HomeMy WebLinkAboutMLCT - Recovery and Reinvestment Actder-fe, ,L???G Ak. LCT?
Recovery and Reinvestment
Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in March. At that time, the
President believed that a high powered and monstrously expensive jolt was necessary to
stimulate the national economy. The federal government will pour $880 million into Montana
through the stimulus package and the biggest challenge during the closing days of the 2009
Legislature was to assure that a fair share of this money would get all the way down to the
cities, towns and counties across Montana where it will work effectively to create jobs and
build the foundation for future prosperity.
The House and Senate worked effectively together to implement the Recovery Act in Montana.
The bill that was passed in the final hours will stabilize threatened programs, provide help to
those most vulnerable in difficult times, bolster schools and state agencies and allocate
unprecedented levels of funding for capital projects across our state.
Cities will receive nearly $10-million in direct grants for street, water, sewer, building and other
facility improvements. An additional 33 municipal projects will be funded with an infusion of
federal money into the Treasure State Endowment, the water and sewer revolving loan
program will be bolstered and cities and towns will be eligible for special financing to promote
energy efficiency.
As usual, the results of the biennial slugfest were a strange concoction of winners and losers,
missed chances and unexpected opportunities that may never come this way again.
The Winners
House Bill 645 --- is the stimulus implementation bill that was passed on the 90th day of the
Legislature. It has been sent to the Governor. This measure will spread nearly $10-million to
cities and towns to cover a specific list of capital projects that were identified in a survey
conducted by the League last month. The Department of Commerce will administer the
infrastructure program. It will develop and post guidelines, provide on-line forms and other
information necessary to get this money out to local governments and into the pockets of those
Montanans who will go to work under the Recovery Act. Reporting requirements may be
cumbersome, but $10-million is a lot of money for a little "paperwork". The bill allows
modifications to the projects on the initial list, and requires local governments to spend
stimulus funds by the end of next September. It also added more than $20 million to the water
and sewer revolving loan program and pumped up funding for historic preservation and energy
conservation.
This bill and other measures to which it is connected, authorize the largest expenditure on local
government capital projects in the history of this state.
House Bill 11--- is the appropriation measure for the Treasure State Endowment Program. As
introduced in January, the bill would have funded 33 local government infrastructure projects
at a cost of $17.8 million over the two-year funding cycle. The Recovery Act allowed the
Legislature to "double down". The final version of the bill will fund all 66 projects that were
submitted with an additional appropriation of $23-million. The Legislature has now funded the
entire TSEP project list in the last two sessions. Total grant allocation to cities, towns, counties
and water and sewer districts over the four year period will be more than $75-million.
House Bill 658 --- was the only survivor of a troop of measures to mitigate the results of the
latest reappraisal of various classes of property across the state. The periodic analysis
determined that the value of residential property had increased 55% since the end of 2001.
There were smaller but still significant increases in the value of commercial and agricultural
property and timberland. This bill will phase in new property values over six years. It will also
adjust tax rates and exemptions, which will "flat line" valuation increases on average across the
state. This approach is similar to current law. The bill includes a provision that will allow
municipal and county levies to increase slightly to capture the full value of new construction.
House Bill 420 --- allows local governments to adopt voluntary energy conservation codes. It is
one of several measures intended to promote the use of energy efficient building practices.
Senate Bill 8 --- authorizes the creation of regional water authorities. The bill was promoted by
cities, towns, counties, water and irrigation districts and other interests along the Hi-line to
begin the rehabilitation of the historic St. Mary's Project. The League worked with supporters
and legislative staff to offer amendments that led to near unanimous support for the measure
in the House and Senate.
Senate Bill 9 --- will allow local governments to use revenue bonds to finance transportation
facilities and equipment including buses, trolleys and light rail systems.
Senate Bill 57 --- was the product of an interim study of special district statutes. Most of the
provisions of the bill apply to counties, but it will allow cities to create park maintenance
districts without referring the question to the voters.
Senate Bill 58 --- includes a sequence of generally inconsequential revisions of local
government laws, but it does allow for the issuance of small denomination bonds, $1-million or
less, through local banks.
Senate Bill 95 --- allows the Department of Environmental Quality to set temporary nutrient
criteria for wastewater discharge permits. This measure will be vital in the collaborative work
between cities and the department to develop nutrient standards that are fair, affordable and
scientifically feasible. Montana cities and towns are committed to protecting the quality of the
state's water resources under a fair and balanced regulatory regime. This bill is an important
step in that direction.
Senate Bill 294 --- allows cities to issue revenue bonds backed by street maintenance
assessments or arterial fees to finance improvements. The act will speed up the timeline on
street projects and protect cities from the recent sharp increases in material and construction
costs.
Senate Bill 390 --- authorizes cities and towns to pledge street maintenance fees as security for
loans from the state.
The Losers
Senate Bill 506 --- would have authorized local referenda on the question of enacting a 4% tax
on goods and services directly linked to the tourist economy. This bill was at the top of the
municipal priority index for the 2009 Legislature and it had many arguable advantages including
uniformity, revenue sharing, property tax relief, business assistance, ease of administration and
the basic fairness of the idea that tourists should pay a fair share of the cost of the services they
use while they are in Montana.
The bill was killed by a margin of more than 2-1 on the floor of the Senate. There is no easy,
understandable or comforting explanation of this vote other than the wimpy excuse that "this
was not the year to talk about new taxes".
House Bill 228 --- is the Citizen's Self Defense and Firearms Right Act. The bill was opposed by
most law enforcement agencies, and they worked 90 days to excise or amend some of the most
threatening provisions including a section that would have allowed almost anyone to carry a
gun inside the limits of a city without a permit. The final bill was better than the introduced
version but it seems to be a step away from the idea of domestic tranquility.
House Bill 472 --- would have prevented the Department of Transportation from requiring cities
to assume responsibility for the maintenance of sidewalks as a condition of construction
projects on state routes within municipal boundaries. This bill passed the House but was tabled
in the Senate Local Government Committee. The League and MMIA are working now to
negotiate new contracts with MDOT that fairly balance state and local responsibilities for
sidewalk maintenance.
House Bill 531--- prohibits the use of remote devices, specifically red light cameras, to issue
traffic citations. Bozeman and Billings were prepared to install cameras to promote safety and
reduce enforcement costs before this bill was introduced, passed and signed into law by the
Governor. This was a difficult issue that got tangled up in irrelevant discussions of the Patriot
Act, Federal ID cards and George Orwell.
The Rejects
House Bill 276 --- would have made local governments responsible for the medical costs of
persons "detained" by law enforcement. The medical costs for those detained by city police
would have been the responsibility of counties in the introduced version of the bill. There was
an attempt to shift this responsibility to cities before the measure was finally rejected in the
House Judiciary Committee.
House Bill 408 -- would have provided workers' compensation coverage to paid firefighters
diagnosed with cancer, heart disease and other conditions. The bill would have increased WC
premiums. It was stalled in the House Appropriations Committee and missed the deadline for
the transmittal of bills.
House Bills 476, 484 and 494 --- would have limited the duration, revised the definitions and
complicated the management of Tax Increment Finance Districts. These bills were tabled in the
House Taxation Committee. A resolution for an interim study of TIF Districts was also rejected.
House Bill 665 ---would have required cities with populations above 20,000 to meet impossibly
stringent wastewater discharge standards. This bill was a message in a bottle filled with
gasoline - a Molotov cocktail hurled at representatives of larger cities who had supported a bill
to limit development along river banks.
Senate Bill 148 --- as introduced was an inconsequential mostly stylistic revision of outdated
local government statutes. Then, Yellowstone County and a major oil company suggested
amendments to revise municipal incorporation laws. These amendments were rejected and
the original version of the bill was passed.
Senate Bill 402 --- was another effort to extend property rights through the application of the
"takings doctrine" in the state and federal constitutions. This version would have protected
intangible property and severely diminished state and local authority to regulate activities and
issue permits. The bill was rejected on a tie vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
Senate Bill 486 --- would have interfered with local control and management of the proceeds of
voter-approved public safety mill levies. The measure died quietly in the Senate Local
Government Committee.
Senate Bill 487 --- would have borrowed the "nexus concept" from the Impact Fee Law to limit
the extent of waivers of the right to protest. The bill was tabled in the Senate Local
Government Committee.
Senate Bill 490 --- would have increased the amount of business equipment that is exempt
from taxation. The bill passed the Senate by a 49-1 margin but died in the House because the
reimbursement schedule attached to the measure would have cost more than $20-million
annually.
The Revisions
House Bill 608 --- may be the last word in a long running disagreement between cities and the
insurance industry over the responsibility of property owners to cover the costs of demolishing
buildings destroyed by fire. The bill allows cities to secure writs of attachment against property
owners to pay clean up costs. Versions of the bill rejected in the last two sessions allowed cities
to file liens against casualty insurance proceeds, which drew strong opposition from the
industry and its phalanx of lobbyists.
Senate Bill 310 --- limits the use of waivers of the right to protest as a condition of subdivision
approval. The introduced version of the bill was an outright prohibition of waivers that are
used to allow developers to install improvements as the subdivision builds out. The final
version of the bill requires the city or county to identify the improvements subject to the
waivers and limits the duration to 20 years.
Senate Bill 491--- specifies that mill levy increases for health insurance benefits that are
exempt under the property tax limits in 15-10-420 cannot cover employees paid through
enterprise funds. The bill also sets up a procedure to allow cities that have not previously
provided group benefits to qualify for the exemption.