Republicans want local hearings on compact

Republican legislators across the state have requested local hearings on the Montana Water Rights Protection Act after the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs recently took a first look at the proposed legislation.

In a letter to committee chair U.S. Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., 27 Montana Republicans asked that one public hearing be held in Kalispell, and another in Great Falls.

“Along with the two-thirds of Montanans that could be negatively impacted by passage of this legislation, we believe it is imperative that your committee members have the opportunity to hear from those who stand to lose so much,” the letter stated.

A separate letter from Montana Public Service Commissioners Brad Johnson and Randy Pinocci was also submitted in support of the idea.

“Your committee’s work on this issue will be precedent-setting and spends nearly $2 billion in taxpayer money — making this request both reasonable and prudent,” the commissioners wrote to Hoeven.

Introduced last year by U.S. Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., the Montana Water Rights Protection Act offers the framework for a settlement between the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the federal government on water-rights claims in Western Montana.

Lake County Commissioners also chimed in with a letter to Indian Affairs detailing a list of grievances with the proposed bill, including concerns about rights of way, property rights, and a general lack of access to information regarding its concerns.

In the letter, the commission accused lawmakers of crafting the bill “in secret.”

“Lake County has tried to obtain a copy of the ‘CSKT Damages Report’ referenced in the Act,” the Commission’s letter states. “In spite of requests ... no copy has been provided.”

“What damages, what amount, what offsets, what interest rate? Is there an offset for depredations by either party per the treaties, an offset for reparations as provided in the treaties? Why are these questions being ignored?”

Daines’ legislation received a friendly review during the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs hearing on June 24, where the senator peppered Tim Petty, Assistant Secretary of Water and Science at U.S. Department of Interior, with a series of questions.

But, Montana House Majority Leader Rep. Brad Tschida, R-Missoula — one of the key legislators to sign the letter requesting local hearings — said that much of what he saw at the hearing came across as “sterile.”

“They didn’t have any opponents available,” he said. “I don’t know if that was by design.”

“It was a little bit too easy,” he said of Daines’ back-and-forth with Petty.

Tschida said local hearings would likely garner a different tone.

“The good senator [Daines] would wind up getting both his ears full,” Tschida said. “The opponents would strongly outnumber the proponents, and the opponents would be citizens directly affected by it.”

Tschida said the concerns he’s heard about the act range from whether property values would be diminished, to whether the act violates the state constitution.

He said he’s talked to a number of landowners about the legislation, but not one “who is glad this bill is being brought forward.”

“The idea of having a meeting or two in Montana on something that significant ... is worthwhile,” he said.

In his opinion, the legislation should be set aside “and minds should gather” to see what could be done to benefit the Tribes and Montana residents.

“Let’s get it done right, so we don’t have legal problems down the road.”