Billings City Council members spent an extended portion of a work session debating how to treat additional mill authority created by House Bill 231 and whether the city should adopt an ordinance to specify how those mills would be allocated.

The discussion centered on whether the newly available 34.71 mills (per staff briefing) should be automatically distributed among existing voter-approved levies (library, transit, public safety) in the same relative proportions, or left to the council's annual budget process. Proponents of an ordinance argued that writing the allocations into city code would protect voter intent by preserving the relative shares adopted by voters in earlier levies. Opponents said the bill is ambiguous, that locking allocations into an ordinance could reduce the council's ability to respond to future needs and could make future tax increases more likely.

City staff presented background on HB 231 and said the measure requires local governments to levy in subsequent years the number of mills that would produce the same total property tax amount levied in 2025 unless the municipality elects a dollar-based transition. Staff asked whether council wanted direction to return with an ordinance to memorialize a proportional allocation approach.

Multiple council members raised legal and policy concerns during the exchange. One councilor said the provision "was poorly drafted" and urged using the annual budget process to maintain flexibility; another said an ordinance would better respect the expressed intent of voters who approved prior levies.

Council member Repsis moved to direct staff to prepare an ordinance implementing the proportional allocation approach; Council member Shaw seconded. The motion failed on a recorded voice vote. For the record, those reporting their votes in favor were Council members Repsis, Cole, Gulick and Shaw; a majority voted no and the motion did not pass.

No formal ordinance or allocation was adopted at the meeting. Staff said they would continue to brief council and suggested that future legislative activity in Helena could change local options. The transcript records multiple requests from councilors for clearer statutory guidance and for staff to return with legal language and options.

Why this matters: HB 231 alters how certain property-tax growth is treated and can change the way local governments raise revenue. Choosing an ordinance that fixes allocations could limit future flexibility; leaving allocation to annual budget decisions preserves discretion but may create uncertainty for departments that have relied on dedicated levy revenues.

What’s next: Staff will track legislative developments, answer specific legal questions for the council, and return as requested for additional discussion. The council did not adopt direction at this meeting to instruct staff to draft an ordinance.