By Josh Margolis
HAVRE, Mont. (NMB) – The Hill County Park Board convened on Monday evening for their regular monthly meeting.
The main topic of discussion was the process in which grazing allotments are distributed and potential conflicts of interest on the Grazing Committee.
The issue has boiled to the surface due to a request by Ray and Debbie Kallenberger to receive a portion of an allotment that they previously had.
At Monday’s meeting, the Park Board voted 5-2 to approve the Grazing Committees recommendation to deny the request.
Shawn Keeley and Commissioner Diane McLean cast the two dissenting votes.
The Kallenbergers contend that they temporarily gave up their allotment around 2009 due to family circumstances. The Park Board says that the Kallenbergers could keep their allotment if they could utilize it after three years, but that after that time elapsed, “they were not able to fill (the allotment) and never made any attempt to get their allotment back after that,” so it was terminated.
However, the Kallenbergers say they reached out to the Park Board around 2017, and believed they had been sitting on a waiting list for years. They say that until recently, they were not made aware that they were not on the waiting list, and believe the process needs serious reform.
“We did not make an attempt to get (back) onto the Park until about 2017. But we found out in 2021 that we were not put on that list, until we called and found out, and then we were put at the bottom of the list,” said Debbie Kallenberger. “This is a County Park. This is not personal ranches. We need to run it as a County Park, and not a good ol’ boys club. That’s all I have to say.”
Park Superintendent Chad Edgar says that many people have been on the waiting list for years, and they were put on the waiting list once he heard they had interest.
“There’s five people ahead of them on the waiting list right now,” said Edgar. “Of those five, a lot of them have been on their a lot longer than 2017 … But we did have four requests just this year on the grazing list, they are ahead of all four of those.”
The allotment in questionwas given to Clint Solomon, a nephew of the Kallenbergers, who then gave half of it to his sister Darcy Reum and her husband Travis, and the other half back to the Park to distribute as needed. The Park Board voted in August 2021 to approve the Grazing Committee’s request to distribute the allotment evenly amongst the ranchers within the pasture.
The Kallenbergers’ say that last year, they requested permission to use the grazing allotment that was being given up by a family member. However, they say they were told there was no formal application process and they only needed permission from the family member.
The Kallenbergers’ say that the family member requested a portion of the allotment go to other family members and the rest back to the Park.
“Due to the fact that our Park Board has not got an application in hand that we have asked people to use, there’s no way for us to really know when requests were made or not made,” said County Commission Chair Diane McLean, who urged everyone to find a compromise. “And that is a piece of the remedy that we have to do as a Park Board. That being said, it’s this word against this word, how do you rectify that situation?”
The Kallenbergers’ maintain that the process of handling their allotment after they stopped grazing violates Board and Committee policy, while the Committee says they followed their regulations and denied the request because they were ineligible to receive the allotment since the leaser of the land was not an immediate family member.
The motion that passed on Monday approved the recommendations of the grazing committee, which reads as follows:
- Allotments in the park are fully distributed at this time
- Transfers of allotments to non-immediate family members is not allowed within the current policies
- Any allotments added would mean removing allotments from current grazers. NOTE: When ranchers receive allotments, they must make financial adjustments to utilize their new allotments. Any removal of allotments is considerable financial impact to those ranchers’ allotment holders.
- The grazing committee has dealt with available allotments at the July 28, 2021, grazing committee meeting and the Park Board has approved the recommendations. The committee acted within the policies of the Park Board.
So therefore, the grazing committee would like to provide this information to the Park Board and recommend that the Park Board, provided they understand the grazing policies and consequence of any action, deny the Kallenberger’s request.
The Board seemed to agree that the application process for allotments needs to be formalized and transparent.
Public Comment
During public comment at the end of the meeting, several local residents spoke out, alleging conflicts of interest on the Grazing Committee and saying serious reforms are needed.
“I’m kind of here expressing some other people’s concerns also along with my own, that there seems to be two sets of rules on the park, and there’s uneven application … Some people can do some stuff while others can’t. That’s frustrating to see,” said Keith Raty, a grazer at the Park.
