Hutchinson, Hollandsworth face off

The Republican primary race for a newly created four-county state House district sees a state representative who retired from farming east of Brady facing a Hingham-area farmer.

Darrold Hutchinson of Hingham is challenging Rep. Roy Hollandsworth, R-Brady, in the primary for House District 27, which starts on the Canadian border in Liberty and western Hill County and runs through Chouteau County and to the northeastern corner of Cascade County outside of Great Falls.

The winner of that race will face Democrat Rob Laas of Chester in the general election. Laas is unopposed in the primary, in the general election.

Hollandsworth, who farmed in the Knees community on the corners of Liberty, Chouteau, Toole and Pondera counties, retired from farming when elected to his first term to the Legislature.

He has served all three of his terms on the House Appropriations Committee and chaired the education subcommittee for appropriations, and has vice chaired and chaired the interim Committee on Revenue and Transportation.

Hutchinson, whose family moved from Indiana to Wyoming while he was a young child, earned a degree in vocational agricultural education and taught in Wyoming for a few years before moving to Montana to take over his wife’s family’s farm near Hingham.

An accomplished aviator, Hutchinson ran an agricultural aviation business for 25 years and works as a pilot dropping flame retardant for the U.S. Forest Service during wildfires.

Select issues discussed

The Havre Daily News asked the candidates about themselves and their positions on some hot-ticket issues in the last two legislative sessions. Their answers follow.

Why should the

voters vote for you?

Hollandsworth said his experience in the Legislature, including the full-time work required on the House Appropriations Committee, writing the state spending bills, makes him the best candidate.

“I’ve got a lot of experience, being a chairman, and Appropriations is a full-time hard committee,” he said. “You don’t get a chance to do anything else when you’re in Helena, you do that only. It is experience, is what I’m saying.”

He added that due to term limits, people spend their first years in the Legislature learning their way around and getting “to know people so they trust you.”

Hutchinson summed up his top qualification in one sentence.

“I’m an active taxpayer,” he said.

While numerous and complex issues are dealt with by the Legislature, “truly, just the mere fact that we’re all taxpayers and we have a vested interest in how government spends its money” is the best qualification, he said.

“I’ve got a lot of varied background experience and some knowledge, wisdom and experience, and I love Montana,” he added.

Freedom of education

The Republican leadership in the House pushed hard last session to increase freedom of education in the state, trying to set up savings accounts to help fund people trying alternatives to public education.

Hollandsworth and Hutchinson made similar comments about that idea.

Hollandsworth said the top priority is, if public money is spent for education, the education has to be accountable to the taxpayers.

“We’ve tried to tell people who are trying to do charter schools and other alternative things, if you have a local board of directors that report to taxpayers, ’cause they’re going to be after taxpayers’ money, then I would very much be for it on a trial basis … ,” he said. “It’s public money, and we have to be careful how we spend it, and why should we give them free rein when we make the public schools go through certain hoops and report back to us?”

Hollandsworth said he is concerned that the push is to get a foot in the door to remove public oversight of public education funds.

“I think what it is, personally, this whole movement is to get into the funding system that we use to fund education,” he said. “Then, once they get in it, then they’ve taken it away from public schools and diverted to other things that aren’t managed, that the taxpayer gets feedback on, and that’s what scares me.

“It’s a fine line there. You know what I mean, you open up Pandora’s box, can you shove it back in, and I don’t know that.”

Hollandsworth also said the proposed alternative school choices have to be accountable.

“First of all, I don’t mind that there are other school options, and if somebody wants to open up a school and offer a public or private education to kids, I don’t have a problem with that, but I do think that they do have to meet the same standards as our public school systems do … ,” he said. “If they’re going to receive money from the state, or indirectly or however they do that, if it’s state money then it should meet the same standard that the public system does.”

Charter schools

Last session also saw a push for expanding charter schools in Montana.

Under Montana rules, a school district now can set up a charter school, which operates under a charter and could focus on a particular area such as agriculture, arts or engineering. The school would operate under the same rules and the administration of the state Office of Public Instruction.

Hollandsworth said there is no need for a change. If people get involved, right now, they can set up whatever school district they want within state regulations, including charter schools.

“That’s how our constitution is set up,” he said. “The school board can change that school, and they can literally run it like a charter school right now.

“They have the ability to do that, if people got involved, but there’s the rub. They want it all done so they can blame someone else instead them doing it their selves.”

Hutchinson said he is not very familiar with the charter school concept, and he would look at it, but it does not seem like a top priority.

“I’m certainly willing to spend time and research that, look at the pros and cons,” he said. “It doesn’t seem to be a huge huge issue. I don’t know, maybe there’s enough interest out there that it is.”

Infrastructure in the Bakken and elsewhere

Gov. Steve Bullock last session vetoed a bill to provide funding for infrastructure at the booming area of the Bakken, saying it overspent his goal to provide a $300 million reserve ending fund balance. He has proposed offering a special loan rate on the state revolving fund and selling $45 million in bonds to fund existing infrastructure improvements and improvements in the Bakken.

Hollandsworth said money will be set to help with Bakken infrastructure, but he does not support Bullock’s proposal. The bill last session was sponsored by a Republican and had heavy bipartisan support, yet it was vetoed, he said.

“And now, he’s turning around and wanting us to help him out … ,” Hollandsworth said. “That’s a question within the question. All the Legislature needs to have credit for helping the Bakken area because we were all behind it, not just the governor.

“I’m not trying to slam the governor because I get along pretty good with him, but he needs to know it takes all of us to work together to do this stuff,” he said.

Hutchinson said he is not familiar enough with Bullock’s proposal to comment on it, but he supports helping with Bakken infrastructure.

He said he is hearing interesting comments about the issue, including that the people in the Bakken have the money and have created the problem of infrastructure shortages and failures and should deal with it themselves.

“But they really haven’t got the money right, and they need some help or things are going to be in a disarray out there, if they aren’t already,” he said. “I do think we need to help them somehow.”

Once the money is rolling into the local communities, the same people who are saying that area should deal with it themselves might want some of that, for schools and so on, he added. Maybe then those jurisdictions could pay into a fund, he added.

“But maybe that’s the payback,” Hutchinson said. “It’s complex kind of deal.

Ending-fund balance

Hollandsworth said Bullock’s goal of a $300 million ending fund balance is not a problem in itself, “as long as it doesn’t get spent on more government growth.

“People think buying buildings is growth. No, thats infrastructure,” he said. “When I talk about growth (that’s) starting another program that funds and goes on forever, and I hate funding that’s in statute because the only way you can ever change it is by changing the statute which is hard.

“An ending fund balance is good as long as there’s a plan that we don’t use it foolishly,” he said.

Hutchinson said the biggest question is how is Bullock going to use that money.

“I guess the thing that bothers me is, if we’re hoarding money, it’s taxpayer money, so were taxing people more than what is needed to operate the state financial system. $300 million in today’s money doesn’t go a long way, but still it’s in excess of what taxpayers would need to run the state.”

He said he would need to know more, but probably would not support the $300 million reserve.

Bonding for

state buildings

The 2011 Legislature voted down Gov. Brian Schweitzer’s proposed bonding bill to pay for state building construction, citing concern that revenue would be less than predicted. The 2013 Legislature voted down Bullock’s bonding bill, voting to pay in cash instead because the revenue actually was higher than predicted.

Hollandsworth said infrastructure is an investment and he supports it, but he would rather pay in cash if the state can. He supported the 2011 bonding bill, but not when the state has spare money, he said.

“And we need to bond,” he added. “The bonding rate is cheap so it isn’t going to cost us a bunch. But what you do is you bond something and you still have an ending fund balance, so they think they can go ahead and spend it.”

He again said the $300 million ending fund balance was more than the state needed.

“Why not buy a building, why not get it appropriated and actually one-time only spend. That way it’s off the plate, that’s the way I feel,” Hollandsworth said. “One-time only spending instead of stretching it out, but I do support the bonding program. One way or another, building is a must.”

Hutchinson said that, again, he is not familiar enough with the issue to comment on the bonding question, but he supports responsible spending for buildings including for education.

“I don’t know that there’s a harm in that,” he said. “How else do they do it? Again, it’s a complex issue. There’s a need, but how do you get the money and how do you fund it?

“I’d rather see them go back to the old days. Try to save money for it like the school districts did,” he added.