Connect with us

Montana

Malek: Montana needs the film industry and its jobs

Published

on

Malek: Montana needs the film industry and its jobs


Sue Malek

Montana’s movie tax credit score handed the Montana legislature in 2019.  The earnings for Montana in movie jobs and related companies has astounded economists.  It’s not simply filmmakers getting cash, carpenters, electricians, motel and restaurant house owners, lumber yards and native communities have gained tremendously.

The collection Yellowstone spent greater than $75 million within the Bitterroot final 12 months and the Yellowstone prequel 1923 spent an extra $75 million in Butte.  An financial examine, accomplished by the Montana Bureau of Enterprise and Financial Analysis, concludes that these movies not solely created 527 new Montana jobs, $25.3 million in wages, $85.3 million gross receipts to companies and $10.4 million in revenues for Montana, it resulted in additional than $700 million in vacationer spending in our state after Season 4 of Yellowstone was seen throughout the US and in lots of European nations.

My objective in 2019 after I served my final session within the Montana legislature was to carry an trade to Montana that may present good, high-paying jobs to individuals throughout our state, each in small cities and enormous, jobs that don’t require years of extra schooling.  An trade that may spotlight the sweetness and variety of our state.

Advertisement

Making ready for the 2019 session, I labored with greater than 100 Montanans who had been asking the legislature to incentivize film-making in Montana. Our downside was, none of us knew what was wanted within the laws.

Then, alongside got here a former Warner Bros government and legal professional who had a imaginative and prescient of constructing a serious movie studio in Montana.  With no ensures however with huge expertise producing movies in states throughout the US and in Europe, he spent numerous hours shaping a invoice that gives robust incentives for filmmakers to come back to Montana, rent Montanans, practice Montanans, whereas guaranteeing no movie firm will earn a tax credit score till a 12 months and a half after they paid their utility charges to the State of Montana, accomplished work. and are audited. This invoice has price the State of Montana nothing and it earns us a lot.

It was arduous in a brief 90-day session with tons of of different payments being introduced to steer legislators on either side off the aisle that this invoice was the important thing to extra prosperity and jobs throughout Montana.

Now, the proof is in. Movie firms come to Montana, they spend large, they practice and rent Montanans, they renew communities. The invoice was bipartisan in 2019. Increasing it within the 2023 session ought to be straightforward. We should exchange the coal and oil industries which are closing down.

So what’s the hold-up within the Montana legislature?  In 2019, the tax credit score cap was $10 million. After virtually going via at $200 million in 2021, the cap was all of the sudden reduce to $12 million with no rationalization from the Republican majority or the governor’s workplace.

Advertisement

The legislature has proposed a $30 million cap this 12 months. That cap will maintain the present productions in Montana, however is not going to broaden the trade. The cap should be greater.  Why such a low cap on a invoice that’s doing a lot for Montana? Everyone knows we want good jobs and new trade, not simply within the Bitterroot and in Butte, however all throughout our state.

This invoice is just not about constructing high-cost retreats for rich vacationers on our public lands. It is a invoice for Montanans. Name your legislators and the governor’s workplace. Inform them we want the movie trade in Montana and we anticipate our elected officers to do the correct factor —- create good Montana jobs.

Sue Malek served within the Montana Senate from 2013 to 2021 and within the Montana Home of Representatives from 2009 to 2013





Source link

Advertisement
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 Supreme Court upholds landmark youth climate ruling

Published

on

Montana Supreme Court upholds landmark youth climate ruling


Montana’s Supreme Court has upheld a lower court’s decision that had sided with 16 young activists who argued that the state violated their right to a clean environment.

The lawsuit was brought by students arguing that a state law banning the consideration of climate when choosing energy policy was unconstitutional.

In a 6-to-1 ruling, the top court found that the plaintiffs, between ages five and 22, had a “fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment”.

Wednesday’s ruling came after a district court’s decision last year was appealed by the state. Similar climate lawsuits are ongoing across the US but this is first of its kind a from a state supreme court.

Advertisement

The lawsuit targeted a 2011 state law that made it illegal for environmental reviews to consider climate impacts when deciding on new projects, like building new power plants.

It cited a 50-year-old constitutional clause that guaranteed the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations”.

The ruling on Wednesday stated that the “plaintiffs showed at trial – without dispute – that climate change is harming Montana’s environmental life support system now and with increasing severity for the foreseeable future” .

Rikki Held, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that “this ruling is a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change”.

Montana state officials expressed disappointment with the court’s decision.

Advertisement

Governor Greg Gianforte said his office was still assessing the ruling, but predicted the impact would be “perpetual lawsuits that will waste taxpayer dollars and drive up energy bills for hardworking Montanans”.

Western Environmental Law Center, which represented the young plaintiffs, said in a statement that the decision marks “a turning point in Montana’s energy policy”.

It said plaintiffs and their legal team “are committed to ensuring the full implementation of the ruling”.

Similar cases are scheduled to be heard in several other states, including Hawaii, Utah and Alaska, as well as in countries like Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Colombia and Uganda.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Montana

Montana Supreme Court affirms decision in landmark youth climate case

Published

on

Montana Supreme Court affirms decision in landmark youth climate case


What’s New

The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed a landmark climate decision that declared the state was violating residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by allowing oil, gas and coal projects without regard for global warming.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces an August 2023 ruling by District Court Judge Kathy Seeley, who found that Montana’s practices violated its residents’ constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment.”

This pivotal case, spearheaded by a group of young plaintiffs aged 6 to 23, represented a milestone for climate advocates seeking judicial intervention to compel governmental action on climate change.

What To Know

On Wednesday in a 6-1 ruling, the Montana Supreme Court upheld the August 2023 decision.

Advertisement

The court’s decision strikes down a state policy that prohibited the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions in granting permits for fossil fuel development.

The state had previously appealed the ruling by Seeley, and arguments were heard in July, in which the state argued that greenhouse gases released from Montana fossil fuel projects are minuscule on a global scale and reducing them would have no effect on climate change.

Dale Schowengerdt, representing Montana Governor Greg Gianforte and state environmental agencies, argues before the Montana Supreme Court on July 10, 2024, in Helena, Montana, in the youth climate lawsuit Held v. Montana. The Montana Supreme…


Thom Bridge/Independent Record/ AP

Chief Justice Mike McGrath dismissed the state’s argument that Montana’s emissions are insignificant on a global scale, likening the defense to an “everyone else is doing it” excuse.

McGrath wrote, “The right to a clean and healthful environment is meaningless if the State abdicates its responsibility to protect it.”

What Are People Saying

Melissa Hornbein, an attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center and attorney for the plaintiffs said, “With the ruling now in place, the Montana Supreme Court’s decision compels the state to carefully assess the greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts of all future fossil fuel permits.”

Advertisement

Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote for the majority: “Plaintiffs may enforce their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment against the State, which owes them that affirmative duty, without requiring everyone else to stop jumping off bridges or adding fuel to the fire. Otherwise the right to a clean and healthful environment is meaningless.”

Republican Governor Greg Gianforte said in a statement that the state was still reviewing the decision, but said it will lead to “perpetual lawsuits that will waste taxpayer dollars and drive up energy bills for hardworking Montanans.

Pushback From State Leadership

The ruling has sparked a backlash from Gianforte, who criticized the court for what he described as judicial overreach. He warned the decision could invite an onslaught of lawsuits, increase energy costs for Montanans and hinder the state’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy.

“This Court continues to step outside of its lane to tread on the right of the Legislature, the elected representatives of the people, to make policy,” he said in a statement. “This decision does nothing more than declare open season on Montana’s all-of-the-above approach to energy, which is key to providing affordable and reliable energy to homes, schools, and businesses across our state.”

Gianforte also convened energy stakeholders earlier this week to discuss boosting production to meet rising demand, emphasizing the need for “unleashing American energy” to maintain grid stability.

Advertisement

The Plaintiffs’ Perspective

For the 16 young plaintiffs, the court’s decision validates their personal struggles with the tangible effects of climate change. In a Wednesday statement, lead plaintiff Rikki Held called the ruling “a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change.”

During the trial, the plaintiffs described how worsening wildfires, droughts and diminishing snowpack have disrupted their lives, polluted the air and depleted vital natural resources. They argued that the state’s failure to address these challenges imperils their future and violates their constitutional rights.

What Happens Next

The ruling has positioned Montana as a flashpoint in the national debate over climate accountability, potentially inspiring similar legal challenges across the United States.

This article includes reporting from The Associated Press.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Pregnant woman claims Montana Highway Patrol wrongfully arrested her for DUI

Published

on

Pregnant woman claims Montana Highway Patrol wrongfully arrested her for DUI


BOZEMAN — A pregnant woman from Sheridan is claiming she was wrongfully arrested by the Montana Highway Patrol (MHP) for allegedly driving under the influence during a traffic stop near Bozeman.

“I was just pretty shocked. And I constantly told him I’m pregnant, and I haven’t drunk in probably eight months,” says Alyssa Johnson.

Alyssa is a photographer from Sheridan who, at 22 weeks pregnant, was pulled over by an MHP trooper on Dec. 1, 2024 for an alleged traffic violation.

“I have a stutter, and he thought I was slurring so he pretty much said can you step out of the car. Made me do all these kinds of tests,” says Alyssa.

Advertisement

Alyssa explains that she has severe dyslexia, which makes understanding directions, and completing any sort of test, difficult.

“I mean, Alyssa, when she was in school, she used to have extra time to take an exam and she’d have questions read to her,” explains Alyssa’s husband, Tim Johnson.

Alyssa says in addition to her mental handicap, she was in a state of panic during the traffic stop—affecting her ability to give a proper breathalyzer result.

“They were saying that since I couldn’t breathe through the breathalyzer and the testing wasn’t doing good, they arrested me and pretty much took me to the hospital for more blood work,” she says.

A written statement by her therapist confirms Alyssa’s dyslexia diagnosis.

Advertisement

And after the incident, the couple got a third-party blood test—because the one conducted by law enforcement could take up to eight weeks to return.

The blood test, provided by the Johnsons, shows negative for any type of drug.

Alyssa says, “I take a prenatal, an aspirin for my blood pressure, and stuff for my heartburn, like Tums. Just like simple stuff.”

Tim explains that in addition to expecting their second child, they’re currently building a home—making the cost of bail and towing a hard hit on finances.

He says, “We have a budget to stick to and the budget doesn’t include any unexpected costs like this.”

Advertisement

Tim says this is an opportunity for police to receive better training on mental impairments and hopes that charges will be dropped from Alyssa’s record.

“And I understand they have to do their job too. I mean, support police. But this wasn’t right to do,” she says.

The couple says they have filed a formal complaint with MHP.

I reached out to MHP for comment but did not receive a response regarding the incident. We will update this story if we hear back.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending