Montana
Bill that would sell isolated state land to neighboring landowners nears Gianforte’s desk
On a tailwind of Republican support, the Montana Legislature has advanced a bill that would facilitate the sale of isolated sections of state trust land.
House Bill 676 is a sweeping 22-page bill sponsored by House Speaker Brandon Ler, R-Savage, that addresses multiple aspects of water rights and the administration of state trust lands.
Although several components of the bill drew scrutiny during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, perhaps the most controversial aspect of HB 676 involves the potential for the noncompetitive sale of an estimated 1.5 million acres of isolated sections of state land.
HB 676 would also close the Montana Water Court, a nearly 50-year-old court created to quantify and prioritize hundreds of thousands of water rights that predate Montana’s 1972 Constitution. If HB 676 passes, an existing law specifying that the court cannot alter tribal water compacts would be struck as well. Critics argue it could invite federal intervention in decisions nearing resolution after decades of negotiation and scrutiny. One such agreement is the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Compact, which is currently before the Montana Water Court.
In their comments to lawmakers, HB 676 proponents referenced a controversial decision the Montana Supreme Court issued last year. They described HB 676 as a private property rights protection measure that will prevent the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation from “stealing” private water rights by dictating that in order to claim ownership of a water right, the water right must be used and diverted on state lands.
At issue is the Schutter v. Montana Land Board ruling the Montana Supreme Court issued in late April 2024 siding with the Land Board. The Land Board, which oversees state trust lands and is comprised of the top elected officials serving in state government, had asserted ownership over a portion of a private water right Gallatin County potato farmers developed on their private land to irrigate both their property and a neighboring property they leased from the state.
In an opinion siding with the Montana Water Court’s interpretation of the matter, Montana’s highest court argued that the state must exercise some ownership over the water right to act in accordance with its directive to “secure the largest measure of legitimate advantage” for state trust land beneficiaries — e.g., Montana’s public schools. State trust lands are sections of land the federal government turned over to the Montana government when it became a state.
The Schutter decision was vigorously opposed by the Senior Ag Water Rights Alliance, which described the DNRC’s stance as “government bureaucracy gone insane.”
Speaking as a member of the Senior Ag Water Rights Alliance on March 21, Jocelyn Cahill described HB 676 as a proposal to put “clarity and stability” into Montana law.
“Many ranchers are afraid to use their water on their state leases, fearing that DNRC will come after their right,” Cahill said. “This uncertainty discourages investment in the infrastructure needed to divert and deliver water. When ranchers stop improving their lease lands, the state leases — and the school trusts that rely on them — lose out on significant benefits.”
Cahill is steeped in water issues in other ways. She recently represented irrigation interests in a water policy stakeholder group that developed legislative proposals over the interim and her politically powerful family recently lost a legal dispute regarding the use of exempt wells to facilitate a Broadwater County development.
Other HB 676 proponents included the Rocky Mountain Stockgrowers Association and the Rocky Fork Decreed Users of Carbon County.
HB 676 opponents argued that the bill is a raw deal for public land access, for Montanans in the midst of the water rights adjudication process, and for public K-12 schools reliant on state trust lands for a healthy and sustainable revenue source.
The Montana Stockgrowers Association, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation, the Montana Water Resources Association, the Montana Quality Education Coalition, the Senior Water Rights Coalition, the Montana Wildlife Federation, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the Property and Environment Research Center, the Public Land Water Access Association and the Montana chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers spoke in opposition to the measure, along with other groups and individuals.
Matt Leow with Backcountry Hunters and Anglers acknowledged the access challenges posed by isolated sections of state land but argued that the solution is not to create a “fire sale of a state treasure” but rather to “figure out ways to open up public access to our public lands.”
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation lobbyist Charlie Booher echoed that assessment, arguing that facilitating “the non-competitive sale of state land” is the wrong way to address state land that public recreationists can’t access.
“Over the last six years, Montana [Fish, Wildlife and Parks] and DNRC have worked through the [Public Access Land Agreement] program, as well as through the Block Management program, to open up access to over 1 million acres of state land that is currently isolated,” he told committee members. “We are supportive of that work and wouldn’t want to see it diminished by this bill.”
Brian Thompson with the Senior Water Rights Coalition described the dissolution of the water court as “problematic.”
“The water court has a job to do, and ending somewhat arbitrarily in 2031 leaves a lot of people in a lurch,” Thompson said during a hearing on the measure. “This is a system and a process that we set in place many decades ago. A lot of people’s water rights are dependent upon this system … They’re counting on the system to continue and to work to protect their rights into the future.”
Opponents also argued that losing more than 1 million acres of state land will jeopardize between $5-7 million of revenue annually, much of which supports public schools. They also pushed back on the notion that the state is “stealing” water rights.
Lt. Gov. Kristen Juras, a former University of Montana law professor with extensive experience in water law, spoke most forcefully on the latter point.
“The state has never and does not assert an ownership of the water used on [private] land. It only asserts the interest on the state trust land, which it’s obligated to do under its fiduciary duty,” said Juras, who was testifying on behalf of Gov. Greg Gianforte in his capacity as chair of the Montana Land Board. “It is absolutely not correct that the state Land Board, acting through the Trust Land division of DNRC, is taking anybody’s private trust rights.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee has not yet taken executive action on HB 676.
HOUSE BILL 379
Just after the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on HB 676, the House of Representatives voted to advance House Bill 379, a twice-tabled and later revived measure that sought to combine two existing tools to facilitate the sale of state trust lands to developers.
Lawmakers’ lifeline to HB 379 was short-lived, though. After passing an initial vote on March 21, the measure failed, 42-54, after 10 Republicans flipped their third-reading vote on Monday.
Rep. Larry Brewster, R-Billings, said he was approached by the Forestry and Trust Lands Division of the DNRC to sponsor HB 379. During a Feb. 6 House State Administration Committee hearing on the bill, Brewster described it as a straightforward measure — “nothing slim shady” — that would alleviate Montana’s housing affordability challenges.
The sale of state lands that are “prime” for such residential development — those that communities have grown around, that have access to utilities and are no longer used for grazing, for example — would provide greater financial benefit to state trust beneficiaries like K-12 public schools if the state could enter into a commercial joint venture agreement with developers, Brewster told his colleagues.
Deidra Kloberdanz, who manages the Real Estate Bureau of the DNRC’s Forestry and Trust Lands Division, said HB 379 combines two existing programs under the DNRC’s umbrella — the commercial leasing program and the land banking program — to create a pathway for larger housing developments. The leasing program provides revenue to trust beneficiaries through commercial rent payments. The land banking program, which has been operational for 22 years, allows the DNRC to sell up to 250,000 acres of trust land in order to reinvest in other lands that will provide more financial benefit to trust beneficiaries.
Kloberdanz said the measure would allow a developer to initiate the subdivision and platting process as a property lessee and establish a framework for the later sale of individual home sites through the land banking program. She added that Land Board oversight is baked into the proposal.
“The idea is the state and the developer would be able to share in both the risk and the reward of the project,” Kloberdanz said.
Gale Heide with Habitat for Humanity of Gallatin Valley was HB 379’s other proponent during the committee hearing on the bill. He argued that HB 379 would make the development of state lands for affordable housing developments that groups like his have explored more financially feasible.
“Though I’m not encouraging the state to become real estate investors, you have proven the ability to use careful foresight in preserving your commitment to future generations and a growing education system,” Heide said. “Maybe some day there won’t be enough of Montana to go around, but for now, I think we can work together to create opportunities for working Montanans willing to bear the load with us.”
The measure drew no opponents during its hearing.
Democratic members of the House spoke in opposition to the bill during floor debate last week, arguing that they have concerns about “uncertainty and ambiguity” in the bill, particularly around a transition away from a public auction process to an online sales platform.
MISSOULA — Four out of five members of Montana’s Public Service Commission were in a federal courtroom in Missoula Thursday morning, as the PSC’s former president challenges the disciplinary action taken against him earlier this year. Now, newly released documents are shedding more light on to what led up to this point.
(Watch the video for a closer look at the case.)
New documents shed light Montana PSC dispute
Commissioner Brad Molnar has sued President Jeff Welborn, Vice President Jennifer Fielder and Commissioner Annie Bukacek – the three PSC members who voted in May to require him to work remotely, after an investigation into complaints about his workplace conduct. Molnar has claimed he is being unfairly punished for constitutionally protected speech, and he asked Senior U.S District Judge Donald Molloy to allow him to return to the PSC offices.
Matthew Monforton, Molnar’s attorney, told the judge that barring Molnar from the building was limiting his ability to do his job.
“He has not been officially kicked out of office, but his voice has clearly been diminished,” said Monforton.
But Natasha Jones, an attorney representing the other three commissioners, said the findings were about behavior, not just speech, and that the PSC’s action was a reasonable response.
“These are serious concerns about a pattern of conduct that has made employees quit,” she said.
Jonathon Ambarian
On Tuesday, Molloy ordered the release of redacted versions of two full investigative reports into Molnar’s conduct – more than 100 pages of documents. Monforton had moved for the full reports to be made public, and Molloy ruled attorneys for the other PSC members hadn’t shown a compelling reason to keep the documents under seal as long as the names of people involved in the investigation were obscured.
While the names remained redacted in the investigation reports, the attorneys for Welborn, Fielder and Bukacek also filed additional documents – including a public declaration from Bukacek and from former PSC executive director Alana Lake, providing information about their allegations against Molnar.
The two reports, from an outside investigator, cover Molnar’s alleged actions over two periods: the first from February to August 2025, and the second from August to October 2025. The investigation began after the first formal complaint, filed by Bukacek in May 2025 – though the reports say employees had been bringing up concerns about Molnar’s behavior informally for several months prior.
Bukacek’s complaint claimed Molnar had repeatedly made what she called “sexualized and demeaning comments.” The examples she cited included saying the PSC should replace “Taco Tuesdays” with “Topless Tuesdays,” reminiscing about watching girls in bikinis as a teenager, and commenting about the beauty of women in areas of China who didn’t get “old and wrinkly.”
In her declaration, Bukacek also claimed Molnar had “maliciously disseminated false information” about her and “engaged in behavior that was dismissive, derisive and otherwise abusive.”
“My primary concern now is not for my safety nor my feelings, but for the rest of the staff who may not have the temperament to speak up or may feel too intimidated to speak up given concerns over job security,” Bukacek said in her declaration.
MTN News
The investigators determined Molnar had violated the PSC’s code of conduct by making comments of a sexual nature, and that it appeared his behavior had continued for some time after he was warned about it. They also found he had behaved unprofessionally and in a belittling manner toward Bukacek, though they said Bukacek herself had at times used “language that could be considered inappropriate” in emails to staff or other commissioners. Bukacek told MTN she “readily self corrected” any behaviors that were brought to her attention.
The investigation also found a violation in connection with a complaint from a PSC staff member, who said he “felt bullied” by Molnar when the commissioner sent an email complaining about his team not being “people with competence.”
However, much of the first report and the entire second report was focused on conduct after the initial complaints, when Molnar was accused of retaliating against people who participated in the investigation. Lake said in her declaration that she saw “an immediate and significant change in his behavior toward staff involved in the process.” She claimed he said he would use an attorney and private investigator to go after people who filed complaints, and she accused him of publicly criticizing her in interviews and removing her job responsibilities because of her handling of the investigation.
Lake said Molnar’s actions led to “declining morale within the agency,” undermined staff members’ ability to do their jobs and damaged her reputation. She said that led her to resign as executive director.
“I believe no employee should be forced to choose between reporting misconduct and protecting their career, reputation, or personal well-being,” she said in her declaration.
Lake has since become Helena city manager.
Jonathon Ambarian
The report said there was evidence to show Molnar had retaliated, including by “making disparaging statements about investigation participants” including Lake, by sending an email warning he could file complaints of his own against people involved, and by taking other actions investigators said could dissuade employees from reporting behavior in the future.
Monforton said during Thursday’s hearing that the initial comments Bukacek complained about were jokes Molnar had admitted were inappropriate, that he regretted saying them, and that he hasn’t made any similar comments in about a year. But he argued the vast majority of the findings against Molnar were about retaliation – and that those were primarily based on speech that the other commissioners don’t have the right to interfere with.
Monforton said it’s unreasonable to punish Molnar for what he said in the July news conference where he announced he was under investigation, in interviews with the media or in commission meetings. He said Molnar’s conduct doesn’t rise to the level of actual retaliation.
“This is an elected official, engaging in speech in his forum,” Monforton said.
He said Molnar may have made harsh comments toward staff, but that he had the right to raise objections about the way the agency does business.
Jonathon Ambarian
Monforton also argued the retaliation claims no longer justify keeping Molnar out of the office, since Welborn, Fielder and Bukacek voted to remove him as president in October and he no longer has the authority he’s accused of misusing. He said there haven’t been further complaints about his behavior since that time.
“We’re not asking for the moon and stars, we’re asking for the status quo as it existed for the last seven months,” he said.
Jones said there is enough evidence to show Molnar would have been punished regardless of whether any protected speech was excluded.
“This is not about a couple of jokes,” she said.
Jones said Molnar made maliciously false statements about people like Lake, and that type of statement isn’t covered by free speech protections.
She also said Molnar’s exclusion from the PSC offices is temporary, and that the PSC will reconsider whether to let him return if he apologizes for his actions, accepts the agency’s code of conduct and undergoes training.
Molloy indicated he saw indications that there was “acrimony” on both sides of the situation, and said he was skeptical it would be resolved easily.
“It would be nice if instead of juvenile behavior, there was professional behavior,” he said.
However, the judge said there was an avenue for Molnar to pursue if he wanted to reach a resolution.
Molloy took no immediate action Thursday. He told the parties he would rule as quickly as he could.
Carrie Gilbertson has been executive director of Cancer Support Community Montana for just under two months, stepping into the role in April with more than 15 years of nonprofit experience and a lifetime of Montana roots.
The organization provides psychosocial and mental health support to anyone affected by cancer — not just those with a diagnosis, but also family members and others walking alongside them.
WATCH: Meet the new leader of Cancer Support Community Montana 🎗️
Cancer Support Community Montana names new executive director
“This mission of providing psycho-social supports and mental health supports for anyone impacted by cancer, not just that person who has the diagnosis, but also family members, anyone who is walking alongside someone as they experience that often scary diagnosis, that’s just something that’s important to me,” Gilbertson said.
Gilbertson’s role extends beyond the Bozeman office. Cancer Support Community Montana’s Missoula location is already up and running, and a Helena location is expected to be operating soon. Each presents its own set of challenges.
“Each hospital is different. They might have different resources. Their social workers might be connecting to things in a different way. So understanding what those hospitals need, what different participants need in each community, is going to be different just because the communities are different, resources are different,” Gilbertson said.
The Bozeman office has been operating for more than 20 years, providing a foundation that supports the organization’s broader statewide efforts.
“I think this is a crew that looks at what does this community need what do our participants need what are some of the changing landscapes in cancer care what things are the gaps that we see that we can maybe just jump right in and you know let’s see if we can provide that for people so that’s something I really love about this crew that I work with and just this mission that there is some flexibility in being able to adjust and adapt as we learn more,” Gilbertson said.
Those adaptations show up in unexpected ways. The organization converts its parking lot into a pickleball court every Friday morning.
“I didn’t know there was a pickleball court. I pulled in actually with my daughter pulled in and she was is that pickleball court and I was like oh, it kind of looks like it is so yeah that’s fun, every Friday morning we clear out the parking lot and put up the net and I haven’t played yet I’ve been watching just to kind of see how that game works but they take it pretty seriously,” Gilbertson said.
This story was reported on-air by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.
-
Detroit, MI6 minutes agoTop 10 ‘Hour Detroit’ Covers, As Voted By Readers
-
San Francisco, CA18 minutes agoInjured SFPD officer released from hospital after line-of-duty shooting
-
Dallas, TX21 minutes ago25,000 free Dallas teen passes available June 29 for museums, zoo and more
-
Miami, FL26 minutes ago3 wildfires burn over 20,000 acres in Miami-Dade ahead of long-awaited rain
-
Boston, MA33 minutes agoBoston is opening outdoor drinking areas during the World Cup. Here’s how it works.
-
Denver, CO36 minutes agoClaimed by Christ, Free in Him: Archbishop Golka Celebrates First Juneteenth Mass in Denver
-
Seattle, WA41 minutes ago‘Seattle News Weekly’: FIFA World Cup 2026 at Seattle Stadium
-
San Diego, CA48 minutes agoIt’s NASCAR weekend in Coronado. Here’s what San Diegans need to know.
