House committee backs study of personal staff for part-time legislators

Representative Steve Vetter introduced House Concurrent Resolution 3,033 and asked the House Finance and Taxation Committee to “consider studying” options to provide legislators with personal staff or allocations to hire assistance.

The committee voted to give the resolution a do-pass recommendation after a period of testimony and discussion that ranged from staff-role definitions to concerns about expanding government.

Nut graf: The resolution would create a study — not an immediate structural change — to examine options such as an allocation of funds to each legislator, shared regional staff models, or other approaches that states use to support legislators who serve in part-time bodies. Supporters said the study is intended to prepare for incoming legislators under term limits; opponents said adding staff runs counter to calls to limit government growth.

Representative Vetter, who said, “My name is Steve Vetter. I represent District 18,” described his review of research from the National Conference of State Legislatures and other organizations and summarized how states organize staff. He noted that “38 states have personal legislative staff of some sort” and that “12 states do not have personal staff” including North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.

Vetter listed possible objectives for a personal staff position, including scheduling, constituent services, legislative research, writing memos and coordinating communications. He said some states use an allocation (examples he cited: $40,000–$50,000) that members can spend on staff or other needs, while others provide shared staff or require leadership approval for hires.

Supporters said personal staff or an interim allocation could help new legislators and improve bill preparation. Representative Steiner, a committee supporter, said she relied on two professionals when preparing a complicated bill and described staff as “invaluable institutional knowledge.” Representative Dressler and others said they favored studying options rather than immediately expanding the legislative council.

Opponents warned of the political optics and cost. Representative Porter said the proposal was “counterintuitive” to term-limit advocates’ intent and argued North Dakotans expected smaller government. Representative Haggart said he could not support the study, though he agreed that targeted education for legislators could be helpful.

The committee debated the language of the resolution; members clarified that the wording in the concurrent resolution reads “consider studying,” and that language would create a study only if the resolution advanced. Representative Wilson moved a do-pass recommendation; the motion was seconded by Representative Machtenbacher. The roll call produced 10 yes, 3 no, and 1 absent; the motion carried.

Ending: The measure will be carried forward from committee by a member selected to carry the resolution; committee members said the study would be used to inform future decisions about staff allocations, shared staffing models, or additional legislative resources. No formal staff hires or budget changes were enacted in the committee; the resolution creates only a study if adopted by the full Legislature.