No. 14850
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1979
ROBERT E . McTAGGART ,
Petitioner and Respondent,
VS .
THE MONTANA POWER COMPANY,
Respondent and Appellant.
Appeal from: District Court of the First Judicial District,
Honorable Nat Allen, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellant:
Corette, Smith, Dean, Pohlman and Allen, Butte, Montana
Kendrick Smith argued, Butte, Montana
For Respondent:
Herron and Meloy, Helena, Montana
Peter M. Meloy argued, Helena, Montana
Submitted: November 1, 1979
Filed:
Mr. J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f
t h e Court.
T h i s i s an a c t i o n f o r t h e r e l o c a t i o n o f an o v e r h e a d
u t i l i t y l i n e p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404,
MCA, i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l District,
i n and f o r t h e County of L e w i s and C l a r k , t h e Honorable N a t
Allen presiding.
Respondent i s t h e owner of c e r t a i n r e a l a g r i c u l t u r a l
p r o p e r t y i n Lewis and C l a r k County. A p p e l l a n t , t h e Montana
Power Company, i s t h e owner of a n overhead u t i l i t y l i n e
which c r o s s e s r e s p o n d e n t ' s p r o p e r t y . Respondent f i l e d a
p e t i t i o n f o r t h e r e l o c a t i o n of t h e u t i l i t y l i n e p u r s u a n t t o
s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404, MCA, a l l e g i n g t h a t he
d e s i r e d t o i n s t a l l a " c e n t e r p i v o t i r r i g a t i o n system" on h i s
p r o p e r t y which would i n c r e a s e t h e p r o d u c t i v i t y of t h e l a n d
from o n e - h a l f t o n of a l f a l f a p e r a c r e t o f i v e t o n s p e r a c r e .
Respondent o f f e r e d a f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e f o r t h e
r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e l i n e g i v i n g a p p e l l a n t a right-of-way to
c o n t i n u e i t s o p e r a t i o n of t h e l i n e and a l l o w i n g r e s p o n d e n t
t o i n s t a l l t h e new i r r i g a t i o n system.
A motion t o d i s m i s s was f i l e d by a p p e l l a n t . Briefs
w e r e s u b m i t t e d on t h e motion by b o t h p a r t i e s , and t h e motion
was o v e r r u l e d . The motion t o d i s m i s s p r e s e n t e d a l t e r n a t i v e
contentions t h a t the applicable s t a t u t e s w e r e unconstitu-
t i o n a l b e c a u s e t h e y a l l o w e d a t a k i n g of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y f o r
p r i v a t e u s e , o r , i f t h e t a k i n g was f o r a p u b l i c u s e , t h e
s t a t u t e s w e r e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b e c a u s e t h e r e was no j u s t
compensation.
Respondent f i l e d a motion f o r summary judgment, which
was g r a n t e d by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t . The c o u r t found t h a t
t h e r e would be a s u b s t a n t i a l improvement i n a g r i c u l t u r a l
p r o d u c t i v i t y by i n s t a l l i n g t h e i r r i g a t i o n system and t h a t
t h e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e o f f e r e d by r e s p o n d e n t f o r t h e r e l o c a -
t i o n o f t h e power l i n e was f e a s i b l e . The c o u r t f u r t h e r
found t h a t s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404, MCA, were
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and o r d e r e d a p p e l l a n t t o r e l o c a t e t h e u t i l i t y
line. The c o s t s o f r e l o c a t i o n w e r e d i v i d e d e q u a l l y between
the parties. A p p e l l a n t a p p e a l s from t h e summary judgment
and o r d e r .
The i s s u e s r a i s e d on a p p e a l s o l e l y c o n c e r n t h e c o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l i t y of t h e a p p l i c a b l e s t a t u t e s . I n p a r t i c u l a r , two
issues are raised:
(1) Whether s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404, MCA,
i n c l u s i v e , v i o l a t e t h e F o u r t e e n t h Amendment t o t h e U n i t e d
S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n and A r t i c l e 11, S e c t i o n 29, o f t h e 1972
Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n , i n t h a t t h e y a l l o w t h e t a k i n g o f
p r i v a t e property f o r t h e p r i v a t e use of another?
( 2 ) Whether t h e u s e s o u g h t by r e s p o n d e n t i s a p u b l i c
u s e , and i f s o , whether s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404,
MCA, i n c l u s i v e , a r e a v i o l a t i o n of t h e F o u r t e e n t h Amendment
t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n and A r t i c l e 11, S e c t i o n
29, o f t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n , b e c a u s e t h e y a l l o w t h e
taking of p r i v a t e property f o r public use without j u s t
compensation?
