Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Butte–Silver Bow panel votes to seek three-part fire-services ballot question amid legal uncertainty
Summary
The Butte–Silver Bow Study Commission voted to pursue a three-part ballot question (Option 1, Option 2, and status quo) on fire-service governance, subject to Secretary of State approval, after hearing county legal analysis that volunteer districts face unclear taxing authority if removed from the charter.
Get email alerts on the Fire Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Butte–Silver Bow Study Commission voted May 18 to pursue a three-part ballot question on fire-service governance — Option One, Option Two and the status quo — subject to approval by the Montana Secretary of State. Commissioner Chad Silk moved the structure and Commissioner Ben Thielen seconded; the motion passed 8–1 (Commissioner Mary McCormick opposed).
The vote came after extended discussion about whether volunteer fire districts would retain taxing authority if they were removed from the charter. County Attorney Enrooth told commissioners that Montana law allows rural fire districts to levy special taxes but that significant legal uncertainty exists about whether volunteer districts inside an incorporated municipality like Butte–Silver Bow could establish new taxing districts. "If removed from the charter, they may need to reestablish taxing authority independently," Enrooth said, noting the budget office and former Budget Director Gleason share that opinion.
Commissioners pressed the practical risks of removing volunteers from the charter: they could be unable to establish new taxing districts, carving up the unified fire budget could leave the paid department underfunded, or new taxes might be insufficient to support volunteer services. Commissioner Lori Casey asked whether smaller volunteer districts would have sufficient funding; Enrooth said questions of rural versus volunteer classification and the Secretary of State's guidance remain unresolved.
The commission also adopted a contingency plan in the event the Secretary of State disallows a three-part question (motion by Lori Casey, seconded by Ben Thielen; passed 7–2). Commissioners then took a series of fallback votes: a motion not to place any fire-related question on the ballot if a three-part question is disallowed failed; a motion to place Option 1 on the ballot if three-part wording is disallowed failed; and a motion to place Option 2 on the ballot if three-part wording is disallowed passed (Ayes: Silk, Dennehy, Stepan, Thielen, Casey, Brandl; Nays: McCormick, Shaw, Perdue-Dolan).
Commissioners voiced frustration with conflicting legal opinions and a lack of timely guidance from the Secretary of State and the MSU Local Government Center. "We need legal decisions, not just legal opinions," Commissioner Matt Stepan said, arguing the commission's goal was to remove ambiguity so voters face clear alternatives.
The meeting packet included written correspondence read into the record. Commissioner Cindy Shaw read a letter from Bruce Graving supporting a mayor–city manager government structure and other charter changes. Chair Brandl read a submission from Jim Fisher proposing a third option that would separate the duties of Fire Chief and Director of Fire Services and have the council appoint an independent Director of Fire Services under Section 7.03(f) of the charter. An emailed submission from Anthony Roth, who identified himself as Trustee Chair of the Terra Verde Volunteer Fire Department, raised maintenance and safety concerns at his station and urged collaboration between paid and volunteer leaders.
What happens next: the commission will seek the Secretary of State's approval of the three-part ballot structure and proceed according to that guidance. The commission set its next meeting for June 1, 2026.
