Road vacation facing legal challenge

SAGLE — The latest vacation of a section of Camp Bay Road is headed back to court.

While he gave no timeline of when the latest challenge would be filed, Fred Arn, who successfully challenged Bonner County's first vacation of the road, told the Daily Bee that he planned to challenge this vote as well.

"Next step, back to court," Arn said in an email to the Daily Bee.

The planned challenge follows a lengthy Dec. 19 hearing in which Bonner County commissioners unanimously approved the vacation "based upon the evidence submitted up to the time the staff report was prepared and testimony received at this hearing."

While tied to the vacation, the hearing's focus was to be on M3 ID Camp Bay LLC’s proposed footpath and whether that trail was in the public's interest.

Among the conditions included in the staff report were a requirement for M3 to provide a designated parking area, an agreement by the developer to maintain the trail, and an easement of at least 20 feet for the path.

Bill Brownlee, who spoke on behalf of M3, said he envisioned that the path could eventually be linked to other nearby trails.

However, critics of M3's request and their proposed footpath said the trail was an inferior substitution that added about a half-mile trek from the designated parking area to the lake and included rough terrain. All of which, critics said, would limit the ability of the young, the elderly and those with physical challenges to access the lake.

A number of those at the meeting called on commissioners to table the issue and allow more discussion of the proposal. With new commissioners coming on board next month, they also contended that the issue should be decided by the new board.

Arn questioned the county's contention that many of the letters submitted on M3's proposal supported the plan. All but three were homeowners on South Camp Bay Road, and six were from couples.

"Planning said they had some for and some against it, but it was overwhelmingly against the trail."

Among the letters not counted — or brought up during the meeting — were ones submitted by Idaho Fish and Game that Arn said favored keeping access to the lake at the current site.

"We will be challenging the vote and are very concerned about the county hiding the Fish and Game response," Arn said in the email.

Arn said supporters of public access at the current site are concerned there have been open meeting law violations, something Arn said is being passed along to the Idaho Attorney General's Office.

"We were concerned that the county prosecutor who interceded in the ice skating rink open meeting violation didn’t do so in our last two hearings that were clear violations of the open meeting laws," Arn said. "His response when I told him I had clear violations of laws was he represented the commissioners."

The vote is the latest in a series of hearings, meetings, and court rulings over the last 2,550 feet of Camp Bay Road. Supporters of the road vacation said it is a matter of private property rights and that the proposed footpath is a generous offer by the developer.

However, critics say the proposed path — located a half-mile away west of the bay — covers steep terrain and would hamper public access to the lake. Access, they contend, that has been historically granted to the public.

Monday's road vacation was the second time Bonner County commissioners voted to vacate the last section of the road. The first vote, held in April 2021, was also unanimous, with the board contending the vacation met the "public interest" standard since the county would no longer need to plow a half-mile of dirt road and because M3 promised to put in a turn-around location.

However, the vote proved to be controversial, leading a Sagle couple, Fred Arn and his wife, Jennifer, to file suit. The courts ruled in favor of the challenge, with Judge Cynthia Meyer ruling in November 2021 that the county's decision was "arbitrary and capricious."

The ruling led the county to deny the Arizona developer's application — and to kick the matter back to the court, contending they had no way to determine if the road did or did not provide legal access to Lake Pend Oreille.

At an August court hearing, M3 introduced the revised proposal, which contained a footpath at a new location. That inclusion prompted Meyer to allow the M3 to put their proposal before the county.

However, in the ruling, Meyer said the proposed footpath was "not additional evidence/information that is material to determine the issue presented" before the court.