The s t a t u t e s a p p l i c a b l e i n t h i s c a s e are s e t f o r t h i n
s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404 o f t h e Montana Code
Annotated. S p e c i f i c a l l y , they provide:
"69-4-401. Definitions. A s used i n t h i s p a r t ,
t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s a p p l y : (1) ' A g r i c u l -
t u r a l improvement' i n c l u d e s , w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n ,
s p r i n k l e r i r r i g a t i o n systems. ( 2 ) 'Overhead
u t i l i t y l i n e ' means a f a c i l i t y f o r t h e t r a n s -
m i s s i o n o r d i s t r i b u t i o n of e l e c t r i c i t y o r t e l e -
phone messages a l o n g w i r e s o r c a b l e s suspended
above t h e ground between s i n g l e o r d o u b l e p o l e s
and t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e a n c h o r s .
"69-4-402. P e t i t i o n f o r r e l o c a t i o n o f overhead
l i n e . An owner of a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d a c r o s s
which a n o v e r h e a d u t i l i t y l i n e h a s been con-
s t r u c t e d may p e t i t i o n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f o r a n
o r d e r f o r r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e l i n e f o r t h e purpose
o f i n s t a l l i n g a n a g r i c u l t u r a l improvement. The
p e t i t i o n s h a l l s e t f o r t h t h e n a t u r e of t h e pro-
posed a g r i c u l t u r a l improvement, t h e i n c r e a s e i n
p r o d u c t i v i t y of t h e l a n d a n t i c i p a t e d t o r e s u l t
from t h e improvement, and a f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e
r o u t e , a c r o s s o t h e r l a n d t o be p r o v i d e d by t h e
p e t i t i o n e r a t no c o s t t o t h e owner of t h e o v e r -
head u t i l i t y l i n e .
"69-4-403. Hearing and o r d e r . The d i s t r i c t
c o u r t s h a l l , upon n o t i c e t o t h e owner o f t h e
overhead u t i l i t y l i n e , hear evidence bearing
upon t h e m a t t e r s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e p e t i t i o n . If
t h e e v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e s a s u b s t a n t i a l improve-
ment i n a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i v i t y and t h e f e a -
s i b i l i t y of t h e r e l o c a t e d r o u t e , t h e c o u r t
s h a l l g r a n t o r modify and g r a n t , a s m o d i f i e d ,
t h e p e t i t i o n and o r d e r t h e owner of t h e l i n e
t o relocate the line.
"69-4-404. C o s t s of r e l o c a t i o n . The c o s t s o f
r e l o c a t i n g a n overhead u t i l i t y l i n e a s o r d e r e d
under 69-4-403 s h a l l be p a i d 50% by t h e u t i l i t y
and 50% by t h e owner of t h e l a n d . However, i f
t h e person p e t i t i o n i n g f o r t h e o r d e r f a i l s f o r
any r e a s o n t o i n s t a l l t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l improve-
ment w i t h i n 2 y e a r s f o l l o w i n g t h e d a t e r e l o c a t i o n
i s completed, he must r e i m b u r s e t h e owner of t h e
l i n e t h e f u l l c o s t o f r e l o c a t i o n , and t h e c o u r t
has continuing j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e p a r t i e s
f o r t h e p u r p o s e of o r d e r i n g s u c h reimbursement."
Our f i r s t c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e above-
quoted s t a t u t e s . On o n e hand, r e s p o n d e n t u r g e s t h a t t h e
s t a t u t e s a r e an e x e r c i s e o f t h e p o l i c e power of t h i s s t a t e
o v e r p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s and t h a t p r o p e r t y may t h e r e f o r e b e
t a k e n w i t h o u t j u s t compensation. On t h e o t h e r hand, a p p e l -
l a n t c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e s t a t u t e s as i n v o l v i n g t h e r i g h t of
e m i n e n t domain, which a u t h o r i z e s t h e s t a t e t o t a k e p r i v a t e
p r o p e r t y f o r p u b l i c u s e w i t h j u s t compensation.
W e f i n d t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s sound i n e m i n e n t domain.
