Connect with us

Montana

On second thought: Montana Supreme Court decides not to give attorneys' fees to groups • Daily Montanan

Published

on

On second thought: Montana Supreme Court decides not to give attorneys' fees to groups • Daily Montanan


As tensions between two of three Montana branches of government continue to simmer, the Montana Supreme Court reconsidered its position on awarding attorneys’ fees in a case of unconstitutional laws brought by the 2021 Legislature. And, it essentially overturned itself, this time agreeing not to award attorneys’ fees.

It is a rare example of the state’s highest court rehearing a matter it had decided, and late last week, the court fractured into at least four distinct camps on the case, which not only dealt with attorneys’ fees, but also examined the powers of the the Montana University System Board of Regents and the Montana Legislature.

The group consisted of 15 people or groups, including the Montana Federation of Public Employees, the state’s largest union, the Faculty Senate of Montana State University and Mae Nan Ellingson, one of the living original members of the 1972 Constitutional Convention. They had originally sued for a declaration that House Bill 349, 112, 102 and portion of Senate Bill 319 were illegal. They all dealt with higher education in some form, although those bills, which have been struck down, were not the basis of the Supreme Court decisions.

The new decision comes as Montana Senate Republicans launch a committee that is looking at ways to reshape the state’s judiciary. A similar committee was convened in 2021 by Republican leaders in the Legislature, and was the topic of heated political disagreements as the Republicans charged the state’s courts were both opaque and overstepping their boundaries. Meanwhile, Democrats defended the courts, saying they were simply doing their job, evaluating new laws against the state’s Constitution.

Advertisement

The new committee is comprised of Republican lawmakers, and Democrats have vowed to boycott the proceedings.

On Friday, the Montana Supreme Court changed course and decided against awarding attorneys’ fees to groups that brought a suit contending that four bills violated the Montana Constitution. All three of the bills were struck down by a Gallatin County District Court judge, and some of the court’s decision was appealed. However, upon re-examination, the Supreme Court sided with the district court that the Legislature’s actions had overstepped the constitutional provision that gives the Montana University Board of Regents administrative and policy power over the public universities and colleges.

Much of the Supreme Court’s very divided opinion didn’t deal with the subjects of the lawmakers’ bills, which were found to be unconstitutional; rather the high court pivoted to whether a group of university students and professors had the power to bring the lawsuit, and whether they were entitled to recouping attorneys’ fees.

When the Supreme Court originally decided the case, it overturned district court Judge Rienne McElyea’s decision not to award attorney’s fees. The Supreme Court previously argued that because the district court had said the laws were brought in bad faith, meaning the Legislature should have known they violated the Constitution, the groups’ were entitled to attorneys’ fees.

However, upon reconsideration, the Supreme Court was unable to come to enough of a consensus to obtain agreement on the issue of attorneys’ fees, so McElyea’s original decision stands; that means the groups will no longer get attorney’s fees from the state.

Advertisement

On second thought…

The Supreme Court’s decision was one of the more complex decisions, with justices agreeing and disagreeing with each other simultaneously. Five of the seven justices said the groups that originally filed the lawsuit had legal standing to do so.

Meanwhile, Justices Jim Rice and Dirk Sandefur disagreed, in part, saying that the lawsuit should have been brought by the Montana University Board of Regents because they are charged, by the Montana Constitution, with oversight and administration of the university system. They reasoned that if laws passed by the Legislature were problematic, it should have been the regents who responded.

Other justices said that because university students, staff and professors would be affected by the laws that they had legal standing to bring the lawsuit.

Advertisement

“The Board (of Regents)’s failure to initially challenge the subject legislation for whatever reason and its intervening prolonged inaction overwhelmingly demonstrate the necessity for private enforcement,” said Justice Ingrid Gustafson, who wrote parts of the opinion. “The actual student plaintiffs here, who were threatened with actual discrimination, cannot be forced to wait indefinitely for the board to assert its own independence.”

Arguably the most consequential portion of the ruling centered on the issue of attorneys’ fees. Ultimately, the high court ruled that while Montana state law allows attorneys’ fees to be awarded to groups or individuals that successfully sue the government for unconstitutional laws, under a legal theory known as the “private attorney general doctrine,” those fees are discretionary, not mandatory.

