2021 Montana Legislature

If the 2021 Legislative Session had to be However, it included an exemption for State laws described in one word, it would be “takings.” and regulations if they were necessary to protect Not only is the legislature taking away public health, safety, and welfare, provisions that your right to free speech, privacy, assembly, are not included in SB 260. participation, and a clean and healthful In 2013, it was projected that the bill would environment, it wants to take even more. It wants cost Montana $600 million over a six-year period. to take away protections for grizzly bears, wolves, Although the 2013 bill had a 10% compensation sage grouse, and bison. And it wants to radically threshold for the State, it only applied to real expand the meaning of “takings” under the property, a far narrower definition of property Montana Constitution. This than is included in SB 260. expansion of the definition of takings is what makes SB The Legislative And unlike the 2013 bill, SB 260 provides no exception 260 (Sen. Steve Fitzpatrick, R-Great Falls) the most Session in One for government regulations that are necessary to protect worrisome bill of the session. SB 260 would greatly Word? public health, safety, and welfare. Governments expand on the provision in must be able to protect all the Montana Constitution that already requires a government body to pay Takings people, including those who live downwind or downstream from a project a property owner for lost by Anne Hedges or are concerned about their property values whenever a government own property values or well-being. action takes away the entire value of that person’s Takings proposals such as SB 260 turn that property, such as when a road is built on their idea on its head and would force governments land. SB 260 drastically changes that. Currently, to pay whenever a regulation prevents someone the constitution requires a government body from doing something, even if the proposed to pay a property owner when a regulation action would harm others. Because of this broad eliminates all of value of their property. SB 260 application, it is likely to cost the State far more would require the state to pay whenever a state than $600 million. action of diminishes the value of property by To compound the problems even further, SB as little as 25%. 260 defines property so broadly that it includes

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen such a far more than just land. It also includes: stocks, takings bill. In 2013, a similar bill failed to pass. bonds, business brands, credit, intellectual property, perceived financial stability of a company, property fixtures, personal property or appurtenances, water rights, permits, domestic animals, all obligations, labor, business licenses, all types of property associated with business licenses, and a host of other types of property. Governments would be prohibited under SB 260 from imposing limitations on any of these types of property, or they could be sued and forced to pay the property owner, regardless of the need to protect other people’s health, property, well-being, or the environment.

For example, the State of Montana could actually have to pay if it revoked a doctor’s license for malpractice – a policy that obviously removes the incentive to hold doctors accountable.

The Senate, on a party line vote, passed this wide-ranging bill with little debate and very few questions, even though it could have devastating repercussions for nearly every action of State and local governments. When Oregon passed a similar law by initiative in 2004, the State faced almost 7,000 claims totaling nearly $20 billion. Oregon voters repealed the initiative just three years later. Even a small fraction of that amount would be devastating to Montana!

Rep. Fitzpatrick made clear that the purpose of this bill is to prevent actions such as the initiative that banned game farms in the state. The bill would also apply to any State restrictions on things such as: • Hunting and fishing (such as closures), commercial fishing regulations, exotic species restrictions, bag limits, outfitter set asides, and river permits. • Floodplain designations, streamside management zones, basin closures, water quality protections, mitigation requirements for gravel pits (such as hours of operation). • Prevailing wage requirements. • State revocation of licenses for medical providers, daycares, healthcare facilities, assisted living, outdoor behavioral programs, building licenses, contractor licenses, food establishments and many more. • Permit limits or mitigation requirements for industrial or commercial operations or their equipment. • Quarantine and pest management requirements. • Road projects. • Split estates where mineral owners or surface owner object to actions by the State. • Public Service Commission decisions that prevent monopoly utilities from recovering imprudent costs from customers or from passing on the cost to customers of expensive new projects.

SB 260 sums up the 2021 legislature – reckless disregard for Montanans and their property, as well as for public health and environmental protections. If this bill passes as is, what happened in Texas during the polar vortex will look like child’s play.