Raty says he went to the Grazing Committee in October to request that some of his cattle can graze in the Kiwanis Pasture, because he says there is often extra forage in that pasture. However, Raty’s request was rejected, and he contends that three people who voted against it graze the same area, raising concerns about conflicts of interest.
“The ordinance says ‘All grazers will be given equal consideration to the forage and usage available on the Park,'” added Raty. “But at that meeting, I was given no consideration whatsoever. I mean, they shut me down, even with very little discussion.”
Raty says that is not the only instance where regulations have not been followed.
“We don’t have the complete records in the Grazing Committee minutes. But one year, all the grazers on the park were given an increase if they wanted it. But I was specifically left out of that by name in the minutes. They excluded me by name. Everybody but Keith Raty. And then a lot of other people have approached me about this new cross fence, of course, none of them in favor of it. The problem is the south end is overstocked. I don’t think a fence is going to fix that problem without some sort of a plan or a reorganization of the park. I feel money would maybe be better spent elsewhere with more weed control, or maybe we need to hire somebody professionally to come in and analyze what forage is available on that park … The grazing committee is protecting the Kiwanis area at the cost of everybody else.”
Another member of the public to speak out was Lee Morse. He asked how many people on the grazing committee have cattle on the park, and members of the public in attendance responded by saying there are five. This is despite the fact that the ordinance says the committee has to include three ranchers, two community members, one Commissioner, one non-park user expert, and the Park Superintendent.
Two members of the Grazing Committee also serve on the Park Board.
These allegations were not disputed by anyone in attendance.
“We have some conflict of interest on the Board,” said Park Board member Nick Siebrasse earlier in the meeting. “I’d like the Grazing Committee to look at that, examine it, and try to rectify that.
Debbie Kallenberger said that for the record, she would like to read a portion of the Code of Ethics for Montana Boards.
“(This) prohibits conflicts between public duty and private interest. In short, the statute establishes that Board members cannot benefit personally or financially from their positions. I just want this put on the record. I would like to pursue this, because I think there’s huge personal and financial things going on in the Grazing Committee.”
Other items discussed:
- Approval of a campsite re-numbering project that is intended to help make it easier to identify sites. 10 different areas of the Park are being designated, such as the First Lake District (FL). Then campsites in Districts will be numbered, so the first site in FL will be FL-1. There are 132 campsites in total and there are extra numbers available for future expansion if needed. Edgar says among other things, this will make it easier for law enforcement to find campsites when called upon.
- Rangeland Management Professional Lou Hagener provided a monitoring update, saying conditions could continue to deteriorate at the park if there is a dry spring and summer.
- A request from Fish, Wildlife and Parks to create a trail from the pavilion to the water at Bear Paw Lake was tabled, with Commissioner Mark Peterson saying he would like to see a formal proposal. Currently, the trek to the water is quite steep and can be difficult for many people. Dave Fuller of FWP has reached out to the Board and says they want to continue improving the Fishing Access Site, adding that they would create the trail by using a mini excavator and blade. The improvements would not make the site handicap accessible.
- Edgar said that they are still awaiting word on whether they will receive a grant for lodge repairs, and may not hear back for some time. He said that Park usage remains slow except for people traveling to Bear Paw Ski Bowl, and says they continue to look for someone to fill the Assistant to the Superintendent Position.
- Ursula Brese says that Friends of Beaver Creek Park will be holding a raffle in the coming months, with prizes including cash, beef and a rifle. All funds will go to repair the lodge, and those interested in providing additional prizes can email her at ubrese70@gmail.com.
- Jeff Torano of the Hill County Conservation District says he will be bringing a request to the Board next month to hold a disc golf tournament at the new Normandy Coulee Course in May. He also asked the Board if they would be interested in installing signs on established trails alerting people to what spotted knapweed looks like and asking them to do their part to pull their fair share of the noxious weed. The Board expressed interest in the idea but said they would like to see exactly what the sign would look like and want to ensure it would be durable.