The court then reconsidered the findings of McElyea, and some justices reasoned that while there were several points that could have triggered an attorneys’ fees award, it was discretionary so the finding of lower court should be upheld.

However, in the opinion written by Justice Gustafson, and joined by Laurie McKinnon, both said that they still found that not only had the Legislature acted in bad faith when passing the laws, but that it could be argued that the Board of Regents should have fought back against the Legislature’s encroachment on their authority. Furthermore, the groups should be awarded the attorneys’ fees for essentially having to do someone else’s job.

“While we need not make a judicial determination of bad faith in this case, there are indications where one could question whether the state was not entirely acting in good faith by defending all of the bills at issue here. One such indication is that the state did not even brief any merits defense for two of the three challenged bills after the district court declared them unconstitutional. Yet the state, in its zeal to impose unconstitutional legislative enactments against the board and the Montana University System, continue to assert the plaintiffs could not even bring the claim against those laws the state concedes are unconstitutional.”

Advertisement

They also argued that the groups should be awarded attorneys’ fees for actually vindicating rights found in the Montana Constitution, namely those of the Board of Regents’ and its authority over the university system.

“Attorney fees are proper because of the process through which the unconstitutional bills came to be: Patently unconstitutional bills adopted through the willful disregard of constitutional obligation,” the Gustafson-McKinnon opinion said. “Assessing fees when plaintiffs successfully challenge legislation which came about through such unconstitutional means may serve to deter wrongdoing in the first place.”

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Mike McGrath and Justices Beth Baker and James Jeremiah Shea said that while the court could have awarded attorneys fees, that there are many factors that could have triggered the award, and the court would not second-guess the district court because the award is not mandatory.

“As noted by the district court, there was an independent entity of state government here who could have enforced its constitutional authority — the Board of Regents. The board is often willing and able to defend its constitutional authority. Plaintiffs here did not make the necessary showing that the board was unwilling or able, for whatever reason, to challenge these laws,” McGrath wrote.

Finally, Sandefur and Rice didn’t discuss the merits of the case or attorneys’ fees because they argued that the group shouldn’t have legal standing in the case, and that the only group with standing was the Board of Regents.

Advertisement

“Such decisions are inherent to the ‘full power, responsibility, and authority to supervise, coordinate, manage and control the Montana University System,’ and necessarily should be made exclusively by the board itself, not by an amorphous group of surrogates,” said Rice and Sandefur.

Reversal attorneys fees



Source link

Montana

Land Board approves 33,000-acre conservation easement in northwest Montana

Published

on

Land Board approves 33,000-acre conservation easement in northwest Montana


A proposal to put nearly 33,000 acres of working forestland in northwest Montana into a conservation easement has cleared its last major hurdle.

In a 3-1 vote on Monday, the Montana Land Board adopted language amending an agreement between timber company Green Diamond and Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks that closes the book on a conservation project that took four years and nearly $40 million to finalize.

The Montana Great Outdoors Conservation Easement is located between Kalispell and Libby and encompasses parts of the Salish and Cabinet mountains. The roughly 33,000 acres of land will be protected from development to support wildlife habitat and “key landscape connectivity,” according to FWP.

An FWP memo on the project says the easement also provides “permanent free public recreation access” to the enrolled lands while sustaining their use as a working forest.

Advertisement

The U.S. Forest Service’s Montana Forest Legacy Program is putting $20 million toward the easement. Habitat Montana, a fund administered by FWP, is contributing $1.5 million, and the Trust for Public Lands coordinated another $4.2 million of financial support for the project. Finally, Green Diamond is donating about $14 million of the land’s value.

The easement is perpetual, meaning the terms of the agreement will remain in effect indefinitely, even if Green Diamond later sells the land.

In addition to supporting long-term timber harvest, the easement will confer tax benefits to Green Diamond, which owns and manages working forests in nine states throughout the southern and western U.S. According to a FAQ on the easement, Green Diamond will continue to pay local property taxes in Lincoln, Sanders and Flathead counties once the easement is recorded.

The easement faced a tumultuous path to adoption. When the Land Board first voted on it in October, WRH Nevada Properties, which owns the mineral estate beneath approximately half of the 33,000 acres, argued that the easement jeopardized its ability to develop the subsurface mineral estate.

