that if we don’t adopt this FLUM, we will get more of what we don’t want. Why do I say lie? Because they know that the upzoning will result in something we don’t want. But also because they can stop the things we don’t want without this FLUM. They just don’t want to.

Mr. Cordovano made a great point on this topic. He said for the past three and a half years, he has been trying to get a third-floor setback requirement for downtown buildings, but staff have repeatedly told him that he needed to wait for the Comp Plan process. In this meeting, the staff admitted that it was not true. It’s just that they encourage the Council to work more comprehensively rather than addressing problems on an ad hoc basis.

The hypocrisy of the mayor and staff on this is outrageous. They changed the zoning code in a footnote in a table to permit Bluebird to be built in an area where the zoning would not have permitted it. They changed the fourth-story setback rule to boost the profit margin for the Bluebird developer. They literally waived the zoning code provisions designed to prevent a building the size of the Marriott from being built on that site. When they want something, they change the rules. But when their constituents want something, they “can’t” change zoning? This is why we don’t trust them.

Ms. Hamilton stated that her feelings were hurt because of the comments that she was not trusted. It makes her sad. “People should understand how I feel.” What grown-up says that in a public meeting? There is no crying in baseball! Ms. Hamilton, let me be clear: saying you are doing this for workforce housing when you know it will not create workforce housing but will instead make what people who live in Ketchum like about living here worse is at the top of a reasonably long list of reasons why I don’t trust you.

There were numerous requests to pause the process to be more inclusive of community input and create a plan that is more comprehensive, with clear goals, objectives, timelines, connection to the budget, and accountability.

Upzoning was never requested by any community members in any public forum; it magically appeared halfway through the public comment period on the first draft of the Comprehensive Plan.

So when they say it hurts their feeling to hear they aren’t trusted, maybe they should do a little self-reflection.

Agree or Be Ignored

Key comment from someone at the meeting: “I live here full-time, and I work in Ketchum; until a month ago, I had no idea what you were doing.” This underscores the selectivity of the input for this process. I think it is part of a larger pattern of minimizing inclusiveness.

During this meeting, as he has done in many previous meetings, the Mayor frequently interrupted public commenters, either to prompt them to speed up or to stop. To one person, he said, “Let’s get through with this.” What is with that? The Council set rules that a person gets three minutes. Who is he to tell people what they can or can’t say during that time? This is the guy who says he wants public meetings to be “safe” for comments. No wonder people don’t feel safe when he is so dismissive of them.

Some of The Disingenuous Points From the City Staff and Troika

If you need further justification for not trusting the staff and Troika, read this footnote, as there are plenty more reasons.³ However, this post is already too long, so I have made it optional reading.

Stay Tuned…They Will Probably Take a Vote on This on August 4th

The Mayor wants a vote and not more meetings. Why does he want to push this when he knows the community does not support it? Is it because he has Ms. Breen and Ms. Hamilton on the Council that he has his best shot of passing it?

Locals are Liquor License Losers

I want to commend Council Member Cordovano for his insightful comments regarding the allocation of liquor licenses in Ketchum. He made some important points about how unfair and untransparent the process is.

The catalyst: Resort communities in Idaho paid a lobbyist in Boise to get more liquor licenses. As with many things, the taxpayers of Ketchum pay for more than half of that lobbying effort. We got three incremental licenses. A new restaurant was allocated one of these licenses before anyone else on the wait list was aware of the new licenses. Some of these restaurants have been on the wait list for over a decade.

What should have happened? When the lobbyist knew this was being passed, they should have alerted the City, and the City should have alerted all people on the wait list of this opportunity. Neither of those steps occurred. Intentional? Oversight? Either way, I think you might be a bit pissed off to see a restaurant that wasn’t even operating apply for a license you didn’t know existed but was created with your tax dollars.

The Mayor dismissed Spencer’s comments about the information flow process, saying that if they didn’t approve the license for Fiamma, Ketchum wouldn’t receive more licenses under the resort cities allocation. I don’t know what his basis is for that statement. I doubt it is true.

Both Cordovano and Hutchinson made the point that the packet provided to the Council was not finalized until 1 pm before the 4 pm Council meeting, and the liquor license item wasn’t posted to the agenda until 7pm on the night before a national holiday. The Mayor said he knew it was coming, so what was his point? Spencer said yes, he knew because he is a Council member, but what about the public?

Exactly. What about the public?

He made a great point about the bad governance process. In my observation it is the Bradshaw norm and part of the larger pattern of lack of concern about doing any more than the legal minimum for public meetings.

The Mayor is not alone in this approach. Ms. Hamilton asked Mr. Hutchinson how his vote would change if the public knew more about what was going on. Then she rushed to move for a vote, which was immediately seconded by Ms Breen and put to the vote by the Mayor. He and the Troika voted for it, while Cordovano and Hutchinson were put in the position of having to vote against it due to the flawed process.

This goes back to why I don’t trust Ms. Hamilton; or the Mayor, who had oversight of the liquor license allocation process. It smells.

1. I'm not making that up. The Mayor said that he plans for every city-owned piece of land to be developed into housing.

2. Patting myself on the back, as this is pretty much exactly what I predicted.

3. The Planner said only 15 families a year will move into Ketchum, so don’t worry about the upzoning leading to a population explosion. And yet, she said the FLUM will direct how Ketchum grows. Which is it? Will we grow or not? If we are only growing 15 families a year, or 150 during the life of this Plan, why do we need upzoning? For workforce housing, as the Mayor and Ms. Breen keep saying? As stated by her and the Mayor in every meeting on this topic, the City cannot regulate short-term rentals (STRs) and cannot prevent market units in upzoned areas from becoming either STRs or second homes.

