HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 04.14.2026
AGENDA
CITY OF LAUREL
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 2026
6:30 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WELCOME . . . By your presence in the City Council Chambers, you are participating in the process of representative
government. To encourage that participation, the City Council has specified times for citizen comments on its agenda -- once
following the Consent Agenda, at which time citizens may address the Council concerning any brief community announcement
not to exceed one minute in duration for any speaker; and again following Items Removed from the Consent Agenda, at which
time citizens may address the Council on any matter of City business that is not on tonight’s agenda. Each speaker will be
limited to three minutes, unless the time limit is extended by the Mayor with the consent of the Council. Citizens may also
comment on any item removed from the consent agenda prior to council action, with each speaker limited to three minutes,
unless the time limit is extended by the Mayor with the consent of the Council. If a citizen would like to comment on an age nda
item, we ask that you wait until the agenda item is presented to the Council by the Mayor and the public is asked to comment
by the Mayor.
Any person who has any question concerning any agenda item may call the City Clerk -Treasurer's office to make an inquiry
concerning the nature of the item described on the agenda. Your City government welcomes your interest and hopes you will
attend the Laurel City Council meetings often.
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call of the Council
Approval of Minutes
1. Approval of Minutes of February 10, 2026.
Correspondence
2. Police Monthly Report - March 31, 2026
3. Public Comments Received by April 10, 2026.
Council Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications
Public Hearing
4. Public Hearing on a variance Requested By Drew Nordman To Allow Side-Corner Minimum
Setback For An Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) In The Approximate Location Of The
Existing Non-Conforming Garage.
Consent Items
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
The Consent Calendar adopting the printed Recommended Council Action will be enacted with one vote. The Mayor will
first ask the Council members if any Council member wishes to remove any item from the Consent Calendar for
discussion and consideration. The matters removed from the Consent Calendar will be considered individually at the end of
this Agenda under "Items Removed from the Consent Calendar." (See Section 12.) The entire Consent Calendar, with the
exception of items removed to be discussed under "Items Removed from the Consent Calendar," is then voted upon by roll
call under one motion.
5. Claims entered through April 10, 2026.
6. Clerk/Treasurer Financial Statements March 2026.
7. Approval of Payroll Register for PPE 3/29/2026 totaling $294,818.45.
Ceremonial Calendar
Reports of Boards and Commissions
8. Budget/Finance Committee Minutes of March 24, 2026.
9. City/County Planning Board Minutes of March 18, 2026.
1
10. Emergency Services Committee Minutes of March 23, 2026.
11. Laurel Airport Authority Minutes of December 16, 2025.
12. Laurel Urban Renewal Agency Minutes of March 23, 2026.
13. Tree/Park Board Minutes of April 2, 2026.
Audience Participation (Three-Minute Limit)
Citizens may address the Council regarding any item of City business that is not on tonight’s agenda. Comments regarding
tonight’s agenda items will be accepted under Scheduled Matters. The duration for an individual speaking under Audience
Participation is limited to three minutes. While all comments are welcome, the Council will not take action on any item not
on the agenda.
Scheduled Matters
14. Appointment of Amy Mullaney to the Public Works Committee.
15. Resolution No. R26-08: A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Mayor To
Approve A Change Order With Earth Mover’s Excavation For The Project Known As The
Bernhardt Ditch Improvements Project.
16. Resolution No. R26-09: A Resolution Of The City Council Approving The Variance Requested
By Drew Nordman To Allow Side-Corner Minimum Setback For An Accessory Dwelling Unit
(ADU) In The Approximate Location Of The Existing Non-Conforming Garage.
17. Resolution No. R26-10: A Resolution Of The City Of Laurel City Council Authorizing The
Mayor To Execute All Necessary Agreements For Services Performed By Emergency
Networking Related To Electronic Management Systems For Laurel Fire Rescue
18. Resolution No. R26-11: A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Mayor To Sign An
Agreement With CivicPlus For Services Relating To Upgrading The City’s Website, Agenda
And Meeting Management, Media, AudioEye, And DocAccess.
Items Removed From the Consent Agenda
Community Announcements (One-Minute Limit)
This portion of the meeting is to provide an opportunity for citizens to address the Council regarding community
announcements. The duration for an individual speaking under Community Announcements is limited to one minute. While
all comments are welcome, the Council will not take action on any item not on the agenda.
Council Discussion
Council members may give the City Council a brief report regarding committees or groups in which they are involved.
Mayor Updates
Unscheduled Matters
19. NWE FERC Letter of Support Discussion
Adjournment
The City makes reasonable accommodations for any known disability that may interfere with a person’s ability to participate
in this meeting. Persons needing accommodation must notify the City Clerk’s Office to make needed arrangements. To make
your request known, please call 406-628-7431, Ext. 2, or write to City Clerk, PO Box 10, Laurel, MT 59044, or present your
request at City Hall, 115 West First Street, Laurel, Montana.
2
File Attachments for Item:
1. Approval of Minutes of February 10, 2026.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
File Attachments for Item:
2. Police Monthly Report - March 31, 2026
103
Page 1 of 5
Total Calls City Council Printed on April 1, 2026
[CFS Date/Time] is between '2026-03-01 00:00:00' and '2026-03-31 23:59:59' and
[Primary Incident Code->Code : Description] All
Code : Description
Totals
10-15 : With Prisoner 0 0
: Abandoned Vehicle 17 17
: Agency Assist 85 85
: Alarm - Burglary 15 15
: Alarm - Fire 1 1
AMB : Ambulance 103 103
: Animal Complaint 1 1
: Area Check 4 4
: Assault 7 7
: Bad Checks 0 0
: Barking Dog 6 6
: Bomb Threat 0 0
: Burglary 0 0
: Child Abuse/Neglect 2 2
: Civil Complaint 14 14
: Code Enforcment Violation 1 1
: Community Integrated Health 0 0
104
Page 2 of 5
Code : Description
Totals
: Counterfeiting 0 0
: Criminal Mischief 4 4
: Criminal Trespass 10 10
: Cruelty to Animals 0 0
: Curfew Violation 4 4
: Discharge Firearm 2 2
: Disorderly Conduct 5 5
: Dog at Large 31 31
: Dog Bite 4 4
DUI : DUI Driver 2 2
: Duplicate Call 3 3
: Escape 0 0
: Family Disturbance 12 12
: Fight 2 2
FIRE : Fire or Smoke 18 18
: Fireworks 1 1
: Forgery 0 0
: Found Property 8 8
: Fraud 9 9
: Harassment 3 3
: Hit & Run 2 2
105
Page 3 of 5
Code : Description
Totals
: ICAC 0 0
: Identity Theft 1 1
: Indecent Exposure 1 1
: Insecure Premises 6 6
: Intoxicated Pedestrian 1 1
: Kidnapping 0 0
: Littering 0 0
: Loitering 1 1
: Lost or Stray Animal 9 9
: Lost Property 4 4
: Mental Health 6 6
: Missing Person 3 3
: Noise Complaint 4 4
: Open Container 0 0
: Order of Protection Violation 1 1
: Parking Complaint 28 28
: Possession of Alcohol 0 0
: Possession of Drugs 2 2
: Possession of Tobacco 1 1
: Privacy in Communications 2 2
: Prowler 0 0
106
Page 4 of 5
Code : Description
Totals
: Public Assist 51 51
: Public Safety Complaint 18 18
: Public Works Call 7 7
: Report Not Needed 5 5
: Robbery 0 0
: Runaway Juvenile 9 9
: Sexual Assault 3 3
: Suicide 0 0
: Suicide - Attempt 1 1
: Suicide - Threat 3 3
: Suspicious Activity 65 65
: Suspicious Person 7 7
: Theft 14 14
: Threats 5 5
: Tow Call 1 1
: Traffic Accident 19 19
: Traffic Hazard 6 6
: Traffic Incident 16 16
: TRO Violation 0 0
: Truancy 1 1
T/S : Traffic Stop 150 150
107
Page 5 of 5
Code : Description
Totals
: Unattended Death 0 0
: Unknown - Converted 0 0
: Unlawful Transactions w/Minors 0 0
: Unlawful Use of Motor Vehicle 0 0
: Vicious Dog 0 0
: Warrant 8 8
: Welfare Check 19 19
Totals 854 854
108
File Attachments for Item:
3. Public Comments Received by April 10, 2026.
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
File Attachments for Item:
8. Budget/Finance Committee Minutes of March 24, 2026.
146
147
148
File Attachments for Item:
9. City/County Planning Board Minutes of March 18, 2026.
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
File Attachments for Item:
10. Emergency Services Committee Minutes of March 23, 2026.
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
File Attachments for Item:
11. Laurel Airport Authority Minutes of December 16, 2025.
175
LAA Board Meeting Minutes
December 16, 2025 (6 pm)
Roll Call: Joe Mutchler, Jim Wise, Randy Hand, Doug Myers present. Gary Blain was out of
town.
Members of public present: Fred Lee, Justin Zindell (KLJ), Jim Schaak, Brad Sinclair, Ed
Taylor, John Roberts
Approval of Minutes from previous meeting: 11 /12/2025 by unanimous consent (Gary absent).
Financial Update
• (Not yet available … YTD financial summary provided by Beartooth accounting and current
Western security bank summary provided.)
• November Bills Approved and previously paid (Signed by Jim / Doug)
o YVEC for $46
o MacKenzie Disposal for $119.22
o Cotters for $60.00
o City of Laurel for $3,310.34
o Century Link for $104.72
Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items:
• Fred Lee – needed emergency access to RW’s and TW’s but snow was too deep and no plowing
had yet taken place.
• Justin Zindell – grant money may possibly be available for addt’l snow removal equipment
Public Comment on Agenda Items: Public comments welcomed as agenda items discussed
• KLJ – can draft “on call” service agreements for all new construction Cory lots.
• EEC has submitted lot survey work for Cory lots and it needs to be signed off and approved by
KLJ. This will save lot owner’s cost. Approved by unanimous vote (Joe / Randy).
KLJ Engineering:
176
177
KLJ Engineering:
Maintenance Report:
• Jim Wise has purchased (to be reimbursed) a new electrically operated fuel pump to be used
with the diesel fuel trailer stored inside the SRE building.
• Murl has requested that Jim (as he has time) help him adjust tension on the door opening
springs for the small garage doors at the SRE building. However, we voted to approve the
purchase and installation of “Jackscrew” style electric openers (@ $515 ea.) for each SRE
building door (Joe / Randy).
• We need to advocate for the removal of the ramp queen aircraft that never fly (maybe by next
season?) to accommodate the snow plowing volunteers (Primarily Murl and Jim Wise) who have
to maneuver around those AC every year. We discussed charging $60 per month (to match FBO
charges) for flying aircraft (fee to be waved with purchase of 10 gallons min. of fuel) or charging
$250 per month for non-flying aircraft that are essentially abandoned on the ramp.
New Business:
1. AWOS system reliability issues were discussed:
o CenturyLink appears to have a dead line as phone calls to the AWOS system play only
busy signals.
o John Roberts has upgraded our power pack to a newer style as the old one was taken
out by a power outage. We need to determine what the cost would be to push our Wx
info to the FAA for METAR creation.
o We need to get AWI to send a technician out to fix and troubleshoot our system but to
also train our LAA board members on how to better use and troubleshoot the system.
2. Randy will contact Brock in an effort to get our webpages transferred to the City of Laurel (new
URL). We can them more easily update our own website with hangar waiting list info, hangar
178
availability to rent info etc. We could also facilitate aircraft owner updates of AC for our
database records submission to the FAA.
3. Discuss the request of a balloon operator, Mark Boulet, to rent space for his equipment trailer
and to launch from 6S8:
o MT Aeronautics has stated that there are balloon ops in MT but none launching from
airports.
o We need to determine if this would be a commercial or non-commercial operation. If
commercial, the operators would need to operate out of a commercial hangar at the
airport.
o Joe Mutchler (as Chairman) would like to discuss further with the operators.
o The board is unanimous with concerns regarding the safety of balloon flight from 6S8.
We are becoming very busy with both fixed wing and helicopter flight and slow moving,
large, hovering balloons would pose a serious risk for potential mid-air collisions as
pilots maneuver around them in attempts to land or take off.
o For the record, no current Laurel airport users (who’ve we’ve asked for opinions from)
are in favor of balloons operating out of our airport.
Doug Myers
LAA Board Secretary
406-633-5299 Cell
Laurel Airport Authority
P.O. Box 242 Laurel, MT 59044
406-628-0172
179
File Attachments for Item:
12. Laurel Urban Renewal Agency Minutes of March 23, 2026.
180
181
182
File Attachments for Item:
13. Tree/Park Board Minutes of April 2, 2026.
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
File Attachments for Item:
14. Appointment of Amy Mullaney to the Public Works Committee.
218
For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in
Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.
Get Adobe Reader Now!
219
File Attachments for Item:
15. Resolution No. R26-08: A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Mayor To
Approve A Change Order With Earth Mover’s Excavation For The Project Known As The
Bernhardt Ditch Improvements Project.
220
R26-08 Approve Change Order for Bernhardt Ditch Improvements Project (Work Change Directive No. 1)
RESOLUTION NO. R26-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
APPROVE A CHANGE ORDER WITH EARTH MOVER’S EXCAVATION FOR
THE PROJECT KNOWN AS THE BERNHARDT DITCH IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel, Montana,
Section 1: Approval. The Change Order for the Project known as the Bernhardt Ditch
Improvements Project, which Change Order is contained in the Triple Tree Engineering, Inc.
Change Order No. 1, a copy attached hereto and incorporated herein (hereinafter “the Change
Order”), is hereby approved. The Change Order authorizes additional charges for the increased
costs of a revised side mount gate design to accommodate certain height restrictions, additional
overflow pipe material and construction changes necessary to avoid telecommunication line,
and landscape edging between proposed crushed limestone and backfill slope not originally
included in the project design, all of which result in an increase to the original contract price in
the amount of Nine Thousand Nine-Hundred Seventy-Seven Dollars and Fifty-Two Cents
($9,977.52).
Section 2: Execution. The Mayor is hereby given authority to execute the Change
Order (Triple Tree Engineering Change Order No. 1) on behalf of the City.
Introduced at a special meeting of the City Council on the 14th day of April, 2026, by
Council Member _____.
PASSED and APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel the 14th day of
April, 2026.
APPROVED by the Mayor the 14th day of April, 2026.
CITY OF LAUREL
___________________________
Dave Waggoner, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Kelly Strecker, Clerk-Treasurer
221
R26-08 Approve Change Order for Bernhardt Ditch Improvements Project (Work Change Directive No. 1)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Michele Braukmann, City Attorney
222
1145 Cap Rd // Helena, MT 59602
www.tripletreemt.com
March 31, 2026
City of Laurel
115 W 1st Street
Laurel, MT 59044
RE: Bernhardt Ditch Improvements
Change Order No. 1
To whom it may concern:
Please reference attached Change Order No. 1 for the Bernhardt Ditch Improvements Project.
The change order addresses cost increases for changes the following changes in work:
1. Increase in proposed side mounted gate costs.
2. Additional fittings for proposed overflow pipe.
3. Installation of landscaping edging not originally in the plans.
Please see attached Change Order No. 1 Memo and documentation. The proposed change
order amount is -$9,977.52. The contract price $597,387.52 after incorporating this change
order.
Please call me anytime at (406) 461-7856 if you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Triple Tree Engineering, Inc.
Douglas C. Tamcke, P.E.
Encl: Change Order No. 1
Change Order No. 1 Memo
223
Owner:City of Laurel Owners Project No.:N/A
Engineer:TRIPLE TREE ENGINEERING Engineer's Project No.:25-034
Contractor:Earth Mover's Excavation Contractor's Project No.:615106
Project:
Contract Name:
Date Issued:11/11/2025 Effective Date of Change Order:12/1/2025
Attachments
Original Contract Times
Substantial Completion April 15, 2026
Ready For Final Payment May 15, 2026
Substantial Completion N/A
Ready For Final Payment N/A
Contract Times Prior to this Change Order:
Substantial Completion April 15, 2026
Ready For Final Payment May 15, 2026
Substantial Completion N/A
Ready For Final Payment N/A
Contract Times with all approved Change Orders
Substantial Completion November 30, 2026
Ready For Final Payment December 30, 2026
By:By:
Title:Engineer Title:
Date:Date:
By:By:
Title:Title:
Date:Date:
Recommended by Engineer (if required) Accepted by Contractor
Authorized By Owner Approved By Funding Agency
Decrease this Change Order:[Increase] [Decrease] this Change Order:
-$
Contract Price Incorporating this Change Order:
597,387.52$
[Increase] [Decrease] from previously approved Change
Orders No. 1 to No.1:
[Increase] [Decrease] from previously approved Change Orders No. 1 to No.
1:
Change Order 2 Schedule, Montana Materials & Construction Change Order 2 Price Sheet
Change in Contract Price Change in Contract Times
[State contract times as specific dates or a number of days]
Original Contract Price
587,410.00$
Description: This Change order includes adding a bid item for 6" gate valves required to be replaced during construction and a bedding
credit since the specified Type II bedding was not installed from MH11 to MH15 which is approximately 1,501 LF. Also, includes
updated warranty on portions of pipe from MH 11 - MH 15.
Change Order No.: 1
Bernhardt Ditch Improvements
N/A
This Contract is modified as follows upon execution of this Change Order:
9,977.52$
Contract Price prior to this Change Order:
597,387.52$
224
ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY
CONTRACT UNIT
PRICE
CHANGE ORDER
UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE NOTES
CO1-302 Side Mounted Slide Gate Increase EA 1 $ - 2,942.50$ 2,942.50$ Changes in gate geometry lead to increased costs.
CO1-306 Overflow Pipe Design Change EA 1 $ - 4,843.12$ 4,843.12$ Existing utility conflict. Pipe material and fittings update.
CO1-603 Landscaping Edging EA 1 $ - 2,191.90$ 2,191.90$ Added landscaping edging to proposed rock.
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
$ - -$ -$
CHANGE ORDER 1 SCHEDULE
225
1145 Cap Rd // Helena, MT 59602
www.tripletreemt.com
Laurel Bernhardt Ditch Improvements Project Change Order #1 Breakdown
March , 2026
The following changes have been made to the original contract documents for the Laurel Bernhardt
Improvements Project.
Side Mount Gate Cost Increase:
The originally designed project featured a Waterman side-mounted gate. The originally designed
structure was laid out based on the restraints of the Waterman gate. During bidding, a Fresno gate was
approved. The Fresno gate did not have the same height restrictions and allowed for a more efficient
design. The updated structure and gate design led to a price increase of the gate lifter assembly of
$2,942.50. See correspondence in Appendix A.
Overflow Pipe Material and Construction Change:
During installation of the proposed overflow piping, two existing telecommunication lines were
encountered at 5.5’ – 6’. The original design was modified to allow for a PVC SDR-35 pipe and 45-degree
fitting to avoid the utility conflict. The additional 45-degree bend, pipe return fee, and new PVC pipe led
to a price increase of $4,843.12. See supplier invoices attached in Appendix B.
Landscaping Edging Bid Item:
The original project design did not include landscaping edging between the proposed crushed limestone
and the backfill slope. Installation of the proposed edging increased the project cost $2,191.90. See
vendor invoices attached in Appendix C.
The total project contract cost increase has been calculated to be $9.977.52.
Sincerely,
Triple Tree Engineering, Inc.
Douglas C. Tamcke, P.E., Project Engineer
Encl:
Appendix A – Gate Supplier Correspondence
Appendix B – Overflow Pipe Cost Breakdown
Appendix C – Landscaping Edging Invoice
226
APPENDIX A
GATE SUPPLIER CORRESPONDENCE
227
1
Doug Tamcke
From:Kris Kloeckner <kriskloeckner@emxmt.com>
Sent:Thursday, January 8, 2026 11:56 AM
To:Doug Tamcke
Cc:pmaccatherine
Subject:Re: fresno gate price increase
Thanks, Paul once adjusted please send over to me and I’ll get it kicked over to Doug.
Thanks
On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 11:54 Doug Tamcke <dtamcke@tripletreemt.com> wrote:
Paul and Kris,
See attached final submittal for the updated gate size. Just some small comments.
Also Kris, make sure you submit me the gate directly now that we have one figured out.
Thank you,
Douglas C. Tamcke, P.E.
406.461.7856
228
2
1145 Cap Road
Helena, MT 59602
www.tripletreemt.com
From: pmaccatherine <pmaccatherine@northwestpipe.com>
Sent: Monday, January 5, 2026 2:25 PM
To: Doug Tamcke <dtamcke@tripletreemt.com>
Subject: fresno gate price increase
See below reason.
Thanks
Paul
229
3
Paul,
Due to the gate height increase from 24” to 36” tall, this increased the lift load on the gate which now requires a geared lift in lieu of the
hand wheel lift originally submitted.
Thanks,
Richard Korbe
Fresno Valves & Castings, Inc.
P: 559-834-2511 Ext. 163
richjk@fresnovalves.com
From: pmaccatherine <pmaccatherine@northwestpipe.com>
Sent: Monday, January 5, 2026 1:14 PM
To: Rich Korbe <RichJK@fresnovalves.com>
Cc: Matt Walter <MattGW@fresnovalves.com>
Subject: Re: F249734-4084 bernhardt ditch
Engineer is questioning why such a price increase on this revised gate? Let me know please.
230
4
Thanks
Paul
Kris Kloeckner
Project Manager
Earth Movers Excavation | 5844 Stearns Circle | Billings MT 59101
Office: 406-598-6007 | Cell: 406-506-8110
Email: kriskloeckner@emxmt.com
231
f
NORTHWEST PIPE FITTINGS, INC.
Servicing Montana and Wyoming Since 1957
Wholesale Plumbing. Heating, Water Works, kldustrial Supplies, SERVICE with our own trucks
NOT FOR SHIPPING
MATERIAL MAY NOT BE SHIPPED
FROM THIS DOCUMENT
172$ MAJESTIC LANE 1901MEAOOWLARK 4041 7TH AVENUEN.E 1780MTHWY35EAST 360 1.055 FLATS RD. 34930108723 SOSSEXPRESEWA'v
P.O. 8071258 P0.8074165 GREAT FALLS,MT59404 KALISPELL,MT59904 BELGRADE MT 59714 SIDNEY, MT 59270 MISSOULA,MT59808
BILLINGS, $1T59103 BUTTE, M139701 PHONE (406) 727.9843 PHONE (408) 7526582 PHONE (406) 3882045 PHONE (406) 630-5120 PHONE 1400 518-0989
PHONE (406) 252.0142 PHONE 1406( 494.212Q FAX(406)4541743 FAX (406) 752.6555 FAX(406)3882093 FAX (408) 63D5125 PICK LIST! QUOTATION FORM FAX (406) 248•!!072 FAX (408) 4943767
QUOTE NO. 489125
QUOTE TO
26963
EARTH MOVERS EXCAVATION INC QUOTE DATE TO DATE JOB REFERENCE FOB TERMS PREPARED BY
5844 STEARNS CIRCLE I'I 10/27/25 PC BOX 957 i 11127/25 BERNHARDT DITCH LAUREL NET 30 PAUL MACCATHERINE
LAUREL, MT 59044
REMARKS
1 14-16 WEEKS AFTER APPROVED
1 SUBMITTALS FOR THE SLIDE GATES
(300) DIVERSION STRUCTURE
PART# QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
0173020 21 4" GALVANIZED IMPORT A53 T&C PIPE FOOT $13.53 $284.13
0231920 2 4" GALVANIZED 90 ELBOW EA $135.07 $270.14
0482188 1 4" X 4" GALVANIZED NIPPLE EA $23.28 $23.28
Segment Total
(302) 24X48 SIDE MOUNT GATE
$577.55
PART# QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
1 FRESNO 48X24 304SS SLIDE GATE W/60" FRM EA $6,837.50 $6,837.50 -
CHANNEL MOUNT, 2-SIDED J-SEAL W/BEARING LIFT ~~„ C',rk >~
FREIGHT-IN 1 FREIGHT IN CHARGES -TO BE DETERMINED EA $700.00 $700.00
Segment Total
(303) PRECAST DIVERSION
$7,53750
PART# QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
0173020 21 4" GALVANIZED IMPORT A53 T&C PIPE FOOT $13.53 $284.13
0231920 2 4" GALVANIZED 90 ELBOW EA $135.07 $270.14
0482188 1 4" X 4" GALVANIZED NIPPLE EA $23.28 $23.28
Segment Total
(307) 42X60 SLIDE GATE
$577.55
PART# QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
1 FRESNO 60X42 304SS FAB SLIDE GATE, 80" TH $13,452.50 $13,452.50
FRAME, WALL MOUNT 3-SIDED J-SEAL WI
TH GEAR LIFT
FREIGHT-IN 1 FREIGHT IN CHARGES -TO BE DETERMINED EA $700.00 $700.00
Segment Total l$14,152.50~
g
1
~0aI
Page 1
232
NORTHWEST PIPE FITTINGS, INC.
Sevicing Mon7ana and Wyoming Since 1957
Wholesale Plumbing, Heating, Water Works, tndustrial Supplies, SERVICE with our own trucks
NOT FOR SHIPPING
MATERIAL MAY NOT BE SHIPPED
FROM THIS DOCUMENT
1725MA)ESTIGLANE 1901 MEADOWLARK 40417THA98NUEN.E 1780MT11WY35EAET 36GFLOSSFLATSRD. 349306W023 SOSSEXPRESSWAY
PO BOX 1258 P0. 8024163 GREATFAILS, MT59404 KALI06ELL, MT59604 8ELGRAOE. MT59714 SIDNEY, 6T59270 M)SSOU(A, MTS3808
BILUNGS, MT 59109 BUTTE, MT 59701 PHONE 1406) 727.9843 PHONE 1406) :526562 PHONE 3406) 3684045 PHONE 1406) 6305120 PHONE (406) 519.0969
PHONE )408)252'0142 PHONE (408) 494.2120 FAX >406> 454.1749 FAX +406) 7526053 FAX 1406) 3684093 FAX 1406) 630.5125 PICK LIST / QUOTATION FORM FAX 1408) 2488072 FAX (408) 4949767
QUOTE TO
26963
EARTH MOVERS EXCAVATION INC
5844 STEARNS CIRCLE
PO BOX 957
LAUREL, MT 59044
QUOTE NO. 489125
QUOTE DATE TO DATE JOB REFERENCE FOB TERMS PREPARED BY
1012725 11/27/25 ~P I PAUL MACCATHERINE
(308) 30X42 SLIDE GATE
PART# QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
2 FRESNO 42X30 304SS SLIDE GATE, 75" FRAME IFT $11,383.75 $22,767.50
WALL MOUNT, 3-SIDED J-SEAL W/GEAR L
I FT
FREIGHT -IN 2 FREIGHT IN CHARGES -TO BE DETERMINED EA $700.00 $1,400.00
Segment Total l $24,167.60
(601) FABRIC
PART# QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXT. PRICE
5228112 5 600X ( 315ST ) 15' X 300' WOVEN FABRIC ROLL $440.82 $2,204.10
Segment Total $2,204.10
We are pleased to quote you on the above material
All quotes are subject to Northwest Pipe Fittings "Terms of Sale"
Quoted prices are subject to change after the "TO DATE" above.
Segments Total
Tax Total
Quotation Total
$49,216.70
$0.00
$49,216.70
Page 2
233
APPENDIX B
OVERFLOW PIPE COST BREAKDOWN
234
Earth Movers Excavation, Inc.
PO Box 81367
Billings, MT 59108 US
Dana Babcock, Estimator
dana@emxmt.com
CUSTOMER NAME JOB NAME JOB NUMBER
STREET JOB ADDRESS
CITY STATE CITY STATE
Mt
PHONE DATE PHONE DATE
LABOR HOURS RATE TOTAL
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
SUBTOTAL $0.00
15%% MARKUP $0.00
TOTAL LABOR $0.00
EQUIPMENT HOURS RATE TOTAL
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
SUBTOTAL $0.00
15%% MARKUP $0.00
TOTAL EQUIPMENT $0.00
QTY UN AMOUNT TOTAL
1.00 LS -712.22 -$712.22
1.00 LS 5115.06 $5,115.06
$0.00
$0.00
SUBTOTAL $4,402.84
10%% MARKUP $440.28
TOTAL MAT/SUBCONT $4,843.12
24" RCP return
F & I 24" SDR 35
MATERIAL/SUBCONTRACTOR
TYPE
DESCRIPTION: Bid Item #306 due to fiber optic location the plan is to return the RCP and replace with
SDR 35 Pipe to work around the fiber.
OCCUPATION
CCO - 001
(406) 970-0086
CITY OF LAUREL - Doug Tamcke Bernhardt Ditch 25049
Laurel
235
TOTAL ADDITIONAL CHARGE FOR WORK ABOVE $4,843.12
Authorization Signature
Authorization Signature
236
237
EXISTING 66" Ø RCP
STORM PIPE
FLOWABLE FILL
BACKFILL
PROPOSED DIVERSION STRUCTURE
GROUT PIPE CONNECTION
PRIOR TO BACKFILL
NATIVE MATERIAL
SUPPORT PIPE AS NECESSARY FOR
INSTALLATION AT BELL ENDS
COMPACTED FILL
SAW-CUT ASPHALT
PROPOSED ASPHALT PATCHREPLACE EXISTING
CURB & GUTTER
FLOWABLE FILL BACKFILL
17°' MITER
CUT
17 LF
O
F
2
4
"
Ø
R
C
P
@
3
0
.
3
8
%
EXCAVATION EXTENTS
BE
R
N
H
A
R
D
T
R
O
A
D
PROPOSED DIVERSION
STRUCTURE
PROPOSED PARKING AREA
GROUT PIPE CONNECTION PRIOR TO
POURING CONCRETE COLLAR (3" MIN.)
17 LF OF 24" Ø RCP @ 30.38%
REPLACE EXISTING
CURB AND GUTTER
AS NECESSARY
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
6
6
"
Ø
R
C
P
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
1.5 0 1.5 3
SCALE FEET
NOTES
1.PROPOSED AND EXISTING
ASPHALT NOT SHOWN FOR
CLARITY.
2.FLOWABLE FILL ENTIRE TRENCH
EXTENTS AS NECESSARY UP TO
BACK OF EXISTING CURB.
13
OV
E
R
F
L
O
W
P
I
P
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
SHEET
25
-
0
3
4
LA
U
R
E
L
,
M
T
DA
T
E
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
BE
R
N
H
A
R
D
T
D
I
T
C
H
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
DC
T
10
/
2
0
2
5
O
c
t
1
9
,
2
0
2
5
-
1
0
:
4
2
p
m
-
P
:
\
L
a
u
r
e
l
\
2
5
-
0
3
4
l
u
r
a
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
#
2
t
o
-
5
\
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
C
A
D
D
\
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
p
l
a
n
s
e
t
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
2
5
0
3
4
_
O
v
e
r
f
l
o
w
D
e
t
a
i
l
.
d
w
g
PR
O
J
E
C
T
#
:
DR
A
F
T
E
D
B
Y
:
CH
E
C
K
E
D
B
Y
:
DA
T
E
:
LA
U
R
E
L
U
R
B
A
N
R
E
N
E
W
A
L
A
G
E
N
C
Y
BJ
K
PLAN VIEW
SECTION VIEW
APPROXIMATE EXISTING FIBER
LOCATION
24" SDR-35
WATER TIGHT
CONNECTION TO
EXISTING PIPE
SDR-35 45-DEGREE BEND
MARKED UP PLAN TO CONTRACTOR
238
APPENDIX C
LANDSCAPING EDGING INVOICE
239
P
Earth Movers Excavation, Inc.
PO Box 957
Laurel, MT 59044
Kris Kloeckner
kriskloeckner@emxmt.com
CUSTOMER NAME JOB NAME JOB NUMBER
STREET JOB ADDRESS
CITY STATE CITY STATE
PHONE DATE PHONE DATE
HOURS RATE TOTAL
2.00 $60.00 $120.00
2.00 $35.00 $70.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
SUBTOTAL $190.00
15%% MARKUP $28.50
TOTAL LABOR $218.50
EQUIPMENT HOURS RATE TOTAL
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
0.00 $0.00
SUBTOTAL $0.00
15%% MARKUP $0.00
TOTAL EQUIPMENT $0.00
QTY UN AMOUNT TOTAL
46.00 16 39 $1,794.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
SUBTOTAL $1,794.00
10%% MARKUP $179.40
TOTAL MAT/SUBCONT $1,973.40
TOTAL ADDITIONAL CHARGE FOR WORK ABOVE $2,191.90
Authorization Kris Kloeckner Signature Kris Kloeckner
Authorization Signature
ALUMINUM EDGING 16FT/STICK
MATERIAL/SUBCONTRACTOR
TYPE
LABOR-FOREMAN
LABOR-LABORER
DESCRIPTION: Proposed Aluminum Landscape Edging to separate topsoil section from gravel section.
OCCUPATION
CCO - 002
(406) 506-8110
City of Laurel Bernhardt Ditch 25049
240
File Attachments for Item:
16. Resolution No. R26-09: A Resolution Of The City Council Approving The Variance
Requested By Drew Nordman To Allow Side-Corner Minimum Setback For An Accessory
Dwelling Unit (ADU) In The Approximate Location Of The Existing Non-Conforming Garage.
241
R26-09 Approve Nordman Variance
RESOLUTION NO. R26-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE VARIANCE
REQUESTED BY DREW NORDMAN TO ALLOW SIDE-CORNER MINIMUM
SETBACK FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) IN THE
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING GARAGE.
WHEREAS, the City of Laurel has adopted zoning regulations pursuant to §76-2-301
et seq., MCA, which establish standards for height, bulk, and location of structures including
outdoor advertising signs;
WHEREAS, Drew Nordman, the Applicant, requested a variance from the minimum
side-corner setback of 20 feet in the Laurel R-6000 zoning district;
WHEREAS, the subject property is located at Lots 19 and 20, Block12, Laurel Original
Townsite, located in Section 9, Township 02 South, Range 24 East, P.M.M., City of Laurel,
Yellowstone County, Montana;
WHEREAS, the request is to install an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) approximately
16 feet from the property line and requires a variance to the adopted R-6000 standards;
WHEREAS, the application was duly submitted by the Applicant on February 2, 2026,
and the Laurel Zoning Commission held a public hearing on March 18, 2026, to consider the
variance request;
WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission reviewed the application, supporting
documentation, and testimony presented at the public hearing;
WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission, based upon its findings of fact, determined that
the variance request met the applicable standards of review for approval of a variance under
the City’s zoning ordinance;
WHEREAS, on March 18, 2026, the Zoning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend
approval of the variance request by Drew Nordman to the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered this matter on April 14, 2026 at 6:30 p.m.;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Zoning Commission’s
recommendation, findings of fact, and supporting documentation, and determined that the
variance request meets the applicable standards of review for approval of a variance under the
City’s zoning ordinance.
242
R26-09 Approve Nordman Variance
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel,
Montana, as follows:
1. The City Council hereby approves the variance request submitted by Drew Nordman to
allow for the construction of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) approximately 16 feet
from the property line.
2. The variance approval is granted based upon the findings of fact and recommendation
of the Laurel Zoning Commission.
3. The variance shall expire one (1) year from the date of approval if the next logical step
in the development process is not commenced, including but not limited to applying for
a building permit, commencing the use, or applying for a Development Permit.
Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 14th day of April 2026 by
Council Member _____.
PASSED and APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel, Montana on the
14th day of April 2026.
APPROVED by the Mayor on the 14th day of April 2026.
CITY OF LAUREL
___________________________
Dave Waggoner, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Kelly Strecker, Clerk-Treasurer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Michele L. Braukmann, City Attorney
243
Drew Nordman
201 5th Ave Laurel MT 59044
406-531-3914
dnordman2024@hotmail.com
January 23, 2026
City of Laurel Board of Adjustment
115 W. 1st St.
Laurel, MT 59044
RE: Variance Request for 201 5th Ave Laurel MT 59044 – Setback Requirements
Dear Members of the Board of Adjustment,
Please accept this letter as a formal statement of intent for a variance request regarding the
property located at 201 5th Ave Laurel MT 59044. I am proposing to demolish an existing non-
conforming detached garage and replace it with a new structure that includes a garage on the
ground fioor and an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) above. I am requesting a variance to maintain
the existing garage's current setback of 16ft from the south property line, along W. 2nd St., rather
than moving the new structure to meet the updated minimum setback limit of 20ft.
R-6000 zoning establishes minimum setback limits on page 31 of the Laurel City Code Title 17. Due
to the property being located on a corner lot the setback limit for “side adjacent to streets” asks for
a minimum setback limit of 20ft along adjacent streets which is W. 2nd St. This street, W. 2nd St.
should be classifled as a “residential local access” or “residential collector 2 lane” according to the
street type on Table 16.4.C.1 of the municipal code. The street type determines the right-of-way
distance which establishes the appropriate minimum setback limits. Setback limits for “residential
local access” require 67ft of right-of-way which would approximate to 12.5ft of minimum setback;
while a “residential collector 2 lane” requires 70ft of right-a-way and approximate to 15ft of
minimum setback. A minimum setback limit of 20ft would be more appropriate for a road that
requires 80ft of right-of-way. Therefore, a minimum setback limit of 20ft would be excessive and
undue for properties along W. 2nd St.
Additionally, corner lots face setback limits for two streets rather than one street, which reduces
the space of usable property. After examining and measuring 31 proximal corner lots within roughly
one block radius of my address, over three quarters of them do not meet the aforementioned
setback requirements.
This request for a variance would not be adding any additional buildings to the property. It is simply
mirroring the setback limit that the current garage on the property has had for decades, removing
one garage and replacing it with another. Maintaining the current setback will allow the visual
proflle and spacing between buildings to remain consistent with what the neighbors have grown
accustomed to.
244
Per Montana Code Annotated § 76-2-323 and Laurel Municipal Code, I believe this request meets
the necessary criteria for a variance due to the following factors:
1. Unnecessary Hardship & Unique Physical Circumstances: The existing house and garage
were constructed prior to current setback regulations and are already situated outside
today's limits. Strict application of the current setbacks would require shifting the new
structure signiflcantly into the usable yard space, which is restricted by the existing primary
residences position. This creates a physical hardship in utilizing the property for a modern
ADU while maintaining functional open space.
2. Harmony with Neighborhood Character: The proposed project seeks only to maintain the
current setback of a structure that has existed for decades. By keeping the current setback,
the visual proflle and spacing between buildings that the neighbors have grown accustomed
to will remain consistent.
3. Public Health and Safety: The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare. The
new structure will be built to current flre and building codes, improving the safety of the site
compared to the aging structure it replaces. It will not interfere with the "Clear Vision
Triangle" required at alleys or intersections.
4. Support for Housing Diversity: This project aligns with the state’s intent to allow ADUs "by
right" to provide more housing options. Maintaining the existing setback allows for a design
that is more architecturally compatible with the site's historical layout.
I have attached a scaled site plan showing the existing non-conforming setbacks and the proposed
new structure. Thank you for your time and consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Drew Nordman
245
Laurel City Code Title 17, page 31, Dimensional Standards R-6000
Municipal code: title 16; chapter 16.04; table 16.4.C.1
Table 16.4.C.1. Required Dedications and Street Improvements for Subdivisions:
246
247
DATES
PAGE:
SHEET
SET:
JEFF WOLLSCHLAGER
(406)321-2280
725 GRAND AVE.
BILLINGS MT, 59101
NO
R
D
M
A
N
AD
U
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
SITE PLAN
MONTANA
CONTRACTOR
LAUREL
INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, 2021
EDITION
ADOPTED CODES
OWNER INDEX OF DRAWINGS
T1.0 TITLE/SITE PLAN
A1.1 MAIN/UPPER LEVEL PLAN
A2.0 ELEVATIONS
Drew Nordman
GENERAL NOTES
SYMBOLS LEGEND
SITE INFO
NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
SCOPE OF WORK
-CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING
CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
-ALL EXISTING AND FINISHED GRADES AND
ELEVATIONS TO BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION
LOT 19
8,400 SQ. FT.
CONTRACTOR
X OF X
T1.0
TITLE/ SITE
TI
T
L
E
/
S
I
T
E
NORDMAN
201 N 5TH AVE
dnordman2024@hotmail.com
Property Address: 201 N 5TH AVE
Township: 02 S Range: 24 E Section: 09
Subdivision: EAST LAUREL ORIGINAL TOWNSITE Block: 12
Lot: 19
Full Legal: EAST LAUREL ORIGINAL TOWNSITE, S09, T02 S,
R24 E, BLOCK 12, Lot 19 - 20
ZONING:R60-Residential 6000
Lot Size:8400 SF
1st Floor: 1118 SF
RRG3 - Garage, frame, detached, unfinished 1 520 3501
RRS1 - Shed, Frame 1 120
FRONT SETBACK:20' MIN.
SIDE SETBACK:5' MIN.
STREET-SIDE:20' MIN.
REAR SETBACK:5' MIN.
6000 SETBACKS
W 2ND ST
N
5
T
H
A
V
E
proposed
footprint
248
1
CITY HALL
115 W. 1ST ST.
PLANNING: 628-4796
WATER OFC.: 628-7431
COURT: 628-1964
FAX 628-2241
City Of Laurel
P.O. Box 10
Laurel, Montana 59044
Office of the City Planner
VARIANCE REPORT VAR-26-01
Drew Nordman
Side -Corner Minimum Setback
March 23, 2026
BACKGROUND:
The City of Laurel has had zoning since the early 1970’s as authorized by §76-2-301 et. seq MCA.
These regulations set minimum and maximum standards for all lands located with the jurisdiction
of the City of Laurel. These regulations establish standards for the height, bulk, and location of
structures.
The property owner is requesting to construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the
approximate location of the existing non-conforming garage. The subject property address is 201
N 5th Avenue and may be described as Lots 19 and 20 Block12, Laurel Original Townsite, located
in Section 9, Township 02 South, Range 24 East, P.M.M., City of Laurel, Yellowstone County,
Montana.
The subject property is zoned R-6000, and is adjacent to two public rights-of-way (5th Ave and W
2nd Street). The subject property is developed with a non-conforming residence and a non-
conforming garage. The non-conformity at issue in this request is related to the Side Corner
Setback Requirements of the Laurel Zoning Regulations. Both the front and side corner setbacks
are 20 feet from the public right-of-way.
Both existing structures are protected as ‘Legally Existing Non-Conforming Uses’. The non-
conforming use section of the Laurel Municipal Code is included in this report. The applicant was
aware of this standard at the time of requesting a building permit from the city and has requested
a variance as outlined in their application.
The application materials address several other points that outline the anticipated benefits of the
project. The application materials are incorporated into this report by reference.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lots 19 and 20 Block12, Laurel Original Townsite, located in Section 9, Township 02 South,
Range 24 East, P.M.M., City of Laurel, Yellowstone County, Montana.
APPLICANT(S):
249
2
Drew Nordman
201 5th Ave
Laurel MT 59044
AGENT:
NONE
EXISTING CONDITION:
The subject property is a platted subdivision within the City of Laurel. The property is developed
and is served by public water, sewer, streets, and solid waste collection. The property is 8,400
square feet in size.
PROCESS:
The application for a Variance was submitted on February 2, 2026, and is scheduled for a
public hearing on March 18, 2026 by the Laurel Zoning Commission.
The Zoning Commission following the Public Hearing must adopt findings of fact and
issue a formal recommendation to the City Council on the requested variance. The Zoning
Commission may propose conditions or modifications to the request so long as the findings
of fact support the condition(s).
Those findings of fact and conclusions as well as the record minutes of the public hearing
will be submitted to the City Council for consideration, hearing and final decision.
The City Council will conduct a duly noticed Public Hearing on the Zoning Commission
recommendation, findings of fact, and any conditions mitigating the impacts associated
with the request. This hearing will occur on April 14, 2026.
ZONES INVOLVED: Existing and Proposed
R-6000 – Residential 6000.
o The required setbacks for structures are:
Front 20feet
Side 5 feet
Side Corner 20 feet per Text of Regulations
Side Corner 10 feet per Dimensional Graphics R-6000
Rear 5 feet
Text and Graphics R-6000 Attached.
Rule of Construction of the Laurel Municipal Code and Zoning Regulations.
o The most restrictive standard is the governing regulation.
As such, the 20 foot side yard setback is required to be applied.
250
3
Laurel Municipal Code.
Chapter 17.56 - NONCONFORMING USES
17.56.010 - Nonconforming use designated.
Any lawful use of the land or buildings existing at the date of passage of the ordinance codified in
this chapter, and located in a district in which it would not be permitted as a new use under the
regulations of this chapter, is declared to be a nonconforming use, and not in violation of this title
at the date of adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter; provided, however, a
nonconforming use shall be subject to, and the owner shall comply with the regulations set out in
Sections 17.56.020 through 17.56.070.
(Prior code § 17.64.010 (part))
17.56.020 - Extension of.
The nonconforming use of a building may be extended throughout any part of a building clearly
designated for such use but not so used at the date of th e adoption of this chapter. No
nonconforming use may be extended to occupy any land outside the building nor any additional
building not used for such nonconforming use at the date of adoption of the ordinance codified in
this chapter. The nonconforming use of land shall not be extended to any additional land not so
used at the date of adoption of the ordinances codified in this title.
(Prior code § 17.64.010(A))
17.56.030 - Additions, repairs and alteration allowed when.
A. No building used for a nonconforming use shall be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or
structurally altered, unless the use is changed to one which complies with the provisions of this
chapter; provided, however, permits may be issued for the reconstruction of an existing
building to be continued as a nonconforming use if the following conditions are complied with:
1. If a single- or two-family dwelling is presently a nonconforming use, and is located in a
residential area, and is destroyed, the dwelling may be rebuilt. However, qualifying
dwelling units located on arterial streets or roads must conform to the applicable setback
standard;
2. New use would decrease the automobile parking congestion in the area;
3. New use would not increase the cubical contents of the structure, floor area ratio, if such
would violate provisions of this chapter;
4 Such reconstruction would be one in accordance with the city building, plumbing,
electrical codes and fire prevention code;
5. The issuance of such permit would not violate the provisions of Section 17.56.040 of
this chapter.
(Prior code § 17.64.010(B)(part))
(Ord. No. O08-05, 6-17-08)
17.56.040 - Applicability when building damaged or destroyed.
A. If any building in which there is a nonconforming use is damaged by fire, flood, explosion,
wind, war or other catastrophe, in an amount equal to or greater than fifty percent of its
assessed valuation, it shall not be again used or reconstructed to be used for any use
except one complying with the provisions of this title in which it is located. This
251
4
subsection specifically does not apply to nonconforming, one and two-family dwelling
units.
B. In addition, repairs and maintenance work may be carried out each year in an amount not
to exceed twenty-five percent of the assessed value of the building for that year. Such
repairs and maintenance work shall not increase the cubical content of the building, nor
the floor area devoted to the nonconforming use. Nor shall it increase the number of
dwelling units provided in a building.
C. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening nor repair of a
building which may be necessary to restore the building to a safe condition or to improve
the sanitary conditions of the building; provided, that such strengthening and repair may
not be used to restore a building to the provisions of Section 17.56.040 of this chapter.
(Ord. 06-12 (part), 2006; Ord. 06-06 (part), 2006; prior code § 17.64.010(B) (part), (C))
17.56.050 - Restrictions on moving building.
Any building in which there is a nonconforming use shall not be moved unless it is moved
to a district in which the use for which the building was designed is permitted by this title.
If any building in which there is a nonconforming use is moved any distance whatsoever,
the building shall thereafter be used only in compliance with the provisions of this title for
the district in which it is located.
(Prior code § 17.64.010(D))
17.56.060 - Continuance and change.
A nonconforming use may be continued in accordance with the provisions of this chapt er,
but it shall not be changed to any other use except the one which would be permitted as a
new use in the district in which the building is located.
(Prior code § 17.64.010(E))
17.56.070 - Discontinuance.
If for any reason a nonconforming use ceases for a period of six months any new use must
conform to the provisions of this title for the district in which the use occurs, and the
nonconforming use no longer allowed.
(Ord. 04-5 (part), 2004: prior code § 17.64.010(F))
RATIONAL BASIS FOR VARIANCE:
“Variance” means an adjustment in the application of the specific regulations of this title to
a particular piece of property which property, because of special circumstances applicable
to it, is deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity or
zone.
Findings of Fact: Standard of Review
A recommendation for Approval or Conditional Approval of a Variance shall require the Board of
Adjustment making each of the following Findings of Fact:
252
5
1. Special Conditions
There are special circumstances or conditions that are peculiar to the land or building for
which the Variance is sought that do not apply generally to land or buildings in the
neighborhood; and
Zoning Commission Finding:
o First, this property has unique physical conditions. As a corner lot, it is subject to two
street-facing setbacks, which significantly reduces the usable building area. The existing
house and garage were built long before current setback standards, and their placement
limits where a replacement structure can reasonably go. W. 2nd Street is also classified
as a residential local access or collector street, which typically corresponds to a smaller
setback than 20 feet.
2. Not Result of Applicant
The special circumstances or conditions have not resulted from an act of the applicant or
been established to circumvent this Ordinance; and
Zoning Commission Finding:
o The Zoning Commission did not issue a favorable finding on this criterion.
3. Strict Application Unreasonable
Due to the special circumstances or conditions, the strict application of this Ordinance would
deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the land or building or create an undue hardship
on the landowner; and
Zoning Commission Finding:
o Third, applying the 20-foot setback strictly would create an unreasonable hardship.
Moving the structure further north would push it into the limited remaining yard space
and create conflicts with the existing home. It would also make it difficult to design a
safe, functional, and code-compliant garage and ADU.
4. Necessary to Provide Reasonable Use
Granting the Variance is necessary to provide a reasonable use of the land or building; and
Zoning Commission Finding:
o Fourth, the variance is necessary for reasonable use. The new structure will be wider
than the existing garage, but placing it in the same general location is essential for the
design to work. Without maintaining the current setback, constructing a practical garage
and ADU becomes extremely difficult.
253
6
5. Minimum Variance
The Variance is the minimum variance necessary to allow a reasonable use of the land or
building; and
Zoning Commission Finding:
o Fifth, this is the minimum variance needed. I am not asking for anything beyond the
long-standing 16-foot setback that has existed for decades.
6. Not Injurious
Granting the Variance will not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public
welfare; and
Zoning Commission Finding:
o Sixth, the variance will not be injurious to the neighborhood. The new structure will
meet all current building and fire codes, and it will not interfere with the clear-vision
triangle. Maintaining the existing setback preserves the visual rhythm of the street. In
fact, after surveying 31 nearby corner lots, more than three-quarters do not meet the
current 20-foot standard, so this request is consistent with the neighborhood.
7. Consistent with Ordinance
Granting the Variance is consistent with the purposes and intent of this Ordinance. A
variance to the Allowed Uses of a zoning district is prohibited.
Zoning Commission Finding:
o Finally, the variance is consistent with the intent of the ordinance. It does not change
the allowed uses of the property. It supports orderly development, maintains
neighborhood character, and allows the addition of an ADU, which aligns with state
housing policy under MCA 76-2-323.
CONDITIONS
Conditions or restrictions may be placed on the approval of a Variance.
None were proposed by the Zoning Commission.
EXPIRATION
A Variance shall expire one (1) year from the date of approval if the next logical step in the
development process is not commenced. The next step in the development process includes but is
not limited to applying for a building permit, commencing the use, or applying for a Development
Permit.
254
7
DISCUSSION:
While the Zoning Commission Did not find favorably on all 7-review criterion, they did find
favorably on 6. It was the Commissions stated belief that the standard of review is the
“Preponderance of the evidence”.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt their Findings of Fact and Grant
the requested variance to the Side Corner setback on Lots 19 and 20 Block12, Laurel Original
Townsite, located in Section 9, Township 02 South, Range 24 East, P.M.M., City of Laurel,
Yellowstone County, Montana, reducing the side corner setback from 20 feet to 16 feet..
255
File Attachments for Item:
17. Resolution No. R26-10: A Resolution Of The City Of Laurel City Council Authorizing The
Mayor To Execute All Necessary Agreements For Services Performed By Emergency
Networking Related To Electronic Management Systems For Laurel Fire Rescue
256
R26-10 Authorize Execution of all Necessary Agreements with Emergency Networking
RESOLUTION NO. R26-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LAUREL CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES
PERFORMED BY EMERGENCY NETWORKING RELATED TO ELECTRONIC
MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FOR LAUREL FIRE RESCUE.
WHEREAS, the City of Laurel (hereinafter “the City”) has identified the need to
procure and/or update Laurel Fire Rescue emergency medical services and fire reporting
software;
WHEREAS, Emergency Networking has proposed to provide the City with cloud-
based, EMS and fire reporting and related modules known as “Aldrin”, allowing EMS and fire
departments to input, collect, store, share, report and otherwise use data to enhance services at
their customary fees; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to memorialize their respective rights and obligations,
pursuant to the Master Services Agreement by and between Emergency Networking and the
City, as well as other respective agreements related to the performance of the services to be
provided by Emergency Networking.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Laurel,
Montana:
Section 1: Approval. The Master Services Agreement by and between Emergency
Networking and the City, as well as other respective agreements related to the performance of
the services to be provided by Emergency Networking, copies attached hereto and incorporated
herein, are hereby approved.
Section 2: Execution. The Mayor is hereby given authority to execute all necessary
agreements for the provision of services by Emergency Networking, as reflected in the
documents attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 14th day of April 2026 by
Council Member ____.
PASSED and APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel, Montana on the
14th day of April 2026.
APPROVED by the Mayor on the 14th day of April 2026.
257
R26-10 Authorize Execution of all Necessary Agreements with Emergency Networking
CITY OF LAUREL
___________________________
Dave Waggoner, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Kelly Strecker, Clerk-Treasurer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Michele L. Braukmann, City Attorney
258
MASTER SERVICE
AGREEMENT (MSA)
Prepared for:
JW Hopper
Laurel Fire Rescue
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 1 of 12
259
MASTER SERVICE AGREEMENT (MSA)
This Service Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of this date by and between
Emergency Networking, Inc., an Ohio limited liability company, located at:
Emergency Networking
PO Box20559
Columbus, OH, 43220
and with,
Laurel Fire Rescue
215 W 1st Street Laurel, MT 59044
This Agreement governs Customer ’s use of the cloud-based, EMS and fire reporting and related
modules as known as “Aldrin”, (the “Service”). The Service permits EMS and Fire Departments to
input, collect, store, share, report and otherwise use data and the use of our Aldrin software platform
entered by Customer or its representatives (all such data, “Customer Data”) and generate
documentation and reports for compliance, tracking and reporting purposes. The Service is offered
through an html-based Internet website (the “Site”) as well as a mobile application.
1. REGISTRATION AND ACCOUNT SECURITY
In order to use the Service, Customer must register an account with Emergency Networking.
Customer represents that it has provided, and will provide, current, accurate and complete
information (including information about Customer ’s users) in all account-related registration
materials. Customer agrees to maintain the security of all usernames, passwords and other log-in
information relating to Customer ’s access to the Service and Customer ’s account. Customer agrees
to promptly provide Emergency Networking with notice of any information necessary to keep
Customer ’s account information accurate, current, and complete. ANY PERSON WITH
USERNAMES, PASSWORDS OR OTHER LOG-IN INFORMATION RELATING TO CUSTOMER’S
ACCOUNT MAY BE ABLE TO ACCESS CUSTOMER DATA. CUSTOMER ASSUMES ALL RISKS OF
UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS OF CUSTOMER’S ACCOUNT BASED ON SHARING OR LOSS OF
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 2 of 12
260
SUCH USERNAMES, PASSWORDS AND LOG-IN INFORMATION. Customer agrees to promptly
provide notice to Emergency Networking if Customer discovers or suspects any security breaches
relating to the unauthorized use or disclosure of Customer ’s username(s), password(s) or log-in
information.
2. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS AND LICENSES
2.1 Reservation of Rights
Subject to the limited rights expressly granted hereunder, Emergency Networking and its licensors
reserve all of its/their respective right, title and interest in and to the following (collectively, the
“Emergency Networking Property”): (a) the Service, the Site, all components of the mobile application
functionality, all other software, hardware, technology, documentation and information provided by
Emergency Networking in connection with the Service: (b) all ideas, know-how, and techniques that
may be developed, conceived or invented by Emergency Networking during the performance of the
Service under this Agreement; and (c) all worldwide patent, copyright, trade secret, trademark or
other intellectual property rights in and to the property described in subsections 2.1(a) and (b) hereof.
Subject to the rights granted to Emergency Networking in Section 2.2, Customer owns and retains all
right, title and interest in and to the Customer Data and all intellectual property rights therein.
2.2 License to Use Service.
Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Emergency Networking hereby grants to Customer a non-
exclusive, non-transferrable, worldwide license during the Service Term (defined herein) to access
and use the Service solely for Customer ’s legitimate business purposes as contemplated by this
Agreement.
2.3 License to Use Customer Data.
Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Customer hereby grants to Emergency Networking and its
Affiliates a non-exclusive, worldwide, limited license during the Service Term to host, copy, transmit,
display and use all Customer Data as necessary to provide the Service in accordance with this
Agreement. Neither Emergency Networking nor its Affiliates acquire any right, title or interest from
Customer under this Agreement in or to any Customer Data. As used herein, the term “Affiliates”
means one or more providers of necessary services used by Emergency Networking and made
available to Customer for purposes of providing the Service. An example of an “Affiliate” for such
purposes is the third-party data hosting provider used by Emergency Networking for cloud-based
data storage pertaining to Customer Data submitted by Customer when Customer uses the Service
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 3 of 12
261
(currently, Amazon Web Services). Emergency Networking may, in its reasonable discretion, change
Affiliate relationships during the Service Term.
2.4 Data De-Identification:
We may De-Identify your Information and use and disclose De-Identified Information for any purpose
whatsoever. We may create limited data sets from your information and disclose them for any
purpose for which you may disclose a limited data set; and you hereby authorize us to enter into data
use agreements on your behalf for the use of limited data sets, in accordance with applicable law and
regulation. In consideration of our provision of the Services, you hereby transfer and assign to us all
right, title and interest in and to all De-Identified Information that we make from your Information. You
agree that we may use, disclose, market, license and sell such De-Identified Information for any
purpose without restriction, and that you have no interest in such information, or in the proceeds of
any sale, license, or other commercialization thereof. You acknowledge that the rights conferred by
this Section are the principal consideration for the provision of the Services, without which we would
not enter into this Agreement.
2.5 Restrictions.
Except as expressly permitted in this Agreement, Customer shall not directly or indirectly: (a) access,
use, sell, distribute, sublicense, broadcast or commercially exploit any of the Emergency Networking
Property or any rights under this Agreement; (b) introduce any infringing, obscene, libelous, or
otherwise unlawful data or material into the Service; (c) copy, modify or prepare derivative works
based on Emergency Networking Property; (d) reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or attempt
to derive source code from any Emergency Networking Property; or (e) remove, obscure, or alter any
intellectual property right or confidentiality notices appearing in or on any aspect of any Emergency
Networking Property.
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 4 of 12
262
3. FEES.
3.1 Fees for Service.
As consideration for the license to use the Service granted hereunder, Customer will pay all fees
specified during the account registration process, on a recurring or other basis as established at such
time, all as set forth in Bid Proposal, attached hereto.
3.2 Invoicing and Payment.
Emergency Networking bills recurring fees on a monthly basis or annual basis, based the number of
modules selected on flat annual monthly or annual fee. Invoiced charges are due net 30 days from
invoice date. Customer is responsible for providing complete and accurate billing information to
Emergency Networking and notifying Emergency Networking of any changes to such information.
3.3 Overdue Payments.
If Emergency Networking does not receive an invoiced amount by the due date, then, without limiting
Emergency Networking’s rights or remedies, (a) such overdue charges may accrue late interest at
the rate of 1.5% of the outstanding balance per month, or the maximum rate permitted by law,
whichever is lower, and/or (b) Emergency Networking may condition future subscription renewals on
payment terms and methods shorter than those specified herein, including pre-payment or payment
by credit card or electronic transfer.
3.4 Suspension of Service.
If any amount owed by Customer under this Agreement is 30 or more days overdue, Emergency
Networking may, without limiting its rights and remedies, accelerate the entire unpaid fee obligations
hereunder so that all of Customer ’s obligations become immediately due and payable, and suspend
the Service to Customer until such amounts are paid in full. Emergency Networking shall provide
Customer with at least 10 days prior notice that Customer’s account is overdue before suspending
the Service.
3.5 Taxes.
Emergency Networking’s fees do not include taxes, levies, duties or similar governmental
assessments of any nature (including for example, sales, use, ad-valorem, value-added or
withholding taxes). Customer is responsible for paying all taxes associated with Customer ’s use of
the Service. If Emergency Networking has a legal obligation to pay or collect taxes for which
Customer is responsible under applicable law, Emergency Networking will include such taxes in its
invoices, and Customer will pay such taxes in addition to the fees for the Service, unless Customer
provides Emergency Networking with a valid exemption certificate authorized by the appropriate
taxing authority.
4. TERM AND TERMINATION
4.1 Service Term.
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 5 of 12
263
The term of this Agreement (the “Service Term”) will commence when Customer registers for the
account specified in Section 1 and will continue until terminated in accordance with this Agreement.
The term of the subscription period for the Service will be for 12Months. Service Term subscriptions
will automatically renew for additional periods equal to the expiring subscription term, unless either
party gives the other written notice of non-renewal at least 60 days before the end of the relevant
subscription term. Fees during any annual automatic renewal term will not increase by more than 5%
from the immediately prior term. Any special terms (In Section 12) listed below that modify the term
length & price increases will supersede the language in this section.
Customer Initials (Agreeing to Service Term)
4.2 Termination.
A party may terminate this Agreement for cause (a) upon 30 days' notice to the other party of a
material breach if such breach remains uncured at the expiration of such 30-day period; or (b)
immediately if the other party becomes the subject of a petition in bankruptcy or other proceeding
relating to insolvency, receivership, liquidation or assignment for the benefit of creditors
4.3 Customer Data Portability and Deletion.
Upon request made by Customer made within 60 days after the effective date of any termination of
this Agreement or expiration of the Service Term, Emergency Networking and its Affiliates will make
all Customer Data available to Customer for export or download. Customer will have the option to
continue to access their data online in a read only mode for a monthly or annual fee. After such 60-
day period, Emergency Networking will have no obligation to maintain or provide access to Customer
Data, and Emergency Networking and its Affiliates will thereafter be permitted to delete or destroy all
copies of Customer Data in its/their systems or otherwise in its/their possession or control as
provided in the hosting service provider ’s terms and conditions, unless prohibited by applicable law.
5. WARRANTIES AND LIMITATIONS
5.1 Representations.
Each party hereby represents to the other that it has validly entered into this Agreement and has the
legal power to do so, and that such party will comply with all applicable laws and regulations that may
be in effect during the Service Term as they apply to such party’s obligations under this Agreement.
In addition, Customer represents to Emergency Networking that the Customer Data, and the lawful
use thereof by Emergency Networking, does not, and will not, infringe, or constitute an infringement
or misappropriation of, any intellectual property rights, privacy rights or other proprietary rights of any
third party or breach the terms of any agreement with a third party.
5.2 Emergency Networking Warranties.
Emergency Networking warrants that (a) this Agreement, any Affiliate(s)’ terms and conditions and
any account sign-up materials accurately describe the safeguards for protection of the security,
confidentiality and integrity of Customer Data, (b) Emergency Networking will not materially decrease
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 6 of 12
264
overall security of the Service during the Service Term, (c) the Service will perform materially in
accordance with this Agreement and any documentation provided to Customer on the Site or
otherwise in the account sign-up materials, and (d) other than as required by Affiliate(s)’ terms and
conditions, Emergency Networking will not materially decrease the functionality of the Service during
the Service Term.
5.3 Disclaimers.
EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED HEREIN, NEITHER PARTY MAKES ANY WARRANTY OF
ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, AND EACH
PARTY SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR NON-
INFRINGEMENT, TO THE MAXIMIUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 7 of 12
265
6. INDEMNIFICATION
6.1 By Emergency Networking
Emergency Networking will defend Customer from and against any and all loss, damage, liability, and
expense arising from or relating to any claim brought against Customer by a third party alleging that
the use of the Service in accordance with this Agreement infringes or misappropriates such third
party’s intellectual property rights.
7. LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY
7.1 Limitations on Liability
If Emergency Networking fails to perform its duties and obligations under this Agreement, and
Customer can establish that as a direct result thereof, Customer has incurred any damages,
liabilities, losses, fees, costs or expenses, then Emergency Networking’s liability to Customer for
actual damages for any cause whatsoever, during the Service Term, whether in contract, tort
(including negligence), strict liability or otherwise, shall not exceed in the aggregate the fees that
Customer has paid for the Service during the Service Term. IN NO EVENT SHALL EMERGENCY
NETWORKING OR ITS OFFICERS, MANAGERS, EMPLOYEES, AFFILIATES OR AGENTS BE
LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OF PROFIT OR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY,
MULTIPLE, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES SUSTAINED OR INCURRED BY
CUSTOMER OR ANY THIRD PARTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE, ANY ACTION ANY
OF THEM TAKE OR FAIL TO TAKE AS A RESULT OF COMMUNICATIONS CUSTOMER SENDS
TO EMERGENCY NETWORKING OR THE DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE ANY SERVICE, OR
EMERGENCY NETWORKING’S OR ITS AFFILIATE(S)’ REMOVAL, MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION
OR DELETION OF ANY PART OF THE SERVICE PURSUANT TO ITS RIGHTS UNDER THIS
AGREEMENT, IN ALL CASES, REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF THE ACTION AND WHETHER
SUCH DAMAGES WERE FORESEEN OR UNFORESEEN AND EVEN IF EMERGENCY
NETWORKING HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. EXCEPT FOR
AN ACTION FOR NON-PAYMENT BY EMERGENCY NETWORKING, NO ACTION, REGARDLESS
OF FORM, ARISING OUT OF THIS AGREEMENT MAY BE BROUGHT BY EITHER PARTY MORE
THAN ONE YEAR AFTER THE CAUSE OF ACTION HAS OCCURRED.
8. DATA
8.1 Security
Emergency Networking and its Affiliates will use reasonable efforts to establish and maintain
safeguards to protect the security and integrity of the Service and protect against the accidental or
unauthorized use, alteration or disclosure of Customer Data. Emergency Networking will arrange for
provision of hosting services for Customer Data which provide confidentiality procedures which are
consistent with the Privacy Rule set forth in the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Hosting services provided by Amazon Web are subject to the HIPAA
Compliance Guidelines found at: Security. Emergency Networking and its Affiliates will use
reasonable efforts to establish and maintain safeguards to protect the security and integrity of the
Service and protect against the accidental or unauthorized use, alteration or disclosure of Customer
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 8 of 12
266
Data. Emergency Networking will arrange for provision of hosting services for Customer Data which
provide confidentiality procedures which are consistent with the Privacy Rule set forth in the U.S.
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Hosting services provided by
Amazon Web are subject to the HIPAA Compliance Guidelines found at:
https://aws.amazon.com/compliance/hipaa-compliance/.
8.2 Backups
Emergency Networking and its Affiliates will use reasonable efforts to establish and maintain
regularly scheduled backups with respect to all Customer Data.
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 9 of 12
267
9. MISCELLANEOUS
9.1 Assignment
Customer may not assign any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement, by operation of law or
otherwise, without first obtaining Emergency Networking’s written consent, except that Customer
may assign this Agreement without Emergency Networking’s consent (i) to an affiliate (controlled by
or under common control with, Customer); or (ii) in connection with a merger, acquisition, corporate
reorganization, or sale of all or substantially all of Customer ’s assets not involving a direct competitor
of Emergency Networking; provided that Customer provides prompt written notice to Emergency
Networking of such assignment. Any permitted assignment by Customer shall not modify the terms
hereof, including without limitation, the specific geographic location applicable to the Service. Any
attempt to assign Customer ’s rights or obligations under this Agreement in breach of this section
shall be void and of no effect. Subject to the foregoing, this Agreement shall bind and inure to the
benefit of the parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns.
9.2 Notice
Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any notice to Customer that is required or permitted
by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed effective upon transmission when mailed
by first class, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid or when sent by overnight courier service,
to the address provided by Customer in the account sign-up provided to Emergency Networking in
connection with entering into this Agreement or to such other address as provided in writing by
Customer to Emergency Networking for such purposes. Except as otherwise provided in this
Agreement, any notice to Emergency Networking that is required or permitted by this Agreement
shall be in writing and shall be deemed effective upon receipt, when mailed by first class, registered
or certified mail, postage prepaid or when sent by overnight courier service, such as Federal Express
or equivalent, to: Emergency Networking, Inc., P.O. Box 20559, Columbus, Ohio 43220, Attn: Legal
Notice.
9.3 Force Majeure
Due performance of any duty or obligation hereunder by Emergency Networking hereunder shall be
excused if prevented by acts of God, information providers or other service providers, public enemy,
war, terrorism, any accident, explosion, fire, storm, earthquake, flood, strike, computer outage or
virus, telecommunications failure, or any other circumstance beyond or event Emergency
Networking’s reasonable control.
9.4 Severability
If any one or more of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal or
unenforceable for any reason, then the validity, legally or enforceability of the remaining provisions of
this Agreement shall not be affected thereby. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the parties
waive any provisions of law that render any provision of this Agreement invalid, illegal, or
unenforceable in any respect.
9.5 Waiver or Consent
Any failure by either of the Parties to comply with any obligation, covenant, condition, or agreement
contained herein may be waived in writing by the party entitled to the benefits thereof, but such
waiver or failure to insist on strict compliance with such obligation, covenant, condition or agreement
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 10 of 12
268
shall not operate as a waiver of or estoppel with respect to any subsequent or other failure. To be
effective, any consent by Emergency Networking must be in writing and signed by an authorized
representative of Emergency Networking.
9.6 Entire Agreement
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter
hereof and supersedes and replaces all prior writings or oral negotiations or other understandings
with respect thereto.
9.7 Independent Parties
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as creating a partnership, joint venture, fiduciary, or
agency relationship between the parties, or as authorizing either party to act as an agent for the
other. The parties to this Agreement are independent parties.
9.8 Governing Law; Forum for Disputes
This Agreement and all terms and conditions included or incorporated by reference herein shall be
governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Ohio applicable to
agreements made and wholly performed therein. Customer hereby consents to the exclusive
jurisdiction of the federal and state courts of competent jurisdiction located in Franklin County, Ohio
for the adjudication of any disputes arising out of or relating to this Agreement or Customer ’s access
to or use of the Services. Customer hereby waives any objection to venue or inconvenient forum laid
therein.
10. MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT
10.1. Maintenance
The following items define what is included as part of maintenance:
10.1.1 Included maintenance is defined as updates to either remedy software defects or provide
enhancements to all Emergency Networking modules core and customized software. Emergency
Networking reserves the right to update software at any time, however, will make efforts to notify
Customer in advance of any maintenance.
10.2. Support
These following items define what is included as part of support:
10.2.1 Included support is defined as 24-hour email support; and phone support, Monday – Friday
8;00 am – 6 pm EST. Support requests will be logged via email, phone, and/or within the system and
Customer will be notified as to the status of the support request within 12 hours of receipt. In good
faith, Emergency Networking will make its best effort to resolve issues in a timely manner depending
upon the nature of the request.
10.2.2 Unless otherwise agreed upon in Exhibit A, excluded support is defined as on-site support or
support of hardware and software solutions with which Aldrin may require to run on and or integrate
with.
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 11 of 12
269
11. ATTACHMENTS
11. Attachments. The following attachments are an integral component of this agreement:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered into this agreement effective as of the date first
set forth above.
12. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
This space reserved for any contractual changes or special agreements.
None
** Please Submit a Copy of Your Tax-Exempt Certificate with this order or "Tax" will be added
to this order.
2025-12-30
Emergency Networking
2026-04-30
Customer
Document Ref: IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD Page 12 of 12
270
REF. NUMBER
IO2WC-BGQXR-4FCHG-F8BFD
DOCUMENT COMPLETED BY ALL PARTIES ON
30 DEC 2025 13:13:52
UTC
SIGNER TIMESTAMP SIGNATURE
JW HOPPER
EMAIL
JWHOPPER@LAUREL.MT.GOV
SHARED VIA
LINK
SENT
18 DEC 2025 01:45:04
VIEWED
18 DEC 2025 02:25:31
SIGNED
29 DEC 2025 22:42:16 IP ADDRESS
72.175.80.66
LOCATION
BILLINGS, UNITED STATES
SEAN RAMSEY
EMAIL
SEAN.RAMSEY@EMERGENCYNETWORKING.COM
SENT
18 DEC 2025 01:45:04
VIEWED
30 DEC 2025 13:13:41
SIGNED
30 DEC 2025 13:13:52
IP ADDRESS
163.116.145.53
LOCATION
ASHBURN, UNITED STATES
RECIPIENT VERIFICATION
EMAIL VERIFIED
30 DEC 2025 13:13:41
Signed with PandaDoc PAGE 1 OF 1
271
File Attachments for Item:
18. Resolution No. R26-11: A Resolution Of The City Council Authorizing The Mayor To Sign
An Agreement With CivicPlus For Services Relating To Upgrading The City ’s Website, Agenda
And Meeting Management, Media, AudioEye, And DocAccess.
272
R26-11 Approve Agreement with CivicPlus for City’s Website, Agenda and Meeting Management, Media,
AudioEye, and DocAccess Upgrades
RESOLUTION NO. R26-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH CIVICPLUS FOR SERVICES RELATING TO
UPGRADING THE CITY’S WEBSITE, AGENDA AND MEETING MANAGEMENT,
MEDIA, AUDIOEYE, AND DOCACCESS.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel, Montana,
Section 1: Approval. The Agreements between the City of Laurel and CivicPlus, a
copy of each agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, is hereby approved.
Section 2: Execution. The Mayor and the City Clerk of the City of Laurel are hereby
given authority to execute the Agreements on behalf of the City.
Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on April 14, 2026, by Council
Member _____.
PASSED and APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Laurel this 14th day of
April 2026.
APPROVED by the Mayor this 14th day of April 2026.
CITY OF LAUREL
___________________________
Dave Waggoner, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Kelly Strecker, Clerk-Treasurer
Approved as to form:
______________________________
Michele Braukmann, City Attorney
273
CivicPlus
302 South 4th St. Suite 500
Manhattan, KS 66502
US
Statement of Work
Quote #:Q-97774-1
CivicPlus Pricing
Approval Date:
3/23/2026 6:54 PM
Expires On:6/3/2025
Client:
City of Laurel, MT
Bill To:
LAUREL CITY, MONTANA
SALESPERSON Phone EMAIL DELIVERY METHOD PAYMENT METHOD
Rewen Reyes rewen.reyes@civicplus.com Net 30
One-time(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 Migration Standard
Implementation
Includes Full Setup and Configuration of Website Design Selected From 1
of 5 Layout Options
1.00 Content Migration All Publicly Available Non-time Sensitive Published Content Migrated While
Maintaining Formatting. Spelling & Links Check Completed.
1.00 Group Training 3 Seats of Pre-scheduled Joint Training Sessions Up-to 3-Hours per
Session
1.00 Meeting Migration All Publicly Available Word / PDF Formatted Meetings and Agendas
Migrated
Recurring Service(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 Municipal Websites Central:
Starter Hosting and Security
Annual Fee
Municipal Websites Central: Module Based Hosting and Security Annual
Fee
1.00 Municipal Websites Central:
Starter Standard Annual Fee
Municipal Websites Central : Starter Standard Annual Fee
1.00 SSL Management CivicPlus
Provided
SSL Management CivicPlus Provided: https://cityoflaurelmontana.com/
Page 1 of 3
274
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 DNS and Domain Hosting
Annual Fee
DNS and Domain Hosting Annual Fee: https://cityoflaurelmontana.com/
Initial Term Beginning at signing and ending 1/31/2028,
Renewal Term 2/1 each calendar year
Initial Term Invoice Schedule Year One Annual Total invoiced upon the signature
date of this Agreement, subject to proration if the
term begins at signing. Subsequent Annual Totals
invoiced every 12 months starting at Renewal Term.
Annual Subscription One Time Fees Annual Total
Year One USD 0.00 USD 0.00 USD 0.00
Year Two USD 4,525.25 USD 4,525.25
Subtotal USD 4,525.25
Annual Recurring Services Starting Year 3 USD 4,751.51
Renewal Procedure Automatic 1 year renewal term, unless 60
days notice provided prior to renewal date
Annual Uplift 5% to be applied in year 3
This Statement of Work ("SOW") shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the CivicPlus Master Services Agreement
and the applicable Solution and Services terms and conditions located at https://www.civicplus.help/hc/en-us/p/legal-
stuff (collectively, the "Binding Terms"). By signing this SOW, Client expressly agrees to the terms and conditions of the
Binding Terms throughout the term of this SOW.
Please note that this document is a SOW and not an invoice. Upon signing and submitting this SOW, Client will receive
the applicable invoice according to the terms of the invoicing schedule outlined herein.
Client may issue purchase orders for its internal, administrative use only, and not to impose any contractual terms. Any
terms contained in any such purchase orders issued by the Client are considered null and will not alter the Binding Terms,
the Agreement or this SOW.
Total Investment – Initial Term to be prorated based on signature date.
Page 2 of 3
275
Acceptance of Quote # Q-97774-1
The undersigned acknowledges having read, understood, and agreed to be bound by the binding terms and conditions
incorporated into this SOW. This SOW shall become effective as of the date of the last signature below (“Effective Date”).
For CivicPlus Billing Information, please visit https://www.civicplus.com/verify/
Authorized Client Signature
CivicPlus
By (please sign):
___________________________________
By (please sign):
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Organization Legal Name:
___________________________________
Billing Contact:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Billing Phone Number:
___________________________________
Billing Email:
___________________________________
Billing Address:
___________________________________
___________________________________
Mailing Address: (If different from above)
___________________________________
___________________________________
PO Number: (Info needed on Invoice (PO or Job#) if required)
___________________________________
Page 3 of 3
276
CivicPlus
302 South 4th St. Suite 500
Manhattan, KS 66502
US
Statement of Work
Quote #:Q-118010-1
Date:2/23/2026 3:46 PM
Expires On:4/24/2026
Client:
City of Laurel, MT
Bill To:
LAUREL CITY, MONTANA
SALESPERSON Phone EMAIL DELIVERY METHOD PAYMENT METHOD
Rewen Reyes rewen.reyes@civicplus.com Net 30
One-time(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 AudioEye Managed
Implementation
AudioEye Managed Implementation
Recurring Service(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 AudioEye Managed AudioEye Managed: URL
Total Investment - Prorated Year 1 USD 3,700.00
Annual Recurring Services (Subject to Uplift)USD 3,200.00
Total Days of Quote:365
Initial Term 12 Months Beginning at Signing
Initial Term Invoice Schedule 100% Invoiced upon Signature Date
The Annual Recurring Services subscription fee for the Products (as described above) included in this SOW are
prorated and co-termed to align with the Client’s current billing schedule and the Annual Recurring Services amount will
subsequently be added to Client's Term and regularly scheduled annual invoices under the terms of the Agreement.
This Statement of Work ("SOW") shall be subject to the terms and conditions of Master Services Agreement signed
by and between the Parties and the applicable Solutions and Services Terms and Conditions located at: https://
www.civicplus.help/docs/civicplus-legal-stuff (collective, the "Agreement"). By signing this SOW, Client expressly agrees
to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, as though set forth herein.
Page 1 of 3
277
Please note that this document is a SOW and not an invoice. Upon signing and submitting this SOW, Client will receive
the applicable invoice according to the terms of the invoicing schedule outlined herein.
Client may issue purchase orders for its internal, administrative use only, and not to impose any contractual terms. Any
terms contained in any such purchase orders issued by the Client are considered null and will not alter the Binding Terms,
the Agreement or this SOW.
Page 2 of 3
278
Acceptance of Quote # Q-118010-1
The undersigned acknowledges having read, understood, and agreed to be bound by the binding terms and conditions
incorporated into this SOW. This SOW shall become effective as of the date of the last signature below (“Effective Date”).
For CivicPlus Billing Information, please visit https://www.civicplus.com/verify/
Authorized Client Signature
CivicPlus
By (please sign):
___________________________________
By (please sign):
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Organization Legal Name:
___________________________________
Billing Contact:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Billing Phone Number:
___________________________________
Billing Email:
___________________________________
Billing Address:
___________________________________
___________________________________
Mailing Address: (If different from above)
___________________________________
___________________________________
PO Number: (Info needed on Invoice (PO or Job#) if required)
___________________________________
Page 3 of 3
279
CivicPlus
302 South 4th St. Suite 500
Manhattan, KS 66502
US
Statement of Work
Quote #:Q-118012-1
Date:2/23/2026 3:52 PM
Expires On:4/24/2026
Client:
City of Laurel, MT
Bill To:
LAUREL CITY, MONTANA
SALESPERSON Phone EMAIL DELIVERY METHOD PAYMENT METHOD
Rewen Reyes rewen.reyes@civicplus.com Net 30
Recurring Service(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 DocAccess DocAccess is a document accessibility platform that scans, converts, and
monitors PDF documents on websites to support ADA and Section 508
compliance efforts for users with disabilities.
Total Investment - Prorated Year 1 USD 4,438.60
Annual Recurring Services (Subject to Uplift)USD 4,438.60
Total Days of Quote:365
Initial Term 12 Months Beginning at Signing
Initial Term Invoice Schedule 100% Invoiced upon Signature Date
The Annual Recurring Services subscription fee for the Products (as described above) included in this SOW are
prorated and co-termed to align with the Client’s current billing schedule and the Annual Recurring Services amount will
subsequently be added to Client's Term and regularly scheduled annual invoices under the terms of the Agreement.
This Statement of Work ("SOW") shall be subject to the terms and conditions of Master Services Agreement signed
by and between the Parties and the applicable Solutions and Services Terms and Conditions located at: https://
www.civicplus.help/docs/civicplus-legal-stuff (collective, the "Agreement"). By signing this SOW, Client expressly agrees
to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, as though set forth herein.
Please note that this document is a SOW and not an invoice. Upon signing and submitting this SOW, Client will receive
the applicable invoice according to the terms of the invoicing schedule outlined herein.
Page 1 of 3
280
Client may issue purchase orders for its internal, administrative use only, and not to impose any contractual terms. Any
terms contained in any such purchase orders issued by the Client are considered null and will not alter the Binding Terms,
the Agreement or this SOW.
Page 2 of 3
281
Acceptance of Quote # Q-118012-1
The undersigned acknowledges having read, understood, and agreed to be bound by the binding terms and conditions
incorporated into this SOW. This SOW shall become effective as of the date of the last signature below (“Effective Date”).
For CivicPlus Billing Information, please visit https://www.civicplus.com/verify/
Authorized Client Signature
CivicPlus
By (please sign):
___________________________________
By (please sign):
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Organization Legal Name:
___________________________________
Billing Contact:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Billing Phone Number:
___________________________________
Billing Email:
___________________________________
Billing Address:
___________________________________
___________________________________
Mailing Address: (If different from above)
___________________________________
___________________________________
PO Number: (Info needed on Invoice (PO or Job#) if required)
___________________________________
Page 3 of 3
282
CivicPlus
302 South 4th St. Suite 500
Manhattan, KS 66502
US
Statement of Work
Quote #:Q-120089-1
CivicPlus Pricing
Approval Date:
Expires On:5/18/2026
Client:
City of Laurel, MT
Bill To:
LAUREL CITY, MONTANA
SALESPERSON Phone EMAIL DELIVERY METHOD PAYMENT METHOD
Rewen Reyes rewen.reyes@civicplus.com Net 30
Added One-time(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 Conversion Pro Premium
Implementation
Includes config. of up to 6 existing meeting types, up to 6 existing boards, 1
approval workflow per existing meeting type, 1 existing staff report, access
to 4h of group training, 1h of consulting and recorded training resources
1.00 CivicPlus Media: Implementation
Fee
CivicPlus Media: Implementation Fee
Added Recurring Service(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
1.00 AMM Select: Pro Annual Fee AMM Select: Pro Annual Fee
1.00 AMM Select: AI Editing Assistant AI Editing Assistant is an optional AMMS feature that enables authorized
users to enhance agenda and meeting content using integrated AI tools to
generate, summarize, rewrite, or polish text in fields like item descriptions,
fiscal info, and minutes.
1.00 CivicPlus Media: Annual Fee CivicPlus Media Annual Fee: Unlimited storage, unlimited users, up to 3
concurrent streams
Page 1 of 3
283
Removed Recurring Service(s)
QTY PRODUCT NAME DESCRIPTION
0.00 Agenda & Meeting Management
Essential Premium Annual
Renewal
Municode Codification Meetings Premium Annual Renewal
List Price - Initial Term Total USD 8,605.07
Total Investment - Initial Term USD 5,813.89
Annual Recurring Services (Subject to Uplift)USD 6,810.00
Initial Term Beginning at signing and ending 11/30/2026,
Renewal Term 12/1 each calendar year
Initial Term Invoice Schedule 100% invoiced at signing, to be
prorated based on signature date.
Renewal Procedure Automatic 1 year renewal term, unless 60
days notice provided prior to renewal date
Annual Uplift 0% to be applied in year 2
This Statement of Work ("SOW") shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the CivicPlus Master Services Agreement
and the applicable Solution and Services terms and conditions located at https://www.civicplus.help/hc/en-us/p/legal-
stuff (collectively, the "Binding Terms"). By signing this SOW, Client expressly agrees to the terms and conditions of the
Binding Terms throughout the term of this SOW.
Please note that this document is a SOW and not an invoice. Upon signing and submitting this SOW, Client will receive
the applicable invoice according to the terms of the invoicing schedule outlined herein.
Client may issue purchase orders for its internal, administrative use only, and not to impose any contractual terms. Any
terms contained in any such purchase orders issued by the Client are considered null and will not alter the Binding Terms,
the Agreement or this SOW.
Total Investment – Initial Term to be prorated based on signature date.
Page 2 of 3
284
Acceptance of Quote # Q-120089-1
The undersigned acknowledges having read, understood, and agreed to be bound by the binding terms and conditions
incorporated into this SOW. This SOW shall become effective as of the date of the last signature below (“Effective Date”).
For CivicPlus Billing Information, please visit https://www.civicplus.com/verify/
Authorized Client Signature
CivicPlus
By (please sign):
___________________________________
By (please sign):
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Printed Name:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Date:
___________________________________
Organization Legal Name:
___________________________________
Billing Contact:
___________________________________
Title:
___________________________________
Billing Phone Number:
___________________________________
Billing Email:
___________________________________
Billing Address:
___________________________________
___________________________________
Mailing Address: (If different from above)
___________________________________
___________________________________
PO Number: (Info needed on Invoice (PO or Job#) if required)
___________________________________
Page 3 of 3
285
888-228-2233 | CivicPlus.com
AudioEye
AudioEye Benefits:
Improve compliance with hands-off web accessibility and remediation.
Gain peace of mind with trusted, certified
website accessibility alignment to WCAG
2.2 standards
Demonstrate and prove accessibility efforts
with simplified reporting
Take the guesswork out of ADA compliance
with our unique approach that combines
automated remediation, expert fixes, and
continuous monitoring
Reduce the costs of maintaining compliance
with hands-off remediation services
Provide instant website accessibility and
personalization for visitors with and without
disabilities with the Accessibility Help Desk tool
“Since implementing AudioEye, a huge burden has been lifted off my shoulders. I trust them to address
accessibility issues, which has allowed me to focus on other priorities. It’s so important to have a tool that not
only improves your position on accessibility but also alleviates the heavy workload that comes with maintaining
compliance at a high level. AudioEye has truly been a breath of fresh air in this regard.”
Chaquinta Fisher, IT Support Manager | McLennan Country
286
888-228-2233 | CivicPlus.com
Website visitors can personalize their experiences and improve accessibility
by customizing things like contrast, text size, images, and more. Additionally,
users can submit feedback through a 24/7 Help Desk if they encounter access
barriers on a website.
Accessibility Help Desk Tool
Ready to see it for yourself?
Schedule a Demo
2,600+ frivolous legal claims
against customers analyzed and
refuted by AudioEye since 2022
AudioEye’s AI-based automation
and custom fixes offers 300% more
protection from legal claims than
traditional consulting approaches—
and 400% more protection than
automation-only solutions
AudioEye automatically fixes most accessibility issues, while improving ongoing
compliance with the latest standards. Our certified experts write custom fixes
for accessibility issues on your website that automation alone can’t fix.
AudioEye provides an Accessibility Trusted Certification that details and
validates your organization’s commitment to digital inclusion and conformance
to WCAG and other ADA-related laws, mandates, and guidelines.
Hands-off Accessibility Remediation
Comprehensive reporting gives better visibility into flagged accessibility issues
and enables you to effectively provide proof of compliance progress. Receive
reporting for a period of time on items like site accessibility score, issue found by
fix type, issues fixed by severity, top fixes applied to site, and more.
Compliance Reporting
287
888-228-2233 | CivicPlus.com
DocAccess
DocAccess
Key Benefits:
Simplify compliance by automatically converting all current and future PDFs into
screen reader-friendly, WCAG 2.1 AA-aligned HTML transcripts.
Eliminate access barriers with 150+
language translations, optional live visual
interpretation support, and interactive
document outlines
Align all current and future PDFs to ADA
standards by automatically converting
documents to WCAG 2.1 AA-aligned,
screen reader-friendly HTML transcripts
Empower residents to explore content
with a searchable, mobile-friendly HTML
format and built-in Ask a Question tool
Save time, resources, and stress while
effortlessly aligning even complex
documents to accessibility standards
language translations
provided
150+
to set up on your website
1 Day
for new PDFs to be automatically
detected and converted
5 Minutes
288
888-228-2233 | CivicPlus.com
Ready to see it for yourself?
Get a Demo
Once DocAccess is activated, all PDF links on your website
automatically open in the mobile-friendly DocAccess view. Residents
can use the print-friendly version or the HTML transcript, which
includes detailed alt text for images.
Instantly Convert Documents to
HTML Transcripts
DocAccess is built for the complexity and range of
government documentation. Use it to convert even your most
difficult PDFs, including:
• Historical and handwritten
documents
• Complex RFPs with diagrams
and decision trees
• Comprehensive financial audits
• Multi-column brochures with
scanned maps
• Scanned legal documents
and budgets with handwritten
signatures
Align Tricky Documents to WCAG 2.1 Standards
Over 150 built-in language translations can be applied to the HTML
transcript with one click. Translations also apply to DocAccess
features, including the Ask a Question tool.
Translate into 150+ Languages
289
File Attachments for Item:
19. NWE FERC Letter of Support Discussion
290
Laurel FERC
YOUR HEADER
DATE
Sample letter
The Honorable Laura V. Swett Docket
ER26-129-002
Chairman
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First St NE
Washington, DC 20426
Dear Charman Swett and Commissioners, Rosner, See, Chang and LaCerte,
The Laurel City Council represents a unique population, all of which are NorthWestern
Energy customers. Many work at the Railroad Switch Yard and the Cenex Refinery (the
largest refinery in Montana). For such a small community we consume a large amount
of energy and produce a large amount of energy. Most of our residents work regular
jobs and many are retired. Many of our businesses are small and struggling.
Our population growth is often people moving here to avoid the costs of living, or
retiring in, bigger cities. Our energy consumption will continue to increase along with the
rest of Montana. This with a backdrop of an ill-liquid energy market and stretched
capacity of rate-based energy and transmission up grades. Because of this we are
experiencing double-digit rate increases every few years.
With great concern we learned of NorthWestern Energy’s move to change the 370 MW
of generation received, at no cost, from Puget Sound and Energy from rate based to
market based (Cost Based Tariff). Removing this resource f rom the control of the
Montana Public Service Commission, and in service to all of NWE customers, to benefit
just a few new customers, is counter intuitive. Especially since, as our “default supplier”,
NWE’s only obligation is to serve their captive customers.
Commissioners, except for a few moderate days in late spring and early fall we are
often energy deficit and must go to the market to balance our energy consumption and
generation. Rate basing the 370MW mentioned would not only take us out of an illiquid
energy market, thus providing relief to a stressed grid, but also provide a capacity for
economic growth to all; not just a few or one data center. Yes, even the “new large load”
customers would benefit from rate basing this resource as indicated in NW E’s recent
Large Load Tariff filing with the Mt. Public Service Commission. If the Mt. PSC approves
NWE’s new Large Load Tariff legacy ratepayers could be paying for $2.1B in new
generation used only by data centers. Of course the attending rate decreases, if the
291
afore mentioned 370 MW are rate based, would help all as property taxes would drop
after a recent history of massive market value increases have driven property taxes
beyond the capacity of many on fixed incomes to pay.
Thank you for your consideration of this vital issue. We ask that you reconsider not only
your determination that NWE can avoid scrutiny by upholding their determination that
the capacity to generate 370MW in an energy deficit circumstance is of $0 value . We
also ask that you recognize that the generation being used is for the greatest good
when it serves all equally.
Sincerely,
Signature______________
Signature_____________________
Name Name
Mayor Deputy Mayor
___Signature________ ____________________________
City Manager ETC
Council Members in Support
_______Signature____________
________Signature__________
Name Teacher,
Lawyer, What ever
292
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Northwest Western Colstrip 370Pu LLC ) ER26-129-001
REQUEST FOR REHEARING ON BEHALF OF NORTHWESTERN ENERGY’S
CAPTIVE MONTANA CUSTOMERS AS REPRESENTED BY MONTANA’S
INDEPENDENT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONERS
Montana Commissioners Brad Molnar and Randall Pinocci (Montana’s Independent
Commissioners or ICs) respectfully request that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) grant rehearing of the February 27, 2026 Order Accepting Tariff Revisions (Order).1
FERC relied on misleading information provided by Northwestern in response to a deficiency
letter; information that led FERC to believe that the jurisdictional asset being sold had no market
value and therefore Federal Power Act Section 203 approval was not required. The ICs recognize
the political pressure that was brought to bear in an attempt to persuade FERC to reach this
conclusion, but the fact remains that this asset has become very valuable. Had FERC directed
Northwestern to provide a current market value assessment rather than rely on unsworn statements
submitted by the very parties seeking to avoid FERC’s Section 203 jurisdiction, it would have
been obvious that Northwestern’s preferred valuation was suspect. The asset is an operating and
profitable steam generating plant with a current replacement cost of approximately $600M to
$800M. The only thing that made it valueless to utilities on the west coast was its fuel source - -
coal. That story has completely changed in the last year as even cursory research would
demonstrate.
1 Order Accepting Tariff Revisions, North Western Colstrip 370Pu LLC, 194 FERC ¶ 61,251 (2026) (Order).
293
FERC’s decision rests entirely on its misapplication of the rebuttable presumption that “the
market price is the transaction price.”2 In light of the relaxation of environmental controls
applicable to coal plants, the exponential increase in demand being driven by artificial intelligence
and associated data center growth, and the need for reliable dispatchable generation to serve this
growing load, concluding that sale of a fully functioning coal plant with projected earnings in
excess of $30 million per year (according to the record) are obvious grounds not to rely on that
presumption. Is it any surprise to FERC, given the west coast’s irrational dislike of coal generation,
Washinton State legislation, and WUTC rulings, that Puget Sound would be “willing” to give away
its ownership share of the Colstrip assets?
FERC has an “affirmative duty to inquire into and consider all relevant facts.”3 FERC must
consider arguments regarding its jurisdiction, or else it acts arbitrarily.4 Because FERC defaulted
to the rebuttable presumption in light of record evidence and instead of conducting a common
sense review of the change in conditions since last Puget Sound sought to sell its share of Colstrip,
its decision is unjust and unreasonable.5
In lieu of rejecting the filing, FERC should have set the docket for hearing so that a
record could have been created to establish market value.
The ICs respectfully request that FERC grant rehearing and reject the filing or set it for
hearing to establish the market value of this asset to determine whether FPA Section 203 applies.
2 Order, P 42.
3 Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. FPC, 354 F.2d 608, 620 (2d Cir. 1965) (citing Mich. Consol. Gas Co. v.
FPC, 283 F.2d 204, 224, 226, 108 U.S. App. D.C. 409 (D.C. Cir. 1960).
4 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), (2)(C); Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, 354 F.2d, 608, 620 (2d Cir. 1965) (citing
Mich. Consol. Gas Co. v. FPC, 283 F.2d 204, 224, 226, 108 U.S. App. D.C. 409 (D.C. Cir 1960).
5 Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference, 354 F.2d, 608, 620 (2d Cir. 1965) (citing Mich. Consol. Gas Co. v. FPC,
283 F.2d 204, 224, 226, 108 U.S. App. D.C. 409 (D.C. Cir 1960).
294
Specification of Errors and Statement of Issues
In compliance with Commission Rule 713(c)(1)-(2), the ICs identify the following issues with
the Order and explain that the Commission erred as follows:
1. Issue: Whether FERC erred by relying on a rebuttable presumption that the transaction
price is the market price despite record evidence to the contrary.
Answer: Yes, FERC erred. Record evidence demonstrated that the coal strip asset is
expected to produce at least $30 million in revenue per year. The threshold for FERC
jurisdiction under FPA Section 203 is $10 million. Clearly an asset that produces that
level of revenue is not worthless. Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA),
federal agency actions are held as unlawful and set aside when they are “arbitrary,
capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.”6 FERC
has an “affirmative duty to inquire into and consider all relevant facts.”7 The
Commission’s decision to ignore these facts was arbitrary and capricious.
REASONS FOR GRANTING REHEARING
At the center of this determination is the market value of Colstrip Units 3 & 4 driven in
part by their capacity to generate 370MW in a reliable manner. The plant was operational on the
day of the transfer. Profitable contracts had been negotiated so we must assume that this acquisition
is at a value greater than the $0 value claimed by the applicants. This is especially true because the
plant is totally equipped with very expensive pollution control devices that make it 100%
compliant with federal and state air quality standards. And has received recent upgrades.
Reliance by FERC on a rebuttable presumption that the acquisition price is the market
value ignored significant evidence that the asset is not valued at zero dollars. An appraisal of the
value would have at the very least reflected the revenue projected to be earned, the salvage value,
land value, and in this case contract value at a minimum. The only real question is whether the
market value of the transferred generation assets is above or below $10M.
6 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A).
7 Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. FPC, 354 F.2d 608, 620 (2d Cir. 1965) (citing Mich. Consol. Gas Co.
v. FPC, 283 F.2d 204, 224, 226, 108 U.S. App. D.C. 409 (D.C. Cir. 1960).
295
FERC’s Rule, 18 CFR 33.1 (a) (ii), states that establishing a value of over $10M may be
done by “any means whatsoever”. Fortunately, there are many accurate methods. These are simple,
common, and accepted across the board in every segment of society.
Market Value
The highest price in terms of money which a property will bring in a competitive and open
market under all condition’s requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently,
knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus.
There are several ways to value a business. Here are several that are commonly used:
Establishing a business’s value—often called “valuation”—is a blend of financial science
and market reality. In 2026, most professionals triangulate value using three primary approaches.
The Market Approach (Multiples)
This is the most common method for small to mid-sized businesses. It values a company
based on what similar businesses have recently sold for.
* Earnings Multiples: You multiply a specific profit figure (typically EBITDA—Earnings
Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization) by an industry-standard
“multiple.”
* Example: If your EBITDA is $1M and your industry multiple is 5x, the enterprise value
is $5M.
* SDE: For very small “Main Street” businesses, owners often use Seller’s Discretionary
Earnings (SDE), which adds back the owner’s salary and perks.
The Income Approach (Discounted Cash Flow)
This method looks at the future rather than the past. It is the “gold standard” for companies
with high growth or predictable recurring revenue.
* DCF Analysis: It projects the business’s future cash flows (usually 5 years) and
“discounts” them back to their value in today’s dollars using a discount rate (to account
for risk and the time value of money).
296
The Asset-Based Approach
This calculates the “liquidation” or “book value” of a company.
* Formula: Total Assets - Total Liabilities = Net Asset Value.
* It is generally used for under performing companies or those with significant physical
holdings (like real estate or heavy machinery).
Key Value Drivers in 2026
Modern buyers look beyond the balance sheet. Factors that increase your “multiple”
include:
* Data Maturity: Having clean, actionable customer data.
* Recurring Revenue: Subscription models are valued significantly higher than one-time
sales.
* Owner Independence: A business that can run without the founder is worth more.
Sources:
* Auxo Capital Advisors (2026): “How to Value a Business: Step-by-Step Guide”
* PwC (2026): “Global M&A Industry Trends”
* The Hartford: “Determining Your Business’s Market Value”
All that shows that there are many accepted ways to appraise a venture, but NWE chose
none. In fact, the only number they show for value is $0 and they do not substantiate that. Instead,
they chose to live in the past and ask the Commission to ignore present day reality, future contracts,
cash flows, and accept a self-serving narrative that market value is not achieved via an agreed to
price between a willing buyer and a willing seller. But rather established by a politically mandated
abandonment date and a bar to selling the asset for even $1.
In Commissioner Molnar’s discussions with industrial appraisers none found the market
value of $0 anything but laughable. None wish to be quoted for fear of political retaliation but all
said they would testify if subpoenaed.
The qualifier (first sentence after Market Value) in the examples above is virtually identical
to Montana’s definition of Market Value in Montana Code Annotated 15-8-111 (Exhibit A). (2)
(a) “Market value is the value at which property could change hands between a willing buyer and
a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell and both having reasonable
knowledge of relevant facts.” Plainly PSE was under compulsion to not sell but rather to
297
“abandon”. The State of Montana had to use a realistic, legal, example of “market value” and did
so properly placing that value at well over $100,000,000.
The relevant fact is that NorthWestern Energy was the last standing qualified entity capable
of receiving the Puget shares of the Colstrip Generating Plant because it could not be sold per
Washington State law as interpreted by the WUTC. And the Colstrip Owners Agreement granted
veto power over a transfer. Therefore, an asset-based approach (see above) was necessary to get
realistic market value. Which the Montana Department of Revenue did, and NorthWestern Energy
and Puget Sound and Energy should have presented to the Commission. (Exhibit B)
MCA 15-8-111 (2) (b) Plainly states that “If the department uses the cost approach as one
approximation of market value (emphasis added), the department shall fully consider reduction in
value caused by depreciation, whether through physical depreciation, functional obsolesce, or
economic obsolesce”. These are the same rationales given to FERC by the applicant, Puget Sound
and Energy, and Governor Gianforte but the definition of “depreciation” is different. FERC erred
when they accepted their story line instead of demanding facts based on an appraisal, with
NorthWestern having to provide the facts, not the Intervenors. In our original filing we clearly
demonstrated the inaccurate and self-serving nature of PSE’s historical rendition so shall not repeat
here.
Now we plead the established market value of PSE’s Colstrip holdings the day they
transferred to NWE from a factual and provable basis.
Montana Code Annotated 15-6-156 (2) (i) (a) (Exhibit A) in pertinent part shows that the
coal fired generation in question (2)(i)(a) is Class Thirteen Property and (4) shows the multiplier
to establish the tax bill to be determined at 6% of market value established by the Montana
Department of Revenue. The Commission’s own rules call for the establishment of market value
298
with acquisition value to be a rebuttable presumption, not a replacement for proven market value.
Zero value is not common nor even logical. An easy rebut to the presumption would be an appraisal
based on “comparative sales”. This was never pursued though it would have established a
legitimate market value based on a willing buyer and a willing seller acting without compulsion.
No explanation as to “why not” is offered.
STATE’S LEGAL PROCESS
An email from Jonathan Rosling (Exhibit B), a utility appraiser for the Montana
Department of Revenue, indicates that the arguments shared with them, and eventually FERC,
regarding declining value were considered, and determinations made, in response to their
arguments. This was done during the assessments for Tax Year 2024. Assessments are made every
two years, so the 2024 market value assessment was used for the 2024 and 2025 tax bills though
the market for coal plants had increased per undisputed MEIC testimony, and the undisputed
testimony of the Independent Commissioners during the 2024 – 2025 timeline up to the day of
transfer and after.
The market value for PSE’s Colstrip holding established in 2024 including the plant and
pollution control equipment was $134,169,942 (Exhibit B). Because this is a two year cycle the
value on the day the plant and some environmental control equipment transferred to NorthWestern
Energy was $134,169,942. Puget and NorthWestern were only $134,169,942 off in their assertions
to FERC. Montana’s DoR market value determination was never appealed by PSE.
New numbers for the next assessment period are due March 31, 2026, the day after this
compressed deadline. We assume that NWE’s tax calculation for 2026 will not read Market Value
x 6% = Tax value $0 because the Colstrip Owners have veto power.
Because PSE negotiated their “declining value theory” with Mr. Rosling (Exhibit B) and
twice paid their tax bill since then the rebuttable presumption is that they were aware of this fact,
299
decided to roll the dice, and withhold the facts from FERC to benefit NWE. NorthWestern Energy
is also centrally assessed, so knows that each such plant is taxed on Market Value after negotiation
with Mt. DoR. Crystal Lail, Chief Financial Officer of NWE, testified at a rate hearing mid 2025
that she had recently negotiated property tax determinations with the Mt. DoR. Facts do not
supplant facts. As to why NWE and PSE chose this high risk tactic remains a mystery. Perhaps a
fear of the WUTC motivated their actions. Perhaps not. But their motive is of zero value.
CREDIBILITY
This is standard practice for NorthWestern Energy and being used on FERC. Not only the
lack of transparency but using time compression as a weapon against a full investigation. In a
recent rate case they uniquely rolled in four other rate cases all to be determined in a 9-month time
frame (the average time frame for one is 14 months) so they could declare their own rate increase.
That rate case also took 14 months.
NWE is in a merger application with Black Hills Energy. The last merger application went
on for 14 months and was for less than $3B. Adjusted for inflation it was still under $4B. The
combined stock value of NWE and BHE in the current merger request is over $15B. The hearing
date is set for 6 months at the request of NWE and Black Hills Energy. During this time there have
been protests that NWE has refused to answer substantive questions and in other ways impeded
the process to not allow full and robust discovery very similar to the requests to abbreviate the
public comment period so questions on this docket could not be raised. We are all victims when
this happens. See (EXHIBIT C)
This exhibit, filed by Attorney Monica Tranel, a utility attorney formerly employed by the
Mt. PSC, is twenty one pages of alleged efforts by NWE and BHE to use time compression, refusal
to answer questions, or to falsely answer questions, to sabotage efforts to build a robust evidentiary
300
base from which the Mt. Commission can raise questions during the hearing and then make an
informed decision. This certainly mirrors the tactics of NWE in this docket. Two weeks ago
Commissioner Molnar raised similar issues and Commissioner Pinocci voted with him to have a
public work session on the proper response to these concerns.
The Commission of course could not have known about the possible nexus between the
acquisition and the merger outlined in Tranel’s filings because NWE withheld it from you. Now
that these statements are public, I am sharing them with you. This goes straight to credibility.
When a quasi-judicial body receives unsworn testimony the first question is if the
testimony is contrived or accurate. Please review commentator’s statements made during this
investigation.
With one exception, none of them, to our knowledge, ever filed anything with FERC. Yet
all filed within two days of the deadline, in theory, nullifying any counter points from being
offered. All mis-stated the effects of the transfer ie attributing the benefits of the transaction to
residential customers when in fact the benefits all flow to NWE’s investors, and new large
customers. All asked FERC to shorten the period of comment for both intervenors and the public
though it is doubtful they even knew of this possibility, or would have condoned it, if not coached
to do so. All requested a January 1, 2026 retroactive acceptance date. Logic dictates the conclusion
that the public commentors (all politicians) were coached to get a second, unchallenged, bite at the
apple and skew the public comment record.
If indeed coached the commentors were all put at risk for any future campaigns having
stood for having the low cost energy reserved for a data center and not for residential rate payers.
The political blow back on this would haunt NWE for years yet is apparently considered worth it
for a plant of zero value.
301
Property taxes have been a huge issue in Montana for the past decade. Rapidly
appreciating market values being multiplied by the tax rate, have forced people to pay taxes on
unrealized capital gains without corresponding increases in income. This has been the conversation
around every pot-bellied stove and pickle barrel in Montana. Were these elected officials oblivious
to the deception their letters caused? Or was this just harmless street theater laid on the
Commission?
Governor Gianforte also attributed the benefits of selling this super low-cost electricity to
data centers as somehow providing services to residential rate payers. To put a fine point on this
he also states that the transfer of this “zero value” holding is “consistent with the assets fully
depreciated value.
Governor Gianforte is a seasoned, pragmatic, successful, businessman and a renowned
philanthropist.
While serving in Congress he was rumored to be the wealthiest congressman. But he might
not know that the full depreciation was not a stranded cost because the plant had reached its
depreciation schedule end, or that it was old and beyond repair. Rather the depreciation schedule
had been bought down to avoid stranded costs to whoever acquired it through abandonment. The
“buy down” was done by Washington ratepayers. The zero dollar valuation is in response to a
political mandate, not a market variable.
Governor Gianforte realizes that if one of his companies buys a warehouse and his
accountants put it on a twenty-year depreciation schedule, at the end of the schedule, it will be
depreciated out. And the same accountant will advise to purchase another warehouse to enjoy the
tax advantages.
302
If the properties around the warehouse have gone up in value, Governor Gianforte will sell
the warehouse for more than he paid for it. But if the property around his warehouse has dropped
in value and/or the building has fallen into disrepair the appraisal may cause him to sell for less
than he paid for the building and land twenty years before. An appraisal will show him and the
buyer the current market value. At no point in this example would Governor Gianforte claim the
warehouse is fully depreciated so it must be abandoned and transferred to a new owner in a zero-
dollar transaction.
Yet Governor Gianforte, perhaps with the best of intentions, and NorthWestern Energy,
guided by avarice and greed, and Puget Sound Energy trying to keep former Governor Inslee and
the Insleeites happy, have indeed misled the Commission.
Commissioners Molnar and Pinocci are both seasoned political veterans and recognize that
political pressure is common, but often with low yield results for the governed. The political
pressure brought in this case championed the dismissal of solid, normal, appraisal tactics. The
Commission must reject the political comments and, rather, rule based on facts and law.
FURTHER ECONOMIC VALUATION CONSIDERATIONS
The market value of the Colstrip plant, $115,214,707, more than satisfies the need to fill
out a 203 Form. And Mt. DoR included $18,955,235 in pollution control equipment for a total
value of $134,169,942. Other value additions are unnecessary but highlight the purposeful
undervaluation presented by NWE and PSE to FERC.
NWE’s response to the deficiency letter shows receiving 25% of the water shares of Castle
Rock Lake to cool the plant. Water is a key component in operating a steam plant. Montana does
not tax water rights, so a market value was not obtained from DoR records.
303
A true industrial audit would have given the water shares a market value. In the high plains
prairie eco system, where the Colstrip Plant is located, the value of water is very high. Twenty-
five percent of this 150-acre lake is possibly more than the $10M in question, every year.
Mt. DoR valued only $18,955,235 in pollution control equipment. The tax burden on such
equipment ranges from $0 to 3% of the market value. Much of the equipment does not qualify for
special tax consideration because the Dept of Environmental Quality has not certified it. Despite
the bureaucratic morass, it has value. Though not included in the “first blush” answer the values
total, not including the $19M mentioned above, $106,391,441, found on Page 4 of 8. EXHIBIT
B
Also found on page 4 of 8 are two pipelines and supplies to accommodate the plant valued
at $4,910,730. And two small substations, valued at $3,912,509. We do not know if the substations
transferred because PSE did not willingly account for transferred items. They may have been used
in the operation of the plant and the transmission system NWE leased. Plainly, listing the market
value of the items transferred was not considered supportive of their story line resulting in $0 in
value.
In NWE’s response to the deficiency letter was a listing of real estate parcels located in
Colstrip, Mt. The Rosebud County Forsyth Field Office reports 182 locations in Colstrip, Mt listing
PSE as owner or co-owner of the properties along with other owner interests in the plant. Mt. DoR
recommended we contact the Field Office to get the valuations, and the Field Office told us to
Contact the Mt. DoR. They then both told us to contact the Montana Office of Public Records
Request. All messages sent through the portal have gone unanswered as of this sending. With the
abbreviated time available the Independent Commissioners cannot provide the market value.
Though certainly a great market value exists. NWE and PSE had a year to do this. Exhibit D
304
The market value is clearly over $10M. The total overage is not important but the lack of
transparency and the failure to provide documentation is.
COAL EXECUTIVE ORDER
In response to your deficiency letter NWE claims that putting the former PSE generation
in their hands, with a CBRT, would help keep the plants open and generating. And NWE states
that this outcome supports the EO supporting the continued use of coal generated electricity.
Commissioners Molnar and Pinocci offer an alternative view point while supporting EO 14621.
First the generation in anyone’s hands would keep it open in our energy-starved nation.
Second, if NWE acted like an Independent Power Producer and sold the electricity to their
residential customers for $21 MWh they would keep the plant open and make better money than
their short term sales will generate, by 25%. Why did they opt to not do this?
With the 370 MWh rate based, as originally intended, and blended with current supplies,
Montanans would enjoy the lowest residential and commercial rates in the nation. This would
give Montanan’s, the Montana legislature, and the Montana Public Service Commission every
incentive to protect the asset and keep it operational even in the face of renewed federal burdens.
We proudly stand in support of President Trumps statement during the recent State of the Nation
address that Data Centers should provide their own energy. Your ruling is the exact opposite of
that national goal.
MORE ON CREDIBILITY
Compare the above sentiments of NWE to the historical antics of NorthWestern Energy,
with many of the current top corporate officers still seated at the table.
Shortly after claiming financial reserves capable of securing the needs of the people of
Montana to become Montana’s default provider for their service area they declared bankruptcy.
305
This was due in part to the multiple fraudulent activities they engaged in before becoming the
default provider. The allegations were upheld by the Securities and Exchan ge Commission.
While Montanans strained under the cost of keeping NWE afloat during the bankruptcy
court proceedings NorthWestern offered to sell the original Colstrip Unit 4 (CU4) to a private
buyer for $403M after having acquired it for $185 two years before. They offered to rate base it
for $403M so Montanans would not have to risk being in the day-ahead market for 5-7 years while
a new gas plant was built. Then rate-base that plant. We rate based. The prospective buyer went
bankrupt the following year.
Under the recent FERC ruling NWE residential customers would remain paying $70 MWh
from Colstrip Unit Four and the cost-based customers will be paying 425% less, at $16.30 per
MWh, for generation from the same plant. The Commissions recent decision is not balanced.
In the midst of bankruptcy NWE offered to transfer our transmission lines to an Australian
Equity firm (Babcock and Brown) so they could use them as collateral and Montanans would have
to pay the never-ending interest. Application denied. Babcock and Brown filed Chapter 11 the
following year. At about the same time NWE offered to sell off our hydro generation system
(Montanans still strained under the costs of keeping NWE afloat in the bankruptcy proceedings).
We rate based the hydro system under duress for an estimated $200M over appraised value (there
remains some dispute on the amount of the overage because so much information was
contradictory) and a 5% “carbon tax”…ON HYDRO!
As pointed out in the Monica Tranel’s 350 filing the income of the 370 MW’s may simply
be uploaded to the umbrella group if the merger is approved by the Montana PSC and your tariff
is allowed to stand.
306
Montana’s Independent Commissioners firmly re-state that the best chance to keep CU
3&4’s generation online is for the Montana Public Service Commission to hold the generation as
rate based so the people of Montana can enjoy the benefits and protect them instead from allowing
the generation to become just another piece in the corporate chess game being played by NWE.
ADDENDUM
The comments of the Montana Public Service Commission were not withdrawn due
“inaccuracies”. No such blemish exists. We attest that the points made on the need to file an
accurate Form 203 are solid and perhaps could have avoided this dust up overvaluation and tariff.
To that end we attach the original PSC filing as our own. Addendum Exhibit D
We note that in an unpublished, closed door, meeting between PSC leadership and NWE
Governmental Affairs officers staff present remember that part of the presentation by NWE asking
the PSC to withdraw their comments was that in the last year the valuation of coal plants had
moved upward and they were afraid that if the Jan 1, 2026 deadline was missed PSE might cancel
the abandonment and take the plant back to capitalize on the new market. I remember the same
facts presented by PSC leadership in our meeting on this subject. Of course it was not possible
under Washington law and precedent on this subject.
CROSS SUBSIDIZATION
Definition: Cross-subsidization is a pricing strategy where a company uses profits from
high-margin products or services to cover the costs or losses of another product, service, or
customer segment. It allows firms to set lower prices in one market to gain competitive advantage
or increase affordability while maintaining profitability overall.
307
Mentioned in the FERC order II Filling (6) is that NWE has a contract for regulation
product for the sales of it’s 370 megawatts from Colstrip 3 and 4. We are not aware of such a
“contract”.
Monica Tranell of 350 Law mentions in her Emergency Motions to Stay that in an investors
meeting NWE stated that with the addition of the Yellowstone County Gas Station, and the 370
Puget megawatts, NWE would have enough energy to serve it’s new large customers.
The Yellowstone gas plant is a rate-based, multi purpose, plant and provides regulation
products for Montana rate payers. NWE has admitted that they only charge the FERC Rate for this
service, even for wind energy exported from Montana to Seattle by Puget Sound and Energy. FERC
Rate does not cover costs borne by rate payers to service the new plants construction costs. This is
referenced on P6 (13) of FERCs rendition of MEIC’s arguments. MEIC and the IC agree on this
point. MEIC’s definition of cross-subsidization was and is correct in this context.
Plainly this is an illegal cross subsidization of NWE’s wind contracts. For NWE to say they
will use this same rate-based plant, without authorization, to serve those receiving what should be
low cost megawatts serving Montana’s captive customers, and have those ratepayers provide the
plant for the regulation product, without compensation, is impermissible cross subsidization and a
back handed slap. This is in contradiction with Commission comments on P 16 (42).
If the Commission does not want to call this cross-subsidization perhaps we can settle on
Forced Investment Without Dividends.
COMPETITIVENESS
Allowing NWE to sell electricity below $17 per MWh out of CU4 to new wholesale
customers is a distinct disadvantage to those that would also want to sell electricity to the same
customers. Those receiving the same power from the same plant and paying $70MWh are not
308
competitive in selling their products to their customers as their competitor’s would be in selling
those products with an energy cost of $16.30.
FERC’s precedents set in Order 2222, rejecting requests to sell excess capacity in the PJM
auction thus protecting rate payers long term, FERC Rule 1920, and many more recent FERC
rulings/interactions supporting competitive markets to ensure positive outcomes by protecting
competitive energy markets are laudable. The single outlier is your ruling on ER26-129-001 in
which NWE is allowed self-dealing by totally ignoring the responsibility to provide a single factual
market-based valuation based on precedent and law.
We repeat, market valuation is not $0 because you won the asset in a poker game, received
it in probate, arm wrestled for it, pistols at dawn, knives at night, or a Slap Jack Tournament. It is
decided by determination of who would buy/sell for how much without interference. Any federal
court will find the same.
RATE BASED
The generation in question was rate based and paid for by the residential customers of
Washington State. The buy down of the depreciated cost was done by the rate based customers of
Washington State. It was rate based and assumed to be so by the Mt. PSC until the Commission
took that away and gave a market based determination without a single fact being given.
Because this was a rate based generation, held by a regulated utility and transferred to
another regulated utility it remained rate based until the recent determination. This should happen
only after a full investigation. Even a cursory investigation did not happen.
RELIEF SOUGHT
The Independent Commissioners of Montana appreciate this opportunity to find a legal and
logical way forward without having to seek judicial review in the 9th District. While we share the
309
belief that such review would not smile on a claim of zero value supported by withheld documents,
we prefer to keep this in the hands of professional regulators voting based on law and fact.
We ask that FERC acknowledge the transfer of the former PSE Colstrip holdings in
recognition of the complexities (created by NWE’s squandering of a year’s time) in compliance
and allow the transfer of the generation as rate based with clear authority for the PSC to review
and act upon the contracts already penned.
Because the first ruling was affected by documents not offered to have a fact based
outcome, we ask that the Commission invoke FERC Rules of Practice and Procedure Part 385 and
sanction both NWE and PSE for failure to provide necessary documents and direct each to
contribute $5M to Montana’s Energy Share not recoverable in rates.
In the alternative we ask that the transfer be deemed probationary while allowing NWE 30
days to file a factual Form 203 with the commission that establishes a defensible market valuation
as of January 2, 2026. And we then ask that the generation be returned to rate based as it was
originally transferred and intended.
While we appreciate the invitation of the FERC Commissioners for the Montana
Commission to protect Montana ratepayers from the fallout of their decision, we prefer to grant
said ratepayers the blessings of the lowest cost, reliable energy in America, and the economic
opportunities it presents. And having that protected by the Montana Public Service Commission.
Finally, we ask that FERC mandate NWE to produce all documents concerning the
discussion on why their current retail customers should not get the $16.30 electricity but their new
customers should.
310
Time spent in court to decide if the value of a generation plant that can produce the lowest
cost electricity in the nation is zero dollars, is better spent working together pursuing our energy
destiny according to law, fact and precedent.
JURISDICTION
The Montana Commission is not aware that the Commission has any information as to who
shall receive the 370 MW short term. But in NorthWestern’s Integrated Resource Plan filed with
the Montana Commission it appears that it will all go to a Data Center located in Broadview, Mt.
in two years time. With this in mind we uphold FERC’s authority rule on the transfer the PSE
holdings to NWE as this is plainly an interstate issue. The rest seems to be, or soon shall be,
intrastate, which is the purview of the Montana Commission.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Brad Molnar
Dated March 30, 2026
Bob Molnar
Randall Pinocci
Montana Public Service Commission
[MPSC address]
[email Bob]
[email Randall]
Attorneys for Montana Public Service
Commission
311
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have this day served the forgoing document upon each person
designated on the official service list compelled by the Secretary in this proceeding in accordance
with Rule 2010 of the Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. 385.1010.
Brad Molnar,
Montana Public Service Commission, District 2
Dated at Helena, Montana on this 30th day of March 2026
Dated this 30th day of March, 2026.
312
EXHIBIT A
MONTANA TAX LAW
313
EXHIBIT B
EMAIL COMMUNICATION WITH THE MT DEPT OF REVENUE
IN PERTINENT PART
314
EXHIBIT C
EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY INVOLVING THE NWE MERGER AS
COORDINATED WITH ER26-129-001
315
EXHIBIT D
ADDENDIUM OF MT. PSC ORIGINAL FILING
316
EXHIBIT E
REQUESTS TO THE MONTANA OFFICE OF PUBLIC RECORDS
REQUEST
317