Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Mail Ballot Plans topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montana bill would require election administrators to post mail-ballot plans online; secretary of staterole pared back
Summary
A bill heard by the Senate State Administration Committee would require local election administrators to post written mail-ballot plans publicly, allow schools to post plans to school websites, and removes routine date-calculation review by the secretary of state while the office says it will provide templates and technical help.
Rep. Morgan Teal, sponsor of House Bill 527, told the Senate State Administration Committee that the bill would require each election administrator to prepare a written plan for any election conducted entirely by mail and post that plan publicly.
The measure limits the statutory section to mail elections, adds explicit permission for school districts to post plans on school websites, and directs local administrators to post plans by methods listed in statute; the bill text acknowledges one county in Montana lacks a website and says the secretary of state's office will work with that county to publish plans via social media or another venue.
Why it matters: Proponents said posting plans where voters already look will improve public notice and reduce the workload now handled centrally by the secretary of state's office. Austin James of the Secretary of State's office said one staffer currently processes roughly 700 mail-ballot plans and that about half the plans contain errors, most often incorrect dates. James told the committee the office will produce an auto-calculation tool and a template so counties don't have to type repetitive fields and to reduce date errors.
Information and concerns from county and school elections officials: Nicole Thuot of the Office of Public Instruction (OPI) and Regina Plettenberg, Ravalli County election administrator speaking for the Montana Association of Clerk and Recorders, joined online to describe a school-focused amendment requested by OPI. Thuot said the amendment clarifies how school districts without websites may provide notice; Plettenberg confirmed many school districts are required to send their mail-ballot plans to the county, providing a local review step.
Enforcement and default rules were discussed. The draft language says if a mail-ballot plan is not posted by at least one of the statutory methods 60 days before the election, the election defaults to a polling-place election. Committee members asked how deadlines would be enforced if the state office no longer does date calculations. James said the current practice allows someone to document an absence of a posting (for example by screenshot) and seek enforcement through the district court or governing body; he said the bill preserves the default to polling-place administration.
Committee action and next steps: Representative Teal indicated he supports a technical amendment requested by OPI and asked the committee for a do-concur recommendation following the hearing. No formal committee vote on the bill occurred in the hearing record provided.
The hearing included questions from Senator Vance and others about which actor is responsible for posting and about the practical steps the secretary of state's office will take to support counties and school districts. James repeatedly described the office's role as providing tools and templates rather than continuing routine manual date calculations.
Ending: The bill remains under committee consideration; sponsors said they would provide an amendment for committee review and that the secretary of state's office will publish templates and an auto-calculation tool to reduce errors and help counties meet posting timelines.