The staff constantly says this is just a Comp Plan and FLUM, and it's the zoning that will be determinative. However, as several people commented, getting the Comp Plan and FLUM right means the code is more likely to accurately reflect community values. The legislative intent of requiring a FLUM with a Comp Plan is so your staff and Council don’t go rogue on zoning.

While it is technically true that the FLUM doesn’t raise your property taxes or change your zoning, that line of argument is disingenuous. When you rezone property to make it more valuable for tourism development, the odds that the taxes on that property will go up are pretty high.

What the Planner called “moderate changes” are, in fact, radical ones in the view of the community—just listen to the public comment. There is a significant expansion of high-density zones that wasn’t mentioned by the staff.

We are supposed to be grateful that they are leaving one-third of Ketchum available for traditional, low-density residential housing. The rest is free to be developed into one big de facto hotel. I am not grateful. I am upset.

Ms. Hamilton stated that her “guiding light” is year-round residents. Yet everything she has done over her term in office has been to displace them. How can she not understand this? During her term in office, she did nothing while hundreds of people were evicted from their workforce housing. She mentioned that most of our workers live in high-density housing. Yet she seems oblivious that building more high-density buildings will not mean that working people will live in them. Her logic is…illogical. Now she wants to do neighborhood meetings. She rejected doing this a year ago. She is not credible to me.

The staff made references to surveys of community sentiment on housing that they know have no statistical validity. The city continues to receive complaints that people are unaware of the status of the Comp Plan and FLUM, yet dismisses this as the complainer’s fault. They blame the victim. There has not been one City-led community meeting in any neighborhood targeted for upzoning. At the one major public meeting in December, no public comments were permitted.

The Planner said that unless the City annexes St Luke's, the City cannot build community housing there. That is misleading. The City itself cannot develop property it doesn't own. However, this is within Ketchum’s Area of City Impact, and the City could do a lot to collaborate with property owners, Blaine County, and ARCH or WRCHT to create housing there. They don’t want to, because then they can’t build low-income housing there with the Bluebird model. The Ketchum Housing Director has been hostile to any other approach.

The Planner said that if we don’t proceed with this FLUM, Ketchum will “decline as a community,” have more empty homes, and the population will age. This is the person who said only 15 new families a year will move into Ketchum. That’s 1% of the homes. Even if the age of those residents is under five, if she believes her fifteen number, it will have no impact on the average age. What is in the draft Comp Plan that will address the issues of aging and emptiness? NOTHING. If those are what we want to address, we need a plan that addresses them. Upzoning does not do that.

The Planner stated that the FLUM doesn’t dictate what constitutes community housing. That is disingenuous. Ketchum has a Housing Action Plan that defines that, and it’s not good. Read page 7 of that plan to see how they define the workforce to include people who choose not to work. It is Alice in Wonderland.

Mr. Hutchinson noted that when housing in the neighborhoods is sold, the neighborhoods won’t stay the same. The only way they will be preserved as single-family residence neighborhoods is for people to self-deed-restrict their homes. Presuming you agree with him, how does that justify upzoning the neighborhood?

They keep saying height limits in the upzoned areas will remain 35’ in the medium and high-density zones. This is also disingenuous. As anyone who looks out over the homes at the dog park can tell you, the actual height is 40’, because you get an extra 5’ for mechanicals on the roof. The current building code encourages flat roof boxes.

Andy Cooley (sp?) made the only public comment in support of the FLUM. His area will be rezoned as high-density, and he is happy to take one for the team. He was on the secret citizens’ advisory council that helped create the Comp Plan. He said that if you don’t support the density increase, you are against workforce housing, as you can’t have workforce housing unless you do this density increase. This is not true, and I don’t know why he believes this so strongly that he made that comment in the meeting. Mr. Cooley, please share your logic in the comments section.

For the Light Industrial zone, they mentioned that they plan to enforce the misuse of properties in the zone. I don’t get it. They have held power for over seven years. Why don’t they enforce LI zoning currently? This is the same crew that approved a private pickleball court in the LI.

The Council’s #1 obligation to the community is health and safety. Many of the Warm Springs residents commented on how there is only one road in/out, and that increasing density also increases their safety risk. There was no safety assessment in this process. Nor even a traffic study.

The Mayor reiterated that the goal is workforce housing. He said if you don’t think workforce housing is essential for Ketchum, you have to elect new people. This is, of course, divisive blarney. You can be for workforce housing and against this plan. As I have repeatedly written, there is plenty of room in other areas besides near the Baldy bases for workforce housing. And this council is not about workforce housing; they are for low-income housing. It is very different.

Mr. Cordovano said that if we don’t have this Comp Plan, we can’t prevent the things we don’t like from being built. That is not true. It would be better if we had a Comp Plan and FLUM, but we don’t need them to address our building codes. No one on the council has proposed a currently actionable plan to advance the goals they say they are for. They could do that right now. Instead, they are just going along for the ride in a car driven by the staff.

Ms. Breen noted that most full-time residents live in West Ketch and Warm Springs. She understands now that the community does not like what has been proposed. She noted that the neighborhoods are now organized, and they don’t feel heard. However, she then fell back on the “if we do nothing” argument, claiming that the problems would only get larger. Presume I agree with her: how does upzoning mitigate that?

“Council, you listen to your staff, but you don’t listen to your residents.” Bingo.

Bingo.“People are figuring this out, and we don’t like it.” Bingo.

Multiple people said, “This is not a good plan.” Bingo.