Proposed Cd’A Tribe rezone still up in the air

COEUR d’ALENE — Kootenai County commissioners will once again consider a proposal to rezone approximately 25,000 acres located within the Coeur d’Alene Tribe’s reservation boundaries.

About two dozen people gathered Thursday night at the Kootenai County Administration Building for a public hearing before the commissioners, who will deliberate on the matter Nov. 9.

Under the proposed rezone, some properties within the reservation currently zoned rural would be designated agricultural.

The purpose of the rezone is to preserve agricultural land, timberlands, open spaces, natural resources and the existing rural character of the southwest portion of Kootenai County.

Affected parcels are all 20 acres in size or larger, currently zoned as rural, within the boundaries of the Coeur d’Alene Reservation and had a recorded agricultural or timber tax exemption within the last two years.

Subdivisions are currently permitted in rural zones, with a minimum lot size of 5 acres. If the parcels within the Tribe’s boundaries are rezoned, subdivisions will no longer be allowed. Timber tax exemptions would not be affected by the rezoning.

Earlier this year, the Kootenai County Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the rezone be approved with no exceptions. But in August, county commissioners indicated they won’t follow the recommendation and instead proposed that landowners be allowed to opt out of the rezone. It was this decision that prompted Thursday’s hearing.

Commissioners have also floated the idea of changing the zoning code so subdivisions on the reservation would have a 10-acre minimum lot size. Doing so will require properly noticed public hearings.

Tyrel Stevenson, legislative director for the Coeur d’Alene Tribe, said the Tribe still believes the best way to protect the land and its resources is through the rezone. Even so, the Tribe recognizes the commissioners’ decision.

“The Tribe’s hand is extended to the neighbors and to the county to find a solution,” Stevenson said Thursday.

Worley resident Traci Whelan was the only person who spoke in favor of the rezone Thursday. She said she and many neighbors attended the Planning and Zoning Commission’s workshops about the proposal and shared their opinions, which commissioners later appeared to ignore.

“We had our say and the planning commission heard what was said and heard what the bulk of the people wanted,” she told commissioners. “Then it came to you and you’ve determined not to follow the planning commission.”

Whelan said there isn’t enough water or infrastructure to support additional development in the area.

The others who spoke Thursday opposed the rezone, with some asking commissioners to allow them to opt out. Many said they believe the change from rural to agricultural would devalue their property. Some said they have successfully drilled wells and are not concerned about the water supply.

Joel Seale, who owns 20 acres of land on the reservation and opposes the rezone, urged commissioners to weigh the concerns of private landowners over that of the Coeur d’Alene Tribe.

“I think the county absolutely can and should cooperate with the Tribe every way they can,” Seale said. “However, the Tribe is a sovereign nation. They have their own government, their own representatives. I would say that landowners should be the primary concern and the Tribe should be a real and valid concern with cooperation, but it should not be primary in terms of the interests you’re trying to balance.”

Pat Braden, civil attorney for Kootenai County, pointed to Brendale v. Confederated Yakima Indian Nation, a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Yakima Indian Nation did not hold executive zoning authority over all fee lands in their reservation.

The decision states in part that “the Tribe should have argued in that zoning proceedings, not that the county was without zoning authority over reservation fee land, but that its tribal interests were imperiled.”

The Coeur d’Alene Tribe has made the latter argument, Braden noted. He said commissioners must examine whether the zoning’s impact to the Tribe would be “demonstrably serious” and would imperil the political integrity, economic security or health and welfare of the Tribe.

“It’s probably going to take the wisdom of Solomon on behalf of the county commissioners to devise a solution to this issue because both sides have brought real, meritorious concerns to the table,” Braden said.