Montana state Sen. Vince Ricci, a Republican whose district stretches from west Billings to the nearby town of Laurel, has spent months trying to keep track of the state’s evolving plans to develop a new psychiatric facility somewhere in his neck of the woods. For a lawmaker used to being well -informed on state policy, it hasn’t 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.  “I got a call from the state warning me that, ‘Laurel’s been selected, we just want to let you know before it hits the press,’” Ricci recalled in a Tuesday phone interview.  But beyond that, the state lawmaker said, critical details remain undefined for him and almost everyone else — including the Laurel City Council. “I hate being in the dark,” Ricci said.  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’s size, services and location has been ongoing since the summer, when Billings officials bristled at assertions from the Gianforte administration that the state’s largest city, also located in Yellowstone County, was likely the right fit.  Details about the facility’s 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.  MONTANA’S NEW BEHAVIORAL HEALTH FACILITY FAQDownload 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’s development arm, Laurel’s Chief Administrative Officer Kurt Markegard emphasized that a suitable parcel of land didn’t exist within the city’s current boundaries.  Rather, Markegard hinted at a location “just outside Laurel’s city limits” with adjacent water and sewer lines under installation and other criteria “that would make building the facility remarkably successful.” If the state were to obtain suitable land, it would then need to go through the city’s annexation process to link the facility up to water and sewer services. But Markegard’s letter did not provide additional information about the parcel of land he referenced. Ricci, as well as state Rep. Lee Deming, R-Laurel, said they have heard multiple locations adjacent to Laurel’s city boundaries are still on the table.  “There 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,” Deming told Montana Free Press in a Monday email.  Laurel’s 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.  In the Nov. 28 press release from the state health department about the Laurel location, director Charlie Brereton thanked “the City of Laurel and its leaders for their interest in partnering with the state on a new behavioral health facility.” In an attached letter that the health department and Board of Investments sent to the governor’s budget office, Brereton listed some of the attributes that led the state to select Laurel.  “Laurel provides access to a critical health care workforce and infrastructure necessary to ensure the facility’s success. Laurel’s 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,” Brereton wrote. BEHAVIORAL HEALTH FACILITY FLOOR PLANDownload 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.  The facility’s 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. One group that remains in the dark about the building’s scope and future is the Laurel City Council. At an October city council workshop, Laurel’s 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. Braukmann repeated that message at another city council meeting on Tuesday, when members asked to discuss the state’s announcement about selecting Laurel as the site for the new facility. If the council does receive an annexation request for the facility’s property, she said, it will then be tasked with acting in a “quasi-judicial role” to evaluate whether the application meets the city’s annexation policy. Given that role, Braukmann directed city council members not to discuss the facility with constituents or in the press. “It is not, and I say this with complete respect to your decision-making role — it is not appropriate to respond to the public at this time as council members on these issues,” Braukmann said. She added that any official deliberations by the council about the state’s facility are likely “months away.” 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. City Hall is seen in downtown Laurel is seen on Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2025. Credit: Lauren Miller, Montana Free Press, CatchLight Local/Report for America “If 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’re in what’s called a ‘quasi-judicial decision,’” Lynch said. “… If there’s 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.” Lynch said the same principle could apply to Laurel’s current predicament, even if the state has not submitted any kind of annexation request.  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.  Reached by phone on Tuesday, Laurel City Council Member Richard Klose said he didn’t know much about the facility except for what he’s read in media outlets. “All I know is that the state awarded Laurel that facility and that’s all I know,” Klose said.  Pressed on what he’s heard about what the facility is meant to do, or who it’s intended to serve, Klose didn’t offer specifics. “Until I know what’s going on, I’m just going to stay open-minded as to what’s going on,” he said. “… I don’t have an opinion on that until I get all the facts.” The post In Laurel, details thin about proposed state-run mental health facility appeared first on Montana Free Press. ...read more read less