{"id":426780,"date":"2025-12-05T15:55:14","date_gmt":"2025-12-05T15:55:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/426780\/"},"modified":"2025-12-05T15:55:14","modified_gmt":"2025-12-05T15:55:14","slug":"in-laurel-details-thin-about-proposed-state-run-mental-health-facility","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/426780\/","title":{"rendered":"In Laurel, details thin about proposed state-run mental health facility"},"content":{"rendered":"

Montana state Sen. Vince Ricci<\/a>, a Republican whose district stretches from west Billings to the nearby town of Laurel, has spent months trying to keep track of the state\u2019s evolving plans to develop a new psychiatric facility somewhere in his neck of the woods.<\/p>\n

For a lawmaker used to being well-informed on state policy, it hasn\u2019t been easy. The day after Thanksgiving, the administration of Gov. Greg Gianforte officially announced it had picked the Laurel area as the site for the 32-bed facility intended to treat mentally ill people in the criminal legal system.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cI got a call from the state warning me that, \u2018Laurel\u2019s been selected, we just want to let you know before it hits the press,\u2019\u201d Ricci recalled in a Tuesday phone interview.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But beyond that, the state lawmaker said, critical details remain undefined for him and almost everyone else \u2014 including the Laurel City Council. \u201cI hate being in the dark,\u201d Ricci said.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Legislature voted earlier this year to set aside $26.5 million for the new facility as part of an effort to ease pressure on the state psychiatric services at Montana State Hospital in Warm Springs, west of the Continental Divide. But the saga about the new facility\u2019s size, services and location has been ongoing since the summer, when Billings officials bristled<\/a> at assertions from the Gianforte administration that the state\u2019s largest city, also located in Yellowstone County, was likely the right fit.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Details about the facility\u2019s concept and the next steps have been thin on the ground for local elected officials in Laurel and Yellowstone County. The list of unknowns includes where exactly the state wants to build the 32-bed facility, the next steps for the project and what role, if any, local government officials will play in approving the plan.\u00a0<\/p>\n

To cap it all, Laurel was one municipality that did not ask to be considered as a location for the future facility, unlike Miles City and Hardin. In a Nov. 17 letter to the Montana Board of Investments, the state\u2019s development arm, Laurel\u2019s Chief Administrative Officer Kurt Markegard emphasized that a suitable parcel of land didn\u2019t exist within the city\u2019s current boundaries.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Rather, Markegard hinted at a location \u201cjust outside Laurel\u2019s city limits\u201d with adjacent water and sewer lines under installation and other criteria \u201cthat would make building the facility remarkably successful.\u201d If the state were to obtain suitable land, it would then need to go through the city\u2019s annexation process to link the facility up to water and sewer services.<\/p>\n

But Markegard\u2019s letter did not provide additional information about the parcel of land he referenced. Ricci, as well as state Rep. Lee Deming, R-Laurel<\/a>, said they have heard multiple locations adjacent to Laurel\u2019s city boundaries are still on the table.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is a plot of land that was being considered just West of Laurel. That plot may not be big enough. There was also a site visit to a State plot of land North of town that, by my understanding, was rejected because of the difficulty of getting infrastructure to that location,\u201d Deming told Montana Free Press in a Monday email.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Laurel\u2019s city planning office did not respond to a Monday request from MTFP for a list of the parcels the state is considering. Board of Investments Executive Director Dan Villa declined to provide details about specific parcels, citing the risk of a price increase if a land owner were to learn that the state is interested in buying their property.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In the Nov. 28 press release from the state health department about the Laurel location, director Charlie Brereton thanked \u201cthe City of Laurel and its leaders for their interest in partnering with the state on a new behavioral health facility.\u201d<\/p>\n

In an attached letter<\/a> that the health department and Board of Investments sent to the governor\u2019s budget office, Brereton listed some of the attributes that led the state to select Laurel.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cLaurel provides access to a critical health care workforce and infrastructure necessary to ensure the facility\u2019s success. Laurel\u2019s geographic location is ideally situated for improving access and transportation logistics for patients and their families, staff, and law enforcement across central and eastern Montana,\u201d Brereton wrote.<\/p>\n

The department also released a Frequently Asked Questions document about the facility, along with a proposed floor plan. In the FAQ, the department said the facility is intended to alleviate some of the existing waitlist for mental health treatment services for people who have been charged with a crime and are awaiting trial in county jails; anyone found unfit to stand trial because of a mental illness who needs inpatient treatment; or anyone who has been found guilty but mentally ill, a legal designation that then routes that person to a secure psychiatric facility to receive long-term treatment. In the last fiscal year, the department said that the statewide waitlist for those services reached a high of 128 people.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The facility\u2019s proposed floor plan totals 32,300 square feet, including living areas for patients, staff offices, recreation rooms and visiting spaces. The department estimated that the facility would require 90-100 full-time staff members to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.<\/p>\n

One group that remains in the dark about the building\u2019s scope and future\u00a0is the Laurel City Council. At an October city council workshop<\/a>, Laurel\u2019s city attorney Michele Braukmann repeatedly cautioned council members against making any statement that might appear to pass judgment on the facility before the city is presented with an official annexation request.<\/p>\n

Braukmann repeated that message at another city council meeting on Tuesday<\/a>, when members asked to discuss the state\u2019s announcement about selecting Laurel as the site for the new facility. If the council does receive an annexation request for the facility\u2019s property, she said, it will then be tasked with acting in a \u201cquasi-judicial role\u201d to evaluate whether the application meets the city\u2019s annexation policy. Given that role, Braukmann directed city council members not to discuss the facility with constituents or in the press.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is not, and I say this with complete respect to your decision-making role \u2014\u00a0it is not appropriate to respond to the public at this time as council members on these issues,\u201d Braukmann said. She added that any official deliberations by the council about the state\u2019s facility are likely \u201cmonths away.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kelly Lynch, the executive director of the Montana League of Cities and Towns, acknowledged that such a tight-lipped posture from city officials on land use issues like annexation can be hard for constituents to understand. But she said the league trains city officials to be exceedingly cautious in an effort to create a level playing field for applicants coming before a council or commission.<\/p>\n

\"LaurenCity Hall is seen in downtown Laurel is seen on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025. Credit: Lauren Miller, Montana Free Press, CatchLight Local\/Report for America<\/p>\n

\u201cIf someone runs into you at the grocery store, we tell them you could talk as much as you want about the policy. But then when someone brings an application in under that policy, to have that policy applied to them and their property, then we\u2019re in what\u2019s called a \u2018quasi-judicial decision,\u2019\u201d Lynch said. \u201c\u2026 If there\u2019s a quasi-judicial decision in front of an entity, your entity, and you run into someone at the grocery store and they want to talk to you about that subdivision proposal, you cannot talk to them.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lynch said the same principle could apply to Laurel\u2019s current predicament, even if the state has not submitted any kind of annexation request.\u00a0<\/p>\n

For some local officials, the obscurity about the facility, its timeline and scope of services has made it difficult to offer any kind of informed opinion, regardless of guidelines about objectivity and fairness.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Reached by phone on Tuesday, Laurel City Council Member Richard Klose said he didn\u2019t know much about the facility except for what he\u2019s read in media outlets.<\/p>\n

\u201cAll I know is that the state awarded Laurel that facility and that\u2019s all I know,\u201d Klose said.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Pressed on what he\u2019s heard about what the facility is meant to do, or who it\u2019s intended to serve, Klose didn\u2019t offer specifics.<\/p>\n

\u201cUntil I know what\u2019s going on, I\u2019m just going to stay open-minded as to what\u2019s going on,\u201d he said. \u201c\u2026 I don\u2019t have an opinion on that until I get all the facts.\u201d<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\tLATEST STORIES<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\tTribes were left out of Trump\u2019s $50B rural health fund, but states like Montana aim to include them anyway<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n

The Trump administration is touting its $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program as the largest-ever U.S. investment in rural health care. But the government made minimal mention of Native American tribes in sparsely populated areas and in need of significant improvements to health care access. Federally recognized tribes can\u2019t directly apply for a share of the rural health fund \u2014 only states can. And states aren\u2019t required to consider tribes\u2019 needs. But state applications for the five-year payout show some states with significant Native American populations did so anyway.<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\tHow soon can you catch a train from Billings to Bozeman?<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n

A coalition of 20 counties is pushing for a new passenger rail route through Billings, Bozeman and Missoula. Opponents believe the rail industry isn\u2019t ready and it will distract from challenges facing existing long-distance passenger routes, like the one in northern Montana. Even if advocates for the new route prevail, it will be a long time before you can get on board. <\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\tSNAP may be back, but new work requirements could mean some lose coverage<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n

Under the new federal budget law, to be eligible for SNAP benefits, more people are required to show that they are working, volunteering, or studying. Those who don\u2019t file paperwork in time risk losing food aid for up to three years. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Montana state Sen. Vince Ricci, a Republican whose district stretches from west Billings to the nearby town of…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":426781,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[36],"tags":[157371,182640,198682,198683,198684,79411,179467,210,198685,198686,29753,198687,198688,517,198689,179468,198690,198691,67,132,68,198692,135225],"class_list":{"0":"post-426780","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-mental-health","8":"tag-billings","9":"tag-board-of-investments","10":"tag-charlie-brereton","11":"tag-dan-villa","12":"tag-department-of-public-health-and-human-services","13":"tag-greg-gianforte","14":"tag-hardin","15":"tag-health","16":"tag-kelly-lynch","17":"tag-kurt-markegard","18":"tag-laurel","19":"tag-laurel-city-council","20":"tag-lee-deming","21":"tag-mental-health","22":"tag-michele-braukmann","23":"tag-miles-city","24":"tag-montana-league-of-city-and-towns","25":"tag-richard-klose","26":"tag-united-states","27":"tag-unitedstates","28":"tag-us","29":"tag-vince-ricci","30":"tag-yellowstone-county"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115667778359574041","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/426780","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=426780"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/426780\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/426781"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=426780"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=426780"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=426780"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}