By Bill on 12-27-07
This is not news. The Beacon shouldn’t be reporting this stuff.
By Chuckinsomers on 12-27-07
So a letter is written by people who are upset with the results of the election and within two days it is news in the Flathead Beacon. Great to see that the Flathead has our own version of US Weekly. Wait until the lawsuit before breaking this garbage.
By Bonnie on 12-27-07
Agreed. Where do you think the Beacon got the letter? They should disclose that…
By Bill S on 12-28-07
Sounds like news to me. Phelps first states he didn’t act as Muhlfeld’s attorney then states he researched the issue before advising him? If John Muhlfeld truly resides in Whitefish he is owed an apology. If he resides elsewhere and Phelps advised him it was ok, then he should have also advised him to make a public disclosure before the election. Regardless of whether Phelps legal advice is correct, the voters thought they elected someone who actually lives in Whitefish.
By I'll sue, I'll sue, I'm made of rubber, you're mad on 12-28-07
crybabies, when are you going to grow up.
Just another phony case before the 11th District Court which is run by alcoholics and their drinking buds..
By heath on 12-28-07
I agree that this is not news but tabloid material and in the least the Beacon (and other news sources) should act with full disclosure.This is a dated issue and the points are extremely minor. Mr Muhlfeld admits to occasionally spending time away from his home. That doesn’t negate the fact that he owns a home in Whitefish and lives within city limits.
Rick Blake on the other hand is good at picking losers (ex. Conrad Burns) and nearly all of his picks for Whitefish City Council were not selected by voters. This is a simple, predictable case of sore losers. Mr Muhlfeld has an intelligent, industrious record and more importantly he was the most popular vote getter by far.
Rick Blake and his group need to realize that democracy is the power of the people and the people of Whitefish have voted. I encourage Rick and his group to quit being reactive after-the-fact and stop working as a mouthpiece of small minded politics.
Rather, like many of us here in town, get involved with the community. Instead of distracting our Councilors and wasting money get involved with the people and issues. In that function perhaps you and your group might yet be able to live up to that name of yours.
By heath is right on 12-28-07
Two quick searches of publically available databases clearly show that 1) Mr. Muhfeld owns a home in Whitefish 2) is registered to vote in whitefish.
Has the beacon ever heard of gis.mt.gov or the word reporting?
By show me the law on 12-28-07
According the Beacon Whitefish city attorney John Phelps told Muhlfeld that residency is all a matter of intent – people can live wherever they want for “a substantial period of time” as long as they intend to ultimately reside within city limits. I grew up in the Flathead live in California and own a home in Whitefish. Since my “intent” is to ultimately live in Whitefish, according to Phelps I am a legitimate candidate for Whitefish public office.
By Crystal L. Cox on 01-03-08
The Issue is Bigger than Residency. The Residency concern is only a way to Get JOHN OFF the council. He is a Man that lacks integrity. His Company has deliberatly hurt and disrespected landowners in the name of grant money coming to River Design Group. He PRETENDS to get Fisheries and Waterways and he leaves a mess for landowner.
Also for Those saying the Beacon should not have printed this, did you email or complain to the daily interlake on 12-27-07 for their version of the story, it even had a Photo of JOHN.
For More on this check out my Blog Post on WhitefishMontanaNews.com
By Old Local on 01-07-08
Is it not important that our “city council” obeys election laws? I think it is. And as long as a legitimate issue is raised, it should be aired in public, and scrutinized by all involved. Maybe John was a legal resident AND eligble for running for office. But if he was a legal resident, but not eligible for running for public office in Whitefish (since there seems to be a difference between the residency and public office eligibility requirements) would the same voters have voted for them? Would you vote for a candidate who was legally not eligible? Maybe, maybe not. But it is like speeding. If you get caught, it is not the officer’s fault. Just because you did it before, or do it all the time doesnt make it a)legal or b)right. We all deserve to know the correct answer. And we are all better off to have a full public discussion of the issues involved. Maybe city council candidates should be allowed to live outside of the city if the own businesses or property in the city. Maybe not. But we should know the facts and respect the current laws, or change them if they are inappropriate.
And it amazes me that some just want to ignore the issues, and the current law without even having an open public discussion.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.