Zombies and Frankenstein: Montana Legislature looks to cobble together tax relief
A stalemate over property tax relief in both Montana Legislative chambers continues with little end in sight as disputes and heated floor sessions continue.
Montana Senators left a marathon session on the floor without any property tax relief on Thursday after voting down two major pieces of legislation — House Bill 155 and House Bill 231.
In another twist, the House Taxation Committee on Friday morning amended Senate Bill 542, originally a two-year freeze on property taxes, into HB 155 and HB 231. House Bill 155, as amended, would reduce tax rates on residential and agricultural property.
'I think I'm optimistic it'll be the vehicle,' Rep. Mark Thane, D-Missoula, who sponsored HB 155 said on Friday morning.
The Senate indefinitely postponed HB 231 on Thursday night, but HB 155 in amended form is technically still alive in the chamber. HB 231 was the preferred bill from the governor, and it would have shifted some tax burden onto those with multiple homes.
The 69th Legislative session began with a mandate — both self-imposed by legislators and by the Governor — to develop property tax relief. While movement has been slowly made on the issue, neither chamber has pushed through expansive property tax relief to the executive branch.
The House has had long discussions over the merits of Senate Bill 90, legislation that would take tourism tax dollars and use them for tax relief. That bill has yet to technically see the House floor, but has been discussed for around an hour total during failed blast motions on Wednesday and Thursday.
SB 90 and House Bill 924, legislation that would create a large trust, are also connected.
The discussions on the major bills have been occasionally emotional and often frustrated. It's also been repeated many times in the hallways, in committee meetings and on the floor that Montanans will hold their elected officials accountable if they don't pass real tax relief.
In the most recent reappraisal cycle, property taxes increased significantly, even leading to a lawsuit against the state. The worry for many Montanans? Being priced out of their homes with no place to go. Legislators on both sides of the aisle promised property tax help this session.
In the background, deals and arguments over what type of assistance is right for the state reign supreme. But the session is days from concluding and there is no consensus.
'I think that this is going to be changing every five minutes for the next week,' Sen. Wylie Galt, R-Martinsdale said on Friday.
Even before the session started, Gov. Greg Gianforte formed a task force to help, and from the beginning of the session this year, he looked to push and prod the Legislature to pass property tax reform, specifically in HB 231.
But both political parties are split into their own factions, responding to different political pressures and interests, and a majority has yet to coalesce around HB 231 or any other proposal.
Some are interested in giving property taxpayers cash in the form of a credit or rebate, some want structural relief, some don't understand why Montanans can't have both, and some worry that plans to help residential payers will just hit industry instead.
That impasse has yet to be fully resolved.
There has been some friction between the branches, with legislative Republicans going so far as to issue a press release after the governor made comments about the slow pace of property tax legislation in March.
'The Governor understands the legislative process and should have submitted his proposals earlier if he wanted them enacted more quickly,' the press release stated.
In the meantime, legislators are cobbling together ideas. HB 231, brought by Rep. Llew Jones, R-Conrad, was recently described as a 'Frankenstein' bill by Senate Taxation Committee Chairman Sen. Greg Hertz and has faced significant scrutiny.
For Hertz, who represents part of the Flathead, second-homes, including rentals, are common in his district and HB 231 would tax those at a higher rate.
He also said Jones had taken control of the finance and claims process, as well as the budgeting process.
'Now I believe he's gotten himself into trouble,' Hertz said. 'Because now we can only control the budget, but he has no balance over here to allow conservative Republicans to readjust the budget that happens this session.'
During a Thursday press conference, Gianforte reiterated his support for the Homestead exemption in House Bill 231.
'I continue to urge the legislature to keep its focus on Montanans who live in their primary residence, the place that they call home, and not on those who only live here part of the year,' Gianforte said. 'Our homestead rate cut was a thoughtfully developed solution and a result of a diverse, bipartisan effort.'
Republican Senate President Matt Regier has pushed Senate Bill 90, a tax rebate proposal.
Hertz has also said he's in favor of SB 90, as are some House Republicans, including Billings Rep. Katie Zolnikov.
She brought the first motion to bring the tabled bill to the House floor and said the conversation around the legislation has become convoluted, challenging and difficult.
'The most frustrating part of the discussion is that most of the arguments against the bill basically utilize the assumption that this is the only property tax bill that we're going to pass,' Zolnikov said in an interview. 'And so it's talked about as if it's this mutually exclusive thing … SB 90 or nothing.'
She also said people then criticize the bill as not being meaningful reform.
'Of course it's not meaningful reform,' she said. 'You're comparing apples to oranges here. But why can't we do both?'
Some Democrats have also supported SB 90, including a cohort who has voted in favor of blast motions to move it to the House floor.
That coalition seems to have taken cues from House Minority leader Rep. Katie Sullivan, D-Missoula, who has voted in favor of bringing SB 90 to the floor twice.
But her caucus has not completely followed her lead. Sullivan had no comment on SB 90 when reached through staff.
For Rep. Jonathan Karlen, D-Missoula, who has been against SB 90, it's a general fund issue. He's concerned the rebate will just eat up more of the fund over time, and that it's simply not enough relief.
'To me, it's almost an insult to my constituents,' Karlen said. 'If I'm like, 'Hey, you know, guess what, the rates are still going to be the same, residential property taxpayers keep paying more and more of the total tax share. But don't worry, we're gonna give you $250 bucks.''
When asked if he'd consider rebates as a property tax relief option, Gianforte said, 'We've been pretty clear we need permanent, meaningful relief.'
Local government policies are playing a role too.
A cohort of representatives from Montana's largest city have an interest in avoiding the potential legal and constitutional issues related to language in HB 231 and HB 155.
Under both bills, cities with a charter that has specific stipulations around how many mills they can levy without voter approval could stand to lose millions. This has Billings legislators on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers looking for answers.
'We feel that the unique issue of Billings needs to be taken into consideration when trying to come to a final resolution on property taxes,' Rep. Denise Baum, D-Billings, said in a Thursday text message. 'We are hoping that SB 90 will become part of the solution in conjunction with an overall property tax reform.'
There's also worry about the constitutionality of legislation surrounding solutions proposed for 'the Billings problem,' something Hertz has repeatedly said in committee meetings.
During an impassioned Senate floor discussion on HB 231 on Thursday, Sen. Dave Fern, D-Whitefish, pushed back against the idea the potential city charter fixes would be unconstitutional. Fern was carrying the bill in the Senate. Karlen had similar thoughts on Billings Friday morning.
Charters were a problem with HB 155, too, and an amendment was added to that bill to address the issue.
'What I would say to folks in Billings is: You'll be included in long term property tax relief,' Karlen said in an interview. 'It's just a little bit wonkier in how that happens.'
One of the proposed solutions is reimbursing local governments impacted by the issue with state money, an idea Gianforte indicated he wouldn't support.
'The other hard line we've drawn is that we do not think we should take someone's income tax dollars and use it to backfill local spending,' Gianforte said. 'So that's something we will not do.'
Galt also had a two year-property tax freeze bill he described April 3 on the Senate floor as a 'backstop' and 'Plan D.'
It's now dead, he said on Friday.
Some Republicans had considered the idea as an option — and not just as a last-ditch attempt to show the Legislature did something on property taxes.
'We're looking at two weeks, if even less, and being out of here,' Regier said on Tuesday. 'And so when things come together and come together fast, and that's obviously one piece that needs to be talked about.'
But all language regarding a tax freeze was cut out, and while Galt's name is at the top of House Bill 542, it's a very different piece of legislation. The House Taxation committee approved a large amendment on Friday morning that creates a $400 tax credit for 2024 taxes paid and takes parts from other pieces of tax legislation.
Residential rates in HB 542 for 2025 mirror language in House Bill 155, starting at 0.76% rate for residential properties. The calculation for 2026 rates are similar to what's in HB 231. There's also a fix in HB 542 for Billings and other cities where there has been conflict between bill language and a charter, though its legality is unclear.
House Speaker Brandon Ler, R-Savage said in the House Taxation committee on Friday morning that it was a good amendment and a step toward how the legislature is going to address property taxes.
'This amendment here kind of has a lot of fixes in it for a lot of different concerns that we've heard in the last 78 days,' Ler said.
Other supplementary property tax legislation beyond direct relief has passed out of the Legislature.
SB 117, which is on the Governor's desk, will allow property taxes collected on new development to be used to offset taxes paid by existing homeowners and businesses. Regier has mentioned it several times as part of a fix for property taxes, and sponsor Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings, said he was pleased it passed.
'We've got plenty more work to do on property taxes before we wrap up the session, but SB 117 is an important structural reform that will help contain property tax increases heading into the future, and we got it across the finish line,' Sen. Zolnikov said in a press release. 'This is a long-term solution to a long-term problem of endless government growth.'
While bits and pieces of property tax legislation have gone through both chambers, no final long-term solution has gathered enough support to get it to the governor's desk.
'A lot of times you don't feel like you actually have input,' Rep. Zolnikov said. 'Because things have been decided prior. Prior to a committee meeting, prior to a floor vote, prior to the session in general.'
What may have been decided remains to be seen as frustration mounts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
We follow the money in politics, and the trail just keeps getting longer
According to the nature of our economy, it's typical that costs increase over time (hello, inflation). But what we're seeing in elections cannot be considered normal. The Pew Research Center recently asked Americans to list which issues are the biggest problems facing the economy right now. Seventy-two percent said the role of money in politics is a 'very big problem' — landing it the foremost spot above health care costs, inflation, the federal deficit, poverty and every other issue. This is significant. While candidates for Congress and the presidency quibble over who gets access to power, moneyed interests continue to creep into the system, making elections costlier than ever. Sometimes it starts to feel like a contest just for the contest's sake. Let's take a look at the numbers. Just three presidential cycles ago, in 2016, the total cost of all federal elections rang in at $6.5 billion, a (relatively) modest increase from 2012. But four years later, the total cost more than doubled to $15.1 billion and, in 2024, nearly matched that total ($14.8 billion). The U.S. vastly outspends all other nations on elections. The source of money has also changed. Twenty-five years ago, the vast majority of candidates who raised more than $200,000 for general election campaigns collected that money from within their districts from people they would ultimately represent if they won (79 percent of House candidates, 62 percent of Senate candidates). As my organization has reported, congressional elections truly have now become national campaigns, with just 17.6 percent local money in House races and only 27.5 percent in Senate races for 2024. So, while more money is pouring into the U.S. election system than ever before, the traditional relationship between elected officials and those they represent has fallen apart. Thanks to the research done by Unite America, we know that nearly all congressional elections are decided by less than 10 percent of voters. Put those low voter participation rates together with low local fundraising rates, and you end up with elected officials who no longer represent the people. And if our officials are not beholden to their constituents, but rather to partisan forces, we end up with a dysfunctional government. We shouldn't be surprised that the American people have had enough. Amid a more politicized landscape in which partisans are moving increasingly toward the extremes, money in politics is one of the few issues that both sides of the aisle can agree on — with 66 percent of Republicans and 78 percent of Democrats citing it as a very big problem. And yet, our leaders appear uninterested in changing a system that helps them stay in power. In every Congress, a handful of lawmakers have introduced legislation to reform the role of money in politics, but none of those bills have any chance at becoming law. In fact, a meaningful campaign finance law has not been enacted since the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was signed in 2002 — nearly a quarter-century ago. Since then, the courts have eaten away at the restrictions created by the law, clearing the way for super PACs and the untraceable ' dark money ' funds that support them. And then there's the Federal Election Commission, which is tasked with regulating campaign fundraising and expenditures in line with current law, enforcing the rules and punishing those who break the law. But even in the best of times, the FEC rarely takes action. When fully staffed, it has three Republican and three Democratic commissioners, leading to partisan gridlock. But deadlocked votes would be a welcome change from what we are facing now. In order to take action, the FEC requires a quorum of four commissioners. Right now it only has three, so it cannot complete most of its core functions. That leaves the judiciary as the only branch of government considering changes to campaign finance laws. All eyes are on Maine, where voters overwhelmingly approved a 2024 ballot measure setting caps on contributions to super PACs. Opponents have sued to overturn the measure, and the case has been teed up for a federal district court's review. It is likely to end up before the Supreme Court in the next couple years, in what will likely be the most significant ruling on money in politics since Citizens United. Before that case makes it to the high court, the justices may consider another campaign finance case. Current law limits how much money party committees can spend in coordination with candidates' campaign committees. That law is being challenged and the case could be heard this fall. While all this is happening (or, at the FEC, not happening), political operatives are already gearing up for the next elections and strategizing how to raise as much money as possible. If nothing changes, the dollars will only get bigger, and voters will be even more dissatisfied. We deserve better.
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Texas Rep. staying in House chamber after rejecting DPS monitoring
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — The Texas House is adjourned until Wednesday morning. But one State Rep. is staying in the chamber, staging a protest that's gaining attention. Before the House adjourned Monday, House Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, ordered the doors to the chamber to be locked. He said that members needed written permission to leave the chamber. But he added an extra step for Democrats who broke quorum and had arrest warrants issued. The Speaker said those members would be granted written permission to leave only after agreeing to be released into the custody of a designated Department of Public Safety officer who will ensure they return to the House on Wednesday at 10 a.m. State Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, refused and was not allowed to leave. 'I refuse to sign away my dignity as a duly elected representative just so Republicans can control my movements and monitor me with police escorts,' Collier stated in a news release. Texas Democrats highlighted her protest, sending out a news release stating that Collier was locked in the chamber, 'detained as political prisoner.' The Texas House Democratic Caucus set up a live stream of Collier remaining on the House floor and offered reporters live interviews with the representative. At one point, supporters gathered outside the chamber chanting, 'Let her go!' A social media post by the Texas House Democrats showed video a group of activists appearing to be arrested outside the House chamber. Other Texas Democrats have taken to social media, posting pictures and videos with Collier to show support. Late Monday, NBC News reporter Ryan Chandler reported that Collier had been told she can leave the House floor to go to her office, which is located in another part of the Capitol. She reportedly cannot leave the building without a DPS escort. Early into Collier's protest, the Texas House committee on redistricting voted out of committee a new version of a bill with proposed new congressional maps. The committee vote sets the stage for the full House to consider the redistricting legislation, where it is expected to pass. The maps are designed to boost Republican representation in the Texas congressional delegation. The push for the redistricting legislation comes after President Donald Trump called on Texas leaders to redraw voting lines to gain five Republican seats in Congress during the mid-term elections. State Rep. Todd Hunter, R-Corpus Christi, defended the plan to boost Republican representation. 'The U.S. Supreme Court … says that jurisdictions may engage in constitutional political gerrymandering, recognizing that politics and political considerations are inseparable from districting and apportionment,' Hunter said before Monday's committee vote. 2024 Election Coverage The maps will likely push out Congressman Marc Veasey, a Democrat who represents the area that includes much of Collier's state house district. Collier believes the maps will have a negative impact on her constituents. 'My community is majority-minority, and they expect me to stand up for their representation. When I press that button to vote, I know these maps will harm my constituents,' Collier stated in a news release. 'My constituents sent me to Austin to protect their voices and rights,' Collier added.
Boston Globe
21 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
In Maine, a political novice makes a long-shot bid to oust Senator Susan Collins
Advertisement 'We need to stop using the exact same playbook that keeps losing over and over and over again,' said Platner, a political unknown who serves as the local harbor master in the tiny town of Sullivan. 'Running establishment candidates who are chosen or supported by the powers that be in D.C. -- in Maine specifically -- has been a total failure, certainly in attempts to unseat Susan Collins. It is time for us to try something new.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up A competitive pistol shooter who worked as a bartender at the Tune Inn on Capitol Hill while attending George Washington University on the GI Bill, he said that 'everyone knows we live in a system that is not built to represent working-class people.' Platner said he had been approached in the past to run for local office, and had always turned it down. But when a group of labor unions focused on climate issues reached out to him about running for Senate, Platner found himself open to the idea. Advertisement 'The political situation feels like a precipice,' he said. 'It feels like it will go really, really dark, or we have an opportunity to claw something back for working people in this country.' An untested candidate like Platner may be a risky bet, but some Democratic strategists said that at a moment of deep anti-Washington sentiment, voters are demanding new faces over veteran politicians they view as part of a system that has failed them. Platner said he was recruited by political organizers who were worried that 'there was going to be a bad decision made for this race, and they went looking around this state for someone. I am terrified that the Democrats are going to squander what could otherwise be a spectacular opportunity.' He said his campaign would focus relentlessly on the dire economic landscape that has made it difficult to afford a house or health care in his state. And his pitch is that he has a unique ability to 'appeal to a lot of voters in Maine who aren't usually on the side of a Democratic politician, or a lot of people who just stopped voting, because they see a political system they feel does not and cannot represent them.' He has already attracted some national political operators to work on his campaign. His sepia-toned launch video was produced by Morris Katz, a top adviser to Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor. A senior adviser is Joe Calvello, who previously worked on the campaign of Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa. Advertisement Platner, whose light social media footprint indicates that he has supported Senator Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said he did not define himself as a progressive or a centrist. But he laughed at the idea that he would have any challenge in connecting with supporters of President Donald Trump. Half of his friends and colleagues at the dock voted for Trump, he said. 'I'm a waterman who works in the ocean with his hands. I'm a competitive pistol shooter -- that's my weekend hobby. I have an extensive combat background,' he said. 'Even if I tried to put myself into the buckets that we as a society have created, I don't fit into any of them.' Maine Republicans disagree. 'Being a Bernie Bro and Kamala Harris donor is a profile to appeal to Portland progressives, not centrist and conservative voters in rural Maine,' said Jason Savage, the executive director of the Maine Republican Party. (Platner made a small donation to Harris' campaign last year, and in 2016 donated to Sanders' presidential campaign.) Jordan Wood, a progressive former congressional aide, entered the race in April, making a pitch that Collins 'hasn't changed the system -- she's part of it.' For years, Collins, 72, who leads the powerful Appropriations Committee, has been able to fend off well-funded Democratic challengers despite Maine voting Democratic in the past three presidential elections. But this cycle, she is facing record-low polling, and her race is one of the top targets for Democrats seeking to win back control of the Senate. Platner may need to hone his attacks on Collins as he tries to make the case against her. In the interview, he criticized Collins for allowing Trump's sprawling domestic policy bill to win approval by the Appropriations Committee, then voting against it on the Senate floor. Yet the legislation was not a spending bill, and never went through the committee. Advertisement Mills, a two-term governor and former prosecutor, is still seen by her party's establishment as the strongest candidate to defeat Collins. She clashed with Trump at the White House this year over his threat to deny federal funding to Maine over the issue of transgender athletes competing in women's sports. But Mills is also not viewed as a perfect candidate. At a time when many Democratic voters are demanding generational change, Mills, if elected, would be 79 when taking office, making her the oldest first-term senator in history. 'I would think seriously about it, but I'm not ready to make any decisions along those lines,' Mills told a local television station in Maine this month. This article originally appeared in
