The MT Lowdown is a weekly digest that showcases a more personal side of Montana Free Press’ high-quality reporting while keeping you up to speed on the biggest news impacting Montanans. Want to see the MT Lowdown in your inbox every Friday? Sign up here.
A wave of state reappraisal notices mailed to Montana property owners in the summer of 2023 signaled the approach of a seismic residential property tax spike — and thrust a policy area that’s been relegated to nerdier corners of the state Capitol into an uncomfortable spotlight.
Lawmakers in that year’s session of the Montana Legislature, which had wrapped up in May before the notices were sent, debated several significant property tax relief measures but ultimately passed only a pair of one-off rebates to offset homeowner tax bills for 2022 and 2023. As higher tax bills driven by surging home values fell on residents across the state that fall, producing median increases of 21%, those rebates failed to appease widespread tax angst.
Lawmakers from both parties say they want to use this year’s legislative session to offer homeowners a fix for rising taxes. With the session in its early stages, several ideas are swirling in the mix. Among them:
- Reducing taxes for primary residences by raising them on second homes and Airbnbs. House Bill 231, backed by Gov. Greg Gianforte, a Republican, would take this approach. It would also tweak tax rates for lower-value commercial properties in an effort to avoid shifting an unbearable burden onto small businesses as taxes on homeowners and landlords are scaled back.
- Reducing taxes on lower-value homes by raising them on higher-value homes, regardless of whether those homes are used as primary residences. A Democratic alternative to the governor’s proposal, House Bill 155, would take this approach. It also includes a provision to avoid pushing higher taxes onto small business properties.
- Offering an income tax credit to offset property tax bills for middle- and low-income taxpayers. Democrats argue this approach, which they’re pitching via House Bill 154, would avoid situations where property taxes rise disproportionately to taxpayers’ ability to pay and also provide direct relief to renters. Republicans have indicated they’re skeptical about using state income tax dollars to offset property taxes, which are mostly collected for local government services.
- Redirecting lodging tax dollars currently used for tourism promotion to offset homeowner property taxes. This approach, proposed via Senate Bill 90, has won support from Senate Republican leadership — and vocal opposition from tourism advocates.
- Making it harder for schools, counties and cities to grow their budgets. Several pending Republican bills would take aim at the local governments that spend most property taxes, for example by making it harder for those jurisdictions to raise taxes by passing voted mill levies. Another Republican bill would adjust a statute that currently limits city and county budget growth.
Like these ideas? Hate them? Think there’s something missing from the list? Most of these bills will likely see their initial committee votes in the coming weeks, so now is the time to let lawmakers know what you think. (We have a guide to offering public comment at the 2025 Legislature.)
I certainly expect to see more property tax proposals in the coming weeks as well — and will certainly continue writing about them. As always, we’d love to hear your thoughts and questions at [email protected].
READ MORE: Following tax spike, property tax relief ideas head before lawmakers.
—Eric Dietrich
Verbatim 💬
“So, I would ask you to look at various methods. Look at our idea of making it a public execution. That way, it’s a true deterrent, because people can actually see what the death penalty is and be deterred, rather than it being hidden away and being conducted in such a manner that can only be considered using the same tactics as the person we’re attempting to execute for murder, done in secret.”
—Don Cape, Montana Coalition for Safety and Justice
Cape testified Jan. 21 before the House Judiciary Committee regarding House Bill 205, which would revise death penalty laws. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Shannon Maness, R-Dillon, passed committee 11-9 without Cape’s suggested amendment.
Glad You Asked 🙋🏻
With Donald Trump officially reassuming the helm of the nation’s executive branch this week, one MTFP reader wrote in curious about the future of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards the federal government adopted last year to rein in pollution from coal-fired power plants. Under the rule, Montana’s largest power plant (and one of its most polluting) faces a May 2028 deadline to install expensive — potentially plant-shutteringly so — upgrades.
