Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Junk Vehicles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kalispell council approves first reading to tighten junk-vehicle rules after debate over poverty exemptions
Summary
On April 21 the Kalispell City Council approved first reading of Ordinance 19-35, revising the municipal code definition and enforcement process for junk vehicles. Councilors debated exemptions for low-income residents and whether the text was overly broad before voting to amend the draft and pass the ordinance.
The Kalispell City Council on April 21 approved first reading of Ordinance 19-35, an amendment to Kalispell Municipal Code Chapter 19 that tightens the city’s definition of “junk vehicles” and streamlines enforcement.
The ordinance, introduced by staff and advanced by Councilor Dahlmann, adds a list of eight specific characteristics that can qualify a motor vehicle as a junk vehicle, and preserves a 60-day exception for vehicles under active repair as well as a shielding option. Councilors also adopted an amendment changing a conjunctive term in the definition from “or” to “and” before voting to advance the measure.
Why it matters: Councilors said the clearer definition aims to give code enforcement specific tools to act on longstanding complaints about inoperable vehicles and related nuisance conditions that the city’s previous, vaguer wording could not cover.
City staff said the earlier definition—“a discarded, ruined, wrecked, or dismantled motor vehicle…that is inoperative or incapable of being driven”—was not specific enough to address many complaints. Doug Russell, city manager, told the council that the new language would “give the city the tools to move a lot of vehicles” that otherwise did not meet the older definition.
Council discussion focused on two issues: (1) whether the ordinance would penalize low-income households that keep nonworking cars for parts or repairs, and (2) whether some of the listed characteristics are subjective or overly broad.
Councilor Ryan Hunter, who opposed the final ordinance vote, urged an exemption for small numbers of inoperable vehicles used for parts, saying, “My wife grew up in poverty…they keep that junk car on the property so that they can replace some parts.” Hunter moved an amendment to exempt the first two inoperable vehicles from enforcement except where they create safety or environmental hazards; that amendment failed in a roll-call vote (Aye: Hunter; No: Fisher, Carlson, Gabrielle, Graham, Dowd, Dahlmann, Mayor Mark Johnson).
Councilor Graham proposed and the council approved a different change to the draft’s wording—replacing “or” with “and” in the phrase following “incapable of being driven”—to narrow the scope of items captured by the definition. That amendment carried on roll call (Aye: Fisher, Hunter, Carlson, Gabrielle, Graham, Dowd, Mayor Johnson; No: Dahlmann).
On final roll call for the ordinance as amended, the council voted to advance Ordinance 19-35 (Aye: Fisher, Carlson, Gabrielle, Graham, Mayor Mark Johnson; No: Hunter, Dowd, Dahlmann). The vote moves the ordinance forward for codification and continued processing per the city’s ordinance-adoption sequence.
What the ordinance says (key details): - Adds enumerated characteristics (1–8) that, if present, may qualify a vehicle or component parts as a junk vehicle for enforcement purposes. - Retains a 60-day repair exception for vehicles actively being worked on and includes a shielding option. - Clarifies enforcement timelines and gives staff a defined standard to cite when complaints meet the listed criteria.
Process notes and staff context: Staff described the change as a “cleanup” to make enforcement more straightforward; under current practice the city issues successive 30‑day letters and, in many cases, said Russell, lacks the statutory language to proceed on complaints that do not fit the prior definition. The new language is intended to reduce those enforcement gaps.
Next steps: The ordinance passed first reading and will be codified by the city attorney as authorized in the motion. Additional readings or procedural steps required by Kalispell’s ordinance-adoption rules will follow before the language becomes law.
Votes at a glance (recorded on April 21): - Amendment (Hunter) to exempt first two inoperable vehicles except where paragraphs a5/a6 apply: Failed (Aye: Hunter; No: Fisher, Carlson, Gabrielle, Graham, Dowd, Dahlmann, Mayor Johnson). - Amendment (Graham) to change “or” to “and” in the definition: Passed (Aye: Fisher, Hunter, Carlson, Gabrielle, Graham, Dowd, Mayor Johnson; No: Dahlmann). - Ordinance 19-35 (first reading as amended): Passed (Aye: Fisher, Carlson, Gabrielle, Graham, Mayor Johnson; No: Hunter, Dowd, Dahlmann).
Speakers quoted in this report appear in the council record and are identified below.
