by Guest Writer | Apr 15, 2026 | Corporations, Data Centers
Photo By MEIC
Guest Editorial by former Butte Legislator, Josh Peck.
Everybody gets it wrong sometimes. This time, unfortunately, organized labor got it wrong.
Let me say this clearly before anyone twists it. I am pro-union. I have spent years supporting unions, studying labor history, standing with workers, and understanding exactly why unions matter. Unions built the middle class. Unions fought for safety rules, fair pay, decent benefits, health protections, training standards, and dignity on the job. In a place like Butte, that history is not abstract. It is sacred.
That is exactly why this moment feels so wrong.
What we are being told right now is that if we ask questions about data centers, if we ask about water, if we ask about electric rates, if we ask about noise, wildlife, land use, public process, long-term costs, and whether regular Montanans will get stuck holding the bag, then somehow we are anti-worker or anti-union. That is nonsense.
Even Montana press is now reporting that AFL-CIO pressure has reached party messaging around data centers. Daily Montanan’s April 13 debate coverage quoted Russ Cleveland saying he was warned to be careful about talking negatively about data centers because AFL-CIO had asked for that. Montana Standard had already reported in February that labor leadership was urging Montana Democrats to back off negative messaging on the issue. 
That is not solidarity. That is message control.
And the message they want us to swallow is simple: jobs, jobs, jobs.
Montanans have heard that tune before.
Yes, data centers create construction work. Nobody is denying that. Brookings says the standard model delivers short-term construction jobs. A USC workforce analysis says the typical large build runs around two years. But that same research also shows the permanent workforce at highly automated hyperscale facilities is tiny compared with the build phase. Good Jobs First warns that many subsidy deals require very few permanent jobs, and some require none at all, while construction labor can be filled by traveling crews rather than guaranteed local hires. 
So let us stop pretending this is some giant long-term employment engine for Montana communities. A lot of these projects look more like a short burst of work followed by a heavily automated facility with a relatively small permanent staff. 
That does not make the construction jobs fake. It means they are not the whole story.
And the other side of the story is huge.
Montana Free Press has reported that Butte is ground zero in this debate for a reason. We already know these projects can require enormous amounts of electricity. We know water use details have been hard to pin down. We know there is a tradeoff between water cooling and electric demand. We know NorthWestern has signed letters of intent that, by one Montana Free Press accounting, could total 1,400 megawatts by 2030, more than double what its existing customers require on a typical day. We know Earthjustice and other groups are fighting the PSC because key data center information has been kept from public view. 
That alone should be enough to justify a pause.
Not a ban. Not a tantrum. Not an anti-union crusade.
A pause.
A serious, adult, Montana-style pause to ask basic questions.
What will this do to electric rates?
What will this do to water?
What will this do to wildlife and habitat?
What will this do to neighboring homes and neighborhoods?
What will this do to noise levels?
What will this do to local infrastructure?
What guarantees exist that Montana ratepayers will not subsidize private corporate expansion?
What percentage of the labor will actually be local?
What percentage of the permanent jobs will be union?
What public benefits are guaranteed in writing, not just promised in a press conference?
These are not extremist questions. These are the exact kind of questions unions are supposed to ask when something big, risky, and potentially harmful is being pushed through too fast.
Because the union tradition at its best is not “trust the corporation.”
It is not “take the deal and ask later.”
It is not “sit down and shut up because leadership already decided.”
The union tradition at its best is: slow down, get it in writing, protect the worker, protect the public, make sure the job is done right, and make sure regular people are not the ones sacrificed so somebody else can cash out.
That is why this feels like such a slap in the face.
We are not talking about a local machine shop. We are not talking about a small industrial project with known impacts. We are talking about a fast-moving, high-power, high-water, highly secretive industry that across the country has triggered fights over utility rates, freshwater, land use, air quality, and transparency. DOE’s Berkeley Lab says data center electricity demand could rise to as much as 12% of all U.S. electricity by 2028. EESI says large data centers can use up to 5 million gallons of water per day. WRI says communities are often left with limited information about long-term impacts and benefits. 
If that does not call for caution, what does?
And here is the part that really gets under my skin.
