Connect with us

Montana

Montana Supreme Court hears arguments on permit for Laurel power plant

Published

on

Montana Supreme Court hears arguments on permit for Laurel power plant


HELENA — Wednesday in Helena, advocates made their case on whether the state correctly granted NorthWestern Energy a permit for their planned power plant near Laurel.

The Montana Supreme Court met before a full audience Wednesday morning, to hear oral arguments in a case that centers on whether the Montana Department of Environmental Quality did sufficient environmental analysis when approving an air quality permit for the Yellowstone County Generation Station – a 175-megawatt natural-gas-fired plant.

Jonathon Ambarian

A full audience was in attendance May 15, 2024 as the Montana Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that centers on NorthWestern Energy’s planned Yellowstone County Generating Station near Laurel.

Last year, a state district judge in Billings vacated the permit. It came after environmental groups challenged DEQ’s decision, saying the agency hadn’t taken the required “hard look” at issues like the plant’s greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of its lighting and noise on nearby residents.

Advertisement

During Wednesday’s arguments, DEQ and NorthWestern defended the permitting decision and called on the Supreme Court to reverse the district court ruling.

Shannon Heim, NorthWestern’s general counsel and vice president of federal government affairs, said greenhouse gases aren’t regulated the same way as other pollutants, so DEQ didn’t have authority to regulate them. Therefore, she argued the permit can’t be vacated simply because the department didn’t review their impacts.

“The DEQ could not, in the exercise of its lawful authority, deny the permit based on greenhouse gas emissions, because there are no legal standards for greenhouse gas emissions,” she said.

Montana Supreme Court Laurel Plant

Jonathon Ambarian

Jenny Harbine, an attorney for Earthjustice, addressed the Montana Supreme Court May 15, 2024, during oral arguments in a case that centers on NorthWestern Energy’s planned Yellowstone County Generating Station near Laurel.

Jenny Harbine, an attorney for Earthjustice, represented the plaintiffs – Montana Environmental Information Center and the Sierra Club. She argued DEQ is required to look more broadly at the possible impacts of a project, and that the emissions from the Laurel plant had to be considered in the context of the potential effects of climate change in Montana.

Advertisement

“Plaintiffs here are not criticizing the analysis that DEQ did do,” she said. “Our point is that there’s analysis that DEQ omitted.”

Harbine said plaintiffs are also concerned that, because the district court put a stay on its decision and NorthWestern was able to resume construction, they could begin operations without having had the full review plaintiffs believe is necessary.

Both sides in this case noted that the issues raised here overlap with those in Held v. Montana, the prominent climate change lawsuit that is also now before the Montana Supreme Court. In Held, a state district judge ruled that a law preventing regulators from considering greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews was unconstitutional. The 2023 Montana Legislature passed that law in response to the judge’s decision that vacated the permit for the Laurel plant.

Montana Supreme Court Laurel Plant

Jonathon Ambarian

Jeremiah Langston, an attorney for Montana DEQ, addressed the Montana Supreme Court May 15, 2024, during oral arguments in a case that centers on NorthWestern Energy’s planned Yellowstone County Generating Station near Laurel.

Jeremiah Langston, an attorney for DEQ, said the department had been planning to update its review in light of that law when it was blocked. He encouraged the Supreme Court to make its decision in Held and this case at the same time or somehow tie them together.

Advertisement

“It would be immensely helpful to DEQ to know what laws apply to its MEPA analysis for a project,” he said.

Harbine said Held gave an example of the broad impacts of the state’s policies on climate reviews, and this case provided a specific example.

“I would just urge that whether the issue is resolved in this case or in Held – or in both, which we think is most appropriate – that it be done in a manner that prevents the constitutional infringement that would be caused when that plant begins operating and emitting greenhouse gas emissions before those emissions have been studied by DEQ,” she said.

The Supreme Court generally takes no immediate action after an oral argument, and that was again the case Wednesday.

Laurel Plant Capitol Rally

Jonathon Ambarian

Advertisement
Attendees hold signs protesting against NorthWestern Energy’s planned power plant near Laurel, during a May 15, 2024, rally organized by Northern Plains Resource Council.

After the hearing, the conservation group Northern Plains Resource Council held a rally at the State Capitol, saying the possible impacts of the Laurel plant’s emissions need to be taken into account.

Those in attendance chanted “Clean and healthful; it’s our right!” – referring to the Montana Constitution’s guarantee of a “clean and healthful environment.”

Mary Fitzpatrick, a Northern Plains member, said people in Laurel and downwind of the plant in Billings have concerns about the potential health effects. MTN asked her what she thought would have changed if DEQ had taken a closer look at the plant’s greenhouse gas emissions.

“It’s hard to say – you know, just listening to the arguments, I got the impression that, possibly, nothing – except that we would know,” she said. “You can’t manage or change what you don’t measure.”

John Hines, NorthWestern’s vice president of supply and Montana government affairs, said the company sees the capacity of the Yellowstone County Generating Station as critical to make sure they can keep serving customers when other resources aren’t available. He said solar and wind production tends to be more unreliable during extreme weather, and that the company will be forced to pay more to purchase power on the open market if it doesn’t have a on-demand generation facility like this.

Advertisement

“The bottom line is we have to have enough electrons and enough gas on our system to meet our customers’ needs when it’s critical weather – and, you know, we saw that in January when it was -45,” he said. “That’s our first obligation. And none of the groups who are throwing out alternative proposals have that responsibility.”

Hines said, if YCGS had been in operation during the January cold snap, it could have saved customers about $12 million over six days. He said renewables are a significant part of NorthWestern’s portfolio, and that it’s unfair for opponents to accuse the company of building the plant for profit because they could make more profit by building the same capacity in renewable projects.

Hines said YCGS could be fully operational within the next month and a half. He said NorthWestern has taken steps to address some of the concerns neighbors have raised about lighting and noise.

“We’ve been operating Yellowstone now in a test mode for quite some time, and local people have been asking us when are we going to start the engines,” he said. “So obviously the noise issue has been abated.”





Source link

Advertisement

Montana

District court judge blocks new Montana GOP bylaws – WTOP News

Published

on

District court judge blocks new Montana GOP bylaws – WTOP News


A restraining order has been issued that blocks the Montana Republican Party from enacting new bylaws intended to drive nonconformists…

A restraining order has been issued that blocks the Montana Republican Party from enacting new bylaws intended to drive nonconformists out of the party ranks.

Lewis and Clark County District Judge Michael F. McMahon issued the restraining order Wednesday morning. The order had been requested by county precinct committees and officers suing the state party organization over the new bylaws. The plaintiffs are the Yellowstone County Republican Central Committee, the Choteau County Republican Central Committee, and individual committee members Jeff Essmann, Ted Kronebusch, James Wilson and state Rep. Brad Barker, R-Red Lodge.

At issue are bylaws passed during MTGOP’s June platform convention that the litigating party members say amount to “fraudulent and corrupt practices.” The new bylaws require members to pay $20 in annual membership dues and pledge a loyalty oath, and subject members to removal from elected party positions for nonpayment of dues or for “conduct deemed inconsistent with party purposes,” as determined by executive party party officers. The new bylaws allow charges for removal to be brought by any 20 official Republican Party members.

Advertisement

Montana Republican Party Chairman Art Wittich, the only official spokesperson for the state party, has not responded to voicemails and texts sent to his cell phone Wednesday. Wittich, elected party chairman in June 2025, has long been emphatic about exposing “Democrats disguised as Republicans” — for Wittich a now decade-old battle that spun into a bitter multimillion-dollar war between party hardliners and relative centrists in this spring’s Republican legislative primaries.

The centrists drew the ire of the hardliners in 2025 by collaborating with Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte and legislative Democrats to pass a balanced state budget and key pieces of legislation, including increased taxes on second homes and property tax reductions for primary residences and small businesses.

What constitutes disqualifying conduct isn’t fully spelled out in the bylaws, but they do specify that “collaborating with Democrats” in the Legislature, the governor’s office, the courts, or elections can get members disciplined or removed.

The lawsuit alleges that “The 2026 bylaws empower a small group within the party to revoke Republican affiliation from candidates or office holders, undoing primary nominations by the electorate.”

The plaintiffs argue that Montana voters, not party bylaws, should determine who represents the Republican Party in general elections and who represents voting precincts on the publicly elected county-level Republican committees that coordinate local political activity.

Advertisement

The Montana Legislature in 2019 passed a bill protecting publicly elected party precinct committee officers from being arbitrarily removed from office and defined attempts to do so as “fraudulent and corrupt practices.” That law, sparked by Republican Party infighting 10 years ago, is the foundation of the current lawsuit.

There has been a surge of public interest in Republican precinct-level politics following a perceived lack of support by party hardliners for Republican candidates in conservative strongholds like Flathead County, where more than 60 new precinct committeemen and committeewomen were elected in June. That wave of new officers was preceded by Flathead County Republican Central Committee members considering an endorsement of Libertarian Sid Daoud for Kalispell mayor over Republican Kisa Davison in late 2025. The Kalispell mayor’s race is nonpartisan, but Republicans have gone to court to secure the party’s right to endorse candidates in nonpartisan races.

Wittich’s own campaign for precinct committeeman representing Whitefish was a casualty of that new wave of public interest. He lost to Republican Giuseppe “G-man” Caltabiano, who serves on the Whitefish City Council.

Caltabiano’s wife, Roxanne Ross, defeated Candace Wittich, wife of the Republican chair, in the same election.

State law gives precinct officers two-year terms and specifies that they can be removed only for death, written resignation or loss of residency. The new bylaws state that participation in party governance, including service as a precinct official, “is a privilege of association, not a right conferred by public office or candidacy. Members must act in good faith to support the Party’s purpose and must not engage in conduct materially inconsistent with the Party’s interests, including conduct that undermines its platform, policy positions, election operations, or internal governance.”

Advertisement

The recent changes to the party bylaws allow precinct officeholders to be suspended from voting in party matters and replaced by party leadership for noncompliance. Empty precinct seats can be filled by the Republican Party chair.

“Every Republican candidate sells their version of Republicanism to the people in a primary campaign, and the voter chooses which version to buy,” the lawsuit states. “The party cannot dictate what brands of Republicanism are on the market.”

Former MTGOP chair Jeff Essmann, a plaintiff who is also a long-serving precinct officer, said in his affidavit that members of the Republican State Central Committee weren’t given a required notification about attempts to amend the bylaws. He said he would have attended the platform convention and argued against amending the bylaws if he had known.

“The 2026 Bylaws empower any twenty members of the Party to recommend any other member of the Party for expulsion from the party, to be determined by the State Central Committee, even people who do not reside in Yellowstone County and who have never met me,” Essmann said in the affidavit.

Other central committee members produced pre-convention emails about potential changes to the bylaws, but no details about the amendments.

Advertisement

In issuing the order, McMahon indicated that Republicans challenging the bylaws are likely to succeed. He set a July 13 hearing on whether to make the order permanent.

“Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims that the challenged provisions are inconsistent with Montana election law and constitutional protections governing candidacy, nomination, speech, association, due process, and elected precinct committee representatives,” McMahon ruled.

___

This story was originally published by Montana Free Press and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

Copyright
© 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for July 8, 2026

Published

on


The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at July 8, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Powerball numbers from July 8 drawing

12-29-37-43-55, Powerball: 18, Power Play: 4

Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Lotto America numbers from July 8 drawing

17-26-31-32-37, Star Ball: 01, ASB: 02

Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from July 8 drawing

03-13-16-17, Bonus: 10

Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Powerball Double Play numbers from July 8 drawing

06-27-33-44-69, Powerball: 23

Advertisement

Check Powerball Double Play payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Montana Cash numbers from July 8 drawing

08-16-17-22-27

Check Montana Cash payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from July 8 drawing

16-18-43-48-50, Bonus: 01

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

When are the Montana Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 9 p.m. MT on Tuesday and Friday.
  • Lucky For Life: 8:38 p.m. MT daily.
  • Lotto America: 9 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Big Sky Bonus: 7:30 p.m. MT daily.
  • Powerball Double Play: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Montana Cash: 8 p.m. MT on Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 9:15 p.m. MT daily.

Missed a draw? Peek at the past week’s winning numbers.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Great Falls Tribune editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana signs onto data center energy cost protection pledge

Published

on

Montana signs onto data center energy cost protection pledge


Gov. Greg Gianforte is backing a new effort to keep data centers from driving up Montanans’ power bills.

This week, Gianforte announced Montana is signing on to the Ratepayer Protection Pledge — an initiative endorsed by President Trump.

Several major technology companies like Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle, and XAI first signed the pledge back in March.

The pledge comes as data center development continues to grow — raising questions about how much new energy will be needed and who will pay for it.

Advertisement

NBC Montana spoke with Julia Haggerty, professor of geography and department head of earth sciences at Montana State University, about whether Montana’s power grid is ready for that growth.

“Not without resolution of significant transmission bottlenecks and massive amounts of new generation. So, while our grid is adequately, relatively adequately equipped to serve the needs of our current load base, it’s definitely not equipped to accommodate the new demands without a lot of expansion,” she said.

According to the pledge, data center developers will pay for new power generation, and infrastructure needed to support their operations.

“It does align with ongoing regulatory efforts to ensure that the cost of new generation associated with data centers is borne by the developers of those data centers and not customers,” Haggerty said.

The governor’s office says Gianforte’s support of the pledge is designed to encourage responsible data center investments while protecting Montana ratepayers from long-term costs.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending