HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 07.06.2021MINUTES
CITY OF LAUREL
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
TUESDAY, JULY 06, 2021
A Council Workshop was held in Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Tom Nelson at
6:31 p.m. on July 06, 2021.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
x Emelie Eaton
x Bruce McGee
x Scot Stokes
x Richard Klose
_x_ Heidi Sparks
_x Richard Herr
X Iry Wilke
Don Nelson
Bethany Langve, Clerk/Treasurer
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director
Brent Peters, Fire Chief
Karen Courtney, Code Enforcement/Building Official
Stan Langve, Police Chief
Matt Smith, KLJ
Public Input:
Barbra Ann Sprague Emineth, 501 Alder Avenue, stated, I've been wondering what's supposed to
happen when a Citizen's complaint is filed because two of them were filed six months ago on the
property at 506 Birch regarding the pile of garbage in the backyard by myself as well as another
neighbor. The people at this property do not bag their garbage. I have watched them dump it, and
when the truck comes through, there is always garbage left behind in our alley. I don't know if
the City requires that people bag their garbage, but I think they should. I think you should; it
wouldn't be that hard to enforce. The people at 506 Birch not only litter their own yard but also
through garbage in everyone else's yards. For the past few years, I have watched as the people
either working at 506 Birch or living there through bikes, microwaves, big -screen TVs, and
anything that will fit into our dumpsters. I also watched as a full flatbed loaded with old
appliances came out of that house, which has to be emptied out by now. And yet, we all still deal
with our dumpsters being filled up on a weekly basis. It's like the bring home junk just to put it in
there. Every person staying there produces garbage. And it seems there are more all the time.
They do not take care of their animals. They do not pick up after their dogs, and their cats do
their business in everyone else's yard. There's been up to five kittens in my yard at one time. We
have no code for how many cats can be at one house, and they are constantly having babies.
There should be a limit for how many cats can be kept at one house. Neighbors have had to put
locks on their hoses to prevent their water from being stolen. They have been told not to burn
garbage in their backyard fire pit because it stinks up the neighborhood, but they continue to do
so. Or something that produces a very rancid smell. There have recently been threats of violence
and bodily harm by someone claiming to be fixing up this property but does not live there. I feel
it is past time for the City to help our neighborhood with this situation. The people of 506 Birch
continue to disrespect the rest of us because they figure there is nothing we can do about it. We
are all hoping they are wrong about that. I love this town, and I look out for my neighbors. I also
refuse to be intimidated or live in fear. I am aware of the fine line between being brave and being
stupid. And yet here I am because when I see things that are going on that aren't right, I am
unable to ignore them. Lord knows I try. Thank you for not only listening but hearing me. Your
help is needed. Respectfully.
Kelly Krum, 517 Birch Avenue, stated that everything Barb just said is true. I've been home for
the past year with respiratory problems. I figured out what half my problem was like; she said
they are burning stuff constantly. Morning, noon, and night. It smells like burnt wiring. Tonight
when I just was on my way up here, they are burning stuff. I call Billings Air Pollution Control;
they say to call them when it happens. Well, they like to do this when nobody is watching. The
traffic in and out of there is unbelievable. Like she said, the animals will walk around. They are
in their front yard; they are smoking weed, climbing in their vehicles, and driving away. That
house, at 506, somethings got to be done over there. I have lived there for over 32 years. The
house I am in has been in the family for 50 years. It seems like in the last 30 years, this has been
going on. That house has been for marijuana growing; it's got to be; they found a dead guy in the
garbage. They got it for, what do you call it, the stuff to make a meth lab. Isn't that house
supposed to be cleaned up before somebody lives in it? And right now, there is water coming out
of the house draining into the gutter. From their house, they dug the basement out; that's where
they have their grow room. That's all dirt and sewer down there. This stuff is draining into the
road right now. These people, something has to be done. I was not prepared here; like I said, I've
lived here all my life. I have never been to one of these meetings. But this, something has to be
done. I mean, I'm not the perfect neighbor by far, but that across the street that is terrorism. Pure
terrorism. I am sure you wouldn't want them by your house. Thank you for listening.
General Items
Executive Review
Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Selecting Midwest Fire As The
Successful Bidder For The City's Purchase Of A Brush Truck.
Brent Peters, Fire Chief, briefly reviewed the attached letter. He is seeking Council's approval for
a new brush truck. This brush truck will replace a brush truck from 1987.
2. Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Award Of Grants
From The Tax Increment Financing District Funds Pursuant To The Lura Large Grant
Request Program For Eligible Applicants And Improvements.
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, briefly reviewed the attached spreadsheet.
It was questioned what the total budget is for LURA. It was clarified the Large Grant program is
$275k.
Bethany Langve, Clerk/Treasurer, clarified the TIF District has $3,216,735. That does include
the EDII project. The EDII project was $2,868,986. Their normal appropriation budget is
$329,749.
It was questioned if that was LURA or the TIF District. It was clarified that it is the entire
District. The only thing that does not take into consideration is their debt service. Their debt
services is an additional $180,000. So when the debt service is added in, it is $509,749.
It was questioned if someone looked at what projects can be paid out of TIF money—looking at
the LURA Large Grant request program and the eligible projects. It says land acquisition,
improvements of public infrastructure, compilation, and analysis of pertinent information to
determine the needs of the District. There are a few of these that don't seem to fit. They seem to
be interior remodeling.
Planning Director Altonaga asked for clarification on which sheet Council was looking at; see
attached. He stated he has been using what MCA states, which does include structural things. He
did state that Council can always cut down the amounts of each grant award as they have the
final say. LURA is an advisory board.
Council President Eaton requested the City Attorney look at this request in light of parameters.
Could the Council hear from the City Attorney to whether or not these all apply?
Mayor Nelson stated he could have something sent to all Council Members prior to next week's
meeting. Council can always choose to move to withdraw that and bring it forward at the next
meeting.
Resolution - Resolution Approving The Application For Bitterroot Grove Townhomes,
A Sixty Unit Planned Unit Development As An Addition To The City Of Laurel.
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, stated no quorum at the last City/County Planning Board.
Then this body becomes the governing body to determine the merits of the question. He briefly
reviewed the attached Staff report.
It was questioned if the entrances and exits were off Juniper and Fir. It was stated that is correct.
Council noted that this development would get the junk cleaned up and be a fantastic addition to
Laurel. Council also noted that there are other developments nearby that have caused some
issues. The Planning Director stated he was very aware of that while reviewing their plans. This
annexation would expand the City's limits,
Dave Waggoner, 419 Maple, asked how they plan to have the garbage picked up. It was clarified
that the City would pick up their garbage. There is access for the garbage truck to pick up
garbage. There are also Emergency access codes that all departments will have for quick access.
It was questioned what type of homes these will be.
Darrell Dyer, 201 P Avenue, stated they would be stick -built homes. There will be some
variety; there will be different sections, there will be statues and water features. There will also
be a few two-story townhomes, but the majority of the development will be one level.
4. Resolution -Resolution Of Annexation And Zoning For Nutting Brothers Subdivision,
Block 6, Lots 1-12 And Block 7, Lots 1-12 And The Abandoned Portion Of Hazel
Avenue Located Between Blocks 6 And 7, As An Addition To The City Of Laurel,
Yellowstone County, Montana.
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, stated this item was discussed with the previous agenda item.
The first item was for the Planned Unit Development. This resolution is for the Annexation and
zoning change. The Variance is in reference to the zoning requirement of a five -acre minimum.
The County has abandoned a portion of Hazel Avenue. The goal was to get as close to the five -
acre minimum. They currently have 4.68 acres they are asking to be annexed into the City. The
alleyways were not abandoned as there are utilities in them. The current debris will be removed.
In the future, the City can go through a public process and amend the annexation agreement. The
Planning Director sees this as a good thing for the City.
Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Mayor To Sign A
Contract With Rossman Masonry LLC For Repairs To City Hall.
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director, stated the Mayor had asked him to get repairs done at
City Hall. He contacted the vendor who did the stucco. He also solicited two quotes to repair
with brick. He contacted Hill Masonry and Rossman Masonry. There will be three feet of
continuous brick along the front side of the building. It will match the existing brick. The City
received a quote back from Rossman Masonry. The total cost for this repair is $13k. The brick
will be adhered to the building with angle iron. It will be sealed at the top. This is a small service
contract for that fix.
Mayor Nelson stated the last CIP showed this portion of City Hall should be raised and rebuilt.
6. Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Mayor To Sign A
Contract With Ace Electric, Inc. For Electrical Work At The City's Sewer Plant.
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director, stated this is a small service contract to add lights to the
headworks building and install two City -owned light poles that were taken down during the
construction of the SED Basins. This quote includes the trenching needed to install these poles.
The cost estimate of the project is $6,120.
Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Selecting COP Construction, LLC as
The Successful Bidder For The City's Purchase Of A Screw Pump For The City's Waste
Water Treatment Plant.
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director, stated there are three scews at the WasteWater
Treatment Plant. Those screws are used to lift all sewer water into the treatment plant. The City
has gone through this process with the replacement of screw pump A. Screw pump B has dents,
the concrete channel is coming apart.
Contractors were asked to prequalify prior to bidding. There were two prequalified bidders. Star
Construction put in screw pump A last year but was the high bidder this year. COP Construction
came in at $169k. The contract will get underway and then be suspended until the pump is
received. Looking at late October before work will begin. Screw Pump A would be overwhelmed
during a rain event. Screw Pump B assists with managing the additional flow. Sewer flows are
higher in the morning and evening when people are home.
8. Resolution - A Resolution Of The City Council Selecting Osseo Construction Co., LLC
As The Successful Bidder For The City's Water Tank Recoat Project.
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director, stated the paint is coming off the top of the reservoir.
This has been occurring over approximately the last three years. The top of the tank has no fall
protection. The Mayor asked that no City Staff go up on top of the reservoir. KLJ did
prequalification on this project as the location is 50 feet in the air with no fall protection. There
were four bidders on this project. A few of the contractors typically do work outside of the
country for the US Government. Bids ranged from $162k to $296k. The reservoir is a 1968 4 -
million -gallon steel tank. The tank needs to be protected from both the outside and inside. In
1998 the City took the tank down and painted the inside. The City needs a new reservoir before
taking the current reservoir out of service to coat the inside.
It was questioned how this project would be funded. It was clarified that this would be paid out
of the Water Fund.
Council Issues
9. Cable Depth Discussion
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director, briefly reviewed the attached handout. There are no
standards for cable depth on private property.
10. Discussion concerning Community Decay
Barbra Ann Sprague Emineth, 501 Alder Ave, stated she has been there for over 40 years now.
And what I have done since I noticed where we were, where I thought you would be talking
about this at. I have just listed down some of the things that I have witnessed, that I have seen in
the back yard of 506 Birch. So we have a huge stack of wooden pallets, now I understand people
use wooden pallets for a lot of different things. I suspect they are going to use this as possible
firewood, maybe instead of garbage. That would be cool with me. They have to be stacked,
however. There is also a massive amount of slats. I don't know if they picked them up
somewhere or if they come out of the house. But those as well shouldn't just be all over the
place, and that's what they are. There also could be and use to be a limit to the percentage of the
property that is taken up by firewood. So that is a suggestion that could be implanted. Everyday
garbage, I am talking about everything you people put in your garbage bag and put in the
dumpster; just drive down the alley once you're going to see: furniture and appliances. There has
been a couch out there, and I am not talking about stuff that sits out there for a couple of days.
Maybe they are moving it in. Maybe they are moving it out. I don't care. It sits there for months
and months. We are talking about rolled -up carpet; oh, we are going to put that in house. Yeah,
after it sits out there and gets rained on and gets all moldy, sure you are. Bushes that need to be
cut, and this isn't those; these are other bushes. We should have an ordinance that your bushes
have to be trimmed so that a person can walk down the sidewalk. Used tires all over the place. If
you got a vehicle that needs the tires put on them, put the tires on them. And that's just what I
came up with out of my head. I am absolutely willing to answer any questions on this issue on
this situation that I have dealt with for 30 years. Michelle Herron has opened her house to anyone
that needs a place to stay. This is the problem. The faces change all the time. We don't know who
lives there from one month to the next. I don't know what her financial situation is, I don't know
if she rents out rooms, and I don't care about that either. I want that garbage picked up. Every
time I look out of my backyard, I look at that. It's not right, and I shouldn't have to. And it has
caused stress, and it has caused issues between myself and my spouse. It has raised my stress
level: the whole neighborhood, it's not just me. I speak for a whole community, a whole
neighborhood that has had it. There has been violence now; there have been threats of bodily
harm. I don't want someone getting their head split open because of a pile of garbage. You know
I don't know what else to do. I get ping-ponged between the cops and you guys. Is it code issues?
Cops say they can't do anything until somebody gets hurt. Well, we're real close here, people.
That's all I'm saying. Please hear me and talk about I know this isn't the only place that this
situation exists.
Nick Altonaga, Planning Director, 506 Birch, has been the real noticeable issue with Code
Enforcement and Community Decay. Staff has been constrained because the nuisance ordinance
is not properly updated. There have been numerous discussions between the Code Enforcement
Officer, Police Chief, and himself regarding what to do with this ordinance. The Code
Enforcement Officer is in the process of updating the nuisance ordinance to include specific
penalties.
Karen Courtney, Building Official/Code Enforcement, stated that she has been moving the Fire
stuff out of Title 8. She is down to two sections left on it. Those sections are the penalties section
and what may consider community decay. Community decay is typically part of a county; it is
considered a public nuisance in a municipality. Community decay does require multiple
complaints. We cannot go through the abatement process unless we go through due process and
we are missing due process. She plans to have it done by the end of this week and sent over the
Chief Langve.
It was questioned if when a draft nuisance ordinance would come forward. It was clarified that at
this time, she is working on getting those loose ends tied up; however, she does have a personnel
matter that may pull her away from the office. The Planning Director will be able to bring
forward in her absence. After an ordinance is adopted, it goes into effect 30 days later. On day
31, Staff can begin enforcing that ordinance. During that 30 -day period, public notices can be
made in the paper, so people are aware of the changes.
It was questioned if the nuisance ordinance that is being worked on will assist with Ms.
Emineth's issue. It was clarified that it would. Currently, the City cannot move to abatement until
the issues have been cited. That citation was removed. In January, Code Enforcement received
photos showing that the property had been cleaned up, but by May was filled again.
Brent Peters, Fire Chief, stated the Code Enforcement Officer has a lot on her plate. He offered
the Volunteer Fire Marshal to assist with ordinances. We need to address the whole issue, not
just part of the issue. The Fire Marshall finds fire hazards. The Fire Department has responded to
this house. It is a hazard.
The Public Works Director reminded residents they need to bag their garbage, including grass.
When hauling to Billings, unbagged garbage does fly out.
It was questioned if Health and Human Services could become involved. Rats are coming out of
the property. Neighbors have found feces on toilet paper. They have also found needles. It was
clarified that sharps should be disposed of up in an enclosed container to keep Public Works
Employees from coming into contact with them.
Stan Langve, Police Chief, stated that we are on the right path. To address this situation. He is
appreciative that they are working on bringing back the Parking and Barking officer. That person
will also be assigned to follow up on nuisances.
Kelly Krum, 517 Birch Ave, stated they are burning in their yard. He has COPD. There are
ordinances that say you can bran but are liable for anything that burns. He questioned if a
homeowner should have home insurance before they are allowed to bum. He could sit here for
hours regarding all the issues.
11. Infrastructure Funds and Appropriations
Bethany Langve, Clerk/Treasurer, briefly reviewed the attached handout.
It was questioned what Laurel has identified for pot A and pot B. It was clarified no project had
been identified yet. Right now, focusing on pot C. This is why the City is working on a new CIP
plan. It is very difficult to get grants without a CIP. The last CIP was in 2008. Everything has
been done in that CIP except the new reservoir. S. 4' needs the engineering done; W. Railroad
does not have as much infrastructure underneath.
Matt Smith, KLJ, stated the CIP would rank projects. Council will be part of the ranking process.
It is up to Council what projects they feel need to be done first. If W. Railroad is more important
than S. 0, then it is more of a priority. He can present an argument for both being necessary
projects. The CIP will rank the most important. That will change from year to year.
The Clerk/Treasurer clarified that pots A and B could be used if there is water and sewer under
the street.
It was questioned if pot C could be used for infrastructure as well. It was clarified that it could
but will need to be part of round two. The second round will be due on January 22nd
It was questioned if the State is holding financing for the W. Railroad improvements because the
City does not have the matching funds. It was clarified the State could not move forward on W.
Railroad until the City agrees to pay the gap in the funding.
The estimate to replace W. Railroad was between 4.4 million and 6 million. The City will need
to come up with the shortfall. The City was looking to come up with between 700k and 2.5
million to move forward on this project. The City can use TIF District funds for a portion of the
project in conjunction with the Urban Route funds. There are funds available in the TIF District,
just not with the current structure for grants. It was questioned if all scenarios could be run for
both these projects in regards to funding opportunities.
The Clerk/Treasurer clarified that the TIF could contribute to W. Railroad, but at the end of the
day Council approves the grants. Just because a grant comes before Council does not mean
Council has to approve those grants. There can be a discussion about taking out a bond and
increasing the debt service payment to get W. Railroad done. That would require altering the
grants or not approving as much as requested. Street Maintenance can also bond. The TIF can
bond. There can be street maintenance assessments. There are options.
Council asked to see both scenarios and how to achieve them. It was clarified that the TIF
District could only take a loan for the life of the EDII bond. Each year that goes by is one year
that cannot be included on an additional bond.
Council asked for a complete picture of the TIF District. They would like to know how far out
the TIF is able to bond. They would like to see what they are bringing in annually. Where would
this leave the TIF District?
The Public Works Director clarified that the stormwater study for the Southside would assist
with W. Railroad. We need to address stormwater first. The City should have that report by
September 1'.
12. CARES Funds Appropriations
CARES Funds were initially expended out of the General Fund. So they can be used for anything
that General Fund pays for. Most of the CARES reimbursement was from the pay, including
overtime, for Fire, Police, and Ambulance. COVID-related expenses were also reimbursed. Not
able to use for Street Maintenance. Streets are the hardest thing to fund. The only thing we can
use is street maintenance.
The City used CARES funds on purchasing some equipment for Fire, Police, and Ambulance.
The City received just under 1.1 million in CARES funds.
13. Qualifications for Elected Office
Juliane Lore, 709 Roundhouse Drive. I have a small legal practice. I am the town attorney for
Joliet. I serve as the prosecutor here in Laurel. It is an honor.
My request is to modify Laurel ordinance 2.68.090 and establish qualifications for the position of
city Court Judge. Amend the ordinance with referral to the MCA qualifications for a Municipal
Court Judge , requiring a legal education and experience. This step is a precursor to a
predecessor taking bench with those qualifications, at which point I will request a vote to
establish Laurel City Court as a full municipal Court. It is a two-step process, and I believe that
this can be done on the same budget by restructuring case management and resources. The salary
is the same whether the person serving on the bench has full qualifications or not. We can
comply with the State requirement for a Municipal Court at 10,000 in population. We are
approaching that if we haven't already, add small claims, add warrants for our officers for
misdemeanor investigations. We can eliminate trial de novo and ensure there are qualified
candidates going forward. Right now, the qualifications to take the bench are extremely minimal,
and the City has grown into a municipal Court. This is the time to be proactive in this
restructuring.
Speaking first as to why we need qualifications, then why we need a Municipal Court which will
require them - the Current code, or all three of them, defining qualifications in our Court, starts
with MCA 3-11-202, provided with handouts. State city Court Judge qualifications are just to
meet state Justice of Peace standards, be a resident of the County, and town ordinance can add
further requirements. Justice of Peace qualifications referred to, MCA 3-10-204, are just live in
the County for a year.
Referring then to the "further" Laurel ordinance 2.68.090, this only adds language requiring the
two-week Justice of Peace/non-attorney city Judge orientation course, which is already required
under the MCA when one of those gets elected and refers to residency in the City of Laurel
analogous to mayoral requirements. The ordinance only refers to the mayoral residency. The rest
of the Mayor's office requirements that don't apply to the Judge are to have reached the age of
21 and be a qualified elector. Qualified elector refers to article IV, Section 2 of the Montana
constitution, requiring US citizenship and at least 18 years of age.
