Missoula County reviews four state bills; backs measure to get tax-adjustment information

County staff briefed Missoula County commissioners on several new and pending bills at the state legislature and asked for direction on whether the county should take positions.

Staff described Senate Bill 307 as a recently introduced proposal to change the distribution of state marijuana tax revenue. Under the draft discussed, funding currently earmarked for conservation, parks and some veteran services would be reallocated: the bill would direct a larger share to the state general fund and to law-enforcement-related accounts, increase funding for the governor's HEART mental-health fund, and create or expand allocations for marijuana prevention and law-enforcement operations. County staff said the change would reduce conservation funding statewide and noted the county has previously taken positions opposing moves that would reduce conservation dollars.

House Bill 466 would create categorical exclusions from Montana's environmental review process for two specific items described in the bill: (1) Department of Administration projects for state buildings and (2) historic preservation grants administered through the Department of Commerce. Staff characterized the measure as potentially contentious because categorical exclusions remove projects from the standard environmental review process; Missoula County has been a recipient of historic preservation grants in the past (including the county historical museum at the Fort and a potential Engen Building grant this year). Staff said they had not found any prior local grants that were delayed by environmental review but were still seeking input.

Senate Bill 289 drew a clear statement of support from county staff. The bill would let Missoula County request information from the Montana Department of Revenue when the department makes certified-taxable-value adjustments larger than $1,500,000 for specific properties. Staff said the change would restore access to information the county previously received when such adjustments were addressed in a public process; the bill would allow access only to information that is public (not proprietary) and would include notification when an adjustment is being considered.

House Bill 489, the Local Option Property Tax Reduction Act, would allow counties to place a voter referendum authorizing taxes on certain tourist-related goods and services (for example, some restaurant sales, guide services, portions of existing rental-car and lodging taxes) to fund property tax relief in counties that adopt the measure. Staff described a press conference scheduled for 11 a.m. at the State Capitol and said the bill includes a certification process so rebates could be applied as a line item on property tax bills.

County staff asked commissioners whether they wanted to take formal positions on any of the bills. Staff noted SB 307 was introduced the prior day and had not yet been scheduled for a hearing; HB 466 had a named sponsor and staff were still gathering details about how it would apply. Staff said they would contact conservation advocates (for example, the League of Conservation Voters) and county legislative delegation members for additional information.

Commissioners and staff agreed to monitor the bills and gather more information before deciding whether to take formal positions, except that staff said the county will support SB 289 to restore access to adjustment information.