East Helena’s growth plans in peril?

Few locals turned out for Habitat for Humanity’s last public event this year on its planned 1500-home East Helena subdivision, yet attendees at the Missouri River Brewing gathering on Thursday were able to zero in on the key concern.

“I have friends that have a water issue,” said Helen Fabian, a longtime East Helena resident who has worked on Habitat homes. “All these pipes that broke this winter. You know, the pressure we’re putting on these things.”

The pressure on East Helena’s water system, and potentially on its ambitious housing vision, increased sharply on Wednesday after Lt. Gov. Kristen Juras denied the city’s request for water rights on the former ASARCO smelter lands – the same area Helena-area Habitat for Humanity is eyeing for its 1500-home Rose Hills project, and where developer Oakland hopes to build 4500 homes.

Ironically, the state decision came the day after East Helena gave preliminary approval to Rose Hills, which plans to make up to 40 percent of its homes permanently affordable through a land trust. With cottages, townhomes, and small-lot single-family homes and 46 acres of green space, the project seeks to provide “missing middle” housing.

Councilman Wes Feist expressed concerns about the plan’s narrow alleyways and oversight of the homeowner’s association before the City Council voted unanimously in favor of Rose Hills. Given the strong local interest in reasonably priced homes, the news of the two previous days, and that this could be residents’ last chance to ask Habitat questions before next spring, one might have expected a strong turnout on Thursday, Oct 23.

Yet only seven people came to the Missouri River Brewing event, and just two East Helena residents. Habitat has held eight public Rose Hills events since March, according to communications director Madeline Forbis. Earlier this month, a couple dozen locals came out for a similar gathering at Helena’s Brothers Tapworks, including East Helena’s Larry Krum.

“There’s only so much water out in East Helena,” Krum told The Monitor Oct 6, envisioning the needs of 1500 homes. “Where is all of this water going to come from?”

It’s a much more pointed question today. The water rights at the center of the dispute – five industrial rights, meant for residential and commercial use, and eight irrigation rights, for environmental and agricultural use – are controlled by the Montana Environmental Trust Group (METG), which was created in 2009 to manage cleanup of the 2000-acre former ASARCO smelter grounds turned Superfund site.

In November 2024, METG, which represents the interests of several state (the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Justice) and federal (the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Interior) bodies, offered East Helena two of the five industrial water rights, which the city calculated could serve 2,274 of the 6000-plus planned homes.

The city, estimating that it would need to spend tens of millions of dollars to treat the industrial water, rejected the offer last December and again this month after a second deadline. In her Wednesday letter to East Helena, Juras called the trust’s offer “more than reasonable.”

She said the state would use the irrigation water rights for instream flows to protect fish habitats in Prickly Pear Creek and blamed the city for its difficult position today, after “it annexed the ASARCO properties without making sufficient provision for water.”

METG President Cynthia Brooks essentially confirmed this, explaining that at the time of the annexation East Helena was surrounded by ASARCO lands, which it viewed as the only route to growth. In 2009, the city might not have imagined sucha massive housing project.

“I don’t think the city envisioned the residential development that is now working its way through the process,” Brooks said, adding that the state would go no higher than 40% of the industrial rights. “It was sort of take it or leave it. We were directed to convey that to the city.”

The state’s decision, in Brooks’ view, poses a direct threat to the city’s housing plans. “The city of East Helena needs those water rights to achieve the housing goals for its property,” she said.

Mayor Kelly Harris seemed a bit more optimistic – hinting at finding another way to supply water to the planned developments. “This was probably the most direct and linear path to water rights to serve those proposed communities,” Harris said. “It isn’t maybe the only one, who knows, but it’s the most direct.”

Feist called the state’s water rights offer “unfeasible,” as the city would have had to build a multimillion-dollar treatment facility. “The city wants to be good partners with the state and the trust to ensure that we have proper water for our current and future residents,” he said.

The state expects to soon shift the water rights to instream flow, subject to public comment and agency approval. Mayor Harris told The Monitor that East Helena may challenge the state’s decision.