Currently, by our local ordinance, even that standard doesn't apply to the Judge —only Laurel
residency. A 17 -year-old could take the bench—a non -citizen. A non-English speaker
potentially. Some of the other things that aren't here are concerning; there is no criminal history
exclusion in or code, or even disclosure. A felon could take the bench. There is no moral or
character standard, and a disbarred attorney could be our Judge . These are hypotheticals, but
what we've got now is that thin. Those are possible, and if a substandard candidate files in an
uncontested race, they may be elected and sit on the bench.
The change requested will require being a Montana lawyer in good standing for three years, and
the MCA also requires Yellowstone County residency. That widens residency back up to state
Justice of Peace or City or District Court rule. Laurel may not want to open it up that much; it is
important to consider at least adding the greater Laurel metro area, though, and include all the
county pockets within the City. There's a few arguments for opening it up to County, though.
Deep knowledge of the Laurel community, a lot, from living exclusively within the finite city
proper area for a long time, is critical for the Mayor role, for the council members. But I'd argue
the ability to be impartial – and we're all human, not having too much knowledge about everyone
in the community and all of their relatives, and all of their choices - that helps with that
separation - that's important for the bench. What's critical for the person presiding over the Court
is knowledge of legal practice from experience. Everyone they're dealing with is a lawyer. There
is an imbalance both in actual knowledge and in perception when everyone in the room is an
attorney except the criminal defendant and our Judge. The City needs a level playing field.
With that change expanding residency to County — there will be more qualified candidates going
forward for the City, and we must take the right steps for the Court for years to come. As Laurel
grows, physical boundaries with annexations and new developments, this will be less of a
problem, but right now, a qualified attorney who buys a nice home on Ridge Drive can't serve
the City. If they walk 200 ft to the Crossings and rent the duplex next to mine on Roundhouse,
they're qualified. If they walk down the hill to the trailer park, they may serve. But the Laurel
greater metro area is currently excluded. No other candidate has filed to run for the bench for 25
years, and I believe this may be a factor that prevents us from fielding qualified candidates.
No matter what happens this election, the current Judge won't serve forever — we need to look to
the future. There has to be a qualified candidate ready to follow who is able to serve a Municipal
Court because that will be forced on us eventually if we don't get ahead of it now. The MCA rule
also requires three years of practice, and this is important to reflect in the amended statute. A
degree of maturity and humility is important in this role.
Municipal Court code will also impose qualifications on any pro tem who sit on the bench, or
substitute Judge s, currently no requirements for that position, including residency. This has
created two kinds of problems related to judicial standards of impartiality that can't be met if a
Court clerk is filling in and ethical problems when a suspended or disbarred attorney is filling in.
Municipal Court compliance with MCA fills those holes - only a similarly qualified substitute
Judge be appointed to serve, and they could be retired, they could be from the County. They
must be in good standing.
So this proposal is to require qualifications for the bench beyond residency in Laurel, requiring a
legal education and a bar card. Modify the Laurel code and refer to or replace it with MCA 3-6-
202. Make this effective at the expiration of the current term, and then vote to elevate the Court
to a municipal Court.
Why do we need a municipal Court, and what that would then give us -first, we don't have a
choice. The State dictates, at a certain population level, that a city's Court must be elevated to
one of record. Right now, we are a Court of no record. This will happen by order from Helena at
a certain point related to the census if we don't do it ourselves. Laurel is currently in a second-tier
municipality under MCA 1.202, municipal classification. We have a population between 5000-
9999. At 10,000, we become first class. We can elect to elevate the Court to the municipal status
now; it is absolutely required at tier 1.
MCA 1.203 says unless a city or town undertakes its own direct enumeration of inhabitants, the
basis for classification is the most recent federal census. When that census indicates to the state
that a population has sufficiently increased, the town council must, by resolution, change the
classification and file that with the County and secretary of State. Laurel may, by City Council
resolution, elevate the Court to a first-tier Municipal Court at this time. If it's not done
voluntarily, it will be mandated from Helena. That order will come.
We may not be quite over 10,000 in April when the last census results are released – by the next
census, we're likely to be well over that number. This should be something we monitor ourselves
and make the change when we're ready. When it's needed, and we're prepared. We should meet
this now. If we're over 10k in April and required to change the Court to a municipal Court, and
there's not a qualified candidate currently sitting on the bench, this will present a problem. I don't
think this is something to undertake midterm.
Right now, we are approaching the end of the term of the current Judge, and this is the right time
to propose a change that will change qualifications for that position. This isn't something to do
mid-term. It's not something to do on a state -mandated timeline; it is something to do
proactively.
As a municipal Court or even a city Court with a bar card on the bench, we would still be a Court
of limited jurisdiction, meaning that felony matters go up to district Court. But it would eliminate
trial de novo for any misdemeanor conviction. The first great thing a Municipal Court would
give us from my office's view.
If we make a Court of record, there is no more automatic appeal to a District Court Judge . Trial
de novo is for no reason; there was no fault in the case or conviction - bad guys convicted in
Laurel just get an automatic do -over with someone with a legal education who's passed a bar
exam. That's MCA 25-33-301. They get one jury trial only is the rule, so that gets played too.
They'll take a bench trial in Laurel, pick a Billings jury for their do -over trial – they can avoid a
Laurel jury because we're a Court of no record. A plea agreement is binding here – a conviction
is not, because we are a Court of no record, under the trial de novo rule.
The first bench trial I watched here, shadowing my predecessor before my first day on duty, was
my first appeal de novo, right out of the gate. That's a tough use of resources and disheartening,
knowing – we don't have teeth. Good guys consent to the judgment of their peers, which is what
a city Judge is, an elected peer - bad guys often don't. That worked with a much lower
population when a community remains more closely knit, and there's a sense of mutual
responsibility. We have a lot of bad guys just coming in from Billings now, though.
Trial de novo is expensive for everybody; they get a new Billings public defender—a new
investigation. I try to do the extra work on my own time; this contract is a flat fee – but the
punishment for winning cuts the time available for regular duties, and District Court is often
scheduled on days where there are hearings here. Worse than this impact is that on the police
officers, they all get to do this twice too, and their time is more valuable than mine.
Usually, there are multiple officers on one case. They're out of the City of Laurel for a half a day
to attend an appeal in Billings, and I believe there's higher pay earned for appearing on a day off.
Ultimately with a caseload as big as ours, it can't be done – it changes how cases can be
prosecuted with limited resources. If you have to plan on doing everything twice, over a period
of maybe years, you have to choose your battles. Municipal Court of record convictions stick.
Your city prosecutor doesn't have to offer plea agreements to be binding. The threat of
conviction becomes effective. Now there's a transcript, and as long as there's no error,
convictions just stick the first time, and a bigger docket load can be accommodated as a result,
and Laurel residents are only tried, and fairly tried, by Laurel juries.
This change to Municipal Court status with a qualified Judge would also contribute to
uniformity and professionalism so practitioners may work efficiently in this Court as in other
Montana Courts, provide more candidates for future elections, and decrease the turnover in
practitioners. I believe I'm the eleventh prosecutor in this position in the past ten years. In the last
two years, I have seen three assigned public defenders rotate through. I know many defense
attorneys who won't take cases here. We need to better with efficiency and professionalism. The
contract prosecutor budget, and judicial budget, and public defender budget —they're state, but
we're still paying for them with taxes - are badly impacted by constant transitions.
So part of that issue and this request dovetails with judicial and Court efficiency — the MCA
Municipal Court code would make this a four-year term, not two. I think this could be modified
by local ordinance, but something to consider — taking the bench is a part-time job. It's a part-
time paycheck, it's well under the state median income, and any practitioner needs to structure
their practice around this to make ends meet. That transition takes time and is hard on a practice,
on a family. As the Court grows, want to be sure the Court has a good pool of qualified
candidates for this important job, and security of a four-year term will make it more viable and
attractive. The transition between judicial terms — even if they're both attorneys — is always
tough, and we have a big caseload to transition, in addition to all of the other judicial functions
where a new Judge has to hit the ground running. The City shouldn't have to go through this
more than every four years. Increasing the term after it is elevated to a Municipal Court would
help provide increased stability. It may also cut the City election expenses for the bench. The
City pays the same salary to this position, whether it's a person who limits Court services with a
lack of qualifications or not.
The biggest impact from this proposal benefitting our police department may be warrants. A
qualified Judge in a Court of record could issue misdemeanor warrants for the Laurel police
department. Without legal education and qualifications of an attorney, a Judge can't issue a
warrant for probable cause. Our guys in blue can get warrants from a District Court Judge in
Billings for DUI blood draws and for felony matters they're investigating — misdemeanors fall in
the cracks right now. This will be less of a problem soon, now that there's been some state
changes in the marijuana laws, but it's a tool that our guys need. Right now, the Laurel Judge
can't issue warrants. You need a bar card to do this.
Only a Judge who has all of the qualifications of a District Court Judge — a legal education, a
bar card, and years of experience — can write a warrant for probable cause for a misdemeanor
investigation. Some reasoning behind that is first the do -over in district Court, that trial de novo.
A warrant by a person not qualified to write one will get tossed immediately whether there was
probable cause or not. This actually doesn't happen that often — but a misdemeanor investigation
that turns up evidence of a felony is something that happens a lot. Then that warrant needs to be
rock solid, and it's being tried the first time in district Court.
Currently, if a suspect refuses a DUI test, our officers can get a warrant for a blood draw from
District Court. If they have evidence of a felony crime, probable cause for a felony — they can get
a warrant. They can't call the District Court Judge for every misdemeanor investigation, though;
no Court can allocate the resources for that. No one person can handle sitting on the bench and
issuing warrants at any hour for both felony cases in District Court and all the misdemeanor
cases in every township and City where there's not a qualified Judge. There needs to be a
separation, and there is, or can be for us now; we're big enough. District Court Judge s issue
felony warrants. Our own Court, even if it's not yet elevated to a Municipal Court of record, our
own Court could issue misdemeanor warrants for our officers if the Judge has a bar card.
Talking to the officers, I think this was more crippling historically because marijuana was a
misdemeanor crime. The plain -view exceptions allowing search and seizure have, and continue,
to evolve against us. Even what you see with your own eyes, or "plain view," often requires a
warrant to investigate. That trend continues. Officers knew that those misdemeanor
investigations would often yield evidence of a felony occurring — but without evidence of the
felony and no ability to look for it despite the visible misdemeanor apparent, there was no way to
move forward at all. There could be no further action in that situation.