Given that Trump doesn’t share the climate and environmental priorities of his White House predecessor, this reader wanted to know if the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rule is likely to survive Joe Biden’s departure.
Michelle Bryan, who teaches federal administrative law at the University of Montana’s Alexander Blewett III School of Law, talked us through a number of potential scenarios.
Under the first one, the EPA could repeal the May 7, 2024, rule through a notice and comment process. To do that, the EPA would have to describe a replacement rule and justify its reasoning. That process would likely take at least a year and possibly multiple years.
In addition to providing notice and taking comments on the replacement rule, Bryan said the agency would have to issue findings “explaining why they are repealing the rule and why the prior findings supporting the rule no longer apply.”
To survive a legal challenge, Bryan added, the EPA would be required under the Administrative Procedures Act to explain why its earlier rule was “arbitrary and capricious.”
Another scenario puts the proverbial ball in federal lawmakers’ court. The Congressional Review Act allows the president to undo a predecessor’s work if both chambers of Congress act within a specified time. Since the U.S. Senate and U.S. House are Republican-controlled, Trump could theoretically rescind the rule and bar the EPA from adopting a similar one in the future. Per MTFP’s review of the anti-MATS resolutions that were introduced in both chambers and a skim of the 118th Congress’ calendar, the CRA could clear the basic timing threshold, though neither measure has gone up for a floor vote.
Finally, the EPA could reverse course in the judicial arena. The EPA, which is currently defending the rule in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, could change its tune, arguing that the rule is not in the public’s interest and that the agency overstepped its authority by adopting it. That scenario is complicated by the fact that there are dozens of other intervenors in the lawsuit — e.g., environmental groups such as the Montana Environmental Information Center, Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council — that would likely continue to defend the rule and urge the court to keep it on the books.
Bryan noted, however, that “when one of the main parties makes a concession, that has a lot of weight as far as the direction of the case.”
In other words, stay tuned.
—Amanda Eggert
By the Numbers 🔢
Number of acres involved in the East Crazies Inspiration Divide Land Exchange, a controversial land swap involving two south-central Montana mountain ranges and six private landowners.
The Custer Gallatin National Forest’s decision on Jan. 17 to authorize the swap was generally criticized by conservationists and public land advocates and celebrated by members of the Crazy Mountain Access Project, a Yellowstone Club-convened consortium that shaped the swap.
Sweet Grass County landowner Lorents Grosfield said the Crazy Mountain Access Project is “committed to the final goal of consolidating large swaths of public land, increasing public access and respecting private property rights.”
“I’m encouraged to see my neighbors in the Crazy Mountains and the Forest Service come together to solve a challenge as great as checkerboard land,” Grosfield continued in an emailed statement.
Longtime public access advocate Andrew Posewitz countered that Crazy Mountain Access Project members “feigned public support” that the project doesn’t actually have. He described the swap decision as a “sad chapter” in Montana’s history.
“As long as the conservation community continues to place harmony over sound policy, we will be sold off piece by piece,” he wrote in an email to MTFP. “My biggest fear is that by the time people realize what is happening to them, it will be too late to fix it.”
The final iteration of the swap, which encompasses more than 15 square miles, was modified to incorporate development-limiting conservation easements and deed restrictions on some parcels leaving federal ownership. The Forest Service also secured a decade-long right of first refusal to reacquire the swapped parcels if private landowners seek to sell them in the future.
—Amanda Eggert
Hot Potato 🥔
Montana lawmakers this week momentarily shifted their ongoing conversation about the state’s teacher shortage away from wages, taking a beat to explore the second-most-cited contributor to the crisis: classroom disruption.
The reframe arose Tuesday in the Senate Education and Cultural Resources Committee, where Sen. Russ Tempel, R-Chester, warned members “we’re losing teachers” and recounted stories shared by teachers in his own family explaining one of the reasons why.
