OPINION: GOP explanation for infrastructure standoff in Helena

Questions are still being asked about infrastructure funding in the 2015 legislative session. It is a complicated story and worth explaining the full tale. The entire infrastructure debate was about the governor wanting to put the state of Montana in debt to pay for his wish list and wants versus using available cash to pay for failing critical infrastructure across Montana.

It is helpful to understand how infrastructure has been funded in the past. There are special state funds dedicated in law to fund infrastructure projects, such as water, sewer, bridges, school facilities and technology, and construction and repair of state buildings. The projects are prioritized by the governor’s departments before the legislative session begins. Money is prioritized to various projects until the funds are exhausted. Lower priority projects that are not funded have to come back for consideration in future legislative sessions.

In the past, the highest priority infrastructure projects were presented in multiple bills. This session, the governor crammed all the infrastructure into one bill, including all high-priority, low-priority and wish-list projects. Then he told the Legislature, “I want all of this or nothing.”

In spite of the fact there was enough money in the bank to fund all of the highest priority projects, the governor insisted on borrowing $200 million and putting you, your kids and grandkids in debt over the next 20 years to pay for it.

Recognizing there was very little Republican support for the governor’s massive spending bill, Republicans divided his bill into five bills covering only the high priority projects. These five bills were passed by the Legislature resulting in $113 million in critical infrastructure projects funded across the state with cash dedicated by law for that specific purpose.

At the end of the session, another bill (SB416) was drafted to provide additional relief for the Eastern Montana oil and gas impacted counties. Before the bill reached the Senate floor, low priority pet projects of the governor and various legislators were added to try to win the votes needed for passage. SB416 passed the Senate and was sent to the House of Representatives, where even more pet projects were added to try to buy the needed votes.

However, to pay for all the projects, two-thirds of the bill would be paid for not with the cash on hand, but by borrowing and putting Montana in debt. What started as a bill to fund critical infrastructure ultimately included millions in state debt for low-priority and wish-list projects, including $51 million for a new 45,000 square-foot addition to the museum in Helena and renovation of an historic gymnasium at Montana State University.

The conservative House Republicans had three primary concerns with SB416: 1) We wanted a prioritized list of projects representing additional critical needs only; 2) we wanted to fund local school maintenance needs across Montana that were eliminated; and 3) we wanted the governor to use the available cash to pay for it and not borrow when cash was available.

In the final days of the session, the conservative House Republicans were told by the Democrats, “There will be no negotiations on this bill — take it or leave it.” The sad thing is, we could have passed this bill with compromise from the Democrats and the governor, but they refused to negotiate.

The governor had the money to pay for everything necessary, but evidently he did not think real infrastructure was that important for the people of Montana. In the end, the Legislature authorized $113 million in cash spending across the state for critical water, sewer, bridge and irrigation needs, and we did not burden you or your kids and grandkids to pay for low-priority, wish-list projects.

Glimm, a Kila Republican, represents House District 6. He was joined in signing this letter by Reps. Nancy Ballance of Hamilton and Art Wittich of Bozeman.