Good government is an appropriate election day topic. It certainly seems, at least lately, that when well meaning, or hell, even those with an agenda, ask for openness in government they seem to hit a wall? Why does it appear the 1^st question wondered aloud is motive, or even worse, being simply assigned one. Why is he/she/they doing this? Something must be afoot!

In the past few weeks there have been plenty of examples: Dillon commission, Missoula emails, Kalispell planning board, Great Falls power arm & airport, Billings law enforcement, and I’m sure others. In many of these issues, it seems the 1^st action of government is to question the action rather than responding to the inquiry.

Certainly some political gamesmanship may be at play, but that is to be expected. The beauty of our system (particularly in Montana) is the ability to ask, question, criticize, and, oh yes, participate. In the long run, these actions ultimately help our society, no matter how ridiculous, vindictive, mundane, or even political.

Now go vote.

No one is more pleased than MOTTO to have the moderates of both parties work to develop a mutually acceptable agreement on the issues currently facing this divided legislature.  That being said, however, due diligence and thoughtful deliberation should not be set aside to meet an artificial deadline.  The tax, education, and budget issues left for the special session are the largest issues that were to be determined by the regular session.  While the budget discussions reached every legislator, many, if not most, of the tax items did not.  Ultimately, the bills will have to co-exist, money in, money out.

Today, the 2nd day of the special session, the tax bill is being heard by joint committee.  MOTTO made reference to the title below, this bill contains several significant policy revisions.  As of this post, a fiscal note was not yet available, yet a majority of our legislators may be asked to vote on a bill they know very little about.  The REIT bill is itself a defining policy statement.  Do our legislators understand the pro & cons?

Regardless of the party, policy decisions as the ones being decided currently should not be made unless proper review, debate, and deliberation is conducted.  Our legislators must remind themselves they are a body independent of the executive.  Perhaps each and every bill is indeed good legislation.  Please, just take the time to ensure it is. And if it isn't, well, remember, is your honorable body (Legislature) to which blame will be placed.   

This is the title of the tax bill (LC0005) to be acted upon during the 3 day special session