I actually do support data centers in the United States. I support keeping critical digital infrastructure here rather than handing it off to regimes and regions with fewer rules and less accountability. I understand the argument that colder climates can be more efficient. I understand why people see economic potential.
But supporting the concept is not the same thing as giving every project a blank check.
A corporation willing to build wherever cost is lowest is not your friend just because it says “union labor” at the groundbreaking. The same market logic that chases cheap land, cheap power, tax breaks, and light regulation is not magically transformed into labor solidarity because someone wore a hard hat at a press conference. If anything, that is exactly when unions should be most skeptical.
And that is why labor leadership should be standing with communities demanding answers, not attacking people for asking the questions.
Want this done right? Then prove it.
Guarantee local labor in writing.
Guarantee ratepayer protections in writing.
Guarantee water protections in writing.
Guarantee disclosure in writing.
Guarantee environmental review in writing.
Guarantee permanent community benefit in writing.
Do not tell Montanans to take it on faith.
This is Montana. People hunt here. Fish here. Raise kids here. Pay utility bills here. Live next to the land being discussed here. They have every right to know what will be built, what it will consume, what it will sound like, what it will cost, and who really benefits.
That is not anti-union.
That is not anti-worker.
That is not anti-progress.
That is exactly what doing it right looks like.
So no, asking for a pause is not opposing labor. It is honoring the best instincts labor was built on. Measure twice. Cut once. Protect people first. Do not let corporate greed wrap itself in a union banner and call that justice.
Everybody gets it wrong sometimes.
This time, labor leadership got it wrong.
And if unions want to be true to the legacy they inherited from places like Butte, then they should stop trying to rush Montanans past their questions and start helping us demand real answers.
The most union thing in the world is not blind loyalty to a project. It is insisting the project be safe, fair, transparent, and worth the cost.
Short-term construction jobs are not a moral blank check for long-term public risk. 
If the deal is so good, it should survive public scrutiny.
Montanans are not saying no. They are saying prove it.
Labor should be helping ask the hard questions, not helping shut them down
Also see WTF406.com previous post on data centers. https://wtf406.com/2025/08/here-we-go-again/
by Helena Lovick | Feb 13, 2026 | Contamination, Corporations, Protests, Taxes, Taxpayers
Photo credit David Saslav
Great Falls, MT
A couple of hardy protesters have been protesting outside of the Calumet Montana Refinery every first and third Monday at 7:30 AM. Why are they doing that?
Fair Taxes
We’ve talked before about how Calumet and politicians in Calumet’s pocket are screwing you. Let’s talk about what happened recently with Calumet’s tax protest.
Every year, Calumet pays all of their required taxes into an escrow account because they concurrently protest the tax valuation. The money is then held in that escrow account and not released for use until the tax protest is settled. Calumet’s goal is to make maximum profits by minimizing the amount of tax they are required to pay. Historically, Calumet “wins” in their tax protest and the actual amount of tax they have to pay is dramatically reduced. Meaning they claw back a portion of the amount sitting in that escrow account.
According to the Electric, Calumet will get $1.4 million tax dollars back after they reached a settlement on their tax protest for tax years 2022 to 2024. Another example of how Calumet protests their taxes was a settlement in 2025. As reported in the Electric, the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Montana Renewables (the biofuel side of Calumet) settled to increase the tax exempt portion of the refinery and Cascade County will have to pay back the overcharges since the tax exempt adjustment was backdated a few years.
While it may be legal to protest taxes, it hurts our community. It makes it impossible for our schools and city and county governments to budget not knowing how much of the taxes they will ultimately receive. Every dollar Calumet gets out of paying, has to be made up by the rest of the tax payers.
Most taxpayers pay their taxes on time and without protest. Then those same taxpayers give even more back to their community, by contributing to good causes like school PTAs, food banks, and more. Meanwhile, we continue to supply Calumet with roads, bridges, rail access, water, and more. We’re not expecting Calumet to do more than we do ourselves. We’re asking them to be good neighbors and give back to a community that gives so much to them.
If not the tax stuff, what else are they protesting?
This might surprise you but…Calumet could be doing more to respect our environment.
In January 2025, Montana Renewables publicly committed to building an on-site water treatment facility. This would prevent their wastewater from being trucked out and dumped elsewhere. Instead, Montana Renewables is still carrying their pollution down the road with no plans in site for the water cleaning facility. That transportation costs money too, and Montana Renewables is looking at alternative ways to dispose of the waste. One potential pathway for this mystery waste water is a proposed permit to allow wastewater to be injected into inactive oil wells such as by Lake Frances in Montana. The actual chemical composition of the wastewater is unknown and the proposed wells may lead to contamination of the Madison Aquifer, a source of drinking water for hundreds of wells in Montana. Yikes!!
One of the protesters, Donna Williams, pointed out “We’re not protesting; we’re rallying behind our refinery to get it right. Most other SAF [Sustainable Aviation Fuel] facilities have wastewater treatment and we want ours to have it, too.”
As reported in the Montana Free Press, “Montana Renewables’ environmental assessment estimates that its pretreatment unit will produce as much as 232,000 gallons of wastewater each day.” That’s a lot of waste. It’s the right thing to do to process that waste to prevent a bigger problem down the road (literally). Let’s not risk polluting our ground water. Montana Renewables can do the right thing and treat their wastewater.
Sounds like good reasons to protest to me!
Upcoming Protests on the corner of 10 St NE and Smelter Ave NE
1st and 3rd Mondays, 7:30-8:00 AM
- February 16th
- March 2nd
- March 16th
by Ken Toole | Aug 23, 2025 | Corporations, Energy/Utilities
This editorial was sent to newspapers across Montana.
What is it about top executives in monopoly utilities that makes them want to play cowboy capitalists? Case in point is NorthWestern Energy’s plan to provide power to gigantic data centers. With great ballyhoo across the state, NorthWestern Energy announced it signed a “letter of intent” to provide as much as 1,000 megawatts of electricity to Quantica Infrastructure for its proposed data center. That’s more than their current total electric load of 760 megawatts. That amount of power would use all of NorthWestern’s existing generation capacity.
You would think that this monopoly business and its top brass would be satisfied with its current situation. In exchange for providing power to its current customer base (that’s us), they receive a virtual guarantee they will not lose their investment for any reason. They also get a guaranteed rate of return on their investments that hovers around 10%. That is for the entire life of the facility regardless of economic conditions or competition.
In exchange for running this sleepy little monopoly, which is headquartered in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, their current CEO, Brian Bird, received $4.8 million in 2024. The 2023 corporate proxy statement lists Board Chair Linda Sullivan receiving an annual retainer of $150,000 plus 3,750 shares of stock. Current price per share is around $55. For comparison, the manager of Flathead Electric Cooperative, the largest public power provider in Montana, receives just under $550,000 per year.
But now NorthWestern wants to take on a lot of risk building new facilities and making investments betting on the latest fashion trend to come down the pike: data centers. And if they miss their bet, we all suffer the consequences. Maybe the business booster crowd needs a history lesson.
In 1971, the Bureau of Reclamation released the North Central Power Study. The plan called for massive coal development on the northern plains. In Montana alone, they envisioned 17 coal plants roughly the size of the Colstrip plants. Of course, the Montana Power Company (NorthWestern Energy’s predecessor) and other corporate interests in Montana were all for it. For them, the environmental degradation and negative impact on existing ag producers and others were worth the cost.
But ranchers, Native tribes, and many others were not convinced. They organized to oppose the massive development being proposed by the coal and utility industries. In the end, only four plants were built and owned by a consortium of utilities. It also spawned two of the most powerful citizen groups in the state: The Montana Environmental Information Center and Northern Plains Resource Council. To this day, they remain actively engaged in protecting Montana’s people and environment from corporate interests seeking a quick dollar.
Fast forward to 1997 and the electric deregulation fiasco. Management of the Montana Power Company became bored with the stodgy old regulated utility business. So they decided to sell off the power plants and power lines they owned. They took all of that money and dumped it into Touch America, a fledgling telecommunications company. In short order, Touch America went bankrupt and all of that money evaporated. Montana suffered through years of economic chaos. We went from some of the lowest customer rates in the country to some of the highest rates in the Northwest. NorthWestern is now proposing significant rate increases on a regular basis, while still trying to acquire worn out, expensive coal plants in the Colstrip complex.
In the emerging world of huge data centers serving everything from artificial intelligence to cryptocurrency ponzi schemes, NorthWestern sees a new shiny object on the horizon: huge electric loads required by data centers. Unfortunately, this confronts us when the national government is run by delusional ideologues. Here in Montana, billionaire tech moguls and far-right legislators are running state government. The Public Service Commission, which should be protecting us from the greed of corporate CEOs, looks more like the clown show in a three-ring circus.
Strap in and hold onto your wallets, folks. It’s gonna be a wild ride.
Ken Toole served on the Public Service Commission from 2007 to 2011. He was a member of the Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee, serving as its chairman in 2005. He served as the vice chair of the Senate Taxation Committee in 2005. He was also the President of The Policy Institute, a private group which conducted research on economic issues including energy and taxation.
by Ken Toole | May 16, 2025 | Appraisal, Corporations, Taxes
In this post we are focusing on the games large corporations play on property taxes and “appraised values.” We’ve already written about Calumet’s shenanigans in receiving reductions in property taxes with the help and support of local Republican legislator Steve Fitzpatrick and Attorney Kim Beatty, wife of the Director of the Department of Revenue. https://wtf406.com/2025/04/calumets-got-lawyers-and-politicians/
The Goal of All Property Appraisal is to Establish the Market Value Of The Property
The first step in determining how much you will owe in property taxes is determined by the appraised value of your home, land, business, or rental. That value is determined by the Montana Department of Revenue’s appraisal process. The most common way the Department of Revenue determines the value of your home is to identify comparable property in your area that has sold. It is determining the “market value” by looking at sales of similar property.
Three Methods of Appraisal to Determine How Much a Property Is Worth
It is harder to find “comparable sales” for large industrial facilities like Calumet, because they do not sell as often and there are far fewer of them to use as comparisons. There are other ways to establish the market value. In addition to the comparable sales method, there is also the “cost approach” which adds the cost of land, buildings and other improvements and adjusts for condition of facilities to determine the total value. The third method is the “income approach.” In this system the appraiser looks at the income and expenses generated by the property. Calumet and other refineries are generally appraised using the “cost approach.”
Here’s The Game They Play. . .
If a property owner does not agree with the Department of Revenue’s appraisal, there is an appeal process through the Montana Tax Appeals Board. That process allows the Department of Revenue and the appellant (say, Calumet) to negotiate a voluntary settlement. Calumet and other refineries in Montana routinely appeal their valuations and routinely enter settlements with the Department of Revenue which result in lowering their taxes. None of the negotiation meetings are public. And when their taxes are lowered, your taxes go up. For a complete explanation of how this works, follow the link below. https://dailymontanan.com/2023/07/26/big-corporations-get-tax-benefits-while-montana-resident-get-higher-property-taxes/
2012 Showdown In A Legislative Committee
Dan Bucks, the Department of Revenue Director under former Governor Brian Schweitzer, refused to play this game. Instead, he defended the appraised values by the Department of Revenue rather than entering settlements. Not surprisingly, big corporate taxpayers, like refineries, didn’t like Buck’s approach. In September 2012, three refineries attempted to set him up in front of the legislative interim committee on Revenue and Transportation in a failed attempt to apply political pressure.
At the same time, Connacher Oil and Gas Limited, the previous owners of the Great Falls refinery, reached a deal with Calumet to sell the refinery for $120 million. That purchase established the actual market value of the refinery. The Department of Revenue had appraised the value of the refinery at $70 million, and Connacher Oil had appealed that appraisal, arguing it was too high even though it was $50 million below the actual purchase price paid by Calumet. Below is an audio clip of Bucks explaining the issue to the legislative committee.
https://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00309/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20120914/-1/20693?startposition=20120914072325&mediaEndTime=20120914072507&viewMode=3&globalStreamId=4
Our Local Elected Officials Need to Represent Us, not Big Corporations
Too often local elected officials pander to these big corporations. Beware of politicians who talk about the economic benefits of “industrial development.” Too often we get taxes shifting more and more to residential and small business and underfunded public services. We need more people in government like Dan Bucks. We won’t get them if we (the public) don’t demand that the tax system is equitable and transparent and companies like Calumet pay their fair share.
