Energy providers look to set precedent for wildfire liability law
HELENA, Mont. — Montana lawmakers are considering legislation that would amend the legal framework for people seeking damages over utility-caused wildfires. Legislative records show the bill was drafted by NorthWestern Energy. Montana’s electric cooperatives said they were also involved in drafting.
During House Bill 490’s 90-minute hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 26, opponents of the legislation argued it goes too far in shirking utilities’ liability and ultimately makes it too difficult to seek legal recourse in the wake of utility-caused wildfires. Those who spoke against the bill included insurance companies, environmental groups and victims of the 2021 West Wind Fire that devastated the town of Denton and surrounding areas after being sparked by a NorthWestern Energy electric line.
Rep. Amy Regier, R-Kalispell and sponsor of the bill, said the legislation is narrowly aimed at preventing Montana courts from allowing those who were harmed by a fire to bring a claim against a utility only by showing the company caused the blaze, not that utility acted negligently in a way that led to a fire.
“I am certain you have all read about recent fires in California, Hawaii, Colorado and Oregon, where utilities have faced a barrage of civil and criminal lawsuits from plaintiffs and insurance companies seeking billions of dollars in damages, including massive punitive awards,” Reiger said before the committee. “One California utility declared bankruptcy and laid off thousands of employees.”
In exchange for blocking Montana from adopting that so-called “strict liability precedent,” the bill mandates that utility companies draft and “substantially” follow wildfire mitigation plans, documents that detail steps taken by a utility to avoid igniting a fire.
Toward the end of the bill’s hearing, Sen. Vince Ricci, R-Billings, asked the question underscoring the morning’s debate.
“How do we balance the risk?” Ricci said, acknowledging the significance of the service provided by utilities before inquiring about how to design a legal structure that fairly compensates victims of wildfire damage.
Mike Green, an attorney who serves as the outside regulatory counsel for Montana-Dakota Utilities, summarized HB 490’s approach.
“The problem with what we’ve seen in wildfire claims is that lines can ignite just by being there, by natural conditions that exist over which the utility has no control,” Green said before listing natural causes, including wind and temperature, that could spontaneously cause a power line to spark.
“So this [bill] is to say: utilities are going to do their part. They’re going to pay for reasonable damages if they cause a fire,” Green said. “But in order to do that, you have to prove that they did.”
In addition to Montana’s two investor-owned utilities, the bill received support from a number of utility providers owned by their energy-users, known as electric cooperatives, that generally serve rural areas. Trevor Parke, the general manager of Vigilante Electric Cooperative based in Dillon, said his co-op’s assets total $58 million and its annual surplus, which hovers around $1 million, is returned to its members.
“We do not have deep pockets,” Parke said. “And strict liability claims on the cooperative where we were not at fault would only put a burden on our ratepayers.”
According to a Montana Free Press-Eagleton Poll conducted in January and February, 54% of Montana’s reported difficulty affording utility bills.
Based on the language in HB 490, a plaintiff would have to demonstrate an energy provider “failed to exercise the degree of care, skill, and learning” that would have been exercised by a similar, in-state provider under similar circumstances.
Anne Hedges, executive director of the Montana Environmental Information Center, took issue with that standard.
“With co-ops, you have a lot of co-ops to compare them to. With an electric utility ‘in this state,’ we really only have one: NorthWestern Energy,” Hedges said, noting that Montana-Dakota Utilities operates in Montana with a substantially smaller footprint.
“That means you’re comparing an electric utility to itself,” Hedges said.
Hedges also said the bill doesn’t go far enough to ensure the mandated mitigation plans meet adequate minimum standards.
“It says you can’t consider whether the utility is spending money on its wildfire mitigation plan — that can’t be part of [the consideration over] whether they’re complying with their wildfire mitigation plan,” Hedges said. “That doesn’t make any sense. Having a great plan is meaningless if it’s shelf art.”
The bill does require cost estimates when utilities draft plans.
During its March 26 hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee, the National Association of Mutual Insurers pushed back against the bill over similar concerns that it doesn’t mandate strong enough mitigation plans. In the event a policyholder sees damage from a wildfire, their insurers would pay out the policy before seeking compensation from the entity that caused the wildfire through a process known as subrogation.
“We want the mitigation programs in place because, frankly, we would rather not pay out and rather not have to subrogate,” said Bruce Spencer, a lobbyist speaking on behalf of the insurance association.
But many representatives of utilities like Mark Hayden, manager of Missoula Electric Cooperative, said that companies are already taking the threat of preventing wildfire seriously and that HB 490 would codify the significance of those efforts.
“Catastrophic wildfire is an ever-growing threat,” Hayden said. “In response, my cooperative has invested heavily in wildfire mitigation.”
In March 2025, 17 of the state’s 25 co-ops had developed mitigation plans. NorthWestern Energy also maintains a plan. Montana-Dakota Utilities does not, though a March 27 email from spokesperson Mark Hanson said the company is working to develop and implement one.
Two attorneys whose properties experienced damage during the West Wind Fire in Denton testified against the bill based on their experiences during the aftermath of the blaze that was sparked by a NorthWestern electric line. According to an annual report from NorthWestern, the blaze destroyed more than 25 homes and structures, including a grain elevator, and about 16 square miles of grassland.
Shane Colton, who grew up in Denton and lost his childhood home in the blaze, said he litigated over damage from the West Wind Fire in addition to representing other residents who sought similar recourse.
“We did not plead strict liability in any of those cases because we don’t believe it applies — we had to prove a standard of negligence — and we went about doing that,” Colton said. “In some instances, I do believe that NorthWestern acted fairly promptly, but at the same time, a lot of those folks were not made whole and resolved quickly just because they wanted to get on with things.”
Mike Weinheimer, the other West Wind Fire victim to testify March 26, said the bill had a broader impact than preventing a strict legal precedent.
“If this was purely about strict liability, this would be a one-page bill: ‘strict liability doesn’t apply to utilities in Montana.’ It’s not. It’s eight pages,” Weinheimer said, arguing Montana’s current statute over wildfire liability “applies to everyone equally” and “doesn’t give special treatment to utilities.”
Mark Lambrecht, director of government relations for Montana Electric Cooperatives’ Association, disagreed.
“What we’re trying to do here is establish standards that are reasonable, that would allow electric co-ops and public utilities to continue to provide that essential service to all of us in the state of Montana,” Lambrecht said. “It’s not a liability shield.”
The state Public Service Commission opposed the legislation over its mandate that NorthWestern Energy and Montana-Dakota Utilities submit wildfire mitigation plans for the approval of the PSC, a new responsibility for which the bill allocated $100,000 to the commission to manage. The Public Service Commission regulates investor-owned utilities with the aim of protecting customers who cannot shop around for utility options.
“This is a state issue. It is not a ratepayer issue,” said PSC President Brad Molnar, a Republican and former state legislator.
Moments after the bill’s hearing ended, Sen. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, shared her opinion while the more than 15 individuals who spoke on the bill trudged out of the room.
“If I had to vote on this bill today, it would be a no,” Manzella said. “But I have a strong faith in the sponsor that she will work to bring the two sides together so that we can support this bill, because it’s an extremely important bill.”
Zeke Lloyd
An Ohio native, Zeke Lloyd spent four years in Colorado before moving up to Helena, Montana. Now acclimated to the elevation, he coordinates the Voter Priority Project, an MTFP initiative designed to keep Montanans informed on the issues that matter most to them. His responsibilities include public polling, data analysis and legislative reporting. Outside the office, you can find Zeke in a quiet, cozy spot immersed in a good book. You can reach him at zlloyd@montanafreepress.org. More by Zeke Lloyd
