Approximately two dozen citizens gathered Tuesday to voice strong opposition to the plan to construct a new psychiatric facility on Laurel’s outskirts. The facility is intended for individuals in the criminal justice system. The meeting’s focus was on the proposed location, which is near an elementary school, residential areas, and a community golf course.
The Laurel City Council listened silently to a lengthy public commentary session. Residents criticized the selection of a 114-acre site near Old Highway 10 and Golf Course Road. Although the council has no request from the Gianforte administration for property annexation to connect with Laurel’s water and sewer services, concerns about its future emergence persist. The city attorney has advised council members to avoid expressing opinions, ensuring impartiality if annexation requests arise.
Attendees described the facility as a “mental health prison,” voicing concerns about nearby educational and residential areas. Some supported mental health treatment expansion, but not at the suggested site. Chris Lorash, Laurel Public Schools board chair, stated, “Safety is more than just access to the building. It’s the students and the teachers state of mind.” The board has openly opposed the site.
Opponents argued that linking the facility to city resources would strain Laurel’s limited tax base. Residents are already funding schools and emergency services privately. Why should Laurel allocate tax dollars to a facility that is tax-exempt and does not visibly benefit the city’s financial health?
Community members conveyed mistrust about how Laurel emerged as a top location choice. A Nov. 17 letter from Laurel’s chief administrative officer, Kurt Markegard, was highlighted. It discussed the annexation process without identifying suitable sites within city limits, prompting speculation of undisclosed negotiations since mid-2025. Resident Samantha Mayes, in her letter, demanded transparency about decision-making and the city’s role.
During the meeting, Markegard addressed criticisms, explaining that the Gianforte administration contacted him and local officials, including from Billings and Yellowstone County, back in July. He expressed willingness to disclose all communications on the issue, ensuring transparency.
“I want open and transparent government. That’s what I want. That’s what I want from the council members. That’s what I want from the mayor and I want that from the public,” Markegard stated. The city commission took no action concerning the facility following the public comments.
—
Read More Montana News
