Latest news with #NathanielBailey
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Montana Legislature gavels out 69th session
The Montana Senate is seen during the Wednesday, February 12, 2025 session. (Nathaniel Bailey for the Daily Montanan) The 69th Montana Legislature adjourned the 2025 session on Wednesday – the 85th day of the session – after finishing up work on a property tax relief package and a litany of speeches by outgoing lawmakers. The final day was relatively subdued, as both chambers took final votes and waited for the pomp and circumstance that accompanies sine die — the motion to adjourn — which included a chamber-wide rendition of 'God Bless America' on the Senate side led by Sen. Denley Loge, a St. Regis Republican. Legislators offered advice for those who will take the torch in the future, along with pleas for the current Montana Legislature continue, because it had come up short on the budget and property taxes, according to some frustrated Republicans. Sen. Butch Gillespie, R-Ethridge, said the diversity of views in the Senate is positive, and he encouraged the body to work together in the future. 'For sure, we don't accomplish much by constant turf wars,' Gillespie said. 'Think about that one a second.' However, when the motion to end was made in the upper chamber, the Senate voted it down not once, but twice, before eventually gaveling out — one final display of the tensions that defined the session in the upper chamber. Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings, stood to oppose adjournment, calling the session, and the largest bills passed by the Legislature, failures. 'Five days early? We're going to quit because we're done? I don't think we've even showed up,' Zolnikov said. More conservative Republicans in the chamber were frustrated to see their majority split and felt cut out of the conversation around major legislative initiatives, including the budget which many decried as bloated. 'This is supposed to be a decentralized process. Fifty people from 50 different areas, each representing 20,000 people each, so everyone in this state has a voice, through us,' Zolnikov continued. 'And we gave that away.' The 2025 session saw 1,759 bills, resolutions and other measures introduced and debated by lawmakers — a record number. As of Wednesday afternoon, the Legislature had sent 484 to the desk of Gov. Greg Gianforte, with another 322 on their way. The laws would be celebrated, derided, and some will likely be fought in court in the future, and in the Senate, Sen. John Esp, R-Big Timber, offered a nod to the ups and downs. 'There are days in this building that you're going to want to cry,' Esp said. 'And there's days in this building that you'll be moved to laughter. Sometimes you get to do a little of each on the same day.' Among the major pieces of legislation that passed the Legislature was Medicaid expansion, the largest income tax cut in state history, historic investments in education, and a property tax relief package. There were also several bills that affect transgender individuals, characterized as erasing and harming them by opponents, including one that has already landed in court. Other lawmakers lauded the same legislation as protecting children and women. Legislators also passed a series of bills changing the Montana Environmental Policy Act in response to the Held v. Montana suit, a historic lawsuit concerning the effects of climate change. But one of the defining features of the 2025 session was a rift in the Republican Caucus in the Senate that appeared 85 days ago when nine moderate Republicans joined Democrats to change the rules of the Senate to give their coalition more power. For the rest of the session, the Senate was effectively run by a working majority coalition that pushed through priority bills for Democrats and the Governor's office, to the frustration of more conservative GOP members. Numerous times throughout the session, the Senate chamber erupted with accusations of betrayal between Republican camps and 'baked in' votes that routinely passed 27-23 along the coalition line. Another defining moment was the censure of a sitting Senator, former Senate President Jason Ellsworth, R-Hamilton, who was kicked out of the chamber halfway through the session. The punishment, described as 'everything but expulsion,' was a response to ethical violations Ellsworth committed by not disclosing a friendship he had when he signed a $170,100 state contract with a longtime business associate. Despite the roller coaster of events throughout the session, Senate President Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, said in a press conference following adjournment that he was still satisfied with the work his caucus accomplished. 'There are many reasons for Senate Republicans to hold their heads high,' Regier said. 'And we will look forward to continuing our efforts in the interim, and also in the next session.' The GOP senators touted many of their wins from the session, including delivering a large income tax cut, bolstering election integrity, and leading the nation with new data privacy legislation. 'We're not just protecting Montanas amid technological advancements, but also making sure that our state is open to cutting-edge innovations,' Senate Pro Tempore Ken Bogner, R-Miles City said. One area the Senate GOP said they fell short on was judicial reform — a key priority for the caucus at the start of the session. More than two dozen bills were introduced aimed at changing the judicial branch, but only a handful made it through the Legislature. Among those that failed were numerous attempts to make judicial elections partisan. 'What we do have is a great foundation for the reform. I think that judicial reform is critical, continuously,' said Senate Majority Leader Tom McGillvray, R-Billings, adding that efforts would continue in the next session. 'We're undaunted.' Despite a long list of bills he considered wins, Regier stood with less than two dozen members of his caucus and called out the missing members of his party. 'I do believe the voters sent the Republican Party here to be in control, and from day one, it was not, and I don't see that as sustainable. I think that in the future, the voters are going to speak their mind,' Regier said. '… I don't believe the people will stand up for another session where the Democrat minority leader and his caucus controls the Senate.' Senate Minority Leader Pat Flowers, D-Belgrade, said the session was one of the hardest he's been a part of, but also one of the most effective — with Democrats pushing through substantially more legislation than anticipated. In a joint press conference with House Minority Leader Rep. Katie Sullivan, D-Missoula, Flowers touted legislation protecting renters, and said every Democrat vote for Medicaid expansion was 'critical,' painting it as a major win for the party. 'We didn't just protect the program,' Flowers said. 'We secured it permanently.' Sullivan added that while the session wasn't perfect, Montanans came out in a better place than they were before the session. 'This session, Montana Democrats stood firm in defending our fundamental freedoms under the Montana constitution and our Montana way of life,' Sullivan said. 'When Republicans spent dozens and dozens of hours pushing bills to legislate every aspect of our lives, Democrats fought back.' The Democrat leaders also highlighted legislation addressing the state's affordable housing crisis that saw bipartisan support. 'It's not fixed,' Flowers said. 'But for the first time in a long time, we're moving in the right direction for practical solutions and real funding.' While bills pushed by the minority party could be at a higher risk of receiving a veto from the Republican governor, Flowers said he was confident many showcase shared priorities. 'I think, frankly, many of our bills are consistent with the values that he described in his State of the State address, where he focused on child care and education,' Flowers said. 'And I think he should appreciate what we're bringing to his desk.' Senate leaders on both sides of the aisle mentioned the possibility of the Legislature returning for a special session, most likely related to potential cuts from the federal government that could affect the state's budget. The Legislature's lower chamber was comparatively calm, a testament to the steady, if unassuming, leadership of House Speaker Brandon Ler, R-Savage. 'When I gave my welcome speech, I said, I hope this body would rise above, would keep everything civil and that we would treat each other with respect, and the Montana way of hard work, honesty and neighborliness would guide our deliberations,' Ler told his colleagues on the House floor. 'I believe we lived up to that.' While some hardline Republicans felt cut out of the legislative process — and in the House, Speaker Ler said his door was open — he said the reality is bills need majorities in the chambers to pass, and then support from the governor. Speaker Pro Tempore Katie Zolnikov, R-Billings, said it's a delicate balance to work on legislation that can, realistically, get across the finish line, and also ensure input. Property tax relief was one measure that passed with substantial bipartisan support in the House, but some legislators expressed their displeasure about it, including that it could land in court. Critics of the property tax reform said the content didn't match the title of the bill, which could be unconstitutional, but supporters dismissed the accusation. At least in the House, Majority Leader Steve Fitzpatrick said he would anticipate legal action following the session, given it hasn't been unusual for bills to be challenged. 'I would assume there will be a lawsuit, since it's lawsuit season now,' Fitzpatrick said. However, he said legislators worked hard on property taxes from the start, through the very end of the session, and the package that passed reflects the areas of agreement. 'It was difficult. I think the product we finally got is just a reflection of the realities that compromise around here requires,' Fitzpatrick said. The final hours on the House floor were joyous, and legislators animately said their goodbyes, took photos together and laughed as they cleared out their desks. They were slow to leave the chamber, and some representatives took in the moment. 'I'll carry this experience with me forever, every debate, every challenge and every late night and every handshake across the aisle,' Ler said shortly before the session ended. 'Thank you for trusting me. Thank you for believing in this institution. Thank you for meeting and for loving Montana enough to serve her.' In the Senate, a flurry of votes in the final minutes offered a final glimpse of division in the chamber. Twice, Flowers sought to reconsider one last bill — an increased fee on luxury vehicles registered in the state — which one Senator said he had voted against at least a half dozen times already. Substitute motions to adjourn failed, the motion to reconsider the bill failed twice, but eventually the chamber reached consensus before boiling over. Before leaving the chamber, 23 Republican senators — minus 'the nine' — gathered around the rostrum for a group photo. On the floor, the remaining lawmakers, a working majority, mingled, cleared their desks, and moved on.
