In almost all categories, earnings in Montana is near the bottom in almost all categories. The following stats, presented by the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, compare income distribution from 2005 to 2019 in Montana based on race.

Average white earnings in Montana is $31,000 as compared to the national average of all races $35,610. Montana’s average is below that of all neighboring states and in fact is the lowest in the nation.

Average Hispanic earnings in Montana is $24,110 or 78% of white earnings – also the lowest in the nation.

Average Black earnings in Montana is $24,800 or 80% of average white earnings.

Average Asian earnings is $20,780 in Montana, 96% of average white earnings. In 2019, nationally average Asian earnings was $49,520, which was 126% of average white earnings at $39,330 and higher than the overage average earnings in the US at $35,610.

Average American Indian or Alaska Native earnings in Montana is $20,790.

Average Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander earnings in Montana is $29,810.

Under great pressure from hospitals in Montana, that depend heavily from government reimbursements, the Montana State Legislature approved a bill to continue Montana’s Medicaid expansion program. House Bill 245 will subsidize health care for low-income adults between 18 and 65 year olds.  It was supported by the Montana Chamber of Commerce, the Montana Hospital Association, the Montana Medical Association, and other industry associations, and tribal governments. Concerned about costs to the budget, most of the opposition came from Republicans, who worried about impacts on the state budget should the federal government reduce funding for the program. It is also considered by some representatives as a forerunner to socialized medicine. 

Other health care access was provided by other bills, such as House Bill 881, which allows families to buy into Medicaid to access benefits for children with disabilities. Senate Bill 72 grants broader eligibility for Medicaid. Senate Bill 319 funds reimbursements for emotional, physical, and educational support for new parents  through Medicaid, and House Bill 585 increases reimbursement rates for physical therapists and occupational therapists who see Medicaid patients. 

While across the state voters approved increased levy requests for four communities, voters were not so generous in Yellowstone County.

Voters approved levy increases for school districts in Missoula, Bozeman, Helena and Kalispell, while Belgrade voters rejected their request. In Yellowstone County School all four requested levies were defeated in Laurel —  for the elementary building reserve, 1,525 to 1,187; for the elementary general fund, 1,596 to 1,119; for the high school building reserve 1472 to 1,144 and for the high school general fund 1,534 to 1090. Mill levies were also defeated for Canyon Creek School District #4, 394 to 263; at Elder Grove School District #8, 914 to 468.

The levy requested by Elysian School District #23 passed 387 to 347.

The widely heralded STARS Act passed the state legislature which is expected to subsidize pay increases for teachers pay for districts throughout the state.

Kenneth Schrupp, The Center Square

Dozens of groups are urging Congress to overturn the Biden administration’s approval of California’s gas car ban, under which new gas-powered cars must be 100% zero-emission by 2035 and 35% for the model year 2026 vehicles already starting to arrive at dealers.

The rules apply not only to California, but Washington, D.C. and the 11 other states that have signed on to adopt California’s gas-car-banning emissions standards, making up 40% of the U.S. market.

The letter’s 26 signatories include the California Policy Center, a center-right think tank, and Citizens for Prosperity, a libertarian advocacy group.

ZEV market share in California declined from 22% in 2024 to 20.8% in the first quarter of 2025, leading Toyota to say the state’s ZEV targets are “impossible” to meet. To hit 35%, ZEV market share would need to increase 68% practically overnight.

Carmakers earn credits for selling qualifying battery-electric and plug-in-hybrid vehicles. Those who don’t have enough credits to keep selling standard hybrid or internal combustion vehicles can purchase credits from those with excess credits, such as Tesla.

But if there aren’t enough credits to go around, carmakers could face fines of $20,000 per non-ZEV vehicle sold for each credit they are short, which has led dealers to warn they may be forced to only offer pricier plug-in-hybrid and all-electric models.

