State Legislature 2022: Melissa Smith

I’m running for state office because our government’s focus on short-term gains is already costing our neighborhood its safety, health, and ability to grow for the future. I value diversity of ideals and experience in our government representatives in order to better arrive at solutions that fit the greater share of our residents. My entire career, I’ve worked to find solutions for customers, businesses and communities, and I want to bring a problem-solving perspective to the way our state is run.

I have two measuring sticks against which all policy writing are ideally measured against – first, that all legislation should honor our state constitution’s promise to “a clean and healthful environment for present and future generations”, and second, that no legislation put forth shall harm children, now or ever. It is normal for all legislation to benefit some at the cost of others, but it should never be at the cost of any Montanan’s general quality of life. Agriculture and energy should be managed sustainably with the land that supports us. Cities should be planned in a way that promotes an economy where families may maintain a certain quality of life, including living wage work, affordable housing, access to affordable healthcare including mental healthcare, and quality education to build a better future.

I generally agree with this sentiment, except in the case of rights assured by our federal and state constitution, which should be universal to our American identity.

Conversely, our state government too frequently passes unfunded mandates and then restricts local governments abilities to equitably provide for the law. What cities like Billings need to provide for a safe, healthy, flourishing community is different than what small towns like Roundup or Hardin need, and those local governments are best served with a certain amount of flexibility in determining taxes, safety and housing.

Community safety is an issue that can only be adequately achieved through preventative means. Once a crime is committed, a community is already unsafe. Affordable housing, access to healthcare and mental health care, and a thriving educational system are integral to improving community safety.

The specifics of building safer communities are better managed by local governments. But every new mill levy, no matter how noble the cause, struggles to pass. The state legislature can support localities in improving public safety through ensuring proper funding at state level for its directives, and creating a more equitable tax system that allows cities and towns more funding flexibility.

I see an interesting parallel between global trade networks and the structure of internet networks. Both systems are constrained by finite resources, and both function best when built with the flexibility to work around individual disruptions.

Internet networks are built in a way to automatically adjust around outages, but this can only be effective through more connections, and more diverse connections. Montana should strive to maintain energy infrastructure that protects our independence, but not to protect us from the impact of disruptions outside our system, but rather to strengthen our negotiating position as we build partnerships. And we cannot build our independence at the cost of a healthy environment, else no one can live well.

To that end, we need more renewable energy sources, more partnerships in trade, and we need a Public Service Commission that is more accountable to Montana ratepayers.

Yes, I completely agree. Tourism places a unique burden on locality’s water and energy utilities, waste and pollution, and even public safety. Resort taxes are an important source of revenue that can help a city government pay for these hidden costs.

I wholeheartedly oppose the ballot initiative to cap property taxes, which favors property investors and landlords while placing an unfair burden on individuals and families as their lives and housing needs evolve through their lifetimes. I also oppose sales taxes, which places a higher burden on local residents with lower incomes.

I support an idea that explores raising property taxes on those who own more than a certain number of residential properties. As an example, property taxes for the first one to three houses is at a lower rate, and the rate increases for the fourth property on up. In this way, it keeps housing affordable and available for Montana families, and makes large corporations that use properties as a business to contribute more to tax revenue.

It is clear that the capitalist ideal that the market will provide for the demand is not working in this case. The demand for low and mid range priced housing has grown year over year in the last decade, while free market builders fail to provide for the market demand.

To start, Montana needs to repeal the prohibition on cities’ ability to implement affordable housing ordinances. Also, since the market is not providing for the demand on its own, we should explore state and local funded programs to build affordable housing for low and middle income residents.