Where t h e e x e r c i s e o f t h e p o l i c e power of t h e s t a t e i s
d i r e c t l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h matters of p u b l i c h e a l t h , s a f e t y and
w e l f a r e , we f i n d t h a t t h o s e matters a r e o n l y i n d i r e c t l y
c o n c e r n e d , i f a t a l l , w i t h t h e m a t t e r s r a i s e d by t h e s t a t u t e s
here. More i m p o r t a n t l y , w e n o t e t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s p r o v i d e
f o r a " t a k i n g ' ! of p r o p e r t y w i t h o u t t h e c o n s e n t of a u t i l i t y .
They i n v o l u n t a r i l y r e q u i r e a p u b l i c u t i l i t y t o move i t s
power l i n e s and pay h a l f o f t h e c o s t s o f r e l o c a t i o n when a n
owner o f farmland makes t h e n e c e s s a r y showings i n D i s t r i c t
Court. T h a t b e i n g t h e c a s e , e m i n e n t domain, t h e r i g h t of
t h e s t a t e t o t a k e p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y f o r p u b l i c u s e , and t h e
p r i n c i p l e s o f e m i n e n t domain are a p p l i c a b l e h e r e .
The f i r s t i s s u e c o n c e r n s whether t h e t a k i n g i s f o r a
p u b l i c o r p r i v a t e use. I t i s fundamental t o t h e law of
e m i n e n t domain t h a t p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y may n o t be t a k e n w i t h -
o u t a n o w n e r ' s c o n s e n t f o r t h e p r i v a t e u s e of a n o t h e r .
S p r a t t v . Helena Power T r a n s m i s s i o n Company ( 1 9 0 8 ) , 37 Mont.
60, 94 P . 631; s e c t i o n 70-30-101, MCA. Both t h e U n i t e d
S t a t e s and Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n s p r o h i b i t a t a k i n g by t h e
s t a t e f o r merely p r i v a t e u s e . U.S. C o n s t . , Amend. X I V ; 1972
Mont. C o n s t . , Art. 11, §17. R a t h e r , f o r t h e r i g h t of eminent
domain t o l i e , t h e u s e must be one which i s p u b l i c .
The Montana l e g i s l a t u r e h a s by s t a t u t e d e c l a r e d s e v e r a l
u s e s t o be p u b l i c i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e r i g h t of e m i n e n t
domain. S e c t i o n 70-30-102, MCA. Among t h e u s e s enumerated
are:
". . . t h e r i g h t of eminent domain may b e
exercised i n behalf of t h e following public
uses:
" (2) . .. a l l other public uses authorized
by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e o f t h i s s t a t e ;
"(4) ... c a n a l s , d i t c h e s , flumes, aqueducts,
and p i p e s f o r p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , supply-
...
i n g I! f a r m i n g neighborhoods w i t h water
H e r e , one o f t h e u s e s f o r which eminent domain i s
s o u g h t i s t h e more e f f i c i e n t u s e o f w a t e r i n t h e i r r i g a t i o n
o f farmland. Respondent d e s i r e s t o i n s t a l l a c e n t e r p i v o t
s p r i n k l i n g system, r e c o g n i z e d a s a much more e f f i c i e n t
method of i r r i g a t i o n t h a n methods s u c h a s f l o o d i n g . Appel-
l a n t , w h i l e acknowledging t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y of such a system,
a r g u e s t h a t such a u s e h a s n e v e r been s p e c i f i c a l l y d e c l a r e d
t o be p u b l i c by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e . Where s u p p l y i n g a f a r m i n g
neighborhood w i t h w a t e r i s a p u b l i c u s e , a p p e l l a n t m a i n t a i n s
t h a t t h e means o f u s i n g w a t e r once it h a s been s u p p l i e d h a s
n o t been r e c o g n i z e d a s a p u b l i c u s e .
W e disagree. F i r s t , w e note s e v e r a l important provi-
s i o n s which r e l a t e t o t h e u s e of w a t e r w i t h i n t h i s s t a t e .
P e r h a p s t h e most i m p o r t a n t o f t h e s e i s a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
p r o v i s i o n i n which t h e p e o p l e have d e c l a r e d t h a t t h e u s e of
a l l w a t e r w i t h i n t h i s s t a t e s h a l l be deemed t o be a p u b l i c
use. A r t i c l e I X , S e c t i o n 3 (1), of t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i -
t u t i o n , provides:
"The u s e o f a l l w a t e r t h a t i s now o r may h e r e -
a f t e r be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r s a l e , r e n t , d i s t r i b u -
t i o n , o r o t h e r b e n e f i c i a l u s e , t h e r i g h t of way
o v e r t h e l a n d s of o t h e r s f o r a l l d i t c h e s , d r a i n s ,
f l u m e s , c a n a l s , and a q u e d u c t s n e c e s s a r i l y used
i n c o n n e c t i o n t h e r e w i t h and t h e s i t e s f o r reser-
v o i r s necessary f o r c o l l e c t i n g o r s t o r i n g water
s h a l l be h e l d t o be a p u b l i c u s e . "
Next, w e n o t e t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e Montana l e g i s l a t u r e
w i t h r e s p e c t t o water. S e c t i o n 85-2-101, MCA, of t h e 1973
Montana Water U s e A c t , p r o v i d e s :
" P u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e I X o f ' t h e Montana C o n s t i t u -
t i o n , t h e l e g i s l a t u r e d e c l a r e s t h a t any u s e of
w a t e r i s a p u b l i c u s e and t h a t t h e w a t e r s w i t h i n
t h e s t a t e a r e t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e s t a t e and f o r
t h e u s e of i t s p e o p l e . . ."
S e c t i o n 85-2-101, MCA, a l s o e n u n c i a t e s t h e p o l i c y of
t h i s state concerning water:
" I t i s t h e p o l i c y of t h i s s t a t e ... t o encour-
a g e t h e w i s e u s e o f t h e s t a t e ' s water r e s o u r c e s
by making them a v a i l a b l e f o r a p p r o p r i a t i o n con-
s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s c h a p t e r and t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e
w i s e u t i l i z a t i o n , development and c o n s e r v a t i o n
o f t h e w a t e r s o f t h e s t a t e f o r t h e maximum bene-
f i t s of i t s p e o p l e w i t h t h e l e a s t p o s s i b l e de-
g r a d a t i o n o f t h e n a t u r a l a q u a t i c ecosystems.
I n p u r s u i t of t h i s p o l i c y , t h e s t a t e encourages
t h e development o f f a c i l i t i e s which s t o r e and
conserve waters f o r b e n e f i c i a l use, f o r the
maximization o f t h e u s e o f t h o s e waters i n
Montana, f o r t h e s t a b i l i z a t i o n o f stream f l o w s ,
and f o r groundwater r e c h a r g e . "
From t h e s e p r o v i s i o n s , w e b e l i e v e t h a t a more e f f i c i e n t
u s e of w a t e r i n t h e i r r i g a t i o n o f farmland i s i n d e e d a
p u b l i c u s e f o r which t h e r i g h t of e m i n e n t domain w i l l l i e .
While t h i s u s e may n o t r e a d i l y conform t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l
c o n c e p t of " p u b l i c u s e , " w e n o t e t h a t t e r m i s e l a s t i c and
k e e p s p a c e w i t h changing c o n d i t i o n s . 26 Arn.Jur.2d Eminent
Domain S27, pp. 671-672. Although i t i s t r u e t h a t t h e r e may
be a p r i v a t e b e n e f i t t o r e s p o n d e n t h e r e i n t h a t t h e produc-
t i v i t y o f h i s l a n d w i l l be i n c r e a s e d , i t i s a l s o t r u e t h a t
t h e r e w i l l be a b e n e f i t t o t h e p u b l i c .
W f e e l compelled t o o b s e r v e t h e h i g h p r i o r i t i e s t h a t
e
have been p u t on t h e u s e of w a t e r by t h e p e o p l e of t h i s
state. Water must be c o n s e r v e d and p u t t o t h e maximum
b e n e f i t o f a l l t h o s e who u s e it. The mere f a c t t h a t o n e may
r e a l i z e p r i v a t e p r o f i t i n p r o p e r t y s o u g h t t o be condemned
d o e s n o t p r e v e n t t h e u s e from b e i n g d e c l a r e d p u b l i c . Spratt
v . Helena Power T r a n s m i s s i o n Co. ( 1 9 0 8 ) , 37 Mont. 60, 77, 94
P. 631. Nor i s t h e mere number o f p e o p l e who a c t u a l l y make
u s e of t h e p u b l i c u s e d e t e r m i n a t i v e of i t s c h a r a c t e r . This
i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e i n t h e c a s e of a r e c y c l a b l e r e s o u r c e . A
u s e may be p u b l i c even though i t may be e n j o y e d a t c e r t a i n
t i m e s by a c o m p a r a t i v e l y s m a l l number of p e o p l e .
