Connect with us

Montana

Competing bills could determine reallocation of Montana pot tax

Published

on

Competing bills could determine reallocation of Montana pot tax


Blair Miller

(Every day Montanan) Fights are ramping up on the state Capitol over what to do with Montana’s marijuana tax income and its funding of the Habitat Montana conservation program, as the 2 payments nonetheless shifting via the legislature that tackle each comprise vastly completely different finish objectives.

Conservation and outdoor teams have been loudly outspoken about what they see as efforts to redistribute greater than $8 million a 12 months in marijuana tax income at present allotted to Habitat Montana, exhibiting up en masse to committee hearings to oppose a number of payments and holding a rally attended by a whole lot on the Capitol in late February at which they known as on lawmakers to maintain their palms off the additional funding for this system.

A number of of the teams against shifting the funding away from Habitat Montana stated this week that they had seen a constructive decision when Senate Invoice 442, sponsored by Sen. Mike Lang, R-Malta, which had sought to redistribute cash going towards Habitat Montana and different packages to county highway funding, was amended to revive the 20% of marijuana tax income at present going to this system on an ongoing foundation – however via a barely completely different mechanism.

Advertisement

Wild Montana State Coverage Director Noah Marion stated in a press release Thursday the modification was “nice information” for conservation and public land entry and urged lawmakers “to push this invoice over the road directly.”

However one other invoice, Home Invoice 669 from Rep. Invoice Mercer, R-Billings, might get in the way in which of that occuring. It comprises one-time funding for Habitat Montana and different packages at present receiving marijuana income solely via the following biennium.

After the top of FY2025, all marijuana tax income – save for six% allotted to the Therapeutic and Ending Dependancy By means of Restoration and Remedy (HEART) fund – would go to the final fund, and lawmakers would resolve the place and the way it must be spent beginning within the subsequent legislative session.

The explanation for that has additionally cut up Mercer and fellow Republican lawmakers with Democrats and conservation teams, who see a key distinction in how the allocation of the marijuana tax income was cut up up within the first place through the 2021 legislative session via Home Invoice 701.

As he instructed the Home Appropriations Committee through the invoice’s preliminary listening to, throughout govt motion earlier this week, and once more when the invoice was heard on second studying on the Home ground Friday, Mercer believes that I-190, the initiative that voters handed to legalize adult-use marijuana, appropriated the tax income and the way it will be spent.

Advertisement

Mercer and fellow Republicans stated a number of occasions throughout committee and ground discussions that it’s the sole accountability of the legislature below the Montana Structure to applicable cash, and since they declare it was the initiative that outlined how the cash must be spent, the present distribution takes the ability of the purse out of the palms of lawmakers.

“The initiative was a really fascinating method to attempt to say to individuals, ‘Should you vote for this, all these {dollars} will do these varied issues,’ which isn’t permissible below the initiative course of,” Mercer instructed the Appropriations Committee earlier this week. “… The concept that we someway have our palms tied behind our again and might’t resolve easy methods to use income is totally impermissible, and we shouldn’t permit it to proceed.”

Rep. David Bedey, R-Hamilton, stated permitting initiatives to applicable cash would result in a “descent into chaos” and would result in initiatives working public relations campaigns to take action.

Democrats on the ground Friday stated the concept constituents had appropriated cash was flat out fallacious.

Rep. Emma Kerr-Carpenter, D-Billings, famous that through the in depth work on the marijuana framework invoice, HB701, lawmakers made modifications to the income allocations that differed from what had been set as a framework within the initiative.

Advertisement

“I’ll say that many people voted for these modifications as a result of we felt prefer it was our accountability. … We modified the income allocations, identical to this invoice would,” she stated. “Nonetheless, I don’t suppose we have to relitigate 701. We handed the laws final session; why are we voting on this invoice?”

Home Minority Chief Kim Abbott, D-Helena, stated the initiative “completely didn’t” applicable cash however legalized adult-use marijuana and despatched the cash to the particular income account to be distributed how lawmakers wished. Additional, she stated, the funds workplace and Division of Justice stated the expenditures have been topic to legislative appropriation.

“Actually, the voters had an opinion about how we must be spending, however we don’t have comply with these opinions,” she stated. “However simply because we don’t must doesn’t imply we shouldn’t pay attention.”

The $353 million in marijuana gross sales within the 14 months since leisure merchandise got here to market have introduced in $53.8 million in tax income, based on the Hashish Management Division. In a fiscal observe hooked up to Mercer’s invoice, the Governor’s Workplace of Price range and Program Planning forecasts medical and adult-use gross sales will usher in between $52.9 million and $57.9 million in tax income yearly over the following 4 years.

Underneath Mercer’s invoice, the primary $5.2 million would go towards Division of Income administrative prices, then proceed to ship $6 million to the HEART fund, as is the case below present legislation.

Advertisement

However as a substitute of distributing out cash to varied funds from there – 20% for the Habitat Montana program; 4% to a state park account; 4% to a trails and leisure facility account; 4% to a nongame wildlife account; 3% or $200,000 to a veterans and surviving spouses income account; $150,000 to fund disaster intervention crew coaching; and the remainder to the final fund – Mercer’s invoice would ship all the cash going to these accounts to the final fund beginning in FY2026, to the tune of $41 million to $46 million per 12 months.

The overall fund below present legislation would obtain about $30 million and $31 million in FY2026 and FY2027.

The invoice was amended this week in Appropriations to make one-time appropriations for the biennium of $8.7 million to the Habitat Montana program; $1.75 million to the state park account; $1.75 million to the paths and leisure amenities account; $1.75 million to the nongame wildlife account; $2.5 million for conservation districts; and $2.5 million for the veterans and surviving spouses income account.

Mercer stated the modification nonetheless made the conservation and recreation packages entire over the following biennium, however stated it must be as much as future legislatures to find out easy methods to transfer ahead with the cash beginning with the 2025 session.

Rep. John Fitzpatrick, R-Anaconda, supplied an instance of what the following legislature would possibly search to do with the marijuana tax income when all the cash is within the normal fund.

Advertisement

“We have now a drug calamity on our palms,” he stated. “In 2025, we’re going to want a small fortune to fund drug remedy and legislation enforcement.”

Reps. Ed Buttrey, R-Nice Falls, Paul Inexperienced, R-Hardin, and Mike Hopkins, R-Missoula, joined all 32 Home Democrats in voting in opposition to the invoice on its second studying, in a 65-35 vote. It can face a 3rd studying earlier than being despatched over to the Senate.

Lang stated he had not but seen Mercer’s invoice, or one other invoice from Republican Rep. Marta Bertoglio which was tabled in favor of Mercer’s, however stated the Senate can be “addressing these as we go down the highway.”

His invoice places 11% of the marijuana tax income to the HEART fund; 20% to a fund to assemble and preserve county roads; 5% to the veterans and surviving spouses income account; 12% whole to the state parks, trails and amenities, and nongame accounts; and 20% to a brand new “habitat legacy account.”

That new habitat legacy account would ship 75% of its funds to the Habitat Montana program, and if the unobligated fund stability goes above $50 million, it will return the surplus to the legacy account to be disbursed to Habitat Montana ongoing tasks in addition to different wildlife habitat enchancment and stewardship tasks.

Advertisement

Habitat Montana’s major supply of funding is licenses purchased by out-of-state hunters, which an FWP official stated earlier this session brings in round $12 million every biennium. Underneath present legislation, the marijuana tax income would put one other $8.3 million to $9.3 million towards this system every of the following 4 years.

Lang instructed the Every day Montanan he needs the tax income to go towards county roads as a result of they tie in with a lot of the entry to public lands in additional rural elements of the state that don’t have the cash wanted to construct and preserve roads.

His invoice is scheduled for its second studying on the Senate ground on Monday, forward of Tuesday’s transmittal deadline for income payments.

He stated he hoped his invoice can be supported by the agricultural and conservation industries, a few of which hinted this week they have been happy with the brand new amended model, over some other income redistribution payments which have been introduced this session.

“I would like [agriculture] to get collectively on this factor; give up capturing one another,” he stated.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Montana

Montana Veterans Memorial hosts annual ceremony Monday

Published

on

Montana Veterans Memorial hosts annual ceremony Monday


Authors Tony and Janet Seahorn, who co-wrote “Tears of a Warrior, a Family’s Story of Combat and Living with PTSD,” will speak at the 19th annual Memorial Day Ceremony in Great Falls, scheduled for 2 p.m. on Monday.

The Seahorns — Tony, an Army veteran who served in Vietnam, and Janet, who teaches on neuroscience and literacy at Regis University in Denver and at Colorado State University — provide education counseling, team building and outdoor adventures through their business, and their book was selected as the military book of the year in 2014. They will participate in a book signing at the VFW Post 4669, at the Black Eagle Community Center, from 5 to 7 p.m. Monday.

The Memorial Day ceremony will also include personnel from Malmstrom Air Base, Montana Veterans Memorial Association President Starnell Darko, Jesse Callendar from the Great Falls Pipe Band, Great Falls Municipal Band and Boy Scout troops from the area. In addition, Army veteran and Blackfeet Community College professor Marvin Weatherwax Sr. will introduce the Blackfeet Veterans Honor Guard. Following the ceremony members of the Blackfeet Nation will conduct a blessing at the Agent Orange Monument at the Montana Veterans Memorial.

Advertisement

The Montana Veterans Memorial is at 1025 25th St. N in Great Falls. Monday’s ceremony will also be broadcast on the Montana Veterans Memorial Facebook page, and on 89.9 KGPR Great Falls Public Radio.



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana parents who lost custody of daughter after opposing gender transition claim 14-year-old was taken without warrant

Published

on

Montana parents who lost custody of daughter after opposing gender transition claim 14-year-old was taken without warrant


A Montana couple who claim they lost custody of their daughter after opposing a gender transition now allege the 14-year-old was taken from them by the state’s child protective services without a warrant, according to a new lawsuit.

The teen’s father, Todd Kolstad, and stepmother, Krista, slapped the agency with a federal suit earlier this week, claiming that social workers allegedly took their child without due process by not having a judge sign off on the warrant, the Daily Montanan reported.

The couple also allege their religious freedoms were ignored and their civil rights violated when CPS opted to put the teen in a psychiatric facility in Wyoming instead of Montana — and then banned them from communicating with the child.

The teen’s father, Todd Kolstad, and stepmother, Krista, are suing Montana’s child protective services after the 14-year-old was removed from their custody last year. Todd Kolstad / Facebook

The legal saga first erupted when the Kolstads’ said the teen, who is only identified as “H.K.” in court papers, told them last year that he identifies as transgender and wanted to transition to a male.

Advertisement

The couple, however, said they refused the teen’s request because of their strong religious beliefs.

State officials were subsequently alerted last summer when H.K. expressed suicidal thoughts at school and was admitted to a hospital for in-patient psychiatric care after claiming to have ingested a mix of ibuprofen and toilet bowl cleaner.

Concerned about the risk of suicide and imminent harm, state officials argued, at the time, that they were justified in taking custody of H.K.

But the couple claim the social workers lied in an affidavit that H.K. faced “an imminent risk of physical harm” and left out any mention of their religious beliefs.

“Seizing a child without a warrant is excusable only when officials have reasonable cause to believe that the child is likely to experience serious bodily harm in the time that would be required to obtain a warrant,” the court filing states.

Advertisement
The legal saga first erupted when the Kolstads’ said the teen, who is only identified as “H.K.” in court papers, told them last year that he identifies as transgender and wanted to transition to a male — but they refused. Todd Kolstad / Facebook

“(CPS) knew that H.K. was not facing an imminent substantial risk of serious harm when they seized her on Aug. 22,” the suit continued. “Defendants’ deceit of the state court made the court’s proceedings against the Kolstads a sham from start to finish.”

When they took custody of the teen, the state said they trying to find a permanent bed in a psychiatric hospital for H.K., the lawsuit notes.

The Kolstads’ argue they, too, were supportive of finding a psychiatric bed for the teen — as long as it was in Montana because they feared out-of-state medical professionals might start the transition process.

The couple believed Montana banned medical support for teens looking to transition given the issue is still being litigated in state courts, according to the suit.

They claim state officials switched the plans at the last minute and moved H.K. to a psychiatric treatment center in neighboring Wyoming against their wishes and banned them from contacting the teen.

Advertisement

The state agency didn’t immediately respond to The Post’s request for comment about the litigation.

The lawsuit comes after the case spilled into the public realm earlier this year when Gov. Greg Gianforte ordered Lieutenant Governor Kristen Juras to carry out a review of the case.

The couple said they refused the teen’s request because of their strong religious beliefs. Todd Kolstad / Facebook

Gianforte, a Republican, later backed the social workers after Juras’ probe found “the court have followed state policy and law in their handling of this tragic case.”

In a statement to The Post, Gianforte’s office stressed the state doesn’t remove minors from homes to provide gender transition services or use public funds to pay for those services while a minor is in the state’s custody.

“As outlined in its statement of purpose, Child Protective Services protects children who have been or are at substantial risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment,” a spokesperson said at the time.

Advertisement

H.K. currently resides with his biological mother in her native Canada.



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Legislators support of Montana Great Outdoors Project

Published

on

Legislators support of Montana Great Outdoors Project



The following was submitted as formal public comment to Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks:

Advertisement

As Republican legislators representing Northwest Montana and the western edge of our state, we write to express our full support for the Montana Great Outdoors Project.

The draft environmental assessment for Phase 1 of the conservation easement clearly illustrates not only that this proposal is the right move for conservation and the environment, but it’s also essential to protect good jobs and the Montana way of life, as well as preserve the very character of Northwest Montana.

Much of the land between Kalispell and Libby has been owned by a rotating set of timber companies for generations. Those companies have been stewards of their private property, managing the forest for its health and creating hundreds of good-paying, blue-collar Montana jobs.

They’ve also generously allowed the public to hunt, fish, and recreate on their properties. Generations of Montanans have grown up with access to these lands. It’s impossible to count how many family memories of first deer, rainy Memorial Day weekend camping trips, and mountain sunset drives would have never happened without that access.

If we lose the land to subdivision and development, we’ll never get back the magic of Northwest Montana. The Phase 1 easement will protect nearly 33,000 acres from such a generational loss.

Advertisement

The Montana Great Outdoors project is a win across the board. It will keep the land in timber production as it has been historically. With recent mill closures in the Swan Valley and Missoula, it’s never been more clear that the future of forest health, wildfire prevention, and timber jobs are on the line with every land management decision.

The project will also maintain the public’s recreational access to the land and preserve the character of Northwest Montana. Population growth is putting unprecedented development pressure on our part of the state. If we do not act to save open spaces and public access, we will lose them forever.

This conservation easement will prevent that loss and ensure that future generations can hunt, fish, camp and explore the forest north of the Thompson Chain of Lakes just as their parents, grandparents and great-grandparents have.

Finally, the financial impacts of the easement are positive ones. The land will remain in private ownership and contributing property taxes; there’s no shifting of the property tax burden to homeowners.

The cost of the easement is being paid for by a combination of the landowner’s generous donation, the Forest Service, private fundraising, and state hunting license dollars. Montana taxpayers aren’t on the hook for the project.

Advertisement

We are senators and representatives, elected by the people, but even more importantly we are hunters, fisherman and outdoors enthusiasts. Some of us have history in the timber industry, several have multi-generational ties to this region. Our families live here. Simply put, this is home. The proposed easement is about protecting and preserving our home. We support the Montana Great Outdoors Project.

Signatories include Sen. Greg Hertz, who represents Polson, Lakeside and Somers, and Rep. Linda Reksten, whose district includes Polson and the south half of Flathead Lake.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending