Montana

District Court finds in favor of Montana Public Service Commission in climate petition question • Daily Montanan

Published

1 year ago

September 13, 2024

District Court finds in favor of Montana Public Service Commission in climate petition question • Daily Montanan

A petition that calls on the Montana Public Service Commission to consider the effects of climate in its decisions is still active, but this week, a district court judge dismissed a lawsuit alleging the PSC needed to be forced to take action on the proposal.

In an order Wednesday, Missoula County District Court Judge Leslie Halligan said the Public Service Commission has broad discretion in how it considers new rules, and she said it had met its legal obligations, contrary to petitioners’ allegations.

Thursday, the PSC president praised the order as “thought fully considered and well decided,” but a spokesperson for the petitioners said the outcome only allows more delay as Montanans suffer from smoke and other effects of climate change.

Said PSC President James Brown in a statement: “The court … affirms the right of state agencies to use this process to make rules in a way that allow agencies to gather the information necessary and to allow time for public input to make rules that make sense for the people of Montana.”

But Anne Hedges, spokesperson for petitioners and policy and legislative director for the Montana Environmental Information Center, said the group believes the court erred.

“What the court has done is reinforce a stall tactic to address a crisis that is only getting worse,” Hedges said.

She said petitioners have not decided whether to appeal to the Montana Supreme Court.

In February, 40 organizations and businesses filed the petition that said the PSC should adopt a new rule that requires consideration of adverse climate impacts of greenhouses gas emissions in utility regulation.

Organizations and businesses include Bridger Bowl Ski Area, Helena Hunters and Anglers, Families for a Livable Climate, the Montana Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, MEIC and others.

The proposal drew significant public interest and has received more than 900 comments so far.

In April, the Public Service Commission held a public hearing after receiving more than 500 comments. It also extended the deadline for comment, arguing it would give more people a chance to provide feedback and also possibly help answer some of the questions that had come up about the petition.

But a subset of petitioners said the PSC had lapsed in its duty to start formally considering a new rule, and they took their argument to court.

They said the Public Service Commission couldn’t just hold a public hearing, it had to clearly initiate the rulemaking process, and it missed the 60-day deadline to do so.

The PSC, however, argued it was operating under “informal rulemaking,” allowed by state statute, and its March 19 notice of public comment in fact launched the rulemaking process.

Judge Halligan agreed with the Public Service Commission, although she also said it could have provided more clarity about its intentions to begin with.

Halligan said the court can tell a party to act if that party is clearly failing to perform a legal duty, but it’s an extraordinary remedy — technically, a writ of mandate. And she said the court is barred from doing so where the duty “is discretionary in nature.”

But she said the PSC hasn’t denied rulemaking in this case, the legislature intends agencies to be able to expand the scope of public participation, and the commission is afforded “broad discretion” when it comes to rulemaking.

The order also said there’s no legal authority that says the commission can’t start an informal process before starting “formal rulemaking.”

By issuing its March 19 written notice, the commission “fulfilled its ministerial duty” to publish a notice within the allowed timeframe, the judge said. She said it also has discretion to determine “how to proceed,” and it did so reasoning more input was needed.

“As a matter of public policy, the Commission’s efforts to consider broad public interests and to allow extensive public participation when proceeding with a proposed rule so large in scope is in harmony with the spirit of MAPA,” or the Montana Administrative Procedures Act, the order said.

Hedges, with the petitioners, said the group will keep advocating, as it has done, and time has already run out when it comes to climate.

“If the smoke-filled skies that we are all experiencing this week don’t underscore the need to address this crisis immediately, I’m not sure what does,” she said.

She said the PSC held a hearing in April, and it hasn’t done anything since then to try to help protect rates or climate: “That just shows that they do not feel an obligation to do their job.”

The Public Service Commission’s David Sanders said agency staff are going through public comment — “five volumes of it” — and looking for information that might help clarify some of the questions about the proposed rule.

Sanders also said commissioners had asked the petitioners specific questions about how the rule could work. He said he hopes the petitioners will respond to those questions that now that the judge found the PSC’s process to be legal.

“We would prefer that they participate in a collaborative process with us,” said Sanders, PSC executive director.

Source link

Click to comment

Montana

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

Published

6 hours ago

March 11, 2026

Press Room

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

It’s the talk of the town this week — powerful winds ripped the roof off Lincoln Elementary School on Sunday, leaving students, teachers, and residents in shock.

The incident has sparked concern among homeowners who are now worried about how such weather damage could impact their own homes—and what their insurance would cover.

According to Tauna Locatelli, owner of Advantage Insurance, most insurance policies have a set deductible for things like fire or theft, but wind and hail damage deductibles are often much higher, or even based on a percentage of a property’s value.

Quentin Shores reports – watch the video here:

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

“Right now our industry is going through a really challenging time, especially when it comes to wind and hail in Montana. Several carriers are going to a standard ‘all peril’ deductible for everything other than wind and hail. So, it could be $1,000 for all but wind and hail, $2,500 wind and hail,” Locatelli explained.

A deductible is the amount homeowners must pay before insurance covers the rest. For wind and hail, that deductible can be steep.

“Some companies are going 1 or 2% of a coverage value, so that’s the building value. If it’s insured for $500,000 and you have a 1% deductible, you’re looking at a $5,000 deductible for wind and hail, which is what we get in Montana,” Locatelli said.

It’s important for homeowners to know their deductible—if repairs cost less than the deductible, insurance won’t pay anything.

Filing small claims can also impact your rates; Locatelli said, “Because if you have a $3,000 patch job claim and you have a $5,000 deductible, you really don’t want to file that because you’re not going to get anything in. That claim is going to follow your insurance record for five years.”

Age of property factors in as well. If you have an older roof, insurance may not fully cover its replacement.

“You’ve now lived half the roof life. Well, insurance is about indemnity and putting you back in the same condition you were in before the loss. You can’t put a 16-year-old roof on a home, so at 16 years, they’ll now pay 50% of that roof instead of 100% because it’s already lived half of its life. And then it drops each year as it goes by,” Locatelli added.

The bottom line: Keep your property maintained, review your insurance policy, and think carefully before filing a claim—especially as Montana faces more intense weather.

Source link

Montana

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

Published

18 hours ago

March 11, 2026

Press Room

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

State

Zip Code

Country

Source link

Montana

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

Published

1 day ago

March 10, 2026

Press Room

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

HELENA — On Monday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen sent a letter to the City of Helena claiming the municipality is not in compliance with the state’s law banning “sanctuary cities.” The letter comes just under a month after the State of Montana launched an investigation into a city resolution on Helena Police policy and Helena’s involvement in federal immigration enforcement.

In the letter, Knudsen laid out the ways he believes the city’s resolution violated state law. The attorney general gave Helena 15 days to respond or reverse the policy. If the city does not comply, his office will pursue legal action.

“Helena’s resolution appears to contain blatant violations of this law,” wrote Knudsen.

MTN News

On January 26, 2026, the City of Helena adopted a resolution clarifying when and how the Helena Police Department will cooperate with federal immigration officials. The vote was 4 to 1. The Helena commission seats and the mayor are elected in non-partisan races.

In the letter, Knudsen alleges the resolution established “a broad sanctuary city policy” that seeks to protect every illegal immigrant, regardless of whether the individual had committed a serious crime or not. The state further claims the resolution gives illegal immigrants “special privileges” in plea deals and establishes a “free-for-all policy” where a police officer can request the unmasking of Department of Homeland Security and ICE officers.

Knudsen has requested that the City of Helena, in their response, specifically describe in detail how the resolution complies with Montana law, provide emails and correspondence from city staff and the commission regarding the resolution.

Helena City manager Alana Lake told MTN in a statement: “The City of Helena is aware of the issues being raised by the Attorney General’s Office and is reviewing the matter. While we cannot discuss the details of a potential legal issue, the City is committed to transparency and compliance with the law. The City takes these matters seriously and will continue to cooperate with the appropriate authorities while remaining focused on serving our community.”

Passed in 2021, Montana House Bill 200 prohibits a state agency or local government from implementing any policy that prevents employees or departments from communicating with federal agencies regarding immigration or citizenship status for lawful purposes. It also states governments must comply with immigration detainer requests if they are lawfully made.

HB 200 was backed by Republicans and passed with only Republican votes. Gov. Greg Gianforte signed the legislation into law on March 31, 2021.

Passage of the resolution by the Helena City Commission has drawn ire from conservative voices in Montana politics and on the national level.

The resolution said the commission supported the Helena Police Department avoiding “committing its resources to federal action for which it has no authority,” such as entering into an agreement with the federal government to directly enforce immigration laws. Under federal law, immigration enforcement is conducted by federal agencies under the Department of Homeland Security. However, under the Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local governments can voluntarily enter into 287 (g) agreements with the federal government that allow them to enforce immigration laws.

The commission further supported HPD’s policy not to stop, detain, or arrest a person solely on suspected violations of immigration law, including assisting other agencies in an arrest based solely on immigration law.

DEEPER LOOK: Helena has seen a growing debate over ICE and local police involvement

In the resolution, the commission also supported an HPD officer, using their own discretion, requesting the identification and unmasking of a Department of Homeland Security Officer if the HPD officer “feels it will not be interfering with the actions of federal officers exercising their jurisdiction.”

“This adversarial relationship by local law enforcement toward federal officers itself undermines public safety and forces immigration officers to fear for their safety when they are simply carrying out their lawful duties,” wrote Knudsen.

The resolution further supports the City of Helena’s policy not to consider immigration consequences in a plea agreement with a defendant.

The commission also supports the City of Helena not disclosing any sensitive information about any person – including immigration status, sexual orientation, or social security number – except as required by law.

“This is a restriction that directly conflicts with Montana’s prohibition on sanctuary jurisdictions, specifically ‘sending to, receiving from, exchanging with, or maintaining for a federal, state, or local government entity information regarding a person’s citizenship or immigration status for a lawful purpose,’” the attorney general wrote.

If a government is found to be violating Montana’s law banning “sanctuary cities”, the state could fine them $10,000 every five days, prevent them from receiving new grants from the state, and have their projects with the state re-prioritized. A government in violation can avoid penalties by becoming compliant with the law within 14 days of being notified of the violation.

Read the full letter from the Montana Attorney General to the City of Helena:

Source link