Representative Lou Jones, sponsor: “House Bill 129 … is to provide some meaningful support and recognition from Montana's volunteer firefighters and emergency medical services.”

Representative Lou Jones opened the hearing on House Bill 129 by telling the House Taxation Committee the measure would exempt roughly $3,000 of income for qualifying volunteer firefighters and emergency medical service (EMS) volunteers, producing about a $150–$180 tax reduction per individual depending on marginal rates.

The bill defines eligibility as an active, full‑year member who completes required training: volunteer firefighters must complete at least 30 hours of training and EMS volunteers must meet training set by the State Board of Medical Examiners, Representative Jones said.

Why it matters: proponents said Montana’s volunteer emergency workforce is shrinking and a modest tax break is intended as recognition and an incentive to recruit and retain volunteers. Mike Doto, chief of the Center Volunteer Fire Department and Montana State Volunteer Firefighters Association delegate, told the committee he has watched his local department shrink from about 50 members to 16 and described the bill as a recruitment and retention tool. “We’re trying to get this as an incentive for the people that are traveling … and if we can give them something to help,” Doto said.

Other supporters included county and local chiefs and organizations. Ed Shindoll, Broadwater Rural Fire District chief, testified the recognition would be appreciated. Eric Somerfeld, representing the Montana Farmers Union and Power Volunteer Fire Department, described how small‑town departments rely heavily on volunteers for EMS and ambulance transport. Ross Fitzgerald, a long‑time volunteer, stressed volunteers absorb time and out‑of‑pocket costs.

Opposition and administration testimony: Allen Lloyd, executive director of the Montana Society of CPAs, said the group ‘‘reluctantly oppose[s] House Bill 129’’ not because it opposes supporting volunteers but because adding adjustments to the tax code re‑complicates returns and circumvents the direct‑appropriation budgeting process. Lloyd urged a direct payment or grant alternative so volunteers receive funds more promptly and the cost is visible in the budget process.

Department of Revenue staff provided informational answers on the fiscal note. Aaron McNay and Shailyn Daigle of the Department of Revenue were present to answer questions about the estimate and administration.

Sponsor closing: Representative Jones reiterated the bill’s aim is recognition rather than a large fiscal outlay, and cited the fiscal note estimate placing the number of affected volunteers around 44,100 and the per‑person benefit as modest.

Ending: The hearing closed after proponents, opponents and informational witnesses answered committee questions and the sponsor reserved the right to close later.

Votes on the bill were not taken at this hearing; the committee will take executive action at a later date.