Yahoo
26-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Governor flexes amendatory veto power; tweaks several bills in final days of legislature
The main stairway to the third floor of the Montana Capitol building is seen on Wednesday, February 12, 2025. (Nathaniel Bailey for the Daily Montanan) When House Bill 145, aimed at raising nonresident base hunting license fees from $15 to $100, moved through committee hearings, the legislation saw opposition from the Montana Outfitters and Guides Association who thought the increase 'drastic.' Gov. Greg Gianforte agreed, and on Tuesday sent the bill back to the legislature with a recommended amendment for a more moderate increase — to just $50. 'Like the Montana Outfitters and Guides Association and other conservation groups, I support a modest increase of the nonresident base hunting license fee, but believe the increase from $15 to $100 is too great,' Gianforte wrote in his amendatory veto letter. The shift from $100 down to $50 still represents a 230% increase from the existing license fee. Forty dollars of each fee goes to fund access programs for hunters, including the Block Management Program, and will generate an additional $2.5 million, according to projections from the governor's budget office. The House and Senate on Thursday both approved of the governor's amendment. 'This has been a really entertaining bill,' Rep. Gary Parry, R-Colstrip, said on the House floor. 'It started out at 100, you go to committee, they drop it to 50, then it comes back from the Senate up to 100. I'm going 'Yeah, no,' I don't even know in committee which one I'm supposed to defend. 'Anyway, so the governor got it and he said 'No, gonna be 50,' and here we are complaining we got so much money in the budget, I'm trying to give him more money and he's taking it away. So, let's concur.' Parry said he was concerned that if the House rejected the amendment, the governor would exercise one of the executive branch's check on legislative power and issue an outright veto. Montana's governor has three versions of veto power over legislation that reaches his desk. The most basic is the outright veto, when the governor decides, for any reason, that he does not agree with a bill passed by the Legislature. A two-thirds vote by both chambers — conducted as normal business if in session, by a mail poll after adjournment, or during a special session — can override a veto. Gianforte also holds the power to issue individual line item vetoes in bills that appropriate state funds, while approving the bulk of the bill — a power shared by 44 state governors. Line item vetos don't often receive much attention, as they often involve ensuring a budget is balanced, but a case in Wisconsin drew national attention in 2023 when Democratic Gov. Tony Evers removed a few words in a 158-page budget bill to increase school funding for 400 years, instead of the intended two. Montana's governor can also recommend amendments to bills, officially called an 'amendatory veto.' Similar to amendments made in a legislative committee, altered bills must be approved by both chambers and then returned to the governor for final consideration. If one or both chambers reject the amendments, the bill returns to the governor in its original form, where he could then opt to veto it outright. If only one chamber approves of the recommendations, a conference committee may be convened to hammer out the differences. On Thursday, the House and Senate approved of the governor's amendments to several bills in addition to House Bill 145. Changes to Senate Bill 45, which creates a judicial performance evaluation system for sitting judges, removed a section which would have added the evaluation information to the state's voter information pamphlet. Amendments to a bill revising the Montana Heritage Preservation and Development Commission kept the legislature from reducing the number of members, while Gianforte amended a bill about reporting on the costs of fiscal legislation to be an annual, rather than bi-annual report. According to a spokesperson for the governor's office, Gianforte has recommended amendments to seven bills this session.
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
From legislative secrecy to Constitutional sunlight
The main stairway to the third floor of the Montana Capitol building is seen on Wednesday, February 12, 2025. (Nathaniel Bailey for the Daily Montanan) Only a handful of us who served in the legislature under the old 1889 Montana Constitution still survive. That constitution reflected the dominant power of the copper mining industry when Montana achieved statehood. It was also ridiculously verbose and prescriptive, and by the late 1960s a consensus had developed that the time had come for our 1889 Constitution to be replaced. Among the people's major concerns was the secrecy by which laws were made within the Legislature. It was 1971 when, at 23, I took my seat in the Montana House of Representatives – the youngest member. The House chamber was overwhelming in its grandeur. What I didn't know then was that what went on in that grand place was far less grand than its setting. Legislative bodies are organized around committees. One of my earliest experiences in a Montana Legislative committee was having the committee chair excuse all nonmembers from the committee room except two gentlemen whom I soon learned were lobbyists. They were hired by a special interest to protect that interest's affairs in the legislative process. Behind those doors, closed to citizens, these selected lobbyists freely interacted with committee members as they voted on the bills before the committee. With no experience, I simply assumed this was fine. Certainly, as the legislature's greenest newbie, I wasn't going to question it. Fortunately, a few legislators were starting openly do so. One, was Flathead Representative James E. Murphy. Murphy had served in the Missouri legislature before relocating to Montana after World War II. He led the Montana House Judiciary Committee and was also Montana's representative on the Republican National Committee. I greatly admired Jim Murphy. Murphy thought the 1889 Constitution was far outdated and needed to be replaced. A prime example of what needed changing was my first experiences with the public's lack of access to legislative decision-making and the open role of lobbyists in orchestrating law-making decisions behind closed doors. Well, the committee procedure I witnessed in the 1971 legislative session could not happen in the Montana legislature of today, thanks to Montana's 1972 Constitution. It requires legislative meetings as well as other government meetings to be open to the public. No longer can lobbyists, but not the public, be allowed to meet with and impact decisions of committees behind closed doors. Under the 1889 Constitution, legislation was routinely passed or killed by either the Montana House or Senate, with few recorded votes and no way for the folks at home to really know how their legislators had voted. Since 1972 they always can. It is constitutionally required. Once in 1971, we house members were startled by a camera flash from the back balcony of the chamber. A photographer had taken a picture of the voting board of a vote that the 1889 Constitution allowed to be non-recorded, 'off the record,' even though that vote essentially determined the outcome of an important bill. The Speaker immediately called for the Sergeant-at-Arms to apprehend the photographer's film. But the photographer was too fast and escaped, film intact, from the capitol building. When the state papers carried the picture of the voting board the following day, the votes of all legislators on that bill were revealed. Such a dramatic act to inform the people is not needed now, thanks to the 1972 Constitution, which stipulates that any vote in the House or Senate, including committees, that could result in a bill being passed or killed must be publicly recorded. These true-life examples directly show how much more open to the people the Montana legislature is since the adoption of our 1972 Constitution. Bob Brown is a retired Whitefish history teacher who also serves as a Board Member of Friends of the Montana Constitution. A member of the Montana Legislature for nearly 30 years, he was also Senate President, Montana Secretary of State and Candidate for Governor. Bob also served on the Board of Trustees for the Montana Historical Society. This column on the Montana Constitution produced for this publication by the 'Friends' organization.
