435 P.3d 1187
Mont.2019Background
- FWP's Habitat Montana program uses license fees to acquire conservation easements and other interests to conserve habitat; as of 2016 FWP held many easements and several large transactions were pending.
- Three pending easements (including Horse Creek) totaled ~18,614 acres and faced deadlines; Land Board had previously declined or postponed consideration of some projects.
- Governor Bullock directed FWP to close at least one easement without Land Board approval, reasoning § 87-1-209(1), MCA, does not require Land Board approval for easement acquisitions.
- Senate President requested an Attorney General opinion; AG Fox issued an opinion concluding § 87-1-209(1) requires Land Board approval for easements over 100 acres or $100,000, blocking FWP from closing pending transactions.
- Governor Bullock and FWP Director Williams sought original jurisdiction in the Montana Supreme Court to overrule the AG opinion and obtain a definitive statutory interpretation; the Court accepted jurisdiction and issued a lead opinion reversing the AG.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioners (Governor and FWP Director) have standing | Bullock/Williams: AG opinion injures their ability to perform constitutional/statutory duties; personal, concrete, redressable injury | AG: Officials lack personal injury when suing in official capacity; issue is political/policy for Legislature | Petitioners have case-or-controversy and prudential standing; their injury is concrete and judicially reviewable |
| Whether § 87-1-209(1), MCA, requires Land Board approval for conservation easements >100 acres or >$100,000 | Bullock/Williams: “Land acquisition” means possessory acquisition; easements are non-possessory interests and thus not covered | AG: “Land acquisition” includes acquiring interests in land (easements); large easements therefore require Land Board approval | Held: "Land acquisition" in § 87-1-209(1) refers to possessory acquisition (fee/possession); conservation easements are non-possessory "interests in land" and are not subject to Land Board approval under § 87-1-209(1) |
Key Cases Cited
- Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (contrast between abstract institutional injury and concrete personal injury)
- Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (state official alleged concrete voting injury supports standing)
- Grossman v. Dep't of Nat. Res., 209 Mont. 427, 682 P.2d 1319 (original jurisdiction for urgent declaratory relief)
- Heffernan v. Missoula City Council, 2011 MT 91, 360 Mont. 207, 255 P.3d 80 (prudential standing principles)
- Missoula City-County Air Pollution Control Bd. v. Bd. of Envtl. Rev., 282 Mont. 255, 937 P.2d 463 (public official's interest in effective discharge of duties equates to personal stake for standing)
- Plan Helena, Inc. v. Helena Reg'l Airport Auth. Bd., 2010 MT 26, 355 Mont. 142, 226 P.3d 567 (justiciability and case-or-controversy limits)