While there were no major fireworks, Wednesday night’s debate between Lewis and Clark County Commissioner Ed Tinsley, a Democrat, and Derek Brown, his Republican challenger, offered a wide-ranging discussion on development, zoning, water quality, county roads and other issues.

Tinsley defended his record on planning for growth and protecting water quality in the Helena Valley, while Brown claimed the county has been too dismissive of public input on growth issues and said he’s unconvinced the valley has wide-ranging water-quality issues.

The forum, attended by about 50 people, was preceded by a presentation on the county’s proposed $10 million open-space bond. Put on by the Queen City News, the League of Women Voters and Plan Helena, the forum included three questions from the sponsors and a number of questions from the audience.

Here’s a breakdown of where the candidates stand on the issues:

Growth and planning

Brown said development has spread haphazardly across the Helena Valley because it’s been driven by developers over the past several decades. The county has failed to come up with sound planning for growth or future infrastructure needs.

“There’s no master plan,” Brown said.

Plans should be developed for roads and centralized wastewater treatment even if the money is not yet available to build that infrastructure, he said.

Tinsley agreed growth has been sporadic, and said planning had been reactionary in the county for a number of years until the current commission said “enough is enough.” Growth is best where infrastructure already exists to support it, he said.

He said the county is developing a master road plan and agreed centralized wastewater treatment may by the answer for the valley. He noted it would be expensive and said it’s probably years away from fruition.

Water quality

Tinsley pointed to the county’s efforts to develop a septic-maintenance district, which would ensure all systems in the valley are pumped regularly and checked for leaks. He said the commission’s actions to protect water quality in the valley have been based in science, and said the county’s first priority is to ensure the health and welfare of its citizens.

“We need to act now with the best science available,” Tinsley said.

Brown said he’s willing to stake his personal and professional reputations on his stance that there’s no groundwater-quality emergency in the valley, as Tinsley and others have maintained. While officials have often publicly cited an 800-percent increase in nitrate levels in the valley’s aquifer over the past 30 years, Brown cited a study that shows only a 20-percent increase over that time period.

“I think the issue is a matter of public trust,” he said. “Is there an emergency? I say ‘no.’ ”

Tinsley responded by suggesting Brown’s position was akin to a belief that the planet is flat in the face of overwhelming information to the contrary.

Zoning

The candidates were both asked whether they agreed with a comprehensive zoning proposal forwarded by the Development Standards Working Group, an ad-hoc committee of builders, smart-growth advocates and citizens.

“Zoning is a wonderful tool,” Brown said. “It needs to be done well.”

He disagreed with the group’s choice of zoning designations and said its members should have included some categories similar to those used in the city of Helena. He repeated his belief that septic-system regulations have no place in zoning rules.

Tinsley said he agreed with most of the working group’s conclusions and recommendations. Comprehensive zoning would give residents and businesses predictability, using as an example the controversy that erupted earlier this year when a company proposed a gravel pit in a residential area. If the zoning package moves forward, he said, residents and businesses alike would have predictability.

Missteps

Both candidates had a few missteps Wednesday night.

Tinsley, when discussing water quality, said peer-reviewed studies can at times be “subjective.” It was unclear what he meant.

Brown claimed the county had scuttled an effort to use impact fees as a way for developers to pay their share of the infrastructure made necessary by growth. It hasn’t — the county and the city have invested in an ongoing study to develop a formula for assessing those fees.

Both candidates, seeking to make opposing points, claimed the Development Standards Working Group had proposed septic-system regulations in its zoning package. There is a requirement for mixing zones to remain within property boundaries or easements, but the package does not include any of the septic regulations contained in the county’s current interim zoning ordinance.

The two-hour session was recorded by Helena Civic Television, though it was unclear when it would be rebroadcast.

Click here to visit the Helena Civic Television Web site.

Reporter Larry Kline: 447-4075 or larry.kline@helenair.com