Montana Legislature is making progress in advancing a series of Republican-sponsored bills aimed at curbing local governments’ authority to promote renewable energies, despite facing resistance from two prominent and rapidly expanding cities in the state.
Officials for Bozeman and Missoula, both of which have climate action policies, say legislative meddling will impede elected officials’ ability to carry out the wishes of their residents and jeopardize their ability to develop the kind of energy infrastructure and policies that appeal to many of the competitive, high-dollar businesses that power those local economies. Proponents maintain the pro-petroleum fuel and anti-solar energy bills will preserve consumer choice, keep costs associated with new construction down, and help Montana stay ahead of “ill-advised” trends in places like Eugene, Oregon, which is considering a ban on new residential “fossil fuel infrastructure.”
Sen. Jason Small, R-Busby, is sponsoring Senate Bill 228, which would prevent a local government from prohibiting the use or purchase of petroleum fuel sources, or the appliances and vehicles that burn them. It passed the Senate on March 2 and is awaiting a vote from the House Transportation Committee. Small, a boilermaker by trade, is also sponsoring Senate Bill 208, which seeks to prevent a local government from prohibiting or impeding the connection or reconnection of electric, natural gas or propane utility lines. It passed with all Republicans except Sen. Brad Molnar, R-Laurel, in support and Democrats unanimously opposed. It’s currently awaiting a vote in the House Energy, Technology and Federal Relations Committee.
A third bill focuses on solar energy and electric-vehicle charging infrastructure. Rep. Josh Kassmier, R-Fort Benton, is sponsoring House Bill 241, which would prevent a local government from requiring solar panels, solar panel-wiring, batteries or “other equipment for solar panels or electric vehicles” in building construction.
All three measures were requested or co-sponsored by Sen. Steve Fitzpatrick, R-Great Falls, a renowned fossil-fuel booster who carried one of the 2021 Legislature’s most controversial energy bills at the request of NorthWestern Energy. The three bills also seek to expand the “power denied” section of Montana law, which deals with regulatory arenas that are expressly off-limits to city and county governments.
According to a Legislative Services’ bill-monitoring report, SB 208 — the bill prohibiting a local government from banning petroleum-based fuels — has garnered the most public interest of the three. In total, 242 comments on the bill have been submitted to lawmakers as of March 24. The vast majority — 228 — were written in opposition to the measure.
During her testimony on March 20, Natalie Meyer, the sustainability manager of Bozeman, expressed her view on SB 208, describing it as a solution that is looking for a problem. She emphasized that the connection and reconnection of natural gas service lines is primarily a matter that should be handled locally. Additionally, she raised concerns about whether this legislation grants utilities irrevocable special privileges and immunities.
In a follow-up conversation with Montana Free Press, Meyer said SB 208, SB 228 and HB 241 “seem to be targeting pretty specific local governments that have adopted climate adoption plans.” Like Missoula and Helena, Bozeman has adopted aggressive climate targets. In 2020, the Bozeman City Commission unanimously adopted a plan that calls for 100% net clean electricity by 2030.
Meyer stated that the reason we possess these plans is due to the requests made by our communities, as they are seeking energy choice and a future that is more sustainable.
Meyer raised doubts about whether the three bills were crafted with a focus on national politics rather than genuine intentions or future initiatives from Montana municipalities or counties.
She added that Bozeman has a detailed climate plan consisting of 64 options, but it does not include a ban on natural gas. The reason being that they do not believe they have the power to impose such a ban and they do not consider bans to be the most effective approach for reducing emissions.
The supporters of SB 208 comprised of various organizations, namely NorthWestern Energy, Montana-Dakota Utilities, Westmoreland Mining, the Treasure State Resources Association, the Montana Petroleum Association, and the Montana Association of Oil, Gas, and Coal Counties.
Christopher Puyear, representing NorthWestern Energy, referred to SB 208 as a bill promoting “fuel diversity” and expressed concerns about the ability of the state’s biggest utility to satisfy customer demands during peak usage times if natural gas usage in furnaces, stoves, and hot-water heaters were to be discontinued.
In his closing remarks, Small characterized SB 208 as a “freedom bill” focused on safeguarding both consumers and businesses. He emphasized that Montana consumers desire the freedom to utilize any secure energy source provided by their local utility.
Rep. Kassmier made his case to the Senate Local Government Committee about House Bill 241, approximately one hour before the SB 208 hearing. He emphasized that the current high housing prices make it inappropriate to burden homebuyers with extra costs linked to energy infrastructure. According to him, the choice to install solar panels, EV charging stations, or the necessary wiring and electrical panels to support these features should be left to individual builders and buyers in the future.
In her opponent testimony, Makenna Sellers from the Montana Renewable Energy Association challenged the argument regarding cost effectiveness of HB 241. She argued that, in the long term, this bill would end up being more costly for numerous homeowners. This is due to the fact that retrofitting a property with wiring and electrical panels for solar panels and electric-vehicle chargers is considerably more expensive compared to including “solar-ready” or “EV-ready” wiring during the initial stages of home construction. Sellers also stated that this approach contradicts consumer demand for electrification and restricts the state’s ability to adequately plan for the growing demand for solar panels and electric vehicles.
Sellers stated that this bill places Montana on the waitlist for innovation.
Representatives from various organizations, including Tesla, the Montana Environmental Information Center, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, the Montana chapter of Sierra Club, and Bozeman Deputy Mayor Terry Cunningham, were among the opponents. Deputy Mayor Cunningham emphasized the importance of considering future technology trends in order to ensure a strong economic development strategy.
Cunningham referred to Bozeman and Gallatin County as the driving force behind the state’s economy. He acknowledged that their growth was partially due to their proactive approach in implementing progressive policies that specifically cater to the requirements of innovative industries.
Cunningham stated that numerous companies desire buildings, including residential properties for their employees, that are already equipped with EV and solar technology, rather than having to incur expenses for retrofitting structures or homes that were initially built without these necessary features. He further mentioned that as most automakers are transitioning a significant portion of their fleet to electric vehicles, it is anticipated that EVs will play a significant role in our future.
During her testimony, Caroline Bean, the Program Manager for Missoula Climate Action, introduced the concept of local control, emphasizing that any mandates for solar-ready or EV-ready infrastructure should be subject to thorough public deliberation.
She stated that if the decision is taken away from the local level, it would restrict local governments from effectively addressing constituents’ requests. She urged to maintain our capability to make decisions at the local level.