A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT REVISING LAWS RELATING TO TAXATION; CONFORMING STATE WITHHOLDING PROVISIONS TO FEDERAL WITHHOLDING PROVISIONS FOR PENSIONS, ANNUITIES, AND CERTAIN OTHER DEFERRED INCOME; REQUIRING WITHHOLDING AT 30 PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT WITHHELD FOR FEDERAL TAX PURPOSES; PROVIDING A REFUND OF UP TO A TOTAL OF $400 OF 2006 MONTANA PROPERTY TAXES PAID BY A TAXPAYER OR TAXPAYERS ON THE RESIDENCE THAT THEY OWNED AND OCCUPIED AS THEIR PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE FOR AT LEAST 7 MONTHS DURING 2006 AND OF CERTAIN 2005 AND 2004 MONTANA PROPERTY TAXES PAID ON THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE; PROVIDING THE PROCEDURE FOR ESTABLISHING ENTITLEMENT TO THE REFUND AND THE PERIOD WITHIN WHICH THE ENTITLEMENT MUST BE ESTABLISHED; PROVIDING A REFUNDABLE RENTERS' INCOME TAX CREDIT; LIMITING THE CREDIT TO INDIVIDUALS BELOW A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL; ALLOWING A REFUNDABLE INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY TAXES PAID ON $20,000 OF MARKET VALUE OF A PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE 95-MILL STATEWIDE LEVIES TO FUND SCHOOLS; ADOPTING PROVISIONS OF THE MULTISTATE TAX COMMISSION MODEL ACT ON REPORTABLE TRANSACTIONS AND THE MODEL ACT FOR A TAX EVASION TRANSACTION VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE PROGRAM; REQUIRING TAXPAYERS TO DISCLOSE CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS; REQUIRING MATERIAL ADVISERS TO DISCLOSE CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS; REQUIRING TAX SHELTER PROMOTERS TO DISCLOSE CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS; PROVIDING FOR A VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE PROGRAM; CREATING THE MONTANA REAL ESTATE BACKUP WITHHOLDING ACT; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; REQUIRING WITHHOLDING FOR INCOME TAX PURPOSES ON THE GAIN FROM THE SALE OR EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN MONTANA REAL ESTATE; ESTABLISHING A WITHHOLDING TAX RATE; PROVIDING EXCEPTIONS TO WITHHOLDING; ESTABLISHING REPORTING AND REMITTANCE REQUIREMENTS; REQUIRING THAT CERTAIN INFORMATION BE SUBMITTED WITH THE REALTY TRANSFER CERTIFICATE; PROHIBITING THE RECORDING OF A TRANSFER OF MONTANA REAL ESTATE OR A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP RECORDS OF MONTANA REAL ESTATE FOR PROPERTY TAX PURPOSES IF THE REQUIRED INFORMATION IS NOT PROVIDED; PROVIDING RULEMAKING AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; CLARIFYING THE LIABILITY OF CLERKS AND RECORDERS; GRANTING AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TO REQUIRE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS OR TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS IN TAX MATTERS; CLARIFYING THAT SHERIFFS' FEES ARE ADDED TO THE BALANCE OF A WARRANT FOR DISTRAINT; CONFORMING THE TIME TO MAKE A RETURN OF A WARRANT FOR DISTRAINT TO THE TIME THAT THE NOTICE OF LEVY IS EFFECTIVE; ALLOWING A NOTICE OF LEVY OF A WARRANT FOR DISTRAINT TO BE SERVED ELECTRONICALLY; INCREASING THE SCOPE OF RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROPERTY CLASSIFIED AS CLASS FIVE PROPERTY BY INCREASING THE POPULATION LIMIT FOR CITIES AND TOWNS SERVED TO 10,000; PROVIDING A 10-YEAR EXEMPTION OF 50 PERCENT OF MARKET VALUE FOR NEW RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROPERTY; DEFINING "NEW RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROPERTY"; INCREASING THE BUSINESS EQUIPMENT TAX EXEMPTION TO THE FIRST $65,000 OF MARKET VALUE OF PROPERTY; REQUIRING THAT THE CLASS EIGHT PROPERTY OF RELATED PERSONS BE AGGREGATED IN DETERMINING WHETHER THE $65,000 EXEMPTION THRESHOLD IS EXCEEDED; PROVIDING FOR THE ALLOCATION OF EXEMPT CLASS EIGHT PROPERTY BY LOCATION; PROVIDING A REIMBURSEMENT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS UNDER THE ENTITLEMENT SHARE PAYMENT AND TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS THROUGH GUARANTEED TAX BASE FUNDING FOR THE LOSS OF CLASS EIGHT PROPERTY TAX REVENUE; EXEMPTING FROM TAXATION ITEMS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY WITH A MARKET VALUE OF LESS THAN $100; CLARIFYING THAT PROPERTY OWNED BY COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICE PROVIDERS IS CENTRALLY ASSESSED FOR PROPERTY TAX PURPOSES; REQUIRING INFORMATION SHARING AMONG STATE AGENCIES; REQUIRING DISCLOSURE OF A PORTION OF THE FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER OF A BUSINESS ENTITY ON THE ANNUAL REPORT FILED WITH THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE; LIMITING DISCLOSURE OF THE FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER; AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TO DISCLOSE CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM TAX RETURNS AND REPORTS TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING A 5-YEAR PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS FOR ASSESSMENT, COLLECTION, OR REFUND OF CORPORATION LICENSE TAX; PROVIDING APPROPRIATIONS AND A STATUTORY APPROPRIATION; AMENDING SECTIONS 7-4-2623, 15-1-121, 15-1-201, 15-1-706, 15-6-135, 15-6-138, 15-6-219, 15-8-301, 15-10-420, 15-23-101, 15-30-301, 15-30-303, 15-31-509, 15-31-511, 15-31-603, 16-11-149, 17-7-502, 20-9-366, 35-1-1104, AND 35-8-208, MCA; AND PROVIDING EFFECTIVE DATES, APPLICABILITY DATES, AND TERMINATION DATES."

Sections have their own title! Do you think your Senator & Representative know what this bill does as they vote on it?

Now that the special session has been called, early bill drafts include

Tax incentives for energy development.  Tax reduction and abatement for clean coal, transmission, and biofuels.  Senator Jeff Essman (R-Billings) requester & sponsor

Tax incentives for energy - Rep. Llew Jones (R-Conrad requester

 General appropriations act (AKA HB2).  Requester, Rep. Galen Hollenbaugh (D-Helena)

Education revise - Rep. Hollenbaugh and School Funding Sen. Dan McGee (R-Laurel), Long range planning, Sen. Cooney (D-Helena)

Educational trust fund funded by REIT's  - Rep. Hollenbaugh requester

and funding for session, Rep. Hollenbaugh, requester

It is unclear whether or not these requested drafts are the Governor's preferred bills.  Senator Essman's request looks as if it very well could be, while Jones isn't prepared for public view as of this post.  Neither education bill was ready for viewing.  Will update as bills become available. 

Note - requesting a bill does not necessarily mean they will carry the bill. 

Anything shocking about the special session call?  Only the timing, the length, and the confidence of the Governor.  The Governor surely was a party whip in a previously life, as he certainly knows how to count votes.  The only questions that remain, who and how many?