“They’ve been spit on, they’ve been called blankety-blank-blank-blank and whatever,” Tempel said. “One daughter was working with a group of kids, and this one little guy would not get out of his desk. He sat there tearing paper up, throwing it on the floor. She spent more time with that kid than these other kids that wanted to learn.”
Tempel appeared with a proposed solution in hand: Senate Bill 138, which would enshrine in state law a teacher’s ability to temporarily exclude a disruptive student from their classroom — or, to put it colloquially, send them to the principal’s office. The measure also recommends specific criteria for returning such a student to the classroom, including parental involvement and the crafting of a “behavioral contract.” Speaking in favor of SB 138, Montana Federation of Public Employees spokesperson Kim Popham said the process outlined in the bill is already the working model across many schools and would address an ongoing concern tied to Montana’s teacher shortage.
“The No. 1 challenge teachers in the field have is that they can’t afford to live and work in their communities,” said Popham, whose union represents the teachers the bill aims to assist. “The second-most-commonly shared challenge is that student behaviors are negatively impacting teaching and learning of students.”
However, several other voices from the public education sphere expressed apprehension about the draft’s lack of accommodation for students with disabilities. While acknowledging the challenges that inspired SB 138, opponents cautioned that any approved policy must recognize state and federal guidelines for such students and ensure they aren’t unduly disciplined for behaviors associated with their disability. Tal Goldin, director of advocacy at the nonprofit Disability Rights Montana, urged lawmakers to “leave this to the districts.”
“Make a statement of your intent in Section One [of the bill], ask that districts that do not have a policy put a policy in place and then let them do the thoughtful and considered work with their legal counsel, with their union members, with their administrators, to figure out what works for them,” Goldin said.
The point hit home, and on Thursday Tempel entertained a friendly amendment from Sen. Sara Novak, D-Anaconda, seeking to maintain the spirit of the bill while also recognizing students’ right to due process under state and federal disabilities requirements. But, the Legislature being the Legislature, lingering debate over the new language prompted committee members to postpone action on SB 138 for a later date.
—Alex Sakariassen
Highlights ☀️
In other news this week —
Competing bills to determine the future of Medicaid expansion in Montana spurred hours of testimony in the Capitol.
After a fire damaged its offices, one of Montana’s premier weekly newspapers is thriving on community ties.
A Missoula doctor is raising concerns about the sentencing of a former patient who threatened her and her clinic.
On Our Radar 
Amanda — May I share with you a delightful little video about the daily rhythms of Leif Haugen, who has spent 24 years staffing U.S. Forest Service fire lookouts? “I think what’s so tricky sometimes talking about the lookout experience is you’re not talking to anybody about it,” he says of his largely solitary life on mountaintop perches. “You more intuit it, you more experience it.”
Matt — This New York Times report about a woman in an active relationship with ChatGPT was the viral story of the past week. I clicked for the premise, but I stayed for the fascinating tech details, like the concept of a “context window.”
Tom — It’s blood orange season, meaning you can find them in supermarkets. I’m no baker, but they make a great cornmeal upside-down cake, like these two from the New York Times and YouTube. My favorite version is in the cookbook “Season: Big Flavors, Beautiful Food,” photographed by Nik Sharma.
Zeke — I woke up Thursday feeling like a sack of potatoes. Twice that morning, though, I read through Joan Didion’s 1961 essay “On Self-Respect,” an articulate reminder that contentment cannot be attained through the affection of others, but instead requires solitary certainty about our own identity.
Holly — A fellow journalist also spending a lot of time in the Capitol basement these days recently told me, “I don’t need vegetables, I have Joan Didion.” But we humans in the depths of winter need some roughage (and sunshine), which is why I’m rocking this fantastic recipe as often as possible.
Eric — I don’t need vegetables to get me through the winter. I have this YouTube video where someone spliced their cat into Game of Thrones footage.
*Some stories may require a subscription. Subscribe!