Now with the change in marijuana laws, this situation won't occur, and our new K9 officer helps
a huge amount with what become felony drug investigations now, filling that misdemeanor hole
in the kind of case where the officers were stopped and blind before. But there are other
misdemeanor investigations that come up and require further actions — for instance, theft
investigations. We have a lot of petty theft investigations and a range of sophistication in crime
from mailbox theft to check fraud schemes, and almost all these are misdemeanor crimes. The
officers need this tool. The bad guys all know that LPD can't get a warrant for a misdemeanor,
just like they know the jail is full. We're always playing a chasing game, and the real trouble is
usually a half step ahead. Good people and innocent people tend to consent to search. It excludes
them, tends to prove their innocence. Warrants for bad guys are the problem. Changing the bench
qualifications to the MCA alone, without elevating the Court, with the same resources as we
have now, would give our guys that important tool.
To summarize this request, it is a proposal to change the qualifications for the bench in the
Laurel City ordinance to reflect those of the MCA Municipal Court Judge and make this
effective next term. Then we may elevate to Municipal Court by Council vote. We're ahead of
Helena making us do it then; the Court is compliant with the City's first-tier status. We ensure
there's candidates in the future who can meet the City's needs, issue warrants, hear small claims,
meet our growing needs cost-effectively, and we achieve stability. We achieve a first-class
Court.
Council President Eaton requested follow-up on the 20th and submissions of proposed
ordinances for Council review on the 14th.
Council Member Sparks seconded and requested the next presentation be set earlier potentially
to allocate greater time for review and questions.
Mayor Nelson requested a statement from the Laurel Police Department next workshop on how
these changes would help them and any pros or cons.
Stan Langve, Police Chief, stated the main influence from the proposal is reflected in historical
city Court warrants that weren't recognized in higher Courts. A further advantage of a Municipal
Court is the same legal standing as a justice Court in that it could provide initial arraignment for
all felonies, as well as issue misdemeanor warrants. He is researching how and when this plays
procedurally into whether they want to spend the time getting a misdemeanor warrant and will
make a brief presentation.
The three ordinance proposals I will prepare are one which adopts the MCA, and two which refer
to the MCA with further modifications under Laurel ordinance; the variables proposed being a
four-year term and county residency.
Other Items
Review of Draft Council Agendas
14. Draft Council Agenda for July 13, 2021.
Mayor Nelson stated he would be absent from next week's City Council meeting. Council
President Eaton will run the meeting.
Attendance at Upcoming Council Meeting
Council Member Wilke apologized for being out of town the last two weeks.
Announcements
15. Employee Recognition
Mayor Nelson recognized Employees for their years of service.
Council requested an update on the money they have received from the Exxon settlement.
Council requested an update on when the campground will be open.
Council noted that the lease law signs in Riverside Park are gone.
Council noted that on Friday, there was a flyover with a drone for a news station. The flyover
was well produced and showcased our City in a positive light.
Mayor Nelson stated the City would be sending out a flyer soon. It will include the projects the
City is currently working on and plan on doing soon. Updates from each Department Head will
also be included.
Mayor Nelson briefly reviewed the attached report from the Fire Department on their call
volume for the 41" of July.
The council workshop adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
submitted,
��A *tl� -
Britmey Moos
Administrative
NOTE: This meeting is open to the public. This meeting is for information and discussion of the Council for
the listed workshop agenda items.
LAUREL FIRE
215 WEST 1 ST STREET • LAUREL, MT • 59044
OFFICE 406.628.4911 • Fax 406.628.2185
Laurel City Council June 25, 2021
Re: Type 5 Wildland (brush) Truck
Laurel City Council,
A Sealed Open Bid Prosses was completed on June 25, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. in the City
Hall conference room. Those that were present was Council Secretary Brittney
Moorman, City Clerk/ Treasurer Bethany Langve, and Fire Chief Brent Peters.
The bid advertisement was posted on the City of Laurel website and in the
Yellowstone County News newspaper beginning Friday June 11, 2021, and again
June 181, 2021. Sealed Open Bids deadline was June 25, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.
The major specifications are for a new Type 5 wildland truck.
o Ford F-550 super cab 4x4 with a 7.3 -liter gas engine; red in color.
0 500 -gallon water tank with injected foam capabilities; 18- 24 hp pump; hose
reels and bumper turret.
o LED 360 -degree emergency lighting.
o Storage for tools, supplies and equipment.
During the sealed bid opening one bid was presented. The bid received was from
Midwest Fire in Luverne, Minnesota. The build price is for the amount of
$190,586.00. This bid met and exceeded all the requirements in the advertised bid
documents.
It is my request and recommendation that we proceed awarding Midwest Fire the
contract to build the Type 5 Wildland truck according to the specifications
presented in the bid for the City of Laurel and the Laurel Volunteer Fire Department.
This truck will replace a 1987 Ford 1 ton Brush Truck and will be a great addition to
fire operations not only in the City of Laurel but the surrounding contracted district.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Brent S. Peters
Fire Chief, Laurel Fire Department
LURA Large Grants 2021 Funding Avail:
Laurel Urban Renewal Agency
Large Grant Requests Program
Purpose:
The purpose of this program is to provide financial assistance for developers, property owners and business owners
above and beyond the capacity of the Facade and Technical Assistance Grant programs. This program is intended to
work cohesively with the current grant funding opportunities in place by the Agency. Applicants who have been
awarded Facade or Technical Assistance funds are encouraged to apply for funding through this program if the project
exceeds the funding capacity of those programs. Projects that are not eligible for funding through Facade and Technical
Assistance are also encouraged to utilize this program so long as the project is allowable under Montana Code
Annotated 7-15-4288 and MCA 7-15-4233.
Projects seeking large grants should align with the goals LURA is committed to carrying out. These goals are outlined in
the Laurel Urban Renewal Plan:
1. Encourage an economically and culturally vibrant downtown.
2. Create a vibrant and cohesive extension of the core downtown Laurel area.
3. Improve traffic patterns to further enhance the business experience for the owner and consumer.
4. Create a destination place where people will want to repeatedly visit.
5. Have state of the art, updated utilities and infrastructure.
6. Encourage more housing and business choices within the district.
7. Have rational consideration of all neighborhoods and sites for public fund expenditures.
Eligible Projects:
Land Acquisition
Demolition or Removal of
Relocation of Occupants within
Structures
the District
Improvements of Public
Acquisition of Infrastructure
Assemblage of Land for
Infrastructure
Deficient Areas
Development of Redevelopment
Compilation and Analysis of
Connection of URA to Existing
Improvements Reducing,
Pertinent Information to
Infrastructure Outside the Area
Preventing, Abating or
Determine Needs of District
or District
Elimination Pollution.
Others as Allowable by MCA 7-15-4233 Please Describe:
'7128/2019 7-15-0288. Costs that may be paid by tax increment financing, MCA
MCA Contents / TITLE 7 / CHAPTER 15 / Part 42 / 7-154288 Costs that m...
Montana Code Annotated 2017
TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER 15. HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION
Part 42. Urban Renewal
Costs That May Be Paid By Tax
Financing
Increment
7-15.4288. Costs that may be paid by tax increment financing. The tax increments may be used by the
local government to pay the following costs of or incurred in connection with an urban renewal area or targeted
economic development district as identified in the urban renewal plan or targeted economic development district
comprehensive development plan:
(1) land acquisition;
(2) demolition and removal of structures;
(3) relocation of occupants;
(4) the acquisition, construction, and improvement of public improvements or infrastructure, including
streets, roads, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, pedestrian malls, alleys, parking lots and offstreet parking facilities,
sewers, sewer lines, sewage treatment facilities, storm sewers, waterlines, waterways, water treatment facilities,
natural gas lines, electrical lines, telecommunications lines, rail lines, rail spurs, bridges, publicly owned
buildings, and any public improvements authorized by Title 7, chapter 12, parts 41 through 45; Title 7, chapter
13, parts 42 and 43; and Title 7, chapter 14, part 47, and items of personal property to be used in connection with
improvements for which the foregoing costs may be incurred;
(5) costs incurred in connection with the redevelopment activities allowed under 7-15-4233;
(6) acquisition of infrastructure -deficient areas or portions of areas;
(7) administrative costs associated with the management of the urban renewal area or targeted economic
development district;
(8) , assemblage of land for development or redevelopment by private enterprise or public agencies, including
sale, initial leasing, or retention by the local government itself at its fair value;
(9) the compilation and analysis of pertinent information required to adequately determine the needs of the
urban renewal area or targeted economic development district;
(10) the connection of the urban renewal area or targeted economic development district to existing
infrastructure outside the area or district;
(11) the provision of direct assistance to secondary value -adding industries to assist in meeting their
infrastructure and land needs within the area or district; and
(12) the acquisition, construction, or improvement of facilities or equipment for reducing, preventing, abating,
or eliminating pollution.
https:Hleg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0070/chapter_0l 50/part_0420/section_0880/0070-0150-0420-0880.html 1/2
'1/6/2021 7-15-4233. Powers which may be exercised by urban renewal agency or authorized department, MCA
MCA Contents / TITLE 7 / CHAPTER 15 / Part 42 / 7-15-4233 Powers whic...
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER 15. HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION
Part 42. Urban Renewal
Powers Which May Be Exercised By Urban
Renewal Agency Or Authorized Department
7-15-4233. Powers which may be exercised by urban renewal agency or authorized department. (1) In
the event the local governing body makes such determination, such body may authorize the urban renewal
agency or department or other officers of the municipality to exercise any of the following urban renewal project
powers:
(a) to formulate and coordinate a workable program as specified in 7-15-4209;
(b) to prepare urban renewal plans;
(c) to prepare recommended modifications to an urban renewal project plan;
(d) to undertake and carry out urban renewal projects as required by the local governing body;
(e) to make and execute contracts as specified in 7-15-4251, 7-15-4254, 7-15-4255, and 7-15-4281, with the
exception of contracts for the purchase or sale of real or personal property;
(f) to disseminate blight clearance and urban renewal information;
(g) to exercise the powers prescribed by 7-15-4255, except the power to agree to conditions for federal
financial assistance and imposed pursuant to federal law relating to salaries and wages shall be reserved to the
local governing body;
(h) to enter any building or property in any urban renewal area in order to make surveys and appraisals in
the manner specified in 7-15-4257;
(i) to improve, clear, or prepare for redevelopment any real or personal property in an urban renewal area;
Q) to insure real or personal property as provided in 7-15-4258;
(k) to effectuate the plans provided for in 7-15-4254;
(1) to prepare plans for the relocation of families displaced from an urban renewal area and to coordinate
public and private agencies in such relocation;
(m) to prepare plans for carrying out a program of voluntary or compulsory repair and rehabilitation of
buildings and improvements;
(n) to conduct appraisals, title searches, surveys, studies, and other preliminary plans and work necessary
to prepare for the undertaking of urban renewal projects;
(o) to negotiate for the acquisition of land;
(p) to study the closing, vacating, planning, or replanning of streets, roads, sidewalks, ways, or other places
and to make recommendations with respect thereto;
https:Hleg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_00701chapter_0150/part_04201section_0330/0070-0150-0420-0330.htm] 1/2
7/6/2021 7-15-0233. Powers which may be exercised by urban renewal agency or authorized department, MCA
(q) to organize, coordinate, and direct the administration of the provisions of this part and part 43;
(r) to perform such duties as the local governing body may direct so as to make the necessary arrangements
for the exercise of the powers and performance of the duties and responsibilities entrusted to the local governing
body.
(2) Any powers granted in this part or part 43 that are not included in subsection (1) as powers of the urban
renewal agency or a department or other officers of a municipality in lieu thereof may only be exercised by the
local governing body or other officers, boards, and commissions as provided under existing law.
History: En. Sec. 15, Ch. 195, L. 1959; R.C.M. 1947, 11-3915(b).
Created by LAWS
https:llleg.mt.govlbillslmca/title_00701chapter_0150/part_04201section_0330/0070-0150-0420-0330.htmi 2/2
LAUREL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT & FINDINGS OF FACT
TO: Laurel City -County Planning Board
FROM: Nicholas Altonaga, Planning Director
RE: Planned Unit Development — Bitterroot Grove Townhomes
DATE: June 24, 2021
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
A Planned Unit Development application and supplemental was submitted by Forrest
Mandeville of Forrest Mandeville Consulting and Engineering West on behalf of Darrel Dyer for
the parcels at 1304 E. 8'h Street, between Fir and Juniper Avenues. The Applicant has proposed
the Bitterroot Grove Townhomes, a 60 -unit Planned Unit Development with age -restricted
units for those 55 and older. This PUD application also includes a request for annexation and a
variance. The Application contains all the necessary components of the PUD, Variance, and
Annexation applications. The property is currently owned by Elvira and James Cotter, with
purchasing agreements in place. The property currently has a great deal of personal property,
debris, and materials on site and is an overgrown state.
Owner: James Cotter, Elvira Cotter
Legal Description: NUTTING BROS SUBD, S10, T02 S, R24 E, BLOCK 6, Lots 1 - 12, BLOCK 6,
Lots 1- 12
Subdivision size: 4.68 Acres
Existing Land Use: Residential, Vacant
Proposed Land Use: Residential Planned Unit Development
1. A pre -application meeting for the Planned Unit Development took place on June 23,
2020 between the Applicant, their engineers, and City Staff.
2. The Application for the Planned Unit Development, Annexation, and Variance and their
supporting documentation was submitted on March 15, 2021.
3. The City Staff Design Conference took place on April 27, 2021.
4. The Planning Director transmitted a letter of findings to the Applicant and their
developer on May 7, 2021.
5. The Applicant and their developer resubmitted documents to the Planning Department
on May 17, 2021.
6. The Planning Board held a public hearing on the proposed Planned Unit Development,
Annexation, and Variance applications on May 19, 2021.
7. The Planning Director worked with the Applicant and their contractor to update the
Annexation Agreement and HOA Bylaws as discussed at the May 191h meeting.
8. The Planning Board has scheduled a second public hearing on the proposed Planned
Unit Development, Annexation, and Variance applications for June 16, 2021.
9. The Planning Board lacked a quorum at the scheduled public hearing on June 16, 2021.
10. The Planning Director forwarded the materials and documentation for the Bitterroot
Grove Townhomes Annexation, Variance, and Planned Unit Development to the City
Council on June 25, 2021.
11. The City Council has scheduled a subsequent public hearing on the proposed Planned
Unit Development, Annexation, and Variance applications to approve, approve with
conditions, or deny the requests on July 13, 2021.
1. The Application for PUD, Annexation, and Variance contain all the necessary items.
2. Annexation has been requested to hook the property into the municipal water and
wastewater system, as well as garbage pick-up.
3. A variance has been sought for the minimum size requirements of a Planned Unit
Development stated in the Laurel Municipal Code.
a. Laurel Municipal Code requires a minimum of 5 acres for a PUD
b. The proposed PUD is 4.68 acres.
4. The Applicant has proposed private interior streets with gated entrances.
5. Gated entrances shall be accessible by all Laurel EMS, Fire, and Police departments, as
well as code enforcement and public works where necessary.
6. The Applicant has proposed private internal water and sewer connections.
7. The Applicant has proposed a water meter building, to manage the interior water
system of the development.
8. The proposed project would improve a largely vacant, blighted lot with a dense
residential development.
9. The application includes bylaws for a townhouse association to manage the property.
10. The subsequent submittal of documents on May 17 included a landscaping plan and
weed management plan.
11. An Annexation Agreement was provided with the application which specifies adjacent
public improvements, development standards, and other requirements for annexation
into the City of Laurel.
PLANNING BOARD AND GOVERNING BODY REVIEW CRITERIA
LMC 17.32.020 — Review and Approval, Part D states:
"Within thirty days after the design conference, the application shall be reviewed by the city -
county planning board and recommendations cased on the comments from the design
conference and the criteria contained in the subdivision regulations shall be forwarded to the
zoning commission. The comments from the design conference shall be forwarded to the
planning board, zoning commission and developer within five working days after the
conference."
The Planning Director Recommends approval of the Planned Unit Development for the
Bitterroot Grove Townhomes with the following conditions of approval:
1. The Property shall be cleared of personal property, debris, and refuse prior to
annexation, variance, and PUD approval.
2. The Property shall be brought up to city standards prior to annexation, variance, and
PUD approval.
3. Landscaping plan and maintenance schedule and/or information shall be sufficiently
detailed for City Departments to enforce nuisance codes and other ordinances.
4. The proposed Water system shall be approved by the contracted city engineer, KU
Inc.
5. The proposed Water system shall meet all Montana DEQ and City Standards.
6. The proposed Wastewater system shall be approved by the contracted city engineer,
KU Inc.
7. Weed Management Plan shall be completed and approved by the Yellowstone
County Weed District.
8. Annexation Agreement shall be updated with specific changes noted by the Planning
Department.
9. Bylaws for the Bitterroot Grove Townhome Association shall be updated with the
specific changes noted by the Planning Department.
10. The Owner/developer shall apply for all necessary and applicable city permits.
11. The Owner/developer and the City shall establish a satisfactory solution for the
public alleyways within project boundary.
1. PUD Written Statement
2. Annexation Application
3. Annexation Agreement (updated)
4. Waiver of Right to Protest (updated)
5. Variance Application and Request Letter
6. PUD Layout/Design
7. PUD Landscaping Plan
8. Bylaws of Bitterroot Grove Townhomes Association (updated)
9. Images of proposed townhome design
10. Planner Letter to the Applicant (dated 5/17/2021)
11. Comments from Ryan Welsh, Engineer at KU, on proposed Water/Sewer expansion (dated June
8, 2021)
16.15 MINIMUM DIAMETER OF WATER SERVICE LINES
The minimum diameter of water service lines to be installed to serve any property shall be'/.
inch and the minimum diameter of firelines shall be 1'% inch. Water service lines shall be
installed with a minimum number of joints and be of uniform diameter from the public water main
in the public right-of-way to the municipal water meter. Firelines shall be of uniform diameter
from the public water main in the public right-of-way to the property line of the property to be
served. In any case, the diameter of water service lines and firelines shall be subject to the
approval of the Public Works Director and shall be based on the criteria stated in Appendix A of
the Uniform Plumbing Code.
16.16 SIZE AND SLOPE OF SEWER SERVICES
The size and slope of the wastewater service lines shall be subject to the approval of the City
but in no event shall the diameter be less than 4 inches. The slope of the wastewater service
line shall not be less 2 percent.
16.17 DEPTH OF WATER LINES
To prevent freezing, water service lines, firelines, or combinations thereof shall be laid 6
feet below the street surface or top of grade. Where existing conditions do not allow minimum
cover requirements, engineered insulation may be placed above the waterline to prevent
freezing.
16.18 DEPTH OF SEWER SERVICES
Whenever possible, the building sewer shall be brought to the building at an elevation
below the basement floor. No building sewer shall be laid parallel to within 3 feet of a weight
bearing wall. In all buildings in which any building drain is too low to permit gravity flow to the
public sanitary sewer, wastewater carried by drain shall be lifted by an approved means and
discharged to the building sewer. Persons installing basements with floor drains should contact
the Public Works Department for information concerning the depth of the public sanitary sewer
prior to commencing construction of such basements. In addition, it is recommended that users
install, as well as periodically inspect and maintain, a one-way valve in their building drain for
the purpose of preventing the backing -up of wastewater into their buildings in the event a
stoppage occurs in the building sewer and/or the public sanitary sewer serving the user's
property.
16.19 MATERIALS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
The materials and methods of construction used in the installation of water and wastewater
service lines, firelines, and appurtenances, their connection with the public water main or
sanitary sewer; and the repair, alteration, or extension of such facilities shall all conform to the
requirements of the MPWSS. In addition, all joints and connections of the water service line or
fireline, including their connection with the public water main, shall be watertight and sustain a
pressure of not less than 200 pounds. All joints and connections of the wastewater service line
must be gas tight and watertight. Traffic control and construction signing trench excavation,
backfilling, compaction, and surface restoration shall all comply with the requirements of the
MPWSS and the agency having jurisdiction and control over the rights-of-way and utility
easements affected by such work.
W.'10703\01 0\2_ 2003Revislons\Rules_Reg 2_03.d0c
March 15, 1999 Revised: 2/03
7/6/2(,21
69-4-501. Definitions, MCA
MCA Contents / TITLE 69 / CHAPTER 4 / Part 5 / 69-4-501 Definitions
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 69. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND CARRIERS
CHAPTER 4. UTILITY LINES AND FACILITIES
Part 5. Excavations Near Underground Facilities
Definitions
69-4-501. Definitions. The following definitions apply to this part:
(1) "Agricultural locate request" means a request for a locate and mark that is requested based on the
perimeter boundary of an agricultural field:
(a) by a property owner or excavator prior to agricultural activity; or
(b) by a property owner or excavator prior to conducting soil probing or testing.
(2) (a) "Business day" means any day beginning at midnight and ending 24 hours later, other than Saturday,
Sunday, New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day.
(b) When a holiday listed in subsection (2)(a) occurs on a Saturday, the preceding Friday is not considered a
business day. When a holiday listed in subsection (2)(a) occurs on a Sunday, the following Monday is not
considered a business day.
(3) "Civil penalty" means a penalty levied by the department in accordance with 69-4-524 and 69-4-525.
(4) "Council" means the underground facility protection advisory council provided for in 69-4-520.
(5) "Damage" or "damages" means any impact upon or removal of support from an underground facility as a
result of excavation or demolition that, according to the operating practices of the underground facility owner,
would necessitate the repair of the facility.
(6) "Department" means the department of labor and industry provided for in 2-15-1701.
(7) "Designated service area" means a geographic area defined using state and county boundaries or
further defined by the members of a notification center in operation on July 1, 2017. There may not be more than
two designated service areas in Montana.
(8) "Emergency excavation" means an excavation in response to an emergency locate request that is
necessary to:
(a) alleviate a condition that constitutes a clear and present danger to life or property; or
(b) repair a customer outage involving a previously installed utility -owned facility.
(9) "Emergency locate request" means a request for a locate and mark that is requested for:
(a) a condition that constitutes a clear and present danger to life or property; or
(b) a customer outage for which repairs on a previously installed utility -owned facility are required.
(10) "Engineering locate request" means a request for a locate and mark to identify underground facilities for
planning and design purposes.
haps://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0690/chapter_0040/part_0050/section_0010/0690-0040-0050-0010.html 1/4
7/6/4021
69-4-501. Definitions, MCA
(20) "Notification center" means an entity whose membership is open to and is contracting with underground
facility owners with underground facilities within a notification center's designated service area.
(21) "Notify", "notice", or "notification" means the completed delivery of information to a person. The delivery
of information includes but is not limited to the use of electronic data transfer.
(22) "Outgoing locate request" means an electronic or other document transmitted from a notification center
to all member underground facility owners affected by a request for a locate.
(23) "Person" means an individual, partnership, firm, joint venture, corporation, association, municipality,
governmental unit, department, or agency and includes a trustee, receiver, assignee, or personal representative
of the listed entities.
(24) 'Positive response" means notification through an electronic system provided by a notification center that
is available to underground facility owners and excavators and is used for communicating and documenting the
status of a request for a locate.
(25) 'Property owner" means a person owning real property in Montana, its agents, and employees. The term
does not include the owner of an easement.
(26) "Reasonably accurate" means location within 18 inches of the outside lateral dimensions of both sides of
an underground facility.
(27) "Request for a locate" means the process by which an excavator communicates with a notification center
a request for underground facilities to be located and marked in an area where an excavation is planned. A
request for a locate that is not an agricultural locate request and is not within city limits or within an area of an
authority as defined in 75-6-304 may not exceed 2 miles long by 1,000 feet wide. A request for a locate that is
not an agricultural locate request and is within city limits or within an area of an authority as defined in 75-6-304
may not exceed 2,000 feet long by 300 feet wide.
(28) "Third party" means a person who is not an excavator or an underground facility owner.
(29) (a) "Underground facility" means a facility buried or placed below ground for use in connection with the
storage or conveyance of water, sewage, electronic, telephonic or telegraphic communications, cablevision, fiber
optics, electrical energy, oil, gas, or other substances. The term includes but is not limited to pipes, sewers,
conduits, cables, valves, lines, wires, manholes, and attachments to the listed items.
(b) The term does not include:
(i) shallow underground water systems designed to irrigate lawns, gardens, or other landscaping;
(ii) privately owned water and sewer lines from private property extending into public rights-of-way to
interconnect with public water and sewer; or
(iii) an underground facility used solely to furnish services or commodities to real property, if no part of the
underground facility is located in a public street, alley, or right-of-way dedicated to the public use.
(30) "Underground facility owner" means a person owning, controlling, or having the responsibility to maintain
an underground facility.
History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 180, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 32-4801; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 286, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 1,
Ch. 179, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 61, Ch. 7, L. 2001; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 544, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 326, L.
2017.
hUps://Ieg.mt.gov/biiis/mca/title_0690/chapter_0040/part_0050/section_0010/0690-0040-0050-0010.html 3/4
> ARPA provides $350 BILLION dollars in emergency funding for
state, local, territorial and Tribal governments to address
immediate pandemic recovery needs and remedy the
mismatch between rising costs and falling revenues.
> $195 BILLION for states;
> $130 BILLION for local governments
> $20 BILLION for Tribal governments; and
> $4.5 BILLION for territories <<KLI
ENGINEERING, REIMAGINED
> Counties
> Cities
> Non -Entitlement Units (Local Governments serving a
population of under
50,000
people) -Every
community in
Montana except for
Billings,
Missoula
and
Great Falls
,�KLJ
ENGINEERING, REIMAGINED
> Support urgent COVID-19 response efforts to continue to decrease spread of
the virus and bring the pandemic under control
> Replace lost revenue for eligible state, local, territorial, and Tribal governments
to strengthen support for vital public services and help retain jobs.
> Support immediate economic stabilization for households and businesses.
> Address systematic public health and economic challenges that have
contributed to the inequal impact of the pandemic
> Flexibility for each government to meet local needs, including support for
households, small businesses, impacted industries, essential workers, and
communities hardest hit by the crisis. THESE FUNDS CAN ALSO BE USED TO
MAKE NECESSARY INVESTMENTS IN WATER, SEWER, AND BROADBAND
INFRASTRUCTURE
< KLI
ENGINEERING, REIMAGINED
U.S. Treasury
Local Fiscal Recovery Funds
�uisrtiN�
-
LCu 6 - bk&-i
State of Montana
Minimum Allocation Grants
$150 Million
Gas Tax Allocation
OAS ,-�)D�
State of Montana
Competitive Grant Program
$25 Million Max
> $459 million (Montana)
> $150 million (Minimum Allocation Grants) (Bucket B)
> $10 million (Regional Water) ($2 million each for 5 Districts)
> $43 million (Long Range Planning Bills -State Projects)
> $11.5 million (Administration of the funding -State Staff)
>Approximately $177 million remaining for competitive grants
(Bucket C)- Broken into 2 rounds of grants KL
ENGINEERING. REIMAGINED
Bucket A -Direct Local Fiscal Recovery Funds
> Direct allocation to Counties from Treasury
> Direct allocation to Cities from the State via Treasury
> National Association of Counties (NACO), US Treasury, and MT League of Cities
have portals to provide the information necessary to disburse payments
> NON-COMPETITIVE
> May be used for Water and Sewer but also for any of the previously identified
ARPA approved categories
> 2 Equal Disbursements -1n in June of 2021 and the 2nd June 2022
Lou�rk 1 -moi u_ -t �5 1 k'1 ZO 13$g (<KLI
ENGINEERING, REIMAGINED
Bucket B-HB632 Allocations from the State of Montana
> Direct Minimum Allocations to communities from the State allocation
> Amount calculated related to BARSAA (Gas Tax) allocation, population and travel miles
> REQUIRES A MATCH of 1:1 or 25 percent of the Direct Local Fiscal Recovery allocation
> Example: Miles City is receiving $2,000,866 in Direct Treasury Allocation (Bucket A).
> Their minimum allocation under HB632 is $1,531,937 (Bucket B).
> Their match requirement to access Bucket B funds is the lesser of 1:1 for Bucket B ($1,531,937) OR 25 percent of Bucket A
($2,000,866=$500,216.50)
> If you apply for multiple small projects, the 25 percent or 1:1 applies for each.
> NON-COMPETITIVE
> Must submit a plan to the State by January 1, 2023 and include commitment to the match required and a plan
for use.
> Only 1 minimum allocation grant per project but the community can apply for multiple minimum allocation
grants for multiple projects until the allocation total is spent.
> Bucket A (Direct Treasury Allocation) $$ may be used for the match for Minimum Allocation $$ (Bucket B).
Additional grants/loans may also be utilized.
1D�,
�u ��,�o0 ICL,
ENGINEERING, REIMAGINED
Bucket C-HB632 Competitive Grants
> Total Funding available estimated at approximately $250 million (broken Into 2 equal
distributions)
> The Advisory Commission is anticipated to "set aside" a portion of this money for state
water/sewer projects. This amount has not yet been determined (probably will be decided at the
6/28 advisory commission meeting)
> Grants for up to $25 million PER PROJECT
> Specific match is not required, but some match is required and will be considered in the
ranking/scoring. Higher match will score higher (ABPA dollars in buckets A & B may be used as
match as can other grants/loans)
> 15L Round Application due date is July 15, 2021. It is anticipated 2nd round applications will be due
January 15, 2022. (Approximately $89 million available in each round)
> Applications were released today (June 14th)
ENGINEERING, REIMAGINED
Bucket C-HB632 Competitive Grants
> Eligible projects are defined by "necessary investments to water and sewer infrastructure" as defined by
the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund definitions (which include projects for flood
control IF the project protects water and sewer infrastructure, storm water, irrigation, etc..). Projects
primarily for fire suppression (50 percent of the oroiect or more) or primarily for erowth are NOT elieible'
> Applications can include a request to pay off debt but only debt incurred after March 3, 2021.
> Planning is an eligible expense, but will be scored against construction grants (for this reason it is advisable
to include planning as part of an ongoing construction request)
> Ranking priorities
> Health and Safety (meeting guidance as outlined in the DWSRF or CWSRF handbook)
> Readiness to Proceed (how well planned is the project? PER, CIP, etc..)