Eminent Domain S32, p. 681. W f i n d , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t a more
e
efficient use of water in the irrigation of farmland is
a public use for which the right of eminent domain will lie.
We note additionally that these statutes do not violate
the rule that where property has already been taken for a
public use, it may not be condemned again except for a more
necessary public use. Cocoanougher v. Ziegler (1941), 112
Mont. 76, 81-82, 112 P.2d 1058, 1060; section 70-30-103!(c),
MCA. Here, the statutes provide that the owner of land
offer a feasible alternative route upon which the utility
may plot its power line. Because the property is substi-
tuted, it cannot be said to have been "doubly condemned."
We have previously upheld substitute condemnation as a valid
exercise of the power of eminent domain. See, State ex rel.
De Puy v. District Court (1963), 142 Mont. 328, 384 P.2d
501, 20 A.L.R.3d 862, 868. Our decision today in no way
involves a determination of whether the transportation of
electricity or the efficient use of water has the higher
priority in terms of public use.
The second issue in this case involves whether there is
just compensation. Section 69-4-404, MCA, provides that the
costs of relocation shall be divided equally between the
landowner and the owner of the power line. Appellant argues
that the statute does not provide for just compensation.
Appellant maintains that the principle of just compensation
requires that the owner of condemned property be made whole
for all of the damages sustained and that there must be full
compensation. Appellant contends that 50 percent compensa-
tion is only half of the compensation properly due appellant.
With this proposition we fully agree.
Article 11, Section 29, of the 1972 Montana constitu-
tion, states:
" P r i v a t e p r o p e r t y s h a l l n o t be t a k e n o r damaged
f o r p u b l i c u s e w i t h o u t j u s t compensation t o t h e
f u l l e x t e n t - -e l o s s h a v i n g been f i r s t made
of t h -
--
t o o r p a i d i n t o t h e c o u r t f o r t h e owner." (Em-
p h a s i s added. )
This Court has a l s o held i n s e v e r a l c a s e s t h a t a land-
owner i n a condemnation a c t i o n s h o u l d be f a i r l y and f u l l y
compensated, S t a t e v . P e t e r s o n ( 1 9 5 8 ) , 134 Mont. 52, 57, 328
P.2d 617, 620, and t h a t j u s t compensation i s d e t e r m i n e d by
e q u i t a b l e p r i n c i p l e s , A l e x a n d e r v . S t a t e Highway Commission
( 1 9 6 6 ) , 147 Mont. 367, 371-72, 412 P.2d 414, 416. I n Alex-
ander w e s t a t e d :
" J u s t compensation i s d e t e r m i n e d by e q u i t a b l e
principles. I t s measure v a r i e s w i t h t h e f a c t s .
Where t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s w i l l n o t p e r m i t , t h e
v a l u e o f p r o p e r t y c a n n o t be measured s o l e l y by
formula o r a r t i f i c i a l r u l e . . ."
Here, t h e r e i s j u s t compensation i n o n e s e n s e ; t h e
u t i l i t y i s compensated f o r t h e e a s e m e n t which i t a l r e a d y
has. The s t a t u t e s r e q u i r e t h a t t h e landowner o f f e r l a n d
upon which t h e u t i l i t y may p l o t a n a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e f o r i t s
power l i n e . I t i s n o n e t h e l e s s a f a c t , however, t h a t t h e
u t i l i t y must a l s o b e a r h a l f t h e c o s t o f r e l o c a t i o n . Where
t h e l a n d i s condemned and t h e u t i l i t y h a s p a i d f o r t h e
e a s e m e n t o n c e , w e t h i n k i t u n f a i r t h a t i t be r e q u i r e d t o pay
f o r t h e easement again. The r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e power l i n e
comes a t t h e i n s i s t e n c e o f t h e landowner, and i t i s h e who
should properly bear t h e c o s t s of r e l o c a t i o n . W e find
t h e r e f o r e t h a t s e c t i o n 69-4-404, MCA, does n o t provide f o r
j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n , and w e d e c l a r e i t u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l .
A c c o r d i n g l y , w e a f f i r m i n p a r t and r e v e r s e i n p a r t t h e
judgment o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t and o r d e r t h a t r e s p o n d e n t pay
t h e e n t i r e c o s t of r e l o c a t i n g t h e overhead u t i l i t y l i n e .
We concur:
Ceief Justice