Psychiatric Prison Timeline

The court weighed economic harm from continued delay and MEPA's requirement to narrowly tailor injunctive relief.

The order does not dismiss the case or resolve the challenges raised in the second injunction motion.

In a separate order filed the same day (Doc 63), the court dissolved the August 26 injunction without deciding the second injunction motion.

The court later dissolved the August 26 injunction on October 20 (Doc 63), leaving the second injunction motion for separate consideration.

The vote is recorded in draft minutes. The adopted resolution text will be linked when available.

The signed ordinance states it was adopted on second reading September 8 and takes effect 30 days after passage.

The State filed these materials in the court record the same day.

At this early stage, the court found Laurel CARED more likely than not to succeed on its claims about the State's water demand and pressure explanation, and about annexation as a prerequisite to water service. On two other claims, emergency services and alternative sites, the court did not find at that stage that Laurel CARED was likely to succeed.

These were preliminary findings made only to decide whether an injunction was needed, on limited supporting documents for some claims. They are not final rulings on the merits. Arguments for summary judgment have not been made, and the court could still rule in Laurel CARED's favor on any claim.

The hearing transcript will be added to the case page when we have it.

The City also noted low water pressure on the newly extended Highway 10 main and its annexation policy for service outside city limits.

The letter is quoted in the court's August 26 order.

The case is Cause No. DV-56-2026-0000855-DK, before Judge Ed Zink.

The July 13 date in the purchase agreement was the deadline for closing.

A fuller version of the assessment, which describes a possible expansion to 64 beds, had been posted May 18.

The recall effort grew out of the facility siting process and the questions about transparency that came with it.

This is a major post-April governance event tied directly to the psychiatric prison fallout.

It should replace the older timeline's stale March-only recall framing.

The City's later letter to the State describes this moratorium as expiring July 27, 2026.

This is the first major post-hearing press item identified for the timeline refresh.

The News From The States mirror was readable during review.

The draft assessment was posted two days before the hearing.

The same communication also confirmed the April 22 public hearing at Laurel Public Library.

This event shows the state shifting from a possible meeting to a formal refusal after accountability requests escalated.

BOI withdrew the county notice on April 2, after the County asked for ownership documents. BOI said it would provide a new notice if the land is in public ownership after a decision to proceed is final.

Press coverage of the hearing plans followed in early April.

Supporters argued the pause would give city staff time to assess infrastructure and service capacity.

Council later passed annexation moratoriums on April 28 (O26-02) and July 14 (O26-03), and a longer one on September 8 (O26-04).

The recall effort centered on local governance, transparency, and the handling of the psychiatric prison siting process.

This event belongs in this project timeline because the recall emerged directly from the facility process.

The district raised concerns about proximity to the school and the state's process.

News coverage of the site followed in the days after the workshop.

The site sits in Laurel's westward growth area and would require annexation or other land-use decisions.

The announcement came after Hardin and Miles City had submitted formal proposals.

Public reporting quickly noted that other communities were surprised by Laurel's selection.

The letter did not include the formal proposal materials requested through the state's process.

It documents that Laurel-area site discussions occurred before the public knew Laurel was under active consideration.

The statement also says previously reviewed sites, including those on Skyway Drive, were not viable.

On September 10, 2025, Governor Gianforte's letter to BOI thanked the Board for "the brief pause you have placed" and encouraged public involvement as the Board worked with DPHHS.

At this stage, the public framing was regional, not Laurel-specific.

The facility population was described as criminal defendants requiring intensive psychiatric treatment in a secure setting.

The funding package included money for a facility serving people involved in the criminal justice system who require psychiatric evaluation or treatment.

This is the earliest public funding anchor for the project timeline.