Survivor: Helena. Our own backyard version of Survivor is on hiatus, as the camps await the necessary callback to complete the game.  Strategy will play an important role, as will any breakout camps.  Does the Republican leadership have the immunity idol? Can the teams rebound as complete the difficult budget and tax challenges? Who will be sent to exile island? 

Outwit, outplay, outlast?  This Survivor has been so poorly rated, the contestants have to wonder if they'll be invited back for the next regular session. 

What a minute.  Maybe that the problem.  We have two side who are trying to do just that, win.  While politics may be about winning and losing, governing is not.  Govern. 

Seriously, I considered not discussing the topic at all. There are no winners in any of this, only losers, starting with the people of Montana.  Once all the political points are made (and make it their last political comment), both sides need to roll-up their sleeves and finish the work. 

When Montana's legislative session 1st started, MOTTO posted the link under "the twilight zone", and this session has certainly proven why.  As the final few days of the regular session wind down, expect as just many head scratching moments as we have seen up to this point.  What exactly will happen?  While no one can predict specific outcomes at this juncture, two critical elements of the process will play themselves out; the conference committees and the respective caucuses. 

With 4 budget bills and at least 3 major tax bills, the conference committees will play an even more significant role.  In the past, HB2, the budget bill, had one conference committee.  A cut or an addition in one area meant a revision in another.  Tedious, but effective.  With 4 separate budget bills, it will be more difficult to make the necessary revisions.  Additionally, look for the conference committees on the budget bills to share key members.  Don't be surprised if the Senate Republican named to these conference committees are Cobb, Laible, or Lewis.  

Brokering a reasonable republican tax policy compromise is more likely under the stewardship of Senator Story & Representative Lake, rather than Majority Leader Lange.  Story is arguable the most knowledgeable member of the Legislature when it comes to tax, particularly the inter-relationship & implications to state, local, and school district governance. 

Finally, the remaining 125 or so legislators who will be waiting to vote on the conference committee actions.  Expect each party in each house to caucus early and often.  Legislators will be presented with committee action, the why and the how to vote on particular bills.  Debate will be organized and perhaps even scripted.  The biggest challenge at this late stage is maintaining the bloc of votes.  Representative Jore, as he was during the original budget debate, will be a key figure, as will moderate republicans and democrats (if they choose to be).  

Oh, and don't be surprised if there is a "Twilight Zone" ending, or endings.....      

 

MOTTO has generally steered away from the debate regarding Highwood Generating Station (HGS) coal-fired power plant.  Over the past year, the issue has grown in a fairly significant way in North Central Montana.  It is certainly no secret that I support energy development and generation, including coal, wind, and ethanol, all of which at one time or another was (or is) to have a positive effect on the region.  The HGS debate has evolved, and now appears to have very distinct (& divisive) avenues of thought.

The pro HGS factions include

• Government: City, County, School District, Airport Authority
• Larger business
• Rural Co-ops
• Economic development & pro-growth advocates
• Public power advocates

Those opposed are distinct as well

• Anti-coal generation, period
• Pro- clean/green alternatives, such as wind
• Process driven opponents concerned with government & tax payer dollar involvement
• Combination
• The PSC & Northwestern Energy

Public power versus "clean/green" energy versus government accountability versus the state's default supplier.  There are plenty of issues to discuss.  Electric City blog has taken on the government accountability issue very substantially.  Groups have formed specifically to oppose the coal aspect, and the city has continued to advocate amidst the negativity.  What has been lost in the discussion is the public power debate.  Hopefully an examination of these issues will illuminate both sides of the discussion.  More to follow.       

The tax credits for transmission of & clean coal technology have the support of key democrats & republicans, as evidenced by the amendments to bills in the house & senate tax committees.  Good news for democrats & the Governor, and perhaps a bit premature for the republicans.  Who plays poker and shows their hold cards before the turn? The house R's blinked.

There are three branches of government, each playing a pivotal role in the governing of our state.  The recent amendatory veto on HB426 crossed that fine line. 

The title of HB426:

AN ACT REMOVING THE $500,000 LIMIT ON A COUNTY'S ROAD AND BRIDGE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND

The entire bill is literally 2 lines long. Stream access as found in SB78 has 6 new sections & amends 2 others. The title alone is 4x as long as HB426. Clearly, the new stream access language does not fit within the scope of 426. The Code Commissioner, the chief legislative lawyer, stated the amendment was outside the scope.  As positive as the veto is, as much as it would rectify the impasse in the house, it is an abuse of the amendatory veto, the separation of powers.

Now, I fully support SB78, the stream access bill.  It should pass and receive better consideration than it has.  It is the job of the legislature to make that policy decision and pass SB78 or amend such language into a similar bill and pass on to the Governor.