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill to allow counties to terminate some zoning districts passing with significant support
The main stairway to the third floor of the Montana Capitol building is seen on Wednesday, February 12, 2025. (Nathaniel Bailey for the Daily Montanan) One member of the public said the bill is 'nothing short of tyrannical,' but the sponsor and a planner said it will help counties resolve zoning when numerous districts create an administrative challenge. Monday, the Senate Local Government committee unanimously passed House Bill 614 on a voice vote, and Chairman Forrest Mandeville, R-Columbus, said he believes it's a good bill. The problem, as described by supporters, is zoning districts initiated by residents, or 'part one' districts, can start piling up in a county. When residents want certain standards in place, commissioners may create a 'part one' district' when 60% of the property owners in an affected area, as small as 40 acres, petition for one. Each one might have its own definition and administrative standards. 'I think there's a lot of these 'part one' districts that kind of get abandoned, and there's no real way in statute right now for a county to clean those up,' Sen. Mandeville said. For example, bill sponsor Rep. Greg Overstreet, R-Stevensville, told the committee last week it used to be 'quite the rage' for citizens to petition and create their own districts in a county. But counties don't have a way to terminate 'zombie zoning districts,' and they become a patchwork that's difficult to manage, he said. 'Now, we have, for example in Ravalli County, 48 zoning districts, and they don't match up with countywide zoning,' said Overstreet, who also credited Mandeville with the idea for the legislation. But Kendra Keating, who lives in the Spring Hill district in Gallatin County, said she moved there specifically because of its protections. She said it scares her to think the state could give the county authority to take away the interests of the citizens who came together to form the district. 'The way this is written, where we can completely lose everything that we have, doesn't seem appropriate,' Keating said. The bill came from the Montana Association of Planners, and at its hearing last week, it drew support from that organization and from a county commissioner. However, roughly a dozen residents said the bill would negatively affect private property rights, and it would upend the ability of residents to manage development in a way they believe is best for their area. For example, one resident said the district in which he lives is prone to fire, and the district takes wildfire into consideration. The bill would give counties a way to terminate the zoning districts under a couple of circumstances, and it has earned a lot of support from legislators, although it lost some votes as it passed through the House. In February, it passed unanimously out of the House Local Government committee. It initially passed 94-4 on the House floor, although it lost some support on third reading, with 80 yes votes and 19 against. The bill would allow a board of county commissioners, after providing notice to the public of a hearing, to pass a resolution to terminate a zoning district under one of two circumstances. It could do so if the county decided to comply with provisions of the Montana Land Use Planning Act. Adopted in 2023, the Lane Use and Planning Act outlines steps, including public participation, for managing growth and development. It requires some cities to participate, and it allows other local governments to choose to comply. The commissioners could also take action to dissolve a district if they've established a larger district that encompasses the land that's up for termination. Mandeville said the bill doesn't allow county commissioners to strip a district of zoning altogether. He said the fear is that commissioners will make a change that, for instance, suddenly allows a nuclear plant in a neighborhood, or completely undermines the interests of residents. However, Mandeville said he doesn't believe that's realistic, especially given the public process. He said the bill means counties can consolidate similar districts in a way that retains the unique characteristics of each, but also makes administration more straightforward. 'It would be unlikely that this process would be used to completely subvert what the 'part one' district had required,' Mandeville said. At its hearing last week, the bill received harsh criticism from residents near Bozeman and a district in Gallatin County, who argued the benefits of the districts outweigh the administrative costs. At least a couple of them suggested the process for terminating districts should remain in the hands of the citizens, and commissioners shouldn't have the right to undo their work. Deanna Campbell raises sheep and chickens on her land, she grazes a few head of cattle, and she said she likes the country life. But Campbell said HB 614 is bureaucratic overreach, and it would affect people's property taxes and their retirements, all without a vote by the people. 'To let elected officials change zoning without a vote, maybe just under pressure from developers or state mandates, is nothing short of tyrannical and a betrayal of Montana's tradition of local control and citizen participation,' Campbell said. 'Please don't let our country way of life become collateral damage to high density development and government overreach.' Wendy Dickson, who described herself as a fifth generation Montanan and property owner in Gallatin County, said some local governments used to respect property rights, but now they even want to dictate who occupies a home. Dickson asked legislators to respect the history of rural zoning and to keep self-governing powers with the people. She suggested counties be allowed to initiate termination, but citizens retain the ultimate authority to do so. 'Unfortunately, it seems the Montana motto of 'live and let live' is now lost in some parts of our state where newcomers love Montana so much, they want to regulate everything,' Dickson said. Charles Howe, who ranches in Spring Hill, said fire is a concern in the area, fueled by winds that blow into the valley. He said the zoning residents worked on, in place for decades, takes the fire and the landscape into consideration. Howe said he hopes anything the legislature passes will maintain similar protections to avoid blazes such as the Palisades fire in California. Monday, Mandeville said he considered amendments to the bill, but did not see one that would address everyone's concerns. He also said he believes county commissioners won't terminate a district if citizens have bought into it. At the hearing last week, Ross Butcher, a commissioner from Fergus County representing the Montana Association of Counties, spoke in support of the bill. Butcher said the bill offers a straightforward process to allow commissioners to end districts when commissioners are seeking a more comprehensive approach or if a county intends to opt into the Land Use Planning Act. Sean O'Callaghan, with the Montana Association of Planners and Gallatin County, said the bill doesn't cut out the public because it allows for a public process. O'Callaghan said it's challenging, time consuming and expensive for counties to maintain all the different zoning regulations that operate independently, with different definitions and administrative standards. 'Counties are looking for solutions to this situation,' O'Callaghan said. He said HB 614 allows counties to combine new zoning regulations over the top of existing ones, then dissolve old ones, and it is a simple solution.
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill aims to ensure public records from Governor's Office are open, limit ‘executive privilege'
People are seen on the third and fourth floors of the Montana Capitol building on Wednesday, February 12, 2025. (Nathaniel Bailey for the Daily Montanan) Rep. Ed Stafman, D-Bozeman, said he doesn't think the governor should get to withhold public records just to gain a tactical advantage over the Montana Legislature. Monday, the Senate Judiciary committee heard House Bill 271, by Stafman, to limit the ability of the Governor's Office to keep documents out of public view. Stafman said the bill 'would restore transparency and open government in the executive branch to what it has consistently been for at least 50 years.' In a lawsuit still playing out in the court system, a member of the public tried to see 'agency bill monitoring' forms the governor was using to gather feedback about legislation and its sponsors in 2021. The Gianforte administration argued 'executive privilege' protected those forms from public view in part because the governor needs candid feedback, and openness would diminish that candor. In January, the Montana Supreme Court found Gov. Greg Gianforte may have legitimate reasons to withhold the information, but he can't refuse to turn over documents without having a court review them to find out. The court also said the governor doesn't get to keep them secret just because he's the governor. But Stafman said Montana hasn't previously recognized executive privilege, the Supreme Court crafted a narrow decision based on common law, and the Legislature has the authority to overturn common law through statute. He also said the court decision effectively reduced 'the timely right to know.' And Stafman said his bill intends to fix those problems. He said it would be consistent with the right to know protected in the Montana Constitution, and it fixes a practical problem of ensuring people can in fact see documents without being forced to go to court. Stafman said his bill aims to ensure documents from the Governor's Office related to the Legislature, politics and policy remain public, and it would keep personal and private information confidential. Last month, the bill passed the House 56-44, and Stafman told the Senate Judiciary committee he couldn't recall any member of the public who testified against it earlier. At the hearing Monday, Stafman agreed some information in state government is protected, such as medical records, income taxes records, and more (he had a long list of those items available). However, Stafman also said he would not be opposed to seeing the committee amend the bill to establish even more openness in the other two branches of government, the legislature and the judiciary. Generally, he said he would like the Legislature to send a message that the goal isn't about the governor personally, it's about 'sunshine' in government. 'This isn't about you. This is about open records,' Stafman said. No one spoke against the bill, and Derf Johnson, with the Montana Environmental Information Center, the only proponent Monday, said such legislation would help him assist the public. The MEIC receives calls from people worried about, say, a potential gravel pit next door or other activity that might affect property rights and property values, Johnson said. Johnson said transparency is good for the public, it's good for holding government accountable, and it's part of the Montana Constitution's protection of the right to know. The bill would set boundaries that ensure the governor is subject to public record requests under the right to know, Johnson said, as he should be. 'He makes important decisions that really impact people's lives on a day to day basis,' Johnson said. Sen. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, said the governor had endorsed several candidates in a primary, and she wanted to know if more information about endorsements might be available if the bill were in place — or if it would be protected. 'We were interested in finding out how deep that went,' Manzella said. Stafman said it was a good question, and given the matter was political, he believed it would be public. 'Without this bill, he might very well say it's private. In fact, he almost surely will,' Stafman said. In response to a question from Sen. Barry Usher, R-Billings, Stafman said the Governor's Office had not weighed in on his bill. As part of his presentation, Stafman provided the committee a letter from Evan Barrett, who worked for previous governors, was involved when he was not on staff, and talked with legal counsel for other former governors. The letter said Barrett personally did not recollect executive privilege being asserted, and his research did not turn up any such claims either going back decades. The committee did not take immediate action on the bill Monday.
