Sign up for the free Great Falls This Week newsletter and stay in the loop on Great Falls city government, public school meetings, business news and upcoming entertainment and events.
6/23/2025
Longstanding dispute centers on who is responsible for cleanup
In 1996, Cascade County reported petroleum contamination in the ground beneath its shop complex near the fairgrounds. Twenty-nine years later, a dispute about who pays for the cleanup is still ongoing.
In early June, the Montana Supreme Court issued its latest opinion that denied Cascade County’s request for various legal fees in the longstanding case. It was the second time the state’s highest court ruled on this matter after the case went through various hearings at the Montana Petroleum Tank Release Compensation Board and the Lewis and Clark District Court.
The Petroleum Tank Release Compensation Board operates as part of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and is governed by various industry representatives. It administers a cleanup fund that is used to remediate underground tank leaks and related environmental damage. The money comes from gasoline sales.
The Cascade County underground tanks related to this case were at a county shop complex near what is now the West Bank Landing development. Site studies found historic contamination from former refinery operations in addition to the reported contamination from four county-owned tanks with “four different product types” that weren’t specified in court documents.
Shortly after the county reported the leak in 1996, the legal disputes over compensation began. According to court documents, the compensation board initially denied reimbursement. After the county requested an administrative hearing, the board approved compensation of $982,500 in 1999.
While the county worked toward a remediation plan with the DEQ, the matter first went to court in 2007 when Cascade County asked for four separate leak designations rather than a single case for all of the pollution.
In the meantime, a contractor completed cleanup of the site in 2008, documents say. When cleanup costs went over the maximum allowed for a single leak designation, the board began denying the county’s reimbursement requests.
For years, Cascade County continued to petition the board to recognize four separate leak events rather than one, which would allow more reimbursement funds. The board contended that the county didn’t follow the necessary procedures to designate four distinct leaks. The case went to Lewis and Clark County District Court, which ruled in 2019 that the county could request that the board recognize three additional pollution events. Cascade County appealed to the Montana Supreme Court rather than face the board again.
The Montana Supreme Court issued an opinion in 2021 that an administrative hearing and report from 21 years prior already established the county’s claim to four pollution events. The court referred the case back to the compensation board to determine eligible reimbursements. The case went back to the Lewis and Clark County District Court but landed back at the Montana Supreme Court in 2022 over Cascade County’s request for legal fees. The court denied that request earlier this month.
The case will come before the compensation board yet again for final discussions on eligible remediation costs. Terry Wadsworth, the board’s executive director, told Montana Free Press via email that the case will first be heard in the Lewis and Clark County District Court before being considered by the board.
It’s been nearly 30 years since the pollution was first reported and nearly 20 years since the initial remediation. The $982,500 remediation funds in 1999 would cost $1.9 million today, and the site of historical pollution has been transformed into a bustling park and commercial area.
The next compensation board meeting is Sept. 15.
Following up
Montana Renewables will receive a property tax exemption on about $67 million worth of equipment at its Great Falls biorefinery, as MTFP reported earlier this month. The company initially asked the state to qualify its entire plant as tax-exempt.
Montana Renewables didn’t reply to MTFP’s inquiries before publication of the story on June 12, but the company did send comments afterward. In an email, a company spokesperson said that Montana Renewables expects about a 2% reduction in its overall property tax bill, which is about $115,530 based on the company’s 2024 tax bill of $5.7 million.
“We thank the state of Montana for its pro-growth policies, which recognize that economic improvements more than pay their way throughout the Montana economy. This particular resolution not only recognizes the significant pollution controls we have in place but also provides clarity and predictability for our future operations through the agreed-upon tax adjustments,” said Montana Renewables CEO Bruce Fleming in a statement.
The settlement allows Montana Renewables to request additional tax exemptions in the future as it expands its biorefinery with a $1.6 billion loan guarantee from the federal government. The company spokesperson did not answer a question about whether it planned to pursue that option.
The tax exemption is retroactive to December 2022, according to the settlement. A spokesperson for the Montana Department of Revenue indicated that all tax adjustments will be applied once other tax appeals are settled. Calumet, the parent company of Montana Renewables, has three pending tax appeal cases before the Montana Tax Appeal Board.
5 things to know in Great Falls
The Great Falls Development Alliance has announced plans for a large data center campus on a 569-acre site near the Agri-Tech Park on Great Falls’ east end. Developer Ardent lists client organizations like Oracle Cloud, Amazon Web Services, Meta and OpenAI, among others. The site will undergo an electricity transmission study with NorthWestern Energy, and the company is looking to secure additional power generation. With additional zoning and administrative procedures, the company’s early estimate to have the data center online is 2027 or 2028.