The Montana Great Outdoors Conservation Easement is being developed as a two-phase project that will conserve nearly 83,000 acres of northwest Montana that span three counties. Credit: Courtesy Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks

Peter Scott, an attorney representing WRH and Citizens for Balanced Use, argued before the Land Board on Oct. 21 that the board would be ill-advised to authorize the easement while a lawsuit over it is pending, and given that ground-disturbing activities are “not compatible” with the Montana Forest Legacy Program’s purpose.

Advertisement

“The folks that fund mineral exploration are not looking for conservation easements as part of their program,” Scott said. “In fact, they’re leaving and taking their mineral exploration money elsewhere. From their standpoint, Montana is not open for business in the context of mineral exploration.”

To help alleviate that concern, the board voted in October to draft language recognizing its intention to protect the mineral rights holders’ ability to access and develop their mineral rights within the easement’s bounds.

The board’s 3-1 vote effectively alters the easement to read that the mineral rights holders “shall not be infringed upon.” The mineral rights holder will retain the ability to “enter and use the [conserved land] for exploration, recovery and development of the minerals consistent with state law,” per the language adopted by the board.

State Superintendent and Land Board member Elsie Arntzen opposed a final vote on the easement, arguing that more discussion is needed and indicating that the state Legislature, which is set to gavel in for its biennial session next month, may be inclined to weigh in. She sought to postpone final action until at least the spring, a delay Gov. Greg Gianforte did not support for fear it would compromise the Forest Service’s $20 million contribution to the easement.

RELATED

Habitat conservation in Montana undergoing a ‘sea change’ 

Advertisement

Habitat conservation in Montana undergoing a ‘sea change’ 

When Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks quietly unveiled a proposal to put Habitat Montana funds toward 30- and 40-year conservation leases, proponents described it as a “new conservation planning tool” while opponents warned of a “sea change” that could weaken one of the state’s most popular habitat protection programs.


“The staff worked with all of the concerned parties to get language that was agreeable. For us to make additional changes here, without consultation with all of the parties, would put us in a difficult position,” Gianforte said, adding that Arntzen had effectively missed her window to oppose the easement writ large.

“At this point, the easement has been approved, subject to this language,” Gianforte continued. “I feel a strong compunction to honor the local consensus which has been built around this, which I think is reflected in this modified language.”

Advertisement

Arntzen also attempted to issue a “no” vote by proxy for Montana Attorney General and Land Board member Austin Knudsen. Gianforte, who chairs the Land Board, said only members who are actively present can vote.

Gianforte also struck down an amendment offered by Secretary of State and Land Board member Christi Jacobsen to make the easement subject to a 99-year term rather than perpetual.

The easement “has been granted, has been finalized,” Gianforte said. “So I would rule your amendment out of order.”

A variety of conservation and forestry-oriented organizations support the easement, arguing that it contributes to conservation and recreational objectives, and supports local economies reliant on forestry by facilitating access to a long-term timber supply. Those groups include Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Montana Wildlife Federation, Trust for Public Land, Montana Wood Products Association, Montana Logging Association,Stimson Lumber and FH Stoltze Land & Lumber. 

A trio of current and former elected officials opposed the easement in a letter to the Land Board, arguing that more due diligence should have been done to assess the prevalence of subsurface minerals and communicate with WRH about the project. A letter signed by Rep. Steve Gunderson, R-Libby; Sen. Dan Bartel, R-Lewistown; and Kerry White, a former state representative from Bozeman who now leads Citizens for Balanced Use, a nearly 20-year-old nonprofit that calls for more motorized recreation and resource development on public land.

Advertisement

The second stage of the Montana Great Outdoors Conservation Easement is still in development. It’s estimated to top 52,000 acres to the west and south of the Lost Trail National Wildlife Refuge.

LATEST STORIES

Little green surprises

Green pasta is easy to make, and a festive option for holiday lasagna and more.


Little Shell Tribe marks 5 years of federal recognition

Five years after federal recognition, the Little Shell tribe is starting to see its holdings grow around its Great Falls headquarters. The tribe has institutionalized cultural programs, developed housing assistance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and made business investments around the region.


The Session: We’re back. So are newly elected party leaders.

The Session is back for the 69th Montana Legislature. This week, we preview lawmakers work that starts January 6. Reporters talk about new party leaders, legislative rules, and how the governor wants to spend public money.


Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Search for missing Montana woman suspended at landfill north of Great Falls

Published

on

Search for missing Montana woman suspended at landfill north of Great Falls


play

The search for a missing Conrad woman at the High Plains Landfill north of Great Falls has been suspended, the Cascade County Sheriff’s Office announced on Monday afternoon.

Alicia Wood, 46, was last seen on Nov. 22 and was reported missing on Nov. 30 to the Conrad Police Department. Wood’s car was found abandoned on the side of Highway 91 between Conrad and Brady and blood was later found inside the vehicle.

Advertisement

The Montana Department of Criminal Investigation took over the case and a lead prompted a search for Wood at the landfill. The search began on Dec. 5 and lasted nine days.

“The is not a decision we took lightly, however, we feel we have conducted a thorough search of our landfill based on the information and leads provided,” Cascade County Sheriff Jesse Slaughter said in a statement.

DCI and the Pondera County Sheriff’s Office will continue to lead the investigation.

“As I said at the beginning of our search this is just one lead in this investigation. I’m confident that the Division of Criminal Investigation will continue to follow all current and future leads,” Slaughter said.

Advertisement

Anyone with information about the disappearance of Alicia Woods is asked to contact the Division of Criminal Investigation by calling or 406-444-3874 or emailing contactdci@mt.gov.

The Cascade County Sheriff’s Office also thanked the numerous law enforcement and civilian agencies who assisted in the landfill search, as well as community supporters who provided meals for the search party.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Montana

7 Most Unconventional Towns In Montana

Published

on

7 Most Unconventional Towns In Montana


Millions of Americans and visitors from all over the world come every year to Montana, and perhaps most know the Big Sky Country state for its access to renowned national parks, like Glacier and Yellowstone. But it offers so much more. A confluence of cultural forces has shaped this region — from the Native American traditions to the gold rushes — and it is that Old West spirit that Montana’s residents have proudly kept alive. In Montana, we’ve discovered seven of the most unconventional towns. They dot the Montana map, inviting visitors to experience and be fully immersed in the state’s heritage and traditions.

Philipsburg brings a bygone mining era back to life. Red Lodge is the ultimate rugged alpine experience. Bigfork is valued for its art scene and summer theater. Livingstone is the “Gateway to Yellowstone.” Virginia City is a well-preserved gold rush historical experience. Whitefish is a haven for outdoorsy types, but it also has a touch of sophistication. Fort Benton, is remembered as the “Birthplace of Montana.” Join the tour and discover how each of these towns is as unique as the landscapes they inhabit.

Philipsburg

Philipsburg, Montana. By Mark de Vries – CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons.

Nested in a verdant valley between the Sapphire Mountains and Flint Creek is the town of Philipsburg, with its dense pine forests and alpine lakes. The downtown is marked by restored 19th-century buildings with colorful frontages. The friendly town has a nostalgic vibe with its antique shops and boutique shopping, such as the Sweet Palace, a candy store. Historical landmarks include the Opera House Theatre, built in 1891, and The Granite Country Museum, showcasing the town’s mining heritage. Sapphire mining at Gem Mountain is a unique experience. The Granite Ghost Town State Park and the annual Flint Creek Valley Days festival with its parade and live music make Philipsburg extra special.

Red Lodge

Red Lodge, Montana
Red Lodge, Montana. Editorial credit: Edward Fielding / Shutterstock.com

With access to Beartooth Highway, what has been dubbed “the most beautiful drive in America,” Red Lodge is an exceptional town. The downtown boasts of Wild West-style architecture, with saloons, eateries and art galleries. Historical landmarks are The Carbon County Historical Society and Museum, displaying the town’s ranching and mining history. Commercial attractions include the Yellowstone Wildlife Sanctuary. The town is settled at the base of the Beartooth Mountains and surrounded by rolling meadows.

Bigfork

Big Fork, Montana
Bigfork, Montana. By Jonah Libsack – CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons.