> Affordability (includes match contribution, water/sewer rates, etc) ll
ft
\\
ENGINEERING. REIMAGINED
> Budget stabilization, rainy day funds, reserve accounts
> Pay outstanding debts before 3/3/2021
> Other infrastructure (such as roads, bridges, etc..)
1C0*KKLJ
ENGINEERING. REIMAGINED
> ALL Buckets of Funding (A, B & C) must be OBLIGATED by December 31. 2024
> ALL Buckets of Funding (A, B & C) must be FULLY EXPENDED by December 31, 2026
> MT ARPA dollars MAY NOT BE USED as match for other federal money (USACE, FEMA,
EDA, etc...) HOWEVER, Federal funds MAY BE USED for match for MT ARPA
> Projects must have (or include as part of the grant request) a formal plan (PER,
Feasibility Study, Technical memo) and relay specific goals/objectives, and protect or
enhance water/sewer services/facilities. Readiness will be scored on whether adequate
planning has occurred to fully understand the project & have a detailed budget
> All projects will be required to follow MEPA (Montana Environmental Protection Act)
and Federal labor and materials standards (Bacon -Davis, American Steel, etc..) and
should include a budget for an annual federal audit and contingency sufficient to
account for inflation and supply shortage/delays in shipping.
K Q
ENGINEERING. REIMAGINED
Health and Safety
Readiness to Proceed
• Engineer hired
• Planning complete
• Other project funding in place
• Final plans and specs approved
• Construction able to being in 24 months
Affordability
• Based on User Rates and MHI/LMI (there is a specific formula and points given for affordability)
Match Public comment is being accepted this week. Advisory Commission will determine ranking criteria for this at
their 6/28 meeting.
• Scores for match will constitute 8 percent of total project score or 50/600 points. Points equal to the match percentage compared to local
ARPA dollars available to the local government. For water and sewer districts, irrigation districts, etc.. The applicable county's ARPA funds
will be used to calculate percent match
• Current proposal is up to 50 percent match for 50 points.
ENGINEERING. REIMAGINED
> ARPA.MT.GOV
> https:Hhome.treasury.gov/policy-issues/coronavirus/assistance-for-state-local-and-tribal-
governments
> https://home.treasurv.gov/policv-issues/coronavirus/assistance-for-state-local-and-tribal-
nd-loca i-tisca i-recovery-tu n
> Anna Miller, Deputy Administrator, MT DNRC, 406-444-6689 or annam@mt.gov
> Becky Bey, Government Relations Specialist, KU, 406-247-2907 or 698-3668 (cell) oroOZF �
becky.bey@kljeng.com l
ENGfNEERING. REIMAGINED
The Courts of Limited Jurisdiction in Montana are justice Courts, City Courts and
Municipal Courts. There are 61 Justice Courts, 84 City Courts and 6 Municipal
Courts. Although the jurisdiction of these courts differs slightly, collectively they
address cases involving misdemeanor offenses, civil cases for amounts up to
$12,000, small claims valued up to $7,000, landlord/tenant disputes, local
ordinances, forcible entry and detainer, protection orders, certain issues involving
juveniles, and other matters. The total caseload of these courts is about 5 times
greater than that of the District Courts in Montana. Courts of Limited Jurisdiction
are the courts in which most Montanans seekingjustice will encounter thejustice
system. -- -
Justice and Municipal CourtJudges are elected, unless appointed to fill a vacated
position. Judges appointed to fill a vacated position must run for the position at the
end of the term to which they were appointed. City CourtJudges may be elected or
appointed. All Limited Jurisdiction CourtJudges serve four-year terms. Justice Court
and City CourtJudges are not required to be attorneys; Municipal CourtJudges
must be attorneys. In 2011, there were 112 Limited Jurisdiction CourtJudges.
Numerous judges serve as both Justice of the Peace and CityJudges.
All Limited Jurisdiction CourtJudges must attend two Supreme Court -supervised
training conferences each year and pass a Certification Examination each term.
Failure to attend a training conference or pass the examination creates a vacancy in
the ludze's office.
i\'I
J U D I G I A L GFtnINCH
The Courts of Limited Jurisdiction in Montana are justice Courts, City Courts and
Municipal Courts. There are 61 Justice Courts, 84 City Courts and 6 Municipal
Courts. Although the jurisdiction of these courts differs slightly, collectively they
address cases involving misdemeanor offenses, civil cases for amounts up to
$12,000, small claims valued up to $7,000, landlord/tenant disputes, local
ordinances, forcible entry and detainer, protection orders, certain issues involving
juveniles, and other matters. The total caseload of these courts is about 5 times
greater than that of the District Courts in Montana. Courts of Limited Jurisdiction
are the courts in which most Montanans seekingjustice will encounter thejustice
system. -- -
Justice and Municipal CourtJudges are elected, unless appointed to fill a vacated
position. Judges appointed to fill a vacated position must run for the position at the
end of the term to which they were appointed. City CourtJudges may be elected or
appointed. All Limited Jurisdiction CourtJudges serve four-year terms. Justice Court
and City CourtJudges are not required to be attorneys; Municipal CourtJudges
must be attorneys. In 2011, there were 112 Limited Jurisdiction CourtJudges.
Numerous judges serve as both Justice of the Peace and CityJudges.
All Limited Jurisdiction CourtJudges must attend two Supreme Court -supervised
training conferences each year and pass a Certification Examination each term.
Failure to attend a training conference or pass the examination creates a vacancy in
the ludze's office.
LAUREL MUNICIPAL CODE
2.68.090 - Cityjuelge qualifications.
A. No person is eligible for the office of cityjudge unless prior to filing the oath of
office with the county clerk is either:
1. An attorney at law authorized to practice law in the state;
2. A person who has held the office of cityjudge within the preceding five years; or
3. A person who has completed the orientation course of study held under direction of
the supreme court or has been excused by the supreme court.
B. No person is eligible for the office of cityjudge who upon filing for office shall not
meet the residency requirements as for the office of mayor under 7-4.4301, MCA.
C. No cityjudge may assume the functions of his office unless he has filed with the
county clerk and recorder a certificate of completion of a course of education and
training prescribed by the commission on courts of limited jurisdiction under 3-1-1502,
MCA.
(Ord. 931 (part), 1988: prior code s 2.) 6.080)
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 3. JUDICIARY, COURTS
CHAPTER 6. MUNICIPAL COURTS
Part 2. Municipal Court Judges
Qualifications -- Certification -- Training
3-6-202. Qualifications -- certification -- training. (1) A municipal court judge must have the
same qualifications as a judge of a district court, as set forth in Article VII, section 9, of the Montana
constitution, except that a municipal court judge need only be admitted to the practice of law in
Montana for at least 3 years prior to the date of appointment or election.
(2) A municipal court judge shall reside in the county in which the court is located and shall meet
the residency requirements provided in 3-10-204.
(3) The commission on courts of limited jurisdiction, upon finding compliance with subsections
(1) and (2), shall issue a certificate, as required in 3-1-1502, prior to the municipal court judge
assuming office. The certificate must be conditioned upon continued compliance with the minimum
judicial education requirements provided for in this section. The certificate must be filed with the clerk
and recorder as provided in 3-1-1502.
7/3/2021
3-10-204. Residence requirements, MCA
MCA Contents / TITLE 3 / CHAPTER 10 / Part 2 / 3-10-204 Residence re...
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 3. JUDICIARY, COURTS
CHAPTER 10. JUSTICES' COURTS
Part 2. Justices of the Peace
Residence Requirements
3-10-204. Residence requirements. (1) A justice of the peace must reside in the county in which the
justice's court is held.
(2) A person is not eligible for the office of justice of the peace unless the person is a citizen of the United
States and has been a resident of the county in which the person is to serve for 1 year preceding election or
appointment.
History: En. Sec. 163, C. Civ. Proc. 1895; re -en. Sec. 6311, Rev. C. 1907; re -en
Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 159; re -en. Sec. 8865, R.C.M. 1935; amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 491,
704; amd. Sec. 190, Ch. 61, L. 2007.
. Sec. 8865, R.C.M. 1921;
L. 1973; R.C.M. 1947, 93.
Created by L V S
https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0030/chapter_0100/part_0020/section_0040/0030-0100-0020-0040.html 1l1
7/3/2021
3-11-202. Salary -- qualifications, MCA
MCA Contents / TITLE 3 / CHAPTER 11 / Part 2 / 3-11-202 Salary -- quali...
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 3. JUDICIARY, COURTS
CHAPTER 11. CITY COURTS
Part 2. City Judges
Salary -- Qualifications
3-11-202. Salary -- qualifications. (1) A city judge, at the time of election or appointment must:
(a) meet the qualifications of a justice of the peace under 3-10-202;
(b) be a resident of the county in which the city or town is located; and
(c) satisfy any additional qualifications prescribed by ordinance.
(2) The annual salary and compensation of city judges must be fixed by ordinance or resolution.
(3) Each city judge shall receive actual and necessary travel expenses, as provided in 2-18-501 through 2-
18-503, incurred in the performance of official duties.
History: En. Sec. 4765, Pol. C. 1895; re -en. Sec. 3241, Rev. C. 1907; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 61, L. 1919; re -
en. Sec. 5020, R.C.M. 1921; re -en. Sec. 5020, R.C.M. 1935; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 76, L. 1953; amd. Sec. 2, Ch.
179, L. 1961; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 158, L. 1965; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 186, L. 1967; R.C.M. 1947,11-726; amd. Sec.
12, Ch. 528, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 543, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 300, L. 1989; amd. Sec. 201, Ch. 61, L.
2007.
Created by LNINS
https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0030/chapter_0110/part_0020/section_0020/0030-0110-0020-0020.html 1/1
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 3. JUDICIARY, COURTS
CHAPTER 6. MUNICIPAL COURTS
Part 1. General Provisions
Establishment Of Court
3-6-101, Establishment of court. (1) A city with a population of 4,000 or more, according to the
last federal census, may have a court, known as the municipal court of the city of (designating the
name of the city) of the state of Montana. The court must be a court of record. The municipal court
shall assume continuing jurisdiction over all pending city court cases in the city in which the municipal
court is established.
(2) A city may have a municipal court only if the governing body of the city elects by a two-thirds
majority vote to adopt the provisions of this chapter by ordinance and, in the ordinance, provides the
manner in which and time when the municipal court is to be established and is to assume continuing
sdiction over all pending city court cases. If a cityjudge is not an attorney and the office is abolished
because a municipal court is established, the ordinance must provide that the time when the
establishment of the municipal court takes effect is the date on which the municipal courtjudge elected
at the next election held under 3-6-201 begins the municipal courtjudge's term of office.'The ordinance
must be consistent with the provisions of this chapter.
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Part 41. Municipalities .
Classification Of Municipalities
7-1-4111. Classification of municipalities. (1) Every city having a population of 10,000 or more
is a city of the first class.
(2) Every city having a population of less than 10,000 and more than 5,000 is a city of the second
class.
(3) Every city having a population of less than 5,000 and more than 1,000 is a city of the third
class.
(4) Every municipal corporation having a population of less than 1,000 and more than 300 is a
town.
Montana Code Annotated 201 9
TITLE 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Part 41. Municipalities
Procedure To Advance Municipal Classification
7-1-4115. Procedure to advance municipal classification. (1) If it appears by such census that
the city or town contains the requisite population to be advanced, the council must thereupon by
resolution declare, as the case may be, that:
(a) the town is advanced to a city of the first, second, or third class;
(b) a city of the third class is advanced to a city of the second or first class; or
(c) a city of the second class is advanced to a city of the first class.
(2) The city or town council must file a certified copy of such resolution in the office of the county
clerk of the county and in the office of the secretary of state. Whereupon such town becomes a city of
the first, second, or third class; a city of the third class becomes a city of the second or first class; and — -
a city of the second class becomes a city of the first class, as the case may be, to be governed under
the provisions of this code relative to cities and towns.
(Billings Municipal Code) -Chapter 10 — COURT - ARTICLE 10-100. - IN GENERAL
• Sec. 10-101. - Establishment and recognition.
The municipal court of the City of Billings is hereby established pursuant to state law
under MCA Title 3, Chapter 6 (section 3-6-101 et seq.). It is specifically recognized by
the city that its municipal court is established for all intents and purposes set forth in
the state law and for all purposes that may be reasonably inferred therefrom. The
municipal court shall assume continuing jurisdiction over all pending city court cases.
• Sec. 10-102. - Municipal court clerk position established.
Pursuant to state law, the position of municipal court clerk is established within the
municipal court. The municipal court clerk shall assist the municipal court judge in the
recording and signing of court proceedings as well as in creating, maintaining and
retaining municipal court records. The city council shall set the salary of the municipal
court clerk and provide for other necessary expenses that may be incurred in
operating the municipal court.
• ARTICLE 10-200. -JUDGE
• Sec. 10-201. - Qualifications.
A municipal court judge must have the same qualifications as a judge of a district
court, as set forth in Article VII, section 9, of the 1972 Montana constitution, except
that a.municipal court judge need only be admitted to the practice of law in the state
for at least three (3) years prior to the date of appointment or election. A municipal
court judge must reside in Yellowstone County and shall be a citizen of the United
States and a resident of Yellowstone County for one (1) year next preceding his
election or appointment.
• Sec. 10-202. - Municipal court judges.
(a) There shall be one (1) full-time elected municipal court judge. The judge's term
commences on the first Monday in January following the election. The judge shall hold office
for the term of four (4) years and until a successor is elected and qualified.
(b) The elected municipal court judge may, with the approval of the city council, appoint a
part-time assistant judge, who must have the same qualifications as a judge pro tempore, to
serve during the elected judge's term of office. An order by a part-time assistant judge has
the same force and effect as an order of a municipal court judge.
(Ord. No. 06-5361, § 2, 3-13-06)
I Municipal Officials Handbook - MSU Extension - Local Government Center
Chapter 1: Municipal Government Defined
By Kenneth L. Weaver, Ph.D.
1.203 When and How to Change Classification
Unless a city or town undertakes its own direct enumeration of inhabitants, the basis for
classifying Montana municipalities is the most recent federal decennial census. Whenever the
federal census indicates that the population of a municipality has increased or decreased
sufficiently to alter its classification, the city or town council must, by resolution, change the
classification to conform to the classes established by 7-1-4111. MCA. as noted above. A
certified copy of the resolution must be filed with the county clerk and recorder and with the
Secretary of State.
1.6 CITY AND MUNICIPAL COURTS
1.601 Local Courts of Limited jurisdiction
Courts of limited jurisdiction (as distinct from district courts with felonyjurisdiction) are those
local courts which deal with local ordinances, residential and commercial landlord/tenant
disputes, forcible entry and detainer (unlawful keeping of another person's goods), collection
of certain taxes, fees and assessments, and, most frequently, misdemeanor criminal charges.
Misdemeanors are those offenses punishable by a fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment
not exceeding six months. A civil action may be brought in a court of limited jurisdiction if the
disputed sum does not exceed $7,000 (exclusive of court costs). The two kinds of courts of
limited jurisdiction found in Montana's cities and towns are the city court and the municipal
court, each of which is described below.
1.602 City and Municipal Courts
Eighty-three of Montana's 127 cities and towns have a city court. Five cities (Bozeman, Billings,
Great Falls, Helena and Missoula) have a municipal court which is also a court of limited
jurisdiction but, unlike a city court, a municipal court is a court of record, as described below.
The criminal jurisdiction of city and municipal courts is limited to misdemeanors, which are
almost entirely violations of city or town ordinances, predominantly traffic- related offenses.
1.603 City Courts
Even though state law does not mandate that a city courtjudge be an attorney, several are
because this additional qualification may be set forth in a city or town ordinance 3-11-202
MCA. The city and town councils of Montana's 115 Class 3 Cities and Towns may decide by
ordinance whether to appoint or elect the city judge to the required four year term of office, 7=4-
4102 and 4103. MCA Most are elected, as are all the cityjudges in class 1 and class 2 cities.
However, a number of smaller cities and towns choose to appoint a city judge from a neighboring
city or town or to appoint a willing county justice of the peace as the city judge. Approximately 38
countyjustices of the peace also serve as cityjudges.
1.604 Municipal Courts
Unlike a city court or justice court, a municipal court is a court of record and, therefore, appeals
from its decisions do not require re -trial by a district court, which may review the case upon
appeal based upon the court record created in the original municipal court proceeding. The five
municipal courts have the same jurisdiction as city courts but, unlike city courts, municipal court
judges must be elected and must have the some qualifications as a district court judge except that a
municipal courtjudge must have been admitted to practice for only three years 3-6-202 MCA.
Montana Cade Annotated 2019
TITLE 25. CIVIL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 33. APPEAL TO DISTRICT COURT FROM JUSTICES' AND CITY COURTS
Part 3. Proceedings in District Court
Trial De Novo -- Pleadings -- Conduct Of Trial
25-33-301. Trial de novo -- pleadings -- conduct of trial. (1) Except as provided in subsection
(3), all appeals from justices' or city courts must be tried anew in the district court on the papers filed
in the justice's or city court unless the court, for good cause shown and on terms that are just, allows
other or amended pleadings to be filed in the action. The court may order new or amended pleadings
to be filed. Each party has the benefit of all legal objections made in the justice's or city court.
(2) When the action is tried anew on appeal, the trial must be conducted in all respects as other
trials in the district court. The provisions of this code as to trials in the district courts are applicable to
trials on appeal in the district court.
(3) The appeal from a justice's court of record pursuant to 3-10-101 is on the record as provided
in 3-10-115. The appeal from a city court of record pursuant to 3-11-101 is on the record as provided
in 3-11-110.
Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 3. JUDICIARY, COURTS
CHAPTER 11. CITY COURTS
Part 1. Creation and Jurisdiction
Appeal To District Court From
Record -- Record On Appeal
City Court Of
3-11-110. Appeal to district court from city court of record -- record on appeal. (1) A party
may appeal to district court a judgment or order from a city court of record. The appeal is confined to
review of the record and questions of law, subject to the supreme court's rulemaking and supervisory
authority.
(2) The record on appeal to district court consists of an electronic recording or stenographic
transcription of a case tried, together with all papers filed in the action.
(3) The district court may affirm, reverse, or amend any appealed order or judgment and may
direct the proper order orjudgment to be entered or direct that a new trial or further proceeding be had
in the court from which the appeal was taken.
(4) Unless the supreme court establishes rules for appeal from a city court of record to the district
court, the Montana Uniform Municipal Court Rules of Appeal to District Court, codified in Title 25,
chapter 30, apply to appeals to district court from the city court of record.
Montana Judges Deskbook — Municipal, Justice and City Courts:
https://courts.mt aov/ExternalZIcourt/desl<book/2010 Deskbool< pdf
Montana Code Annotated:
https://lei mt zov/bills/mca/index html
LAUREL FIRE
215 WEsr 1 ST STREET • LAUREL, Mi • 59044
OFFICE 406.628.4911 • FAX 406.628.2185
Re: 2021 4th of July Fire report
July 6, 2021
During the 2021411, of July weekend (July 2- July 5), the Laurel Volunteer Fire Department
responded to 14 fire calls.
July 2, 2021- 3 calls
Motor Vehicle Accident
Grass fire caused by fireworks- Bristol Way.
Smoke Alarm
July 3, 2021- 4 calls
Grass fire caused by fireworks- 12th Ave; outside of allowed fireworks times.
Motor Vehicle Accident
Trash can fire- Mountain View and 4m Ave- unknown cause.
Camp fire- Duck Creek fishing access; County
July 4, 2021
Four- Wheeler accident
Grass fire caused by fireworks- Ranch Trail Road; County.
Bon fire in an alley- East 6th Street
Grass fire- West Main and 1�t Ave; Unknown cause
Grass fire- West Railroad and South 8th Ave; Unknown cause
Dumpster fire Pennsylvania Ave
Dumpster fire- East 6th and Fir Ave
July 5, 2021
Dumpster fire- East 3�d and Montana
Previous year's total calls and firework related for July 2- July 5
2020- 8 calls; 3 fireworks
2019- 4 calls; 3 fireworks
2018- 5 call; 1 firework
2017- 10 call; 9 fireworks
2016- 10 calls; 2 fireworks
The Laurel Volunteer Fire Department would like to thank every citizen of Laurel for doing their
part to keep the 20214th of July weekend as safe a possible while using fireworks.
Thank you.
Brent S. Peters
Fire Chief, Laurel Fire Department