Brock Cherry, the city’s planning and development director, pitched a permitting change to Great Falls city commissioners that would skip the geotechnical study for home construction on lots that meet certain criteria. The measure is intended to bring engineers back into the fold and support housing development. Expanding soils in the city have created home foundation issues, and Cherry said that the current geotechnical study places liability on engineering firms, though the city has also been sued in the past for soil issues. The proposal would create an initial soils assessment to see if a lot meets the criteria to forgo the larger geotechnical study. The proposal can be viewed here, and it has not yet reached a commission vote.
Weekly guided gallery tours have started at the C.M. Russell Museum. Led by museum staff or a guest docent, the tours offer greater insight into the works on display. Tours run through Aug. 13 and are Wednesdays at noon. Meet at the museum’s front desk to participate.
The city named state legislator and former county commissioner Jane Weber as the recipient of the 16th Paris Gibson Award. In addition to her work as an elected official, Weber helped to establish the Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center and was its first director until 2010. According to a press release about the award, Weber has “significantly contributed to the preservation of Great Falls’ history and to the ongoing improvements of Great Falls residents’ quality of life.” A ceremony is set for June 25 at 7 p.m. at the Gibson Bandshell.
The International Economic Development Council is holding its 2025 rural retreat in Great Falls this week. The organization supports economic developers in the public and private sectors. Attendees of this year’s retreat will get tours of central Montana developments in White Sulphur Springs, Conrad, Choteau, Great Falls and Cut Bank.
Verbatim
“I’m just frustrated with the property. It’s a blight.”
— Great Falls Mayor Cory Reeves
Reeves made his comment at the end of the June 17 city commission meeting in reference to the Rocky Mountain Building on Central Avenue. Long vacant, Alluvion Health purchased the building for a massive renovation but was unable to fund the project and abandoned construction in 2023.
City Manager Greg Doyon told commissioners that a property cleanup enforced through the city’s nuisance abatement process is unlikely for the hollowed-out structure. Construction crews recently braced the wall along Central Avenue for pedestrian safety.
The city’s nuisance abatement process relies on the ability to recoup costs, often through a lien on the property. But in the case of the Rocky Mountain Building, Great Falls would have to get in line. Alluvion already owes more than $4 million in construction costs to contractors, the biggest of which is Sletten Construction, which already has a lien on the property.
“In our estimation, I think it would be very difficult to expect cost recovery if the commission asked us to evaluate whether or not it met the definition of a nuisance,” Doyon said.
Alluvion associate vice president and spokesperson Maia LaSalle told MTFP in an email that the nonprofit is working with stakeholders, including the city, to find a path forward. She weighed the attention given to the 60,000-square-foot Rocky Mountain Building against that of other vacant properties in the area.
“While we recognize that the Rocky Mountain Building has drawn attention, the selective scrutiny from select elected officials compared to other long-vacant properties in the area raises questions about consistency and intent,” LaSalle wrote.
LaSalle also characterized the building as an issue that current administrators inherited from past leaders.
“We acknowledge that past decisions under previous leadership have created challenges that we are now responsible for navigating,” she wrote. “Our current leadership is focused on making the responsible, mission-driven decisions necessary to move forward with transparency and stability for our patients, our staff and the community.”
Photo op
Brian Patrick is soon to be the former director of business operations at Great Falls Public Schools. District administrators held an appreciation reception for Patrick’s retirement on June 17. While Patrick would have opted for a quieter affair, GFPS Superintendent Heather Hoyer said that Patrick was too important to the community to skip a celebration.
A former history teacher, Patrick took his position as the district’s financial and budgetary officer in 2011. He prepared annual budget books, which covered the typical budgetary needs but also included a compilation of district data, financial explainers and other extra information.
At his reception, Patrick said he was blessed with great colleagues and said the time flew by.
“I’ve enjoyed every minute,” he said. “It seems like it’s been a snap of a finger.”
Calling all photographers: Submit a photo for Great Falls This Week to [email protected].
User notes
It’s nearly a year since the first edition of Great Falls This Week. Recently, MTFP has fielded a couple of inquiries from readers wanting to know where to find this newsletter and how to follow Great Falls news on our website.
Great Falls This Week is built as an email newsletter to bring top stories and news briefs to your inbox. It’s going to be the most consistent local news feed from MTFP from its local Great Falls reporter. At the top of each newsletter is a link to view it on a web browser, which can be shared on social media or sent to others.
If you missed a newsletter edition or want to find a version online that’s shareable, all of the editions can be found on this archive page.
In addition to the weekly newsletter, MTFP will publish standalone articles to its website that complement the regular newsletter reporting. To find all of those articles related to Great Falls, bookmark this page on the MTFP website.
Whether in your inbox or online, thank you for your readership and support.