The House resolution is the last option short of a court decision or revision in the California legislature that could reverse the rule. The resolution now heads to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce to be scheduled for a vote. 

FEMA Reform Bill

By Thérèse Boudreaux, The Center Square

Long plagued by inefficiency and politicization, the Federal Emergency Management System could soon see major reforms if Congress passes bipartisan legislation that has been introduced.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Sam Graves, R-Mo., and Ranking Member Rick Larsen, D-Wash., released draft legislation that would bring transparency, efficiency, and accountability to the taxpayer-funded agency.

The 177-page FEMA Act of 2025 is still in draft form to allow feedback from lawmakers. Graves said the plan “provides the most significant and meaningful FEMA reforms since Hurricane Katrina.”

“We have clearly seen that FEMA is not working as it should for Americans who’ve been impacted by disasters,” Graves said. “This draft bill includes substantive changes that will transform FEMA and our emergency programs to be much more state and locally driven – not micromanaged into ineffectiveness by the federal government.”

One of the most important changes the plan proposes is to return FEMA to a Cabinet-level agency, streamlining government-wide responses to disasters and making the Administrator reportable — and thus accountable — to the President.

At the non-federal level, the legislation authorizes project-based grants to help states speed up rebuilding efforts, prioritize highest-need projects, and not have to shoulder as many costs. It would also enact permitting reforms to speed up rebuilding projects, and allow states to secure pre-approval for disaster mitigation projects.

FEMA would also be required to provide a single, simplified assistance application for disaster survivors and clarify its agency notices.

During the Biden administration, FEMA drew criticism for shifting its focus — and taxpayer-funded budget — away from actual disaster relief to migrant services, climate initiatives, and diversity and equity goals.

Among other actions, FEMA sent $1.4 billion taxpayer dollars to cities nationwide to pay for migrant services. As a result, FEMA ran out of funds for hurricane relief programs in 2024, delaying crucial aid to some states impacted by Hurricane Helene. 

The agency also came under fire for allegedly directing its workers to avoid directly helping Trump supporters in the aftermath of Helene, as The Center Square reported.

In light of that incident, the legislation strictly prohibits political discrimination in disaster recovery efforts. For added transparency, it requires the Office of Management and Budget to create federal disaster-assistance tracking website.

“Republican[s] and Democrats on this Committee agree that it is an important agency in need of reform,” Larsen said. “That’s why I’m proud to partner with my counterpart, Sam Graves, to release draft legislation giving FEMA the tools it needs to simplify its programs and provide quicker relief to disaster-impacted communities.”

From Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council

The process for advancing a reconciliation bill continues to chug along, which can’t come soon enough for entrepreneurs and small business owners who urgently need a tax package that makes permanent expiring provisions of the 2017 “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” and restores key measures that encourage investment and growth.

For now, talk of a big tax hike among some Republicans and in isolated corners of the White House has generally subsided. There is no way that a tax hike on entrepreneurs and small businesses would make it to the President’s desk. President Trump is indeed correct in noting that American taxpayers (read: capital) would take flight if taxes were raised. Moreover, a tax hike out of the Trump Administration and Congress would undermine the diligent work of the states that have been cutting taxes to promote business-friendly and taxpayer-friendly climates, and helping Main Street businesses compete more effectively. In mid-April, SBE Council joined our allies in the small business community and signed a letter to Congressional tax writers that opposed tax hikes on so-called high-income earners and “millionaires.”

Penalizing productive economic activity is not good policy, which also means that increasing taxes on carried interest is a bad idea. This bad idea is still percolating. As SBE Council chief economist Ray Keating wrote back in February when the idea surfaced:

“Increasing taxes on investment will negatively impact business startups and growth, and will inflict broad damages on incomes and jobs for workers, on entrepreneurship, on competitiveness, and on economic growth. Putting aside the political rhetoric, that’s the harsh economic reality if taxes are increased on carried interest.”

Consistency and certainty on policy across the board are vital to U.S. economic growth and competitiveness. Reducing, not increasing, government burdens and costs will support efforts to keep the United States the best place in the world to start and grow a business.

Secretary Bessent Very Optimistic. Today, on Day 100 of President Trump’s tenure in office, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is bullish on a tax bill. In a post on X, Secretary Bessent notes that the “Big 6” Hill leaders who are meeting on the tax bill are making great progress. He adds:

“I’m happy to announce that they are in substantial agreement and that this is going to be a very big, pro-growth win for the American people.”

A pro-growth win on taxes and positive progress on the trade/tariff front would certainly help to soothe worries and concerns about a possible recession. Experts are mixed on whether that will happen.

In a preview event on the “global economic outlook” hosted by International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva, and attended by SBE Council President & CEO Karen Kerrigan, Ms. Georgieva predicted slower growth for sure, but not a recession.   

By Kenneth Schrupp, The Center Square

A 17-state-and-territory coalition led by California, Washington and Colorado is suing the Trump administration to maintain access to $5 billion in EV charger funding passed by Congress in 2021 but put on hold by the current administration.

A majority of the coalition, including lawsuit leaders California and Washington, has failed to build any chargers using $3.3 billion in awarded funds over the past four fiscal years.

Following President Donald Trump’s order to eliminate electric vehicle mandates, the Federal Highway Administration suspended the approval of state EV charger network plans submitted for federal grants under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which was signed into law in 2021. It provided $5 billion in National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure grant funding.

The FHWA’s notice said that “until new guidance is issued, reimbursement of existing obligations will be allowed in order to not disrupt current financial commitments.”

According to the NEVI dashboard maintained by the National Association of State Energy Officials, $3.3 billion has already been awarded. That means the suspension mainly impacts the $1.7 billion in unallocated funding that would have otherwise gone out through fiscal year 2026, but are required by the IIJA “to remain available until expended.”

Forty-four states and territories, including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, issued at least one solicitation for NEVI funding. Of the 44 soliciting states and territories, 38 have been issued funding, of which only 16 have at least one operational NEVI station, despite four years of funding between fiscal year 2021 and fiscal year 2025.

The lawsuit filed by 17 attorneys general requests that the courts block the withholding of NEVI grants, citing the explicit congressional mandate in the IIJA.

In its plan suspension notice, the FHWA say the NEVI program is “unique in that this Program requires the Secretary to approve a plan for each State describing how the State intends to use its NEVI funds,” and simply “has decided to review the policies underlying the implementation of the NEVI Formula Program.” 

This suggests that while the IIJA may have required the FHWA to disburse $5 billion in NEVI grants, that it’s also true the IIJA grants the FHWA the power to temporarily suspend NEVI plans for review. 

The lawsuit says that “The Secretary must distribute to each State its share of NEVI Formula Program funds unless the State fails to timely submit its State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plan or if the Secretary determines a State has not taken action to carry out its State Plan.” 

Despite having secured $302 million in NEVI funding since fiscal year 2021 of the $384 million it requested, California is yet to have completed a single NEVI-funded charger. Washington has been awarded $56 million, but also has no completed NEVI chargers. Of the 17 states and territories filing suit, only eight have completed any NEVI chargers.

The lawsuit says the IIJA creates clear guidelines for the FHWA to follow if it determines a state is not carrying out its plan, including identifying actions to rectify concerns and providing at least 90 days to address those concerns, and providing notice of 60 days of its intent to withhold or withdraw funds.

Should courts find that the IIJA’s explicit procedures were violated in excess of the powers available to the FHWA, it’s likely the FHWA will have to reinstate the rescinded state plans and at some point resume the awarding of NEVI funding.

While gasoline-powered cars take two minutes to refill, a 60-kilowatt-hour Tesla Model 3 requires eight to 12 hours to charge at a Tesla Destination charger, 40 minutes to reach 80% on a 150 kw charger and 20 minutes on a 250 kh charger. 

These rapid technological advancements mean significant investments in current EV charging technology may soon become obsolete, challenging the value of taxpayer investments in the sector.

The Montana State Legislature concluded its business for the 2025 session. It passed over eight hundred bills, many of which await action by the Governor. Over the last 20 years, the average number of bills adopted was 614. The legislators approved a $16.6 billion budget, which is about 15% more than the 2023 budget. It includes raises for state employees, two new district court judges for Yellowstone County, additional spending on health and human services, and a $500 million recruitment and retention fund for state employees, housing lending program and child care. While it remained questionable, right up to the last hours of the session, the legislators finally passed property tax “relief” which will shift the property tax burden from homes and long-term rentals to secondary properties and businesses.

The budget relies upon about $5 billion from the General Fund, which is drawn from state income taxes.

About $60 million in tax revenue collected from taxes on recreational marijuana will be shifted from the general fund and directed more specifically to environmental rehabilitation projects on private lands under the Fish, Wildlife and Parks department. The shift draws funding away from funds previously directed to support treatment for substance abuse and health disorders, and support of law enforcement efforts and homelessness.

By Christina Lengyel,  The Center Square

A bill aimed at removing a 2007 tax break from wind energy producers has West Virginia legislators at odds over the supremacy of coal in West Virginia’s economy.

Senate Bill 439 would clarify that “wind power projects are not pollution control facilities,” which are taxed at salvage value. The clarification would subject them to real property taxes.

Supporters of the bill say the change would add millions in tax revenue to the state and take away an unfair advantage over the coal industry. Those who oppose it say the wind industry, which employs West Virginians and is an essential component of a clean-energy future, would suffer a huge blow.

Sen. Glenn Jeffries, R-Putnam, argued for an “all energy” policy, encouraging the incentivization of all energy production, including coal, rather than disincentivizing wind power production.

The bill’s sponsor and chair of the Senate Energy, Industry, and Mining committee Sen. Chris Rose, R-Monongalia, said the wind industry profits “at the expense of our hardworking coal and natural gas industries,” which he called “a slap in the face to the men and women who have powered this state for generations, digging coal and drilling gas to keep America running.”

County regulations on how private property is used by owners, which were rewritten a couple of years ago, are being tweaked by the city/county planning department, to correct errors, spelling, grammar, etc. and make changes that weren’t working, according to Nicole Cromwell, Zoning Coordinator for the Planning Division of the City of Billings.

The 96 page document with its changes was approved by Yellowstone County Commissioners. The county’s regulations, which are laws mandating how property owners may develop and use their property, are different than those imposed inside the city boundaries.

Restrictions on how a property owner may exercise his rights to determine how to use a property, ostensibly exist to assure “public health and safety” but they often extend into issues of esthetics, environmental preferences, consistency, compliance, or the majority sentiments of neighbors.

Cromwell reviewed some of the more significant changes before the commissioners during their regular weekly board meeting.

Included in changes are details about where a property owner must store garbage, ie. “must be located in either the rear yard, or interior side yard;” it may be located inside the building  with “access doors off the rear or interior side façade. . . “doors must be opaque, screening a minimum of 80 percent of the opening.”

Added to the document are regulations dictating maximum height of a building does not include “spires, belfries, cupolas, antennas, water towers or tanks, chimneys or smokestacks, power transmission lines, cooling or elevator towers” etc. To exceed height limits a property owner must seek approval by submitting an “approved application for Administrative Relief” or a “Variance.” Signs must be approved . . . trees trimmed up 8 feet clearance. . . canopies are covers “attached to and supported by the structure to which it is attached . . .”

Minimum requirements for arterial setbacks are included. “No building or structure shall be erected or maintained within fifty feet of the centerline of an arterial street.” “. . . no required parking area or portion thereof, including driving aisles, shall be constructed or located within forty feet of the centerline. . .”

The number of buildings (residents) allowed on a lot was increased from one to two, with up to three accessory buildings. Details on where a property owner can locate a driveway or a garage are also included.

Due to a change in state law the zoning regulations can no longer discriminate as to manufactured homes, so all language that did so in past regulations has been struck. Regulations that dictated that a two-unit building must be “ located perpendicular to the street in a U-shaped configuration with a courtyard or shared yard,” was eliminated.

However, it now restricts that garage entrances located on the front façade be limited to 50 percent of the front façade width. Eliminated was the mandate that only one entrance may be located on the street from the garage, now two entrances are allowed by the regulators.

If a property has no alley or other rear entrances, the law will allow the property owner to put a garage on their property fronting onto a street so long as it has  “. . . single-wide garage entry door of ten feet in width or less. . .” If a property owner wants two garage doors, not only must each be no more than ten feet wide but they must share the driveway, that can be no more than 25 feet wide. Front entry garages are prohibited from taking up more than 40 percent of the front of the lot, and the garage doors must be set back at least 8 feet behind the front door.

Also eliminated was a 20,000 square feet minimum size of a “parklet” or landscaped open space, which still is mandated to have 70 percent living plant material and extend at least 20 feet along street frontage. A “green” must extend as much as 50 feet along a street. A “natural area” is a large area “to conserve a natural feature, such as a stream, wetland or woodland” must also extend 50 feet.

How far different kinds of structures must be set back from a property line are also dictated.

In “mixed-use” permitted areas a restriction that dictated that only “upper stories” could accommodate residential and/or office uses, was struck in the revised regulations, and now a property owner may use any story of the property he owns for such purposes. Also struck were restrictions on allowing dwelling use below the ground floor level.

Another change stipulates that manufactured homes may not be used for any commercial use or as an office for a manufactured home sales area.

The regulations grant permission for either private or public ownership of amusement and recreation facilities, and they grant permission for such entities to charge fees. Ice arenas, playgrounds, picnic shelters, community centers, gardens and orchards and nature preserves were added to the list of acceptable amusement and recreational facilities.

The rules further restrict how storage facilities may be used, disallowing any business activity, mandating fencing and where it must be, and that stacked stored items cannot exceed the height of the fence. And shipping containers shall be screened from view from any public right-of-way.

Agriculture, commercial and industrial zones have been included as allowable users of “Antennas co-located on existing stealth communication facilities or existing antenna support structures which have previously received all required approvals and permits shall be permitted . . .”

Other regulations restrict the size and number of detached accessory structures, depending on lot size.

There are extensive additions to regulations pertaining to expanding by fifty percent or more the gross building square footage, requiring that it comply with current mandates. Many of the esthetic changes are only required if they front the street.

Some of the mandates regarding how the outside of such a remodeled building should look, require replacing existing front-facing façade with up-to-date approved materials and dictating the size of windows. Also the roof, should it need to be changed, would have to be changed to meet new standards. Lots larger than 1.5 acres will have to have a plan prepared by a licensed landscaper, and owners of smaller lots will be strongly urged to consult with a professional landscaper. Regulations note that a list of appropriate plant species for Yellowstone County can be obtained from the Planning Department.

“All multifamily residential projects, manufactured home parks, and all mixed-use and non-residential projects shall include on the landscape plan, a detailed drawing of enclosure and screening methods to be used in connection with mechanical equipment, trash bins, recycle bins, storage yards, service areas, loading docks, and other equipment storage areas on the property.”

“Any fence greater than a height of three feet and equal to or less than 7 feet in height shall require a fence permit.” Added to the planners’ list of acceptable fencing materials are “corrugated and uncorrugated metal panels framed in wood, vinyl, composite, brick or stone. Metal panels shall be coated with a non-reflective material . . . “

Changes have also been made to regulations dictating signage requirements for businesses and when they are required.