Enveloped by forests, rolling hills and settled along the northeastern shore of Flathead Lake is the town of Bigfork. Bigfork’s downtown blends rustic log cabins with modern designs. The charming town is lined with bistros, galleries and shops. The town has a thriving art scene, annual events like the Bigfork Festival of the Arts, brings the whole community together. Wayfarers State Park provides breathtaking views of Flathead Lake and is rich in Native American history. One thing that is special about this town is The Bigfork Summer Playhouse, a seasonal theater that has given the town the nickname “Montana’s Broadway.”

Livingston

Livingston, Montana
Livingston, Montana. By Jon Roanhaus – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons.

Downtown Livingston with its turn-of-the-century brick buildings hosting quirky cafes, bars and bookshops, presents residents and visitors with a relaxed, artsy vibe. The town is prized as a “foodie paradise” with local favorites like Fainting Goat Pub and Engine Room Deep Dish Pizza. Lying along the Yellowstone River, the small town is surrounded by the Crazy and Absaroka mountains. One thing that stands out is Livingston hosts an annual famous rodeo and has become known as the “Gateway to Yellowstone.” The Livingston Depot Center is a restored train station, which showcases the town’s railroad history. Livingston is a haven for outdoor enthusiasts with activities like fly-fishing, hiking and, of course, access to Yellowstone National Park.

Virginia City

Virginia City ghost town
Virginia City ghost town. Editorial credit: Eniko Balogh / Shutterstock.com

Once known as “Fourteen Mile City,” the gold rush era town of Virginia City is based in a valley and surrounded by sagebrush hills and the Tobacco Root Mountains. During its heyday period the town was regarded as a social center and transportation hub in the region. Today the entire town is a historic site. Something that makes Virginia City unusual is the town actors that bring the mid-1800s to life again. The small settlement feels like a well-preserved ghost town with its wooden sidewalks, saloons, and mercantile shops. Be sure not to miss the Virginia City Opera House and Alder Gulch. Visitors can pan for gold and take a historic stagecoach ride.

Whitefish

Whitefish, Montana
Whitefish, Montana. By Royalbroil – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons.

The town of Whitefish has a unique tradition, known as their annual Huckleberry Days, which celebrates the local berry. A gateway to Glacier National Park, surrounded by forests and lakes with views of Big Mountain, Whitefish is plentiful in natural beauties, with much to explore and see. The downtown combines rustic architecture with a sophisticated modern touch. Be sure to check out the Whitefish Farmers’ Market, along with the many fine dining options and boutiques. Big Mountain has the best skiing in the winter and the tail rides through Bar W Guest Ranch are second to none. No visit to Whitefish is complete without some time by or on the water. Whitefish City Beach is a great place for the whole family to play. The Great Northern Railway Depot and Whitefish Lake State Parks are historical landmarks.

Fort Benton

Fort Benton, Montana
Fort Benton, Montana. Editorial credit: Joseph Sohm / Shutterstock.com

When visitors drive past herds of antelope and deer while enjoying majestic views in all directions, they quickly come to understand why Fort Benton has been praised for its beauty by both Forbes and National Geographic Traveler. Located along the Missouri River and surrounded by rolling planes and the region’s rich agricultural land, Fort Benton is a gem of a town. Fort Benton’s downtown blends well-maintained frontier-era buildings and modern designs. Landmarks include The Lewis and Clark Memorial and the Museum of the Upper Missouri, which display the town’s role in westward expansion. Be sure to book boat tours with groups like Upper Missouri River Guides for excursions along the Missouri River that showcase views of bluffs and local wildlife.

Parting Thoughts

Montana is the fourth-largest state in the U.S., covering over 147,000 square miles. Its name comes from the Spanish word montaña, meaning “mountain,” reflecting its dramatic landscapes. The Missouri River, one of North America’s longest rivers, begins in Montana. The state experiences a range of weather, from snowy winters to warm summers. Rich in history, Montana was once home to Native American tribes like the Crow and Blackfeet. Today, it’s celebrated for its outdoor recreation, including hiking, fishing, and skiing. These seven most unconventional towns in Montana are each marked out for something special in their natures, which have become woven together into the cultural tapestry of this Old West state. From world class national parks to outstanding natural wonders to rich Native American and gold rush histories, these towns are quintessentially Montana.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending