I would like to thank everyone who attended or tried to attend the meeting last night and I would urge anyone who lives in the county near town to attend the March 28th meeting to keep the city from shoving annexation and higher taxes down our throat. IMO the only thing the city is after is the taxes.

Conservatives really hate having things shoved down their throats, but they LOVE to talk about it.

I feel the mayor, city attorney, and the council members were not prepared for this. Mr. Hollowed really never did answer what is in it for the county residents. I really would encourage anyone in the county that has water and /or sewer hooked up or nearby to attend the next meeting.

[Edited by K. D. (3/1/2017 11:03:12 AM)]

From what I've heard this morning they better hold the next meeting in a much larger place that will accompany everyone that wants to attend. The way they held it last night is not a way to hold a meeting. It's only fair that if you attend a city meeting that there should be room for everyone to hear what everyone before and after them has to say.

Dose anyone know the website where I can find the info from last nights meeting?

simplyme wrote:

Dose anyone know the website where I can find the info from last nights meeting?

While I don't know the website? One thing is for certain. The paper had it all jacked up. I sat through the whole meeting and the paper had maybe half of the facts correct if they were lucky. They quoted some citizens with things that other citizens with the same last name but different spelling said and just like the meeting it was a total disaster.

Hopefully you can find what your're looking for here. The city has never been one to update on a regular basis.
http://milescity-mt.org/c...-meetings/

[Edited by K. D. (3/1/2017 11:34:11 PM)]

There will be a public hearing on Ordinance 1309, "Adopting a utility rule requiring a property owner to consent to annexation as a condition of receiving water and/or sewer services." This Ordinance affects property owners that are members of the Custer County Water and Sewer District. The hearing will be during the council meeting on March 28th at 7:00 pm. PLEASE NOTE THE MEETING WILL BE HELD AT THE CUSTER COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL AUDITORIUM, not City Hall as usual.

Thanks for the update. I would really like to know who's brilliant idea this was to start with. The officials we as county residents were not allowed to vote for somehow think they control the destiny of our property.

76-2-303. Procedure to administer certain annexations and zoning laws -- hearing and notice. (1) The city or town council or other legislative body of a municipality shall provide for the manner in which regulations and restrictions and the boundaries of districts are determined, established, enforced, and changed, subject to the requirements of subsection (2).
(2) A regulation, restriction, or boundary may not become effective until after a public hearing in relation to the regulation, restriction, or boundary at which parties in interest and citizens have an opportunity to be heard has been held. At least 15 days' notice of the time and place of the hearing must be published in an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the municipality.
(3) (a) For municipal annexations, a municipality may conduct a hearing on the annexation in conjunction with a hearing on the zoning of the proposed annexation if the proposed municipal zoning regulations for the annexed property:
(i) authorize land uses comparable to the land uses authorized by county zoning;
(ii) authorize land uses that are consistent with land uses approved by the board of county commissioners or the board of adjustment pursuant to Title 76, chapter 2, part 1 or 2; or
(iii) are consistent with zoning requirements recommended in a growth policy adopted pursuant to Title 76, chapter 1, for the annexed property.
(b) A joint hearing authorized under this subsection (3) fulfills a municipality's obligation regarding zoning notice and public hearing for a proposed annexation.

Laws, how do they work?

The upcoming hearing is in regard to the proposed utility rule, not an annexation at this time. However,the City does have an annexation plan and any future annexations are initiated the City Council, I've been told. Hopefully we can all get our questions answered at this upcoming meeting.

First of all Bridgier can go fly a kite. Second IMO the city brass not being fiscally responsible enough to balance their budget should not be used to punish other citizens that paid a premium for their property because it is not in the city and not in the flood plain. Giving them more tax revenue is like putting a band aid on a gunshot wound. It will only be a matter of time before they are out of money again and then what will they do? It seems they would struggle to operate a profitable lemonade stand.

I can't help it if you bought a house within an area subject to lawful annexation.

As usual. You have no meaningful content to add. That's about par.

AFAB, you can always disconnect your city services, dig a well and put in a septic system and not be part of the city. It seems that they are only attempting to annex the properties that use city services.

Cory,
If it is that easy then I surely will. I already have a well so it would be nothing to put in a septic system.

My only more of a question is if they have service through Custer county water and sewer district is that miles city water and sewer, or a complete separate entity? Yes I understand the county sewer and water contracts with the city but do the users?

I was told last night that the Custer County water and sewer district will be holding an informational meeting regarding the city's plan for annexation on Monday the 20th at 630pm in rooms 106 and 107 at MCC. I encourage everyone who lives near the city in the county to attend.

It is very important for all property owners currently receiving water and/or sewer services from the Custer County Water and Sewer District to be in attendance at this informational meeting as well as those living in the outlying areas of the City limits as mentioned in the previous post by AFAB. Please help spread the word to those who may not see it on here. Thanks!!

Cory Cutting wrote:

AFAB, you can always disconnect your city services, dig a well and put in a septic system and not be part of the city. It seems that they are only attempting to annex the properties that use city services.

Cory and AFAB, no you cannot. If an existing service is within something like 500 feet as per DEQ regulation it is illegal to disconnect and install your own. You have to go with the cleaner, more developed service. Even though this is mentioned as an option noone is disclosing the fact that it's illegal.

My god, is there no end to the liberal fascism?

Bridgier wrote:

My god, is there no end to the liberal fascism?

Bridgier
If you don't have anything worthwhile to say please quit trolling this thread. It is very important for a lot of residents and we don't need your useless input deterring readers of this thread.

Just a reminder that the Custer Water and Sewer District Board will hold an informational meeting about annexation tomorrow night, March 20th, at 6:30 at MCC room 106.

It is very important that all property owners receiving water and/or sewer from Custer Water and Sewer and those property owners on the outlying edges of the City limits attend this meeting.

The meeting last night was well attended and very informative. Great job by the CCWSD. While the attendance was good I still think we can pack more people into the meeting next Tuesday. I urge everyone to attend.

Cory how about you let the locals worry about their issues!?!?

Gee, if someone who doesn't live in the beautiful MC can't make a fairly obvious, non-threatening comment on a post, Larry should just shut down the whole show. Many, many people who comment here DON'T live there.

I no longer live in Miles City either. That being said I have never been inclined to tell someone whom actually owns property involved in this to basically dig up or shut up. Commenting in general is one thing but singling out an individual is a a whole other can of worms.

oh ffs.

B_Steig
They are the first to whine when you troll on their threads but they don't mind trolling on yours. Lol

Hey Anything-For-A-Buck Howhard,

Cory was trying to be helpful to you with his suggestion to use a septic tank. You seemed grateful for the suggestion at the time. I have no idea why you felt the need to turn on him just because "B_Stieg" decided to, but it makes you look petty.

And "B_Stieg", Cory has as much right to post on these forums as you or anyone else does. If you don't like what he says, you're welcome to say so, but trying to bully him off the forums is not acceptable.

- Dave

Again they love to troll. It gives them a sense of being when they run people off the site with all of their jibrish.

I was not bullying anyone off of this forum. Not sure why challenging Cory would be considered bullying? Just seems odd to me why feels so opinionated about this issue. I have family that this directly affects. Cory assumes the degree of city services people in the proposed annexation supposedly receive. He is welcome to comment all he wants, but when he is making comments based on assumptions he should be able to handle someone challenging his opinion....is that not the purpose of having open forums?

B_Stieg wrote:

Cory how about you let the locals worry about their issues!?!?

This sounded kind of "if you don't live here, you don't belong here" to me, and judging by Cory's response he didn't exactly take it as a friendly comment either.

Besides that, I see nothing that Cory said up to that point that deserved that kind of a remark.

The basis for Cory's comment was very likely this information in the Miles City Star (underline emphasis added by me):

Miles City Star: A Full House
Published: Wed, 03/01/2017 - 3:12pm
By Elaine Forman

[ . . . ]

The Ordinance

Mayor John Hollowell said there has been no decision made on what areas, if any, to annex and the ordinance adopts a utility rule requiring property owner’s consent to annexation as a condition of receiving water and/or sewer service.

The ordinance has to go through two readings by the council and a public hearing. It will also go through the Finance Committee for a recommendation.

Council’s Public Service Committee reviewed the ordinance at a meeting on Monday that also attracted a large crowd voicing many of the same concerns. No motion was made to recommend the ordinance.

Tuesday night City Attorney Dan Rice said this ordinance would not affect people with their own septic system and water unless they were totally surrounded by people with city water and sewer.


City Hall began getting many phone calls from people against annexation about Thursday, according to City Clerk Lorrie Pearce, and the calls became more steady each day.

If annexation is attempted the ordinance calls for a 10-day period for Custer County Water and Sewer District customers outside the city limits to make arrangements to discontinue water and sewer service after receiving a mailed notice if they don’t want to be annexed in.

Rice explained to the crowd that the ordinance used a Whitefish law as a draft because it has already been upheld by the Montana Supreme Court.

He said that since the inception of the district up to 1999 the agreement between the city and the district was the city required a signed no-protest to annexation agreement for each individual user that used the services. If the previous property owner signed it, it remained in effect for the property and shows up on the title insurance.

In 1999 the policy was changed to only require commercial property owners to sign the agreement, but the previous agreements remained in place.

Rural resident Nolan Mikelson said he signed the agreement “under protest,” and opined that what the city is doing is unconstitutional.

Rice said that has been brought up before and in the 1980s there was a lawsuit but there was never a final judgement on it, because it was settled out of court.

[ . . . ]

Read more here.

Had this issue say affected his mothers property and her taxes could potentially double he would be singing a different tune. Especially had someone made those same snarky comments he did. Like I said before if he can't handle a few questions about his comments then don't post them I guess...anyways I am done explaining to someone besides Cory my feelings about this topic. If he is worried about it he will reply.

There is a very informative news article in the Star tonight about the proposed utility rule used in conjunction with annexation. Please take time to read it and plan on attending the second reading of Ordinance 1309 which is the utility rule proposed by the City of Miles City. The meeting is tomorrow, Tuesday March 28th, at 7:00 at the CCDHS auditorium.

Cory Cutting wrote:

AFAB, you can always disconnect your city services, dig a well and put in a septic system and not be part of the city. It seems that they are only attempting to annex the properties that use city services.

The problem with this is, if you live in the flood plain, you cannot legally replace your septic system. While some people do the Saturday "dig and bury", not all of us are afforded that luxury. If our septic system fails, our only choices are to tie into city sewer, try to sell or abandon our property, or use a bucket.

And, don't forget, City Council meeting tonight at CCDHS auditorium at 7:00.

[Edited by K. D. (3/28/2017 9:55:58 AM)]

First let me start by saying that error will be made in the statements made below, but the intent of my post is to continue a discussion on a very heated topic going on in our... well I guess I can't say city so lets go with community.

Annexation has become a very well talked about subject over the last month and it has been interesting to listen to everyone's side, and as you listen both side have made very good and very poor points for and against annexation. It seems as though it all being said it comes down to taxes. I live with in the city limits and our family has discussed the issues of where to live, both in regards to schools, neighborhoods, water, sewer, gas and electric. Because I like all of those things we have chose to live within the city. As the discussion on annexation has progressed I have realized there are other things that I have in town that are important, and one of the big things everyone continues to ask is what do I get if I am annexed into Miles City. Most likely truth be told there will be no great change or revelation made if areas surrounding Miles City are annexed into the city, but I do ask what services do you already use that you will continue to use that are paid for with city taxes and with extra help may we can provide better services.

The biggest item that comes to my mind in regards to our city is our youth, and almost all of us that have kids, grand kids, nieces, and nephews or have ourselves grown up in this community. Our city provides the services to our parks, and by parks and I don't just mean Wibaux and Riverside Park but they are included. I also mean our soccer, baseball, softball, football fields are also parks in which almost all of our kids at some point in there lives have enjoyed and our future generations will continue to enjoy. These fields provide the kids in our town the opportunity to learn team work, competition, and a space to enjoy our community. Without taxes and continued taxes we would not have as many opportunities. There has been talk of try to get a parks and recreation department, but I know as well as anyone that there is no way to fund one. Brady Stone and his guys along with the countless volunteers do a great job keeping our parks and our youth going. This is an example of one service the city provides there are many other services that our taxes provide for that we take for granted.

I do not feel that the approach for annexation is correct, but is there really any way to approach this issue that isn't going to cause blood to boil. I know that it get me a bit irritated when I hear one of my county commissioners say that is a city issue not a county issue. I do pay my county taxes and should be represented by my commissioners as well. I assume that my tax dollars go to fund the sheriffs department and the county fire department, but when you live in town and ask for assistance from the sheriffs department you are told you live in the city you need to call the city police. I also live in Custer County so why can't I expect help from Sheriffs department. I also doubt that if I have a fire in town that the county fire department will be dispatched to the fire. As a residence of Miles City should we protest our county taxes due to some of these issues, no I don't think we should. The commissioners where quoted in the paper as saying the residence of Miles City are not for annexation of the surrounding areas, in my conversations most of the people are in favor of it I just don't think their voices are as vocal.

Maybe this issue needs to extend past the annexation issue and into the area of combined city county government. I know when budgets are tight and your are in business one of the first things you have to cut is overhead, and in a county of 12,000 with one major city is it wise to have a police chief and a sheriff, two fire chiefs, ect ect. The issue of annexation goes well beyond water and sewer, it goes into everything our taxes provide. I dislike taxes as much as the next person, but if we do not pay taxes these service we take for granted will no longer be available to us.

I am sure that there will be a bashing as there always is on this forum, but I am neither at this point for or against annexation because I do not have enough knowledge yet to make an informed decisions all I know is I live in Miles City, Custer County, and Montana and am proud of all three of them.

What sort of misanthrope would